Hierarchical model-based complex equipment system fault propagation analysis method and system
Patent Information
- Authority / Receiving Office
- CN · China
- Patent Type
- Patents(China)
- Current Assignee / Owner
- CHINA AERO POLYTECH ESTAB
- Filing Date
- 2023-11-27
- Publication Date
- 2026-07-14
Smart Images
Figure CN117688730B_ABST
Abstract
Description
Technical Field
[0001] This invention relates to the field of safety analysis technology, and in particular to a method and system for analyzing the failure propagation of complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model. Background Technology
[0002] Complex equipment systems, such as aircraft, missiles, radars, and carrier-based aircraft, play a crucial role in production, transportation, and other fields. Complexity, a property existing between randomness and order, is the primary characteristic of complex equipment systems. The complexity of a system manifests in its interaction with the external environment, resulting in behaviors and characteristics that are difficult to predict. Besides complexity, complex equipment systems also possess hierarchical and interactive characteristics. Hierarchicality means that complex equipment systems can be divided into levels not only in terms of structure and function, but also in the different levels of fault generation and propagation. Interactivity means that the input and output relationships between different subsystems or components are interconnected and mutually influential, and in terms of fault propagation, a single point of failure can trigger a cascading failure. Complex equipment systems possess complexity and hierarchy in their structure, and interactivity in their function.
[0003] In the field of fault propagation analysis, there are currently many existing analytical methods. Newer and widely accepted methods include: System Theoretical Process Analysis (STPA), Functional Resonance Analysis (FRAM), and Multilevel Hazard Origin and Propagation Study (HIP-HOPS). STPA builds a model within the framework of system structure and behavior, but lacks analysis of system function. FRAM primarily analyzes function, but is mainly used for socio-technical systems and safety accident analysis. HIP-HOPS uses IF-FMEA to analyze failure logic, employing tables and verbal descriptions of fault causes, leading to ambiguity in the results. Therefore, the shortcomings of current fault propagation analysis methods can be summarized in three aspects: first, the analysis of system structure, function, and behavior is not comprehensive enough; second, ambiguity arises from natural language descriptions; and third, there is a lack of analytical methods applicable to the entire system lifecycle. Summary of the Invention
[0004] The purpose of this invention is to provide a method and system for fault propagation analysis of complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model. Considering the complexity and hierarchical nature of complex equipment systems, the invention provides a comprehensive analysis of the hierarchical relationships of the system from a two-dimensional perspective: vertical and horizontal.
[0005] A method for fault propagation analysis of complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model, comprising:
[0006] S1, Determine the analysis objectives and security requirements:
[0007] Define the boundaries of the analysis object, determine the analysis purpose and hierarchy of the analysis object based on the life cycle stage of the analysis object, and determine the security analysis requirements of the analysis object based on the stage of the analysis object.
[0008] S2, Establish a hierarchical model of the analysis object:
[0009] Based on the relationships between the hierarchical levels of the analysis objects, the structure of the analysis objects is sorted out, and a hierarchical model of the analysis objects is established. The hierarchical model of the analysis objects represents the hierarchical control structure of the analysis objects and describes the internal structure of the analysis objects and the interaction relationships between the structures.
[0010] S3, Establish the functional model of the analysis object:
[0011] Based on the hierarchical model of the analysis object, a functional model of the analysis object is established; the functional model reflects the functional transmission relationship between each level and between each component within each level, and describes the information and data flow between each level and between each component within each level.
[0012] S4, Establish the behavioral model of the analysis object:
[0013] Behavioral models represent the characteristics of variables in the analysis object as they change over time; they describe the behavioral state of each component by using the changing relationships between process variables, and use the relationships and deviations between variables to represent the behavioral state.
[0014] S5, Failure Logic Reasoning:
[0015] Based on the hierarchical model, functional model, and behavioral model of the analysis object, the failure logic of the analysis object is analyzed. Failure logic refers to the specific manifestations that cause behavioral deviations in the analysis object, and it describes the changes in the variable relationships that lead to component failure.
[0016] S6, Fault Propagation Path Analysis:
[0017] By traversing the causal relationships defined in the failure logic of each component, the failure propagation path in the entire analysis object is analyzed: the failure output of the previous component is taken as the failure input of the next component, and calculations and reasoning are performed according to the logical relationship to obtain the output of the next component, and so on. Through the layer-by-layer transmission of failure deviation, the analysis of the failure propagation path is completed.
