Component Fault Tree Analysis for Dormant System Failure States
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current safety assurance methods for complex systems, such as aerospace and automotive, face challenges in identifying dormant system failure states, which are not immediately evident and require significant manual effort, leading to potential hazards and errors.
Innovation Solution
A computer-implemented method using a component fault tree (CFT) to model multi-component control or actuator systems, correlating operational and diagnostic failure events to identify dormant and non-dormant system failure states, facilitating automatic detection and optimization of diagnostic measures.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If manual identification of dormant system failure states is performed based on system design information, then complete identification of failure states can be achieved, but the effort and time required increase drastically with system complexity
Solution Approach 1:
The patent replaces manual mechanical analysis with automated computer-based analysis. The system automatically generates fault trees from system design information and performs correlation analysis between operational and diagnostic failure events, eliminating the need for manual identification while maintaining completeness.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent creates a virtual model (fault tree) that copies the system's failure behavior. By analyzing this copied representation rather than the physical system directly, the method enables automated identification of dormant failure states without manual intervention.
2Reliability
If manual identification of dormant system failure states is performed, then comprehensive safety analysis can be conducted, but errors may occur due to human factors
Solution Approach 1:
The patent replaces human analysts with automated computer-based analysis. The system programmatically correlates operational and diagnostic failure events, eliminating human errors such as oversight, fatigue, or inconsistency while maintaining thorough safety analysis.
Solution Approach 2:
The system performs self-analysis by automatically generating fault trees and identifying dormant failure states without human intervention. The computer-based method serves itself to conduct the safety analysis, eliminating the need for human analysts and their associated errors.
3Adaptability or versatility
If manual specification of diagnostic measures is performed, then tailored diagnostic solutions can be developed, but significant effort and potential errors are required
Solution Approach 1:
The patent replaces manual specification of diagnostic measures with automated computer-based generation. The system automatically determines appropriate diagnostic measures based on the correlated failure events, maintaining adaptability to different systems while eliminating the complexity and errors of manual specification.
Solution Approach 2:
The system performs preliminary analysis by automatically generating fault trees and identifying failure states before diagnostic measures need to be specified. This preliminary automated work provides the foundation for automatically determining appropriate diagnostic measures, reducing the complexity of the specification process.
Data Source
Figure 1~2
Figure 3
Figure 4
AI summary
Techniques of safety assurance using fault trees for identifying dormant system failure states are descried. According to the invention, both, operational failure events, as well as diagnostic failure events are included in a fault tree and the operational failure events are then correlated with the diagnostic failure events. This enables to identify the dormant system failure states. In embodiments, a component fault tree is used.