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

Abstract

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

CLC Number:

TB114.3

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.

Figures/Tables 18

Fig.1

Fig.2

Table 1

Fig.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Table 7

Fig.8

Table 8

Table 9

Fig.9

References 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

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

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 18

References 32

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

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]	Xinxin RU, Xiaoguang GAO, Yangyang WANG. Bayesian network parameter learning based on fuzzy constraints [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2023, 45(2): 444-452.
[2]	Yifan LI, Huaming QIAN, Hongzhong HUANG, Tingyu ZHANG, Tudi HUANG. Reliability analysis of command and control network system based on generalized continuous time Bayesian network [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 44(12): 3880-3886.
[3]	Peng WANG, Zijing SUN, Fan ZHANG, Guosong XIAO. Reliability analysis model for phased-mission system considering probabilistic common cause failures [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 44(12): 3887-3898.
[4]	Dianfeng QIAO, Yan LIANG, Chaoxiong MA, Xinyu YANG, Mian WANG, Jianguo LI. Recognition and prediction of group target intention in multi-domain operations [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 44(11): 3403-3412.
[5]	Yanzhao LIU, Zhiqiu HUANG, Guohua SHEN, Jinyong WANG, Heng XU. Behavioral decision-making methods of autonomous vehicles based on decision tree and BN [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 44(10): 3143-3154.
[6]	Luda ZHAO, Bin WANG. Method of electronic countermeasure targets' list generation based on RS-DBN [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2021, 43(9): 2373-2382.
[7]	Hongzhuan CHEN, Aijia ZHAO, Tengjiao LI, Congcong CAI, Shuo CHENG, Chunli XU. Fuzzy Bayesian network inference fault diagnosis of complex equipment based on fault tree [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2021, 43(5): 1248-1261.
[8]	Xue SUN, Zhiqiu HUANG, Guohua SHEN, Jinyong WANG, Heng XU. Behavior decision method of autonomous vehicle based on ontology and BN [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2021, 43(2): 452-465.
[9]	Changxiao ZHAO, Hao LI, Lei DONG, Peng WANG. Safety analysis and evaluation of airborne HUD system based on STPA-Bayes model [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 42(5): 1083-1092.
[10]	Qiang ZENG, Zheng HUANG, Shuhuan WEI. Bayesian network parameter learning method based on expert priori knowledge and monotonic constraints [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 42(3): 646-652.
[11]	Guanglei MENG, Mingzhe ZHOU, Haiyin PIAO, Huimin ZHANG. Threat assessment method of dual-aircraft formation based on cooperative tactical recognition [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 42(10): 2285-2293.
[12]	LI Xiaopeng, HUANG Hongzhong, LI Fuqiu. PRA based reliability analysis of complex space phased-mission system [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 41(9): 2141-2147.
[13]	SUN Haiwen, XIE Xiaofang, SUN Tao, ZHANG Longjie. Threat assessment method of warships formation air defense based on DBN under the condition of small sample data missing [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 41(6): 1300-1308.
[14]	LIU Jiufu, DING Xiaobin, ZHENG Rui, WANG Biao, LIU Haiyang, WANG Zhisheng. Weighted class-conditional Bayesian network classifier parameter learning of chaos quantum particle swarm [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 41(10): 2304-2309.
[15]	LI Ming, ZHANG Ren, HONG Mei, BAI Chengzu. Improved structure learning algorithm of Bayesian network based on information flow [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2018, 40(6): 1385-1390.

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