[0018] Optionally, the hierarchy of the analysis object includes system, subsystem and component; the hierarchical model is a 3×3 hierarchical model, with system, subsystem and component in the vertical direction and function, behavior and structure in the horizontal direction.
[0019] Optionally, the functional and behavioral models of the analysis objects can be constructed using SysML tools.
[0020] Optionally, the behavioral model also includes the behavioral influence of people and the environment on the analyzed object, and describes it in the form of variables and biases.
[0021] This invention also provides a fault propagation analysis system for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model, comprising:
[0022] The requirements analysis module is used to determine the purpose of the analysis and security requirements.
[0023] Define the boundaries of the analysis object, determine the analysis purpose and hierarchy of the analysis object based on the life cycle stage of the analysis object, and determine the security analysis requirements of the analysis object based on the stage of the analysis object.
[0024] The hierarchical model module is used to build hierarchical models of the analysis objects.
[0025] Based on the relationships between the hierarchical levels of the analysis objects, the structure of the analysis objects is sorted out, and a hierarchical model of the analysis objects is established. The hierarchical model of the analysis objects represents the hierarchical control structure of the analysis objects and describes the internal structure of the analysis objects and the interaction relationships between the structures.
[0026] The functional model module is used to build the functional model of the analysis object.
[0027] Based on the hierarchical model of the analysis object, a functional model of the analysis object is established; the functional model reflects the functional transmission relationship between each level and between each component within each level, and describes the information and data flow between each level and between each component within each level.
[0028] The behavior model module is used to build a behavior model of the object being analyzed.
[0029] Behavioral models represent the characteristics of variables in the analysis object as they change over time; they describe the behavioral state of each component by using the changing relationships between process variables, and use the relationships and deviations between variables to represent the behavioral state.
[0030] The logic reasoning module is used for failure logic reasoning:
[0031] Based on the hierarchical model, functional model, and behavioral model of the analysis object, the failure logic of the analysis object is analyzed. Failure logic refers to the specific manifestations that cause behavioral deviations in the analysis object, and it describes the changes in the variable relationships that lead to component failure.
[0032] The fault propagation module is used for fault propagation path analysis.
[0033] By traversing the causal relationships defined in the failure logic of each component, the failure propagation path in the entire analysis object is analyzed: the failure output of the previous component is taken as the failure input of the next component, and calculations and reasoning are performed according to the logical relationship to obtain the output of the next component, and so on. Through the layer-by-layer transmission of failure deviation, the analysis of the failure propagation path is completed.
[0034] Optionally, the hierarchy of the analysis object includes system, subsystem and component; the hierarchical model is a 3×3 hierarchical model, with system, subsystem and component in the vertical direction and function, behavior and structure in the horizontal direction.
[0035] Optionally, the functional model module and the behavioral model module are implemented based on the SysML tool.
[0036] Optionally, the behavioral model also includes the behavioral influence of people and the environment on the analyzed object, and describes it in the form of variables and biases.
[0037] The effects of this invention are as follows:
[0038] This invention presents a fault propagation analysis method for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model. It analyzes the characteristics of complex equipment systems, focusing on complexity, hierarchy, and interactivity, and conducts targeted hierarchical relationship and security analysis of complex equipment systems.
[0039] This invention presents a fault propagation analysis method for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model. By studying the hierarchical relationships of the system, a 3×3 hierarchical model is given. The model analysis method is presented from six aspects: vertical system, subsystem, and component; and horizontal function, behavior, and structure. This makes the analysis process clearer and more organized.
[0040] This invention presents a fault propagation analysis method for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model. Building upon the 3×3 hierarchical model, it proposes a 3×3 analysis method. This method constructs a system model from the perspectives of function, behavior, and structure, and, combined with failure logic reasoning, can complete the fault propagation path analysis of complex equipment systems.
[0041] This invention presents a fault propagation analysis method for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model. The 3×3 analysis method employs a formal approach, using mathematical logic to formally describe the failure logic. This not only avoids the ambiguity of natural language but also facilitates subsequent verification and analysis.
[0042] This invention presents a fault propagation analysis method for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model. The 3×3 analysis method is applicable to different stages within the system's life cycle, making it easier for analysts to clarify the granularity of the models constructed at different stages during the safety analysis of complex equipment systems.
[0043] This invention presents a fault propagation analysis method for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model. The 3×3 analysis method can analyze not only the unsafe conditions of equipment but also the unsafe behaviors of people. Furthermore, it can combine the above two types of factors for simultaneous analysis, thus achieving a wider range of analytical objectives and considering more comprehensive factors. Attached Figure Description
[0044] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the fault propagation analysis method for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model, as described in this invention.
[0045] Figure 2 This is the 3×3 hierarchical model of the present invention;
[0046] Figure 3 The hierarchical and functional models of the wheel braking system are provided as examples.
[0047] Figure 4 A behavioral model of an example wheel braking system;
[0048] Figure 5 The failure logic of the selector valve is shown in the example.
[0049] Figure 6 This invention analyzes the security requirements of each stage of the analysis of the object.
[0050] Figure 7 This is a schematic diagram of the extended SysML state machine diagram elements of the present invention;
[0051] Figure 8 This is a schematic diagram illustrating the use of the improved state machine diagram to construct the failure logic in this invention;
[0052] Figure 9 This is a schematic diagram of a wheel braking system as an example. Detailed Implementation
[0053] Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the accompanying drawings.
[0054] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the fault propagation analysis method for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model, as described in this invention. Figure 1 As shown, this invention provides a method for fault propagation analysis of complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model, which includes:
[0055] S1, Determine the analysis objectives and security requirements:
[0056] The boundaries of the analysis object are defined, the analysis objective and hierarchy are determined based on the lifecycle stage of the analysis object, and the security analysis requirements of the analysis object are determined based on the stage of the analysis object. In this embodiment, the hierarchy of the analysis object includes system, subsystem, and component.
[0057] Security requirements of the analysis object at each stage, such as Figure 6 As shown.
[0058] S2, Establish a hierarchical model of the analysis object:
[0059] Based on the hierarchical relationships between the objects being analyzed, the structure of the objects is analyzed, and a hierarchical model of the objects is established. This hierarchical model represents the layered control structure of the objects, depicting their internal structure and the interactions between these structures. Subsequent analyses are all built upon this hierarchical model, ensuring the consistency of the constructed model.
[0060] Furthermore, such as Figure 2 As shown, vertically, the analysis object is divided into three layers: system layer, subsystem layer, and component layer. Horizontally, each part of the system, subsystem, and component can be analyzed from three aspects: function, behavior, and structure. Therefore, this hierarchical model is called a 3×3 hierarchical model.
[0061] The analysis of complex equipment systems proceeds from both vertical and horizontal perspectives, starting with a holistic vertical analysis followed by a horizontal analysis of each level. Vertically, the complex equipment system is divided into three layers: system, subsystem, and component. In product design, products are typically divided into seven levels: equipment system, equipment, system, subsystem, device, component, and parts. However, excessive layering is not conducive to system design, modeling, and analysis. This is because different research objectives exist at different stages of the complex equipment system's lifecycle, and not every analysis requires examining every level. Therefore, this invention simplifies the complex equipment system to three layers: system layer, subsystem layer, and component layer. The system layer represents the overall complex equipment system, the subsystem layer represents the individual subsystems that make up the complex equipment system, and the component layer is the collection of components that make up the subsystems. Taking a sand-mixing equipment system essential for oil extraction as an example, its system layer is the sand-mixing equipment system, the subsystem layer includes hydraulic subsystems, circulating cooling subsystems, sand conveying subsystems, etc., and the component layer includes hydraulic pumps, turbines, motors, electric motors, etc. In real-world complex equipment systems, it's not always necessary to divide them into only these three levels. Instead, the appropriate level should be selected based on the specific needs of the analysis. The purpose of using a 3×3 hierarchical model is to appropriately simplify complex equipment systems, decomposing complex problems to facilitate analysis. For example, if only the hydraulic subsystem is being analyzed, it can also be divided into three levels: system-subsystem-component.
[0062] From a horizontal perspective, each element in the three layers of system, subsystem, and component can be divided into three parts: function, behavior, and structure. Function refers to an attribute that can satisfy a certain requirement. Behavior refers to the characteristics of variables in a complex equipment system that change over time, primarily determined by the structure of the complex equipment system. The structure of a complex equipment system is a collection of interrelated system elements organized according to certain rules.
