Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-06T20:30:00.027Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An innovative analytic redundancy approach to air data sensor fault detection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2019

S. Prabhu Open the ORCID record for S. Prabhu [Opens in a new window]  and
G. Anitha
S. Prabhu*
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Division of Avionics Madras Institute of Technology Campus Anna UniversityChennaiIndia
G. Anitha
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Division of Avionics Madras Institute of Technology Campus Anna UniversityChennaiIndia
*
vasanprabu155@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article presents a potential analytic redundancy approach to detect faults in the air data sensor of an aircraft. In modern aircraft, fault detection of air data sensors is performed using a complex voting mechanism, which requires the availability of redundant air data sensor in all situations. However, to continuously monitor operation and performance of these sensors, the analytic redundancy-based air data estimation and fault detection is highly preferred than estimation with air data probe measurements. The proposed algorithm uses the kinematics of aircraft to estimate air data and detect air data sensor fault. In this paper, a simple mathematical model is developed, which does not consider the forces and moments acting on aircraft and uses measurements only from the Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) and Navigation System Data (NSD). In order to implement this approach, the Iterated Optimal Extended Kalman Filter (IOEKF) is developed to estimate air data, which provides an accurate and stable estimation. With the estimated states, the physical air data sensor measurements are compared and the residual is calculated to track each sensor performance and to detect the occurrence of a fault. The key advantage of this approach is that it does not require complex dynamic equations and is free from system uncertainties. The proposed algorithm is simulated in MATLAB software using flight simulator flight data and validated using the real-time flight data of Cessna Citation II transport aircraft.

Keywords

ADSAnalytic redundancyNSDIOEKFResidualFD
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 124 , Issue 1273 , March 2020 , pp. 346 - 367
Copyright
© Royal Aeronautical Society 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Hajiyev, C. and Caliskan, F. Integrated sensor/actuator FDI and reconfigurable control for fault-tolerant flight control system design, The Aeronautical Journal , 2001, 105, (1051), pp 525–533, doi: 10.1017/S0001924000017966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berdjag, D., Zolghadri, A., Cieslak, J. and Goupil, P. Fault detection and isolation for redundant aircraft sensors, Conference on Control and Fault-Tolerant Systems, 2010, pp 137–142, doi: 10.1109/SYSTOL.2010.5675993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inseok, H., Sungwan, K., Youdan, K and Chze Eng, S. A Survey of fault detection, isolation, and reconfiguration methods, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems and Technology, 2010, 18, (3), pp 636–653 doi: 10.1109/TCST.2009.2026285.Google Scholar
Gao, Z., Cecati, C. and Ding, S.X. A Survey of fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant techniques—Part I: Fault diagnosis with model-based and signal-based approaches, IEEE transactions on industrial electronics, 2015, 62 (6), pp 3757–3767. Survey Review, doi: 10.1109/TIE.2015.2417501. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zolghadri, A. The challenge of advanced model-based FDIR for real-world flight-critical applications, Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 2018, 68, pp 249–259, doi: 10.1016/j.engappai.2017.10.012, Survey Review.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Japan transport safety board. Aircraft serious investigation report on Unreliable airspeed on both the captain’s side and the co-pilot’s side on 9 July 2016 to the Airbus A320-232 registered JA04JJ operated by Jetstar Japan, http://www.mlit.go.jp/jtsb/eng-air_report/JA04JJ.pdf, 2018.Google Scholar
Lombaerts, T. Fault Tolerant Flight Control – A Physical Model Approach, Ph.D. thesis, http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:538b0174-fe84-43af-954d-02f256b2ec50, 2010.Google Scholar
Bureau d’ Enquêtes et d’Analyses pour la sécurité de l’aviation civile. Report on the accident on 27 November 2008 to the Airbus A320-232 registered D-AXLA operated by XL Airways flight GXL888T Germany- Paris, Report, https://www.bea.aero/docspa/2008/d-la081127.en/pdf/d-la081127.en.pdf, 2010.Google Scholar
Bureau d’ Enquêtes et d’Analyses pour la sécurité de l’aviation civile, Final report on the accident on 1 June 2009 to the Airbus A330-203, https://www.bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp090601.en/pdf/f-cp090601.en.pdf, 2012.Google Scholar
Rohloff, J.T., Catton, I. and Whitmore, S. Fault-tolerant neural network algorithm for flush air data sensing, Journal of Aircraft, 1999, 36, (3), pp 541–549, doi: 10.2514/2.2489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, D.E., Atkins, E.M. and Ogura, S. Fault detection and fail-safe operation with a multiple-redundancy air-data system, Proceedings of the AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, 2010, pp. 1–14, doi: 10.2514/6.2010-7855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sevil, H.E. and Dogan, A. False fault detection in air data sensor due to non-uniform wind in aerial refueling, Proceedings of the AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, 2011, 2, doi: 10.2514/6.2010-7855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castaldi, P., Mimmo, N. and Simani, S. Avionic Air Data Sensors Fault Detection and Isolation by means of Singular Perturbation and Geometric Approach, MDPI Sensors J, 2017, 17, (10), 2202, doi: 10.3390/s17102202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freeman, P., Seiler, P. and Balas, G.J. Robust Fault Detection for Commercial Transport Air Data Probes, IFAC Proceedings, 2011, 44, (1), pp 13723–13728, doi: 10.3182/20110828-6-IT-1002.03750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ganguli, S. Airspeed estimation using servo current and aircraft model, Proceedings of the IEