基于多信号流图和相似性度量的故障可诊断性评价方法

doi:10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2023.01.35

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

针对目前基于定性模型无法对电子系统故障可诊断性进行定量评价的问题, 将定性模型与数据驱动方法相结合, 提出一种基于多信号流图和相似性度量的故障可诊断性评价方法。首先, 根据系统的组成结构建立多信号流图模型并得到故障-测试相关性矩阵, 基于故障-测试相关性矩阵提出了故障可诊断性评价准则。其次, 提取测试信号的小波包Shannon熵作为特征向量, 以欧式距离作为相似性度量指标, 将故障可诊断性定量评价问题转换为不同故障模式下测试信号特征向量的相似性度量问题。然后, 构建故障可诊断性评价矩阵, 依据故障可诊断性评价矩阵提出了系统可诊断性指标。最后, 通过仿真分析验证了所提方法的有效性。结果表明, 所提方法在不构建数学模型的前提下, 能够实现电子系统的故障可诊断性的定量评价。

关键词: 故障可诊断性, 可诊断性评价, 多信号流图, 相似性度量, 欧氏距离

Abstract:

Aiming at the problem that the fault diagnosability of electronic system cannot be quantitatively evaluated based on qualitative model, the paper combines qualitative model with data-driven methods, and a method of fault diagnosability evaluation based on multi-signal flow graph and similarity measure is proposed. Firstly, the multi-signal flow graph model is established according to the composition of the system and the fault-test correlation matrix is obtained. Based on the fault-test correlation matrix, the fault diagnosability evaluation criteria is proposed. Secondly, the Shannon entropy of the wavelet packet of the test signal is extracted as the feature vector, and the Euclidean distance is used as the similarity measurement index. The problem of fault diagnosability quantitative evaluation is transformed into the similarity measure problem of the feature vector of the test signal under different fault modes. Then, the fault diagnosability evaluation matrix is constructed, and the system diagnosability indicators is proposed according to the fault diagnosability evaluation matrix. Finally, the effectiveness of the proposed method is verified by simulation analysis, and the results show that the method proposed in the paper can realize the quantitative evaluation of the fault diagnosability of electronic system without constructing mathematical model.

Key words: fault diagnosability, diagnosability evaluation, multi-signal flow diagram, similarity measure, Euclidean distance

中图分类号:

TP306.3

秦玉峰, 史贤俊. 基于多信号流图和相似性度量的故障可诊断性评价方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2023, 45(1): 302-312.

Yufeng QIN, Xianjun SHI. Fault diagnosability evaluation method based on multi-signal flow graph and similarity measure[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2023, 45(1): 302-312.

