Aircraft Failure Effects Modeling for Cascading Hazard Assessment

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for analyzing cumulative effects of system failures in complex systems, such as aircraft, are labor-intensive and lack automation, making them impractical for comprehensive assessment, especially in highly integrated systems where cascading failures can occur.

Innovation Solution

A failure-effect validation system that includes an effects modeler and model analysis system to develop cumulative effects models, perform automated analysis, and generate visual layouts of results, enabling efficient identification and evaluation of cascading failures across multiple systems.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If traditional manual analysis methods are used to assess cumulative effects of system failures, then analysis depth can be maintained for individual systems, but the breadth of coverage and productivity deteriorate due to labor intensity and impracticality for comprehensive assessment

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveanalysis depthVSAvoidbreadth of coverage
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the complex system into multiple subsystems and further into individual components, creating a hierarchical structure where failure effects can be analyzed at different levels. This segmentation enables automated propagation of failure effects through defined relationships between components, maintaining analysis depth while expanding coverage to entire systems.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces an automated analysis system that acts as an intermediary between system designers and failure effect assessment. This intermediary automatically propagates failure effects through the system model, performs hazard categorization, and generates analysis results, thereby increasing productivity and breadth of coverage while maintaining precision through systematic automated analysis.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Loss of energy

If traditional manual analysis methods are used for cumulative effects assessment, then resource consumption can be controlled, but productivity and efficiency deteriorate due to labor intensity

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresource consumptionVSAvoidefficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of energyVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a self-service automated analysis system that performs failure effect propagation, hazard categorization, and result generation without requiring manual intervention for each analysis task. The system automatically processes failure scenarios, traverses system models, and produces comprehensive assessment results, thereby dramatically improving efficiency while resource consumption is managed through automated resource allocation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Reliability

If the system model is extended to include cumulative effects model for comprehensive failure assessment, then analysis completeness improves, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveanalysis completenessVSAvoidmodel complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent employs a nested model structure where a cumulative effects model is embedded within the extended system model. The cumulative effects model contains hazard categorization logic and analysis rules that operate within the context of the broader system model. This nesting enables comprehensive failure assessment while managing complexity through hierarchical organization of model elements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #7Nested doll (Nesting)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent creates a universal cumulative effects model that can be applied to multiple different system configurations and failure scenarios. The model uses standardized hazard categorization criteria and failure propagation rules that work across diverse system types, thereby improving analysis completeness while reducing the need for system-specific complex modeling.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentEP2827209B1System and method for assessing cumulative effects of a failure in an aircraft
Publication Date: 2022.01.26 THE BOEING CO
  • EP2827209B1 patent drawingFigure 1~2
  • EP2827209B1 patent drawingFigure 3
  • EP2827209B1 patent drawingFigure 4~5

AI summary

A failure-effect validation system (100) includes an effects modeler (104) configured to develop a cumulative effects (600) model for failure modes (302) of the complex system, and by which a model of the complex system is extendible to form an extended complex-system model. The effects modeler (104) is also configured to develop search targets each of which includes logical expressions of notable hazards (304) and other factors that contribute to the cumulative effects (600), such as crew workload (306), safety margin (606) and/or physiological effects (608). A model analysis system (106) is configured to perform an automated analysis using the extended complex-system model and search targets, and in which the automated analysis includes a graph search of possible states of the extended complex-system model to locate search targets. And the effects assessment system (108) is configured to selectively generate a layout of failure analysis data including at least a portion of the extended complex-system model and results of the automated analysis.