[0063] The study of hierarchical relationships in complex equipment systems is conducted top-down. It begins with a horizontal analysis starting at the system level. The system level's function is the starting point for the design of complex equipment systems, describing the tasks that the complex equipment system ultimately needs to accomplish. Since functional requirements are realized through behavior and implemented through structure, extending the functions of a complex equipment system leads to its behavior and structure. Simultaneously, the behavior of a complex equipment system requires a specific structure for implementation. Therefore, the relationship between these three parts—function, behavior, and structure—is as follows: Figure 2As shown in the diagram. Next, we extend vertically to the subsystem layer. Each subsystem in the subsystem layer can also be analyzed in terms of function, behavior, and structure. Continuing the vertical analysis downwards, we can extend from the subsystem layer to the component layer in terms of function and behavior. In fact, the structure of the component layer can be further extended downwards to the component layer, but due to the large number and high complexity of components in complex equipment systems, this invention will not further subdivide it.
[0064] In summary, in the design of complex equipment systems, functionality is the prerequisite for everything, and behavior is the foundation for the realization of functionality. Various types of components build up the entire complex equipment system, and structure is the fundamental condition for the existence of a complex equipment system.
[0065] S3, Establish the functional model of the analysis object:
[0066] Based on the hierarchical model of the analysis object, a functional model of the analysis object is established. The functional model reflects the functional transmission relationship between each level and between each component within each level, and describes the information and data flow between each level and between each component within each level.
[0067] S4, Establish the behavioral model of the analysis object:
[0068] Behavioral models represent the characteristics of variables in the analysis object as they change over time; they describe the behavioral state of each component by using the changing relationships between process variables, and use the relationships and deviations between variables to represent the behavioral state.
[0069] Behavioral models also include the behavioral influences of personnel and the environment on the analyzed object, described in the form of variables and biases. For example, a person opening a valve can be represented as: "operator→valve:1", where "operator" represents the person, "valve" represents the valve, "→" indicates that the behavior is applied to the valve by the person, ":" represents the result of the behavior, "1" represents true, and "0" represents false. The person opening the valve results in the "valve opening behavior," causing a change in the variable "flow rate greater than 0", which can be described as q>0; if the person does not open the valve, an erroneous behavior occurs, the valve does not produce a flow rate change, and the flow rate remains 0. This series of behaviors can be formally described as: operator→valve:0, q=0.
[0070] S5, Failure Logic Reasoning:
[0071] Based on the hierarchical model, functional model, and behavioral model of the analysis object, the failure logic of the analysis object is analyzed. Failure logic refers to the specific manifestations that cause behavioral deviations in the analysis object. Failure logic describes the changes in the variable relationships that lead to component failure.
[0072] Failure logic reasoning requires analyzing the state of the component and the conditions for state transitions.
[0073] In this embodiment, the hierarchical model, functional model, and behavioral model of the analysis object are constructed and the failure logic reasoning is analyzed based on the SysML tool.
[0074] Furthermore, the failure logic is reasoned using SysML tools:
[0075] In SysML, state diagrams are primarily used to describe the lifecycle of an object. State diagrams reveal all the states an object can reach, and the impact of different events on those states. Therefore, state diagrams can represent the state transitions of a component and the relationships between different states.
[0076] A component's functional state has two types: nominal state and failure state. The nominal state is the operating state of the analyzed object under normal conditions. The failure state refers to the state of the analyzed object after deviations have occurred. Failure logic can be represented using the logical relationships between the inputs, outputs, and deviations of key process variables, illustrating the component's current state. Each internal fault in the component's behavior or the impact of related components on itself can be represented using deviations.
[0077] However, to effectively describe failure logic using state diagrams, what's currently lacking is the representation of different component state types and failure deviations. To meet these requirements, the elements in the SysML state machine diagram have been expanded. Figure 7 The SysML elements in the improved state machine diagram are shown.
[0078] To illustrate how to use the improved state machine diagram to model failure logic in a 3×3 analysis framework, a general schematic diagram is provided here, such as... Figure 8 As shown.
[0079] exist Figure 8 The system contains one normal state path and two abnormal state paths. State analysis begins with the initial state, which is the normal state of component 1. The normal state path progresses from the initial state (component 1 normal), through the intermediate state (component 2 normal), and finally to the final state (component 3 normal). When component 1 experiences failure deviation 1, the state transitions to abnormal state 1, and the system terminates. When component 2 experiences failure deviation 2, the state transitions to abnormal state 2, and the system terminates.