图/表 15

图1

图2

表1

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

图8

图9

表2

图10

图11

图12

图13

参考文献 31

1	王大轶, 符方舟, 刘成瑞, 等. 控制系统可诊断性的内涵与研究综述[J]. 自动化学报, 2018, 44 (9): 1537- 1553. doi: 10.16383/j.aas.2018.c170618
	WANG D Y , FU F Z , LIU C R , et al. Connotation and research status of diagnosability of control systems: a review[J]. Acta Automatica Sinica, 2018, 44 (9): 1537- 1553. doi: 10.16383/j.aas.2018.c170618
2	化永朝, 李清东, 任章, 等. 连续系统故障可诊断性评价方法综述[J]. 控制与决策, 2016, 31 (12): 2113- 2121. doi: 10.13195/j.kzyjc.2015.1483
	HUA Y Z , LI Q D , REN Z , et al. Overview of fault diagnosability evaluation methods for continuous systems[J]. Control and Decision, 2016, 31 (12): 2113- 2121. doi: 10.13195/j.kzyjc.2015.1483
3	刘文静, 刘成瑞, 王南华, 等. 定量与定性相结合的动量轮故障可诊断性评价[J]. 中国空间科学技术, 2011, 31 (4): 54- 63. doi: 10.3780/j.issn.1000-758X.2011.04.008
	LIU W J , LIU C R , WANG N H , et al. Quantitative and qualitative model based fault diagnosability evaluation of momentum wheel[J]. Chinese Space Science and Technology, 2011, 31 (4): 54- 63. doi: 10.3780/j.issn.1000-758X.2011.04.008
4	王振西, 刘成瑞, 张强, 等. 基于多信号流图和改进BHS-树的陀螺可诊断性研究[J]. 空间控制技术与应用, 2012, 38 (4): 1- 5.1-5, 56 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-1579.2012.04.001
	WANG Z X , LIU C R , ZHANG Q , et al. Gyro's diagnosability method based on multi-signal flow graph and improved BHS-tree[J]. Aerospace Control and Application, 2012, 38 (4): 1- 5.1-5, 56 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-1579.2012.04.001
5	刘文静, 李文博, 张秀云, 等. 基于图论的深空探测航天器故障可诊断性评价[J]. 控制理论与应用, 2019, 36 (12): 2074- 2084.
	LIU W J , LI W B , ZHANG X Y , et al. Fault diagnosability evaluation of deep space exploration spacecraft based on graph theory[J]. Control Theory & Applications, 2019, 36 (12): 2074- 2084.
6	LIU J, HUA Y Z, LI Q D, et al. Fault diagnosability qualitative analysis of spacecraft based on temporal fault signature matrix[C]//Proc. of the IEEE Chinese Guidance, Navigation & Control Conference, 2016: 1496-1500.
7	ERIKSSON D , FRISK E , KRYSANDER M . A method for quantitative fault diagnosability analysis of stochastic linear descriptor models[J]. Automatica, 2013, 49 (6): 1591- 1600. doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2013.02.045
8	JUNG D E, KRYSANDER M, FRISK E. Quantitative fault diagnosability performance of linear dynamic descriptor models[C]// Proc. of the 22nd IEEE International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis, 2011.
9	JUNG D E, KRYSANDER M, FRISK E. Quantitative stochastic fault diagnosability analysis[C]//Proc. of the 50th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control and European Control, 2011: 1563-1569.
10	JUNG D E , KRYSANDER M , FRISK E . Using quantitative diagnosability analysis for optimal sensor placement[J]. IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 2012, 45 (20): 940- 945. doi: 10.3182/20120829-3-MX-2028.00196
11	FU F Z , WANG D Y . A method for quantitative fault diagnosability analysis of systems with probabilistic sensor faults[J]. International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, 2019, 17 (8): 2159- 2164. doi: 10.1007/s12555-018-0319-z
12	FU F Z , WANG D Y , LI W B , et al. Data-driven fault identifiability analysis for discrete-time dynamic systems[J]. International Journal of Systems Science, 2020, 51 (2): 404- 412. doi: 10.1080/00207721.2020.1716101
13	ZHAO D , AHN C K , PASZKE W , et al. Fault diagnosability analysis of two-dimensional linear discrete systems[J]. IEEE Trans.on Automatic Control, 2021, 66 (2): 826- 832. doi: 10.1109/TAC.2020.2986054
14	CUI Y Q , SHI J Y , WANG Z L . System-level operational diagnosability analysis in quasi real-time fault diagnosis: The probabilistic approach[J]. Journal of Process Control, 2014, 24 (9): 1444- 1453. doi: 10.1016/j.jprocont.2014.06.014
15	JIANG D N , LI W . Multi-objective optimal placement of sensors based on quantitative evaluation of fault diagnosability[J]. IEEE Access, 2019, 7, 117850- 117860. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2936369
16	SHARIFI R , LANGARI R . Isolability of faults in sensor fault diagnosis[J]. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2011, 25 (7): 2733- 2744. doi: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2011.02.015
17	SHARIFI R , LANGARI R . Sensor fault diagnosis with a proba- bilistic decision process[J]. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2013, 34 (1-2): 146- 155. doi: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2012.07.014
18	李文博, 王大轶, 刘成瑞. 一类非线性系统的故障可诊断性量化评价方法[J]. 宇航学报, 2015, 36 (4): 455- 462.
	LI W B , WANG D Y , LIU C R . An approach to fault diagnosability quantitative evaluation for a class of nonlinear systems[J]. Journal of Astronautics, 2015, 36 (4): 455- 462.
19	LIN L X , WANG Q , HE B W , et al. Evaluation of fault diagnosability for nonlinear uncertain systems with multiple faults occurring simultaneously[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 31 (3): 634- 646. doi: 10.23919/JSEE.2020.000039
20	HUA Y Z, LI Q D, REN Z, et al. A data driven method for quantitative fault diagnosability evaluation[C]//Proc. of the Chinese Control and Decision Conference, 2016: 1890-1894.
21	FU F Z , XUE T , WU Z G , et al. A fault diagnosability evaluation method for dynamic systems without distribution knowledge[J]. IEEE Trans.on Cybernetics, 2022, 52 (6): 5113- 5123. doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2020.3027549
22	SHAO J , ZHANG Y Q . Research on modeling method based on multi-signal flow model[J]. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 2014, 494-495, 983- 988. doi: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.494-495.983
23	YANG C L, ZHANG S W, TONG C M, et al. Research on testability modeling with Bayesian network based on multi-signal flow model[C]//Proc. of the IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics & Applications, 2013: 1870-1873.
24	XIONG S C , ZHOU H D , HE S , et al. Fault diagnosis of a rolling bearing based on the wavelet packet transform and a deep residual network with lightweight multi-branch structure[J]. Measurement Science and Technology, 2021, 32 (8): 85106- 85115.
25	YU F J, LIU Y C, FENG Z Q. Compound fault diagnosis of gearbox based on wavelet packet transform and sparse representation classification[C]//Proc. of the 32nd Chinese Control and Decision Conference, 2020: 5339-5343.
26	LI G Q , DENG C , WU J , et al. Rolling bearing fault diagnosis based on wavelet packet transform and convolutional neural network[J]. Applied Sciences, 2020, 10 (3): 770.
27	YI T Q , XIE Y Z , ZHANG H Y , et al. Insulation fault diagnosis of disconnecting switches based on wavelet packet transform and PCA-IPSO-SVM of electric fields[J]. IEEE Access, 2020, 8, 176676- 176690.
28	XIONG S C , ZHOU H D , HE S , et al. A novel end-to-end fault diagnosis approach for rolling bearings by integrating wavelet packet transform into convolutional neural network structures[J]. Sensors, 2020, 20 (17): 4695.
29	赵光权, 姜泽东, 胡聪, 等. 基于小波包能量熵和DBN的轴承故障诊断[J]. 电子测量与仪器学报, 2019, 33 (2): 32- 38.
	ZHAO G Q , JIANG Z D , HU C , et al. Bearing fault diagnosis based on wavelet packet energy entropy and DBN[J]. Journal of Electronic Measurement and Instrumentation, 2019, 33 (2): 32- 38.
30	胡广书. 现代信号处理教程[M]. 北京: 清华大学出版社, 2015.
	HU G S . Modern signal processing tutorial[M]. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2015.
31	张勇, 邱静, 刘冠军. 测试性模型对比及展望[J]. 测试技术学报, 2011, 25 (6): 504- 514.
	ZHANG Y , QIU J , LIU G J . Comparison and prospect of testability models[J]. Journal of Test and Measurement Technology, 2011, 25 (6): 504- 514.

