Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T07:30:21.423Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A hybrid approach for aircraft fault diagnosis based on fault inference and fault identification

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

X. Liu  and
Z. Liu
X. Liu*
Affiliation:
CAD Research Center, Tongji University, Shanghai, China
Z. Liu
Affiliation:
Aerospace System Engineering Shanghai, Shanghai, China
*
liuzhijuan6512@163.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A cockpit instrumentation system provides various elements of information for pilots. However, logical inference based on a cockpit instruments fault tree (FT) and reliability sometimes cannot give a correct diagnosis of failures. In addition, in flight control systems (FCS), a fault identification method based on the multiple-model (MM) estimator cannot find the basic fault cause. To deal with these problems, a hybrid approach which is capable of integrating inference and fault identification is proposed. In this approach, the event nodes of the FT which have correlations to the FCS are separated into modules. Each module corresponds to a fault mode of the FCS. To use these correlations, fault inference and the MM estimator can share fault diagnosis information. Simulation results show that the proposed approach is helpful in detecting the root cause of failure and is more correct than single fault diagnosis method.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 118 , Issue 1199 , January 2014 , pp. 81 - 97
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Li, W.C., Chen, H.C. and Wu, F.E. Human errors in the cockpit and accidents prevention strategies from cockpit resources management perspective. Proceedings of the 19th Conference on Digital Avionics System, Philadelphia, PA, USA, October, 2000.Google Scholar
2. Lapp, S.A. and Powers, G.A. Computer-aided synthesis of fault trees, IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 1977, 26, (1), pp 2–13.Google Scholar
3. Haasl, D.F. Advanced concepts in fault tree analysis, system safety symposium, The Boeing Company, Seattle, Washington DC, USA, June 1965.Google Scholar
4. Barrlett, L.M., Hurdle, E.E. and Kelly, E.M. Inte grated system fault diagnostics utilising digraph and fault tree-based approaches, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2009, 94, (6), pp 1107–1115.Google Scholar
5. Yao, Y.H., Lin, G.Y.P. and Amy, J.C. Using knowledge-based intelligent reasoning to support dynamic equipment diagnosis and maintenance, Int J Enterprise Information Systems, 2006, 2, (1), pp 17–29.Google Scholar
6. Reddy, M. and Mohanta, D.K. Performance evaluation of an adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system approach for location of faults on transmission lines using Monte Carlo simulation, Fuzzy Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2008, 16, (4), pp 909–919.Google Scholar
7. Eide, P. and Maybeck, P.S. An MMAE failure detection system for the F-16, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic systems, 1996, 23, (3), pp 1125–1136.Google Scholar
8. Rupp, D., Ducard, G., Shafai, E. and Geering, H.P. Extended multiple model adaptive estimation for the detection of sensor and actuator faults. Proceedings of the 44th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Seville, Spain, December 2005, pp 3079–3084.Google Scholar
9. Liu, Z.J., Li, Q., Liu, X.H., Lan, J. and Mu, C.D. An Expected-mode augmentation based approach for multiple-fault detection and diagnosis in flight control systems, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G, J Aerospace Engineering, 2012, 226, (10), pp 1202–1213.Google Scholar
10. Pettit, D. and Turnbull, A. General aviation aircraft cockpit instrument reliability analysis, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, 1997.Google Scholar
11. Pettit, D. and Turnbull, A. General aviation aircraft study, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, 2001.Google Scholar
12. Bennetts, R.G. Analysis of reliability block diagrams by Boolean techniques, IEEE Transaction on Reliability, 1982, 31, (2), pp 159–166.Google Scholar
13. Semanderes, S.N. A computer program for the effcient logic reduction analysis of fault trees, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 1971, 18, (1), pp 481–487.Google Scholar
14 Sonneveldt, L. Nonlinear F-16 model description. Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands, Version 0.3, June 2006.Google Scholar