[0080] S6, Fault Propagation Path Analysis:
[0081] By traversing the causal relationships defined in the failure logic of each component, the failure propagation path in the entire analysis object is analyzed: the failure output of the previous component is taken as the failure input of the next component, and calculations and reasoning are performed according to the logical relationship to obtain the output of the next component, and so on. Through the layer-by-layer transmission of failure deviation, the analysis of the failure propagation path is completed.
[0082] Specifically, the method of the present invention will be described below using a wheel braking system as an example:
[0083] like Figure 9 As shown, the wheel braking system consists of a Braking System Control Unit (BSCU), a hydraulic system, and other structures. The BSCU is an electronic device that calculates and sends normal limit commands, backup limit commands, and isolation valve opening / closing commands to the hydraulic system. The BSCU employs a dual-redundancy structure, utilizing collected aircraft operational data to achieve automatic control of the braking process. The hydraulic system consists of a normal circuit and a backup circuit. The normal circuit includes a green hydraulic pump, a normal circuit isolation valve, and a CMD / AS limit valve; the backup circuit includes a blue hydraulic pump, a backup circuit isolation valve, an accumulator pump, and an AS limit valve. Other mechanical structures include a selector valve and a manual braking component. The selector valve chooses the appropriate circuit by comparing the flow rate of the two circuits with its own output flow rate. The manual braking component ensures aircraft safety in the event of BSCU failure.
[0084] Figure 9 The variables next to the middle arrow represent key process variables in the component's output; S represents signal, and Q represents flow rate. By analyzing changes in the values of these key process variables, we can obtain deviations, failure types, and failure logic.
[0085] Based on the combination of the 3×3 analysis framework and model checking, as well as the correspondence between the 3×3 analysis framework and the SysML modeling language, formal modeling of the wheel braking system based on the 3×3 analysis framework is carried out.
[0086] Define the analysis objectives and security requirements
[0087] First, the main sources of hazards in the wheel braking system include: component failure (single component failure, multiple component failure), human behavior (nominal behavior, erroneous behavior), external environment (wet runway, icy runway), and sudden events (hydraulic oil leaks causing fires, collisions with foreign objects). Next, the safety requirements are clearly defined, and the most important factors in the wheel braking system are selected for analysis. The basic functioning of the wheel braking system is chosen as the safety requirement for analysis, meaning the wheel braking system should activate normally when needed and be able to perform its braking function.
[0088] Establish hierarchical and functional models
[0089] Based on the 3×3 analysis framework, the wheel braking system is hierarchically divided into a system level. The system level consists of four subsystems: a control subsystem, a hydraulic subsystem, a hydraulic redundancy subsystem, and a selection valve subsystem. A hierarchical model of the wheel braking system is established, as follows: Figure 3 As shown, there are information and functional transmission relationships between the various structures. Here, the key process variables of the wheel braking system are represented by the signal transmission and flow transmission of the components.
[0090] like Figure 3 As shown, the wheel braking system comprises four subsystems and twelve components. Their key process variables are displayed below "Values" in the module; for example, the key process variable output by the Command component is Signal1, and the key process variable output by the GreenPump component is Q1. Their respective functions are displayed below "Operations" in the module; for example, the function of the Command component is to output a signal, while the function of the GreenPump component is to output pressure.
[0091] Build a behavioral model
[0092] Sequence diagrams in SysML can be used to represent behavioral models within a 3×3 analysis framework. For example, a behavioral model of a wheel braking system can be established. Figure 4 As shown.
[0093] Figure 4 This indicates that after the operator presses the foot pedal, the BSCU subsystem receives the work command and transmits a signal. The selector valve receives the S1 signal and initially selects the green pump subsystem. However, the data returned by the green pump subsystem does not meet the requirements, causing the selector valve to switch to the blue pump subsystem. The blue pump subsystem returns data that meets the requirements, and then performs its work task, controlling the rotation of the wheel. Finally, the wheel performs the correct operation, providing feedback to the operator, who receives a message indicating that the task has been successfully completed.
[0094] Failure Logic Reasoning
[0095] SysML state machine diagrams can display the different states of a component and the transitions between those states. State machine diagrams can be used to represent failure logic, such as... Figure 5 As shown. The key process variables selected are flow rate Q, pressure P, and time t. The arrows indicate the transformation relationships between different states, and the text above the arrows is a mathematical description of the failure deviation.
