人机环耦合效应下卫星天线装配概率风险分析

doi:10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2023.02.34

系统工程与电子技术 ›› 2023, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (2): 606-613.doi: 10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2023.02.34

• 可靠性 • 上一篇

人机环耦合效应下卫星天线装配概率风险分析

曾婷¹, 高帅²^,*, 孙富强², 赖小明¹, 李云¹, 李孝鹏³

1. 北京卫星制造厂有限公司, 北京 100094
2. 北京航空航天大学可靠性与系统工程学院, 北京 100191
3. 中国航天标准化与产品保证研究院, 北京 100071

收稿日期:2022-03-25 出版日期:2023-01-13 发布日期:2023-02-04
通讯作者: 高帅
作者简介:曾婷(1981—), 男, 高级工程师, 硕士, 主要研究方向为航天器机构设计与制造技术
高帅(1998—), 男, 硕士研究生, 主要研究方向为可靠性建模、加速试验理论与应用
孙富强(1983—), 男, 副研究员, 博士, 主要研究方向为加速试验理论与应用、可靠性与加速试验设备开发
赖小明(1969—), 男, 研究员, 硕士, 主要研究方向为航天器机构设计与制造技术
李云(1979—), 男, 高级工程师, 博士, 主要研究方向为航天器智能装配、可靠性技术
李孝鹏(1984—), 男, 高级工程师, 硕士, 主要研究方向为航天器可靠性与安全性
基金资助:
科工局技术基础科研项目(JSZL2019203B014);中央高校基本科研业务费(YWF-22-L-824)

Probabilistic risk analysis of satellite antenna assembly considering man-machine-environment coupling effect

Ting ZENG¹, Shuai GAO²^,*, Fuqiang SUN², Xiaoming LAI¹, Yun LI¹, Xiaopeng LI³

1. Beijing Spacecraft Manufacturing Company Limited, Beijing 100094, China
2. School of Reliability and Systems Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China
3. China Academy of Aerospace Standardization and Product Assurance, Beijing 100071, China

Received:2022-03-25 Online:2023-01-13 Published:2023-02-04
Contact: Shuai GAO

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

卫星天线展开机构装配工序复杂, 主要依赖人工装调, 装配过程中可靠性安全性风险因素众多且相互耦合, 直接影响天线装配质量和效率。为此, 提出一种基于贝叶斯网络的概率风险评价方法。首先, 在全面识别装配过程风险因素的基础上, 构建事件树模型, 并采用贝叶斯网络建立考虑人机环风险耦合的中间事件可靠性模型。然后, 采用人因可靠性等方法进行模型量化与不确定性分析, 并开展敏感性分析与风险重要度排序。最后, 以某型星载合成孔径雷达(synthetic aperture radar, SAR)天线展开机构为例, 说明了所提方法的工程适用性。该方法可为飞船、运载火箭等人机耦合系统的风险分析与量化提供一定的参考。

关键词: 卫星天线, 装配, 人机环耦合, 概率风险评价, 贝叶斯网络

Abstract:

The assembly process of satellite antenna deployable mechanism is complex and mainly depends on manual adjustment. The reliability and safety risk factors in the assembly process are numerous and mutually coupled, which directly affect the quality and efficiency of antenna assembly. Therefore, an approach of probabilistic risk assessment based on Bayesian networks is proposed. Firstly, based on the comprehensive identification of risk factors in the assembly process, the event tree model is constructed, and an intermediate event reliability model of man-machine-environment coupling is established by Bayesian network. Then, human reliability and other methods are used for model quantification and uncertainty analysis, and sensitivity analysis and risk importance ranking are carried out. Finally, the engineering applicability of the proposed method is illustrated by taking a certain type of spaceborne synthetic aperture radar (SAR) antenna deployment mechanism as an example, and the method can provide a reference for risk analysis and quantification of man-machine coupling system such as spacecraft and launch vehicle.

Key words: spaceborne antenna, assembly, man-machine-environment coupling, probabilistic risk assessment, Bayesian network

中图分类号:

TB114.3

曾婷, 高帅, 孙富强, 赖小明, 李云, 李孝鹏. 人机环耦合效应下卫星天线装配概率风险分析[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2023, 45(2): 606-613.

Ting ZENG, Shuai GAO, Fuqiang SUN, Xiaoming LAI, Yun LI, Xiaopeng LI. Probabilistic risk analysis of satellite antenna assembly considering man-machine-environment coupling effect[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2023, 45(2): 606-613.