故障模式编号	故障模式名称
f₁	电阻R₁短路
f₂	电阻R₁断路
f₃	电阻R₂断路
f₄	运放A₁输入端与输出端断开
f₅	电阻R₃短路
f₆	电阻R₃断路
f₇	电容C₁短路
f₈	电容C₁断路
f₉	电阻R₄短路
f₁₀	电阻R₄断路
f₁₁	运放A₂输入端与输出端断开

故障模式编号	故障模式名称
f₁	电阻R₁₈短路
f₂	电阻R₁₁断路
f₃	电容C₁₀短路
f₄	电阻R₁₀短路
f₅	晶体管Q₁断路
f₆	光电耦合器U₃断路

[1]	蒋留兵, 周小龙, 姜风伟, 车俐. 基于改进匹配网络的单样本学习[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2019, 41(6): 1210-1217.
[2]	陈世媛, 李小将. 基于自适应非局部均值的SAR图像相干斑抑制[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2017, 39(12): 2683-2690.
[3]	王晨, 林伟, 汤鹏飞, 贾泽林. 基于纹理上下文的遥感图像目标识别[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2017, 39(10): 2197-2202.
[4]	涂松, 李禹, 粟毅. 基于主动轮廓模型的SAR图像分割方法综述[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2015, 37(8): 1754-1766.
[5]	刘红亮，陈维义，许中胜. 基于序列图像匹配的车载自主测速方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2015, 37(4): 964-968.
[6]	黄长强，胡杰，蔡佳. 无人战斗机态势评估变精度粗集决策方法[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2011, 33(5): 1045-.