[0096] Figure 5This section describes the method for describing the selector valve failure logic using an improved state machine diagram. The initial state starts with the selector valve normal, followed by the green pump circuit being normal, the green pump valve opening, and the state ending. The entire path consists of white state modules, representing modules in normal states. Another path is: selector valve normal, green pump circuit normal, green pump circuit malfunction due to reduced flow, green pump valve closing, blue pump circuit opening, blue pump circuit normal, and the state ending. In this path, although there is a green pump circuit malfunction, the existence of redundant circuits ensures the final state is normal.
[0097] Apart from these two normal situations, Figure 5 The document lists some failure scenarios caused by deviations, such as: delay faults due to t > t0 (i.e., starting too late in time); excessive flow faults due to Q >> Q0 (i.e., actual flow is much greater than normal flow); intermittent flow faults due to Q = variable (i.e., actual flow is a changing value); erroneous action faults due to action deviations; and logical inversion faults due to logical deviations.
[0098] This invention also provides a fault propagation analysis system for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model, comprising:
[0099] The requirements analysis module is used to determine the purpose of the analysis and security requirements.
[0100] Define the boundaries of the object of analysis, determine the analysis objectives and levels based on the lifecycle stage of the object, and determine the security analysis requirements of the object based on its stage.
[0101] The hierarchical model module is used to build hierarchical models of the analysis objects.
[0102] Based on the relationships between the hierarchical levels of the analysis objects, the structure of the analysis objects is sorted out, and a hierarchical model of the analysis objects is established. The hierarchical model of the analysis objects represents the hierarchical control structure of the analysis objects and describes the internal structure of the analysis objects and the interaction relationships between the structures.
[0103] The functional model module is used to build the functional model of the analysis object.
[0104] Based on the hierarchical model of the analysis object, a functional model of the analysis object is established. The functional model reflects the functional transmission relationship between each level and between each component within each level, and describes the information and data flow between each level and between each component within each level.
[0105] The behavior model module is used to build a behavior model of the object being analyzed.
[0106] Behavioral models represent the characteristics of variables in the analysis object as they change over time; they describe the behavioral state of each component by using the changing relationships between process variables, and use the relationships and deviations between variables to represent the behavioral state.
[0107] The logic reasoning module is used for failure logic reasoning:
[0108] Based on the hierarchical model, functional model, and behavioral model of the analysis object, the failure logic of the analysis object is analyzed. Failure logic refers to the specific manifestations that cause behavioral deviations in the analysis object. Failure logic describes the changes in the variable relationships that lead to component failure.
[0109] The fault propagation module is used for fault propagation path analysis.
[0110] By traversing the causal relationships defined in the failure logic of each component, the failure propagation path in the entire analysis object is analyzed: the failure output of the previous component is taken as the failure input of the next component, and calculations and reasoning are performed according to the logical relationship to obtain the output of the next component, and so on. Through the layer-by-layer transmission of failure deviation, the analysis of the failure propagation path is completed.
[0111] Optionally, the hierarchy of the analysis objects includes systems, subsystems, and components; the hierarchical model is a 3×3 hierarchical model, with systems, subsystems, and components vertically, and functions, behaviors, and structures horizontally.
[0112] Optionally, the functional model module and the behavioral model module are implemented based on the SysML tool.
[0113] Optionally, the behavioral model also includes the behavioral influences of people and the environment on the analyzed objects, described in the form of variables and biases.
[0114] The embodiments described above are merely preferred embodiments of the present invention and are not intended to limit the scope of the present invention. Various modifications and improvements made by those skilled in the art to the technical solutions of the present invention without departing from the spirit of the present invention should fall within the protection scope defined by the claims of the present invention.