图/表 18

图1

图2

表1

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

表2

表3

表4

表5

表6

表7

图8

表8

表9

图9

参考文献 32

33	COLSON A R , COOKE R M . Cross validation for the classical model of structured expert judgment[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2017, 163, 109- 120.
1	KRUGER J , LIEN T K , VERL A . Cooperation of human and machines in assembly lines[J]. CIRP Annals, 2009, 58 (2): 628- 646. doi: 10.1016/j.cirp.2009.09.009
2	YI Y , YAN Y H , LIU X J , et al. Digital twin-based smart assembly process design and application framework for complex products and its case study[J]. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 2021, 58, 94- 107. doi: 10.1016/j.jmsy.2020.04.013
3	XU Z P , MO Y C , LIU Y , et al. Reliability assessment of multi-state phased-mission systems by fusing observation data from multiple of operation[J]. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2019, 118, 603- 622. doi: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2018.08.064
4	LI X P , LI F Q . Reliability assessment of space station based on multi-layer and multi-type risks[J]. Applied Sciences, 2021, 11 (21): 10258. doi: 10.3390/app112110258
5	TORRES Y , NADEAU S , LANDAU K . Classification and quantification of human error in manufacturing: a case study in complex manual assembly[J]. Applied Sciences-Basel, 2021, 11 (2): 749. doi: 10.3390/app11020749
6	ALOGLA A A , ALRUQI M . Aircraft assembly snags: human errors or lack of production design?[J]. Aerospace, 2021, 8 (12): 391. doi: 10.3390/aerospace8120391
7	ARAS E M , DIACONEASA M A . A critical look at the need for performing multi-hazard probabilistic risk assessment for nuclear power plants[J]. Eng, 2021, 2 (4): 454- 467. doi: 10.3390/eng2040028
8	PARHIZKAR T , UTNE I B , VINNEM J E , et al. Dynamic probabilistic risk assessment of decision-making in emergencies for complex systems, case study: dynamic positioning drilling unit[J]. Ocean Engineering, 2021, 237, 109653. doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.109653
9	KIM J , KAMARI M , LEE S , et al. Large-scale visual data-driven probabilistic risk assessment of utility poles regarding the vulnerability of power distribution infrastructure systems[J]. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2021, 147 (10): 4021121. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0002153
10	NIELSEN J S , MILLER-BRANOVACKI L , CARRIVEAU R . Probabilistic and risk-informed life extension assessment of wind turbine structural components[J]. Energies, 2021, 14 (4): 821. doi: 10.3390/en14040821
11	HUGHES A J , BARTHORPE R J , DERVILIS N , et al. A probabilistic risk-based decision framework for structural health monitoring[J]. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2021, 150, 107339. doi: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2020.107339
12	MAO Q H , GUO M X , LYU J , et al. A risk assessment framework of hybrid offshore wind-solar PV power plants under a probabilistic linguistic environment[J]. Sustainability, 2022, 14 (7): 4197. doi: 10.3390/su14074197
13	National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Probabilistic risk assessment procedures guide for NASA managers and practitioners[R]. Washington D.C. : National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2011.
14	Office of Safety and Mission Assurance. 5A technical probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) procedures for safety and mission success for NASA programs and projects[S]. Washington D.C. : National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2010.
15	李孝鹏, 黄洪钟, 李福秋. 基于PRA的复杂航天多阶段任务系统可靠性分析[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2019, 41 (9): 2141- 2147.
	LI X P , HUANG H Z , LI F Q . PRA based reliability analysis of complex space phased-mission system[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 41 (9): 2141- 2147.
16	王鑫, 陈金豹, 杨卓鹏, 等. 基于概率风险评估的导弹武器系统可靠性建模与分析[J]. 战术导弹术, 2020, (6): 112- 119.
	WANG X , CHEN J B , YANG Z P , et al. Reliability modeling and analysis of missile weapon system based on PRA[J]. Tactical Missile Technology, 2020, (6): 112- 119.
17	LIU Z K , MA Q , CAI B P , et al. Risk coupling analysis of subsea blowout accidents based on dynamic Bayesian network and NK model[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2022, 218, 108160.
18	汪子恒. 基于贝叶斯网络的道路危货运输耦合风险评估研究[D]. 南京: 南京林业大学, 2020.
	WANG Z H. Research on coupling risk assessment of dangerous cargo transportation based on Bayesian network[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing Forestry University, 2020.
19	MOREIRA A , PRATS-IRAOLA P , YOUNIS M , et al. A tutorial on synthetic aperture radar[J]. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Magazine, 2013, 1 (1): 6- 43. doi: 10.1109/MGRS.2013.2248301
20	GUO J W , ZHAO Y S , XU Y D , et al. Design and analysis of truss deployable antenna mechanism based on a novel symmetric hexagonal profile division method[J]. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2021, 34 (8): 87- 100. doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2020.06.004
21	YANG H , GUO H W , WANG Y , et al. Configuration synthesis of planar folded and common overconstrained spatial rectangular pyramid deployable truss units[J]. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2019, 32 (7): 1772- 1787. doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2019.04.020
22	HU Y , PARHIZKAR T , MOSLEH A . Guided simulation for dynamic probabilistic risk assessment of complex systems: concept, method, and application[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2022, 217, 108047.
23	LI W H , LIU G Z . Dynamic reliability analysis approach based on fault tree and new process capability index[J]. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 2022, 38 (2): 800- 816. doi: 10.1002/qre.3015
24	RESCORLA M . Bayesian modeling of the mind: from norms to neurons[J]. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 2021, 12 (1): e1540.
25	BOBBIO A , PORTINALE L , MINICHINO M , et al. Improving the analysis of dependable systems by mapping fault trees into Bayesian networks[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2001, 71 (3): 249- 260.
26	KHAKZAD N , KHAN F , AMYOTTE P . Safety analysis in process facilities: comparison of fault tree and Bayesian network approaches[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2011, 96 (8): 925- 932.
27	MONTANI S , PORTINALE L , BOBBIO A , et al. Radyban: a tool for reliability analysis of dynamic fault trees through conversion into dynamic Bayesian networks[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2008, 93 (7): 922- 932.
28	CHEN X Q , LIU X W , QIN Y . An extended CREAM model based on analytic network process under the type-2 fuzzy environment for human reliability analysis in the high-speed train operation[J]. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 2021, 37 (1): 284- 308. doi: 10.1002/qre.2736
29	ZHENG X , BOLTON M L , DALY C . Extended SAFPHR(systems analysis for formal pharmaceutical human reliability): two approaches based on extended CREAM and a comparative analysis[J]. Safety Science, 2020, 132, 104944.
30	PAN X , WANG H X , LIN Y , et al. HEP quantification strategy based on modified CREAM[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 30 (4): 815- 822.
31	HOLLNAGEL E . Cognitive reliability and error analysis method (CREAM)[M]. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1998.
32	HEMMING V , BURGMAN M A , HANEA A M , et al. A practical guide to structured expert elicitation using the IDEA protocol[J]. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 2018, 9 (1): 169- 180.

转动轴空间定位		框架和桁架机构安装		收拢展开测试		真板对接及展收测试
代号	风险名称	代号	风险名称	代号	风险名称	代号	风险名称
H₁₁	精测基准不当	H₂₁	吊装操作失误	H₃₁	气浮装置安装错误	H₄₁	未开展多余物检查
H₁₂	被测物没固定	H₂₂	电缆妨碍机构运动	H₃₂	基频测试位移过大	H₄₂	吊装操作失误
H₁₃	吊装操作失误	H₂₃	零部件安装错位	H₃₃	精测基准选择不当	H₄₃	精测基准选择不当
M₁₁	定位工装影响精度	M₂₁	安全防护设备故障	H₃₄	天线翻转速度过快	M₄₁	气浮装置失效
M₁₂	安全防护设备故障	M₂₂	铰链解锁装置故障	H₃₅	热控与机构干涉	M₄₂	安全防护设备故障
HM₁	安全防护风险	M₂₃	吊装设备影响精度	M₃₁	安全防护设备故障	E₄₁	环境引入多余物
-	-	HM₂	安全防护风险	HM₃	安全防护风险	E₄₂	静电放电损伤
-	-	-	-	-	-	HM₄	安全防护风险
-	-	-	-	-	-	HE₄	多余物风险

人因风险事件	概率分布(分位数)/%
人因风险事件	5	50	95
精测基准选择不当	0.019	0.023	0.026
吊装操作失误	0.007	0.010	0.013
被测物没有固定	0.008	0.010	0.012

CPC名称	水平	认知功能对应的权重
CPC名称	水平	观察	解释	计划	执行
组织完善度	非常有效	1	1	0.8	0.8
工作条件	优越	0.8	0.8	1	0.8
人机交互完善性	充分	1	1	1	1
计划可用性	适当	0.8	1	0.5	0.8
目标数量	能力相符	1	1	1	1
可用的时间	充分	0.5	0.5	0.5	0.5
工作时间	可调整	1	1	1	1
经验水平	不充分	2	5	5	2
合作质量	有效	1	1	1	1
总权重(权重因子的连乘积)	0.64	2	1	0.512

人因差错事件	概率分布(分位数)/%
人因差错事件	5	50	95
精测基准选择不当	0.012 2	0.014 7	0.016 6
吊装操作失误	0.003 6	0.005 1	0.006 7
被测物没有固定	0.004 1	0.005 1	0.006 1