Claims
1. A method for fault propagation analysis of complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model, characterized in that, It includes: S1, Determine the analysis objectives and security requirements: Define the boundaries of the analysis object, determine the analysis purpose and hierarchy of the analysis object based on the life cycle stage of the analysis object, and determine the security analysis requirements of the analysis object based on the life cycle stage of the analysis object. S2, Establish a hierarchical model of the analysis object: Based on the relationships between the hierarchical levels of the analysis objects, the structure of the analysis objects is sorted out, and a hierarchical model of the analysis objects is established. The hierarchical model of the analysis objects represents the hierarchical control structure of the analysis objects and describes the internal structure of the analysis objects and the interaction relationships between the structures. S3, Establish the functional model of the analysis object: Based on the hierarchical model of the analysis object, a functional model of the analysis object is established; the functional model reflects the functional transmission relationship between each level and between each component within each level, and describes the information and data flow between each level and between each component within each level. S4, Establish the behavioral model of the analysis object: Behavioral models represent the characteristics of variables in the analysis object as they change over time; they describe the behavioral state of each component by using the changing relationships between process variables, and use the relationships and deviations between variables to represent the behavioral state. S5, Failure Logic Reasoning: Based on the hierarchical model, functional model, and behavioral model of the analysis object, the failure logic of the analysis object is analyzed. Failure logic refers to the specific manifestations that cause behavioral deviations in the analysis object, and it describes the changes in the variable relationships that lead to component failure. S6, Fault Propagation Path Analysis: By traversing the causal relationships defined in the failure logic of each component, the failure propagation path in the entire analysis object is analyzed: the failure output of the previous component is taken as the failure input of the next component, and calculations and reasoning are performed according to the logical relationship to obtain the output of the next component, and so on. Through the layer-by-layer transmission of failure deviation, the analysis of the failure propagation path is completed.
2. The fault propagation analysis method for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model according to claim 1, characterized in that, The hierarchical structure of the analysis objects includes systems, subsystems, and components; the hierarchical model is a 3×3 hierarchical model, with systems, subsystems, and components vertically, and functions, behaviors, and structures horizontally.
3. The fault propagation analysis method for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model according to claim 1, characterized in that, This document describes how to construct functional and behavioral models of the objects being analyzed using SysML tools.
4. The fault propagation analysis method for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model according to claim 1, characterized in that, The behavioral model also includes the behavioral influence of people and the environment on the analyzed object, and describes it in the form of variables and biases.
5. A fault propagation analysis system for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model, characterized in that, It includes: The requirements analysis module is used to determine the purpose of the analysis and security requirements. Define the boundaries of the analysis object, determine the analysis purpose and hierarchy of the analysis object based on the life cycle stage of the analysis object, and determine the security analysis requirements of the analysis object based on the life cycle stage of the analysis object. The hierarchical model module is used to build hierarchical models of the analysis objects. Based on the relationships between the hierarchical levels of the analysis objects, the structure of the analysis objects is sorted out, and a hierarchical model of the analysis objects is established. The hierarchical model of the analysis objects represents the hierarchical control structure of the analysis objects and describes the internal structure of the analysis objects and the interaction relationships between the structures. The functional model module is used to build the functional model of the analysis object. Based on the hierarchical model of the analysis object, a functional model of the analysis object is established; the functional model reflects the functional transmission relationship between each level and between each component within each level, and describes the information and data flow between each level and between each component within each level. The behavior model module is used to build a behavior model of the object being analyzed. Behavioral models represent the characteristics of variables in the analysis object as they change over time; they describe the behavioral state of each component by using the changing relationships between process variables, and use the relationships and deviations between variables to represent the behavioral state. The logic reasoning module is used for failure logic reasoning: Based on the hierarchical model, functional model, and behavioral model of the analysis object, the failure logic of the analysis object is analyzed. Failure logic refers to the specific manifestations that cause behavioral deviations in the analysis object, and it describes the changes in the variable relationships that lead to component failure. The fault propagation module is used for fault propagation path analysis. By traversing the causal relationships defined in the failure logic of each component, the failure propagation path in the entire analysis object is analyzed: the failure output of the previous component is taken as the failure input of the next component, and calculations and reasoning are performed according to the logical relationship to obtain the output of the next component, and so on. Through the layer-by-layer transmission of failure deviation, the analysis of the failure propagation path is completed.
6. The fault propagation analysis system for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model according to claim 5, characterized in that, The hierarchical structure of the analysis objects includes systems, subsystems, and components; the hierarchical model is a 3×3 hierarchical model, with systems, subsystems, and components vertically, and functions, behaviors, and structures horizontally.
7. The fault propagation analysis system for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model according to claim 5, characterized in that, The functional model module and the behavioral model module are implemented based on the SysML tool.
8. The fault propagation analysis system for complex equipment systems based on a hierarchical model according to claim 5, characterized in that, The behavioral model also includes the behavioral influence of people and the environment on the analyzed object, and describes it in the form of variables and biases.