设备风险	概率分布(分位数)/%
设备风险	5	50	95
定位工装影响精度	0.006 7	0.008 8	0.010 1
安全防护装备故障	0.000 1	0.000 2	0.000 3

人机环耦合效应下卫星天线装配概率风险分析

Probabilistic risk analysis of satellite antenna assembly considering man-machine-environment coupling effect

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 18

参考文献 32

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

条件		概率分布
吊装操作失误		0		1
安全防护装备故障		0	1	0	1
安全防护风险	0	0.995	0.920	0.940	0.004
安全防护风险	1	0.005	0.080	0.060	0.996

后果状态	概率分布(分位数)/%
后果状态	5	50	95
任务成功	0.949 279	0.947 850	0.947 636
任务失败	0.045 617	0.047 012	0.047 186
人员伤害	0.005 104	0.005 138	0.005 178

排序	F-V重要度	基本事件
1	0.018 4	精测基准选择不当
2	0.011 2	基频测试位移过大
3	0.008 8	定位工装影响精度
4	0.007 5	零部件安装错位
5	0.006 2	热控与机构干涉

[1]	茹鑫鑫, 高晓光, 王阳阳. 基于模糊约束的贝叶斯网络参数学习[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2023, 45(2): 444-452.
[2]	李懿凡, 钱华明, 黄洪钟, 张庭瑜, 黄土地. 基于广义连续时间贝叶斯网络的指挥控制网络系统可靠性分析[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44(12): 3880-3886.
[3]	王鹏, 孙紫荆, 张帆, 肖国松. 考虑概率型共因失效的多阶段任务系统可靠性分析模型[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44(12): 3887-3898.
[4]	乔殿峰, 梁彦, 马超雄, 杨心语, 汪冕, 李建国. 多域作战下的群目标意图识别与预测[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44(11): 3403-3412.
[5]	刘延钊, 黄志球, 沈国华, 王金永, 徐恒. 基于决策树和BN的自动驾驶车辆行为决策方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44(10): 3143-3154.
[6]	赵禄达, 王斌. 基于RS-DBN的电子对抗目标清单生成方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(9): 2373-2382.
[7]	陈洪转, 赵爱佳, 李腾蛟, 蔡匆聪, 程硕, 徐春丽. 基于故障树的复杂装备模糊贝叶斯网络推理故障诊断[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(5): 1248-1261.
[8]	孙雪, 黄志球, 沈国华, 王金永, 徐恒. 基于本体和BN的无人车行为决策方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(2): 452-465.
[9]	赵长啸, 李浩, 董磊, 王鹏. 基于STPA-Bayes模型的机载平视显示系统安全性分析与评价[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2020, 42(5): 1083-1092.
[10]	曾强, 黄政, 魏曙寰. 融合专家先验知识和单调性约束的贝叶斯网络参数学习方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2020, 42(3): 646-652.
[11]	孟光磊, 周铭哲, 朴海音, 张慧敏. 基于协同战术识别的双机编队威胁评估方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2020, 42(10): 2285-2293.
[12]	李孝鹏, 黄洪钟, 李福秋. 基于PRA的复杂航天多阶段任务系统可靠性分析[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2019, 41(9): 2141-2147.
[13]	孙海文, 谢晓方, 孙涛, 张龙杰. 小样本数据缺失状态下DBN舰艇编队防空目标威胁评估方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2019, 41(6): 1300-1308.
[14]	吕学志, 胡晓峰, 吴琳, 贺筱媛. 基于改进竞争性假设分析的战役企图分析方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2019, 41(3): 555-563.
[15]	刘久富, 丁晓彬, 郑锐, 王彪, 刘海阳, 王志胜. 混沌量子粒子群的权重类条件贝叶斯网络分类器参数学习[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2019, 41(10): 2304-2309.

条件	概率分布
HM₁	0								1
H₁₁	0				1				0				1
H₁₂	0		1		0		1		0		1		0		1
M11	0	1	0	1	0	1	0	1	0	1	0	1	0	1	0	1
OK	0.989	0.859	0.849	0.809	0.849	0.809	0.779	0.749	0.940	0.810	0.800	0.760	0.810	0.760	0.760	0.700
LOM	0.010	0.140	0.150	0.190	0.150	0.190	0.220	0.250	0.010	0.140	0.150	0.190	0.140	0.190	0.190	0.250
LOC	0.001	0.001	0.001	0.001	0.001	0.001	0.001	0.001	0.050	0.050	0.050	0.050	0.050	0.050	0.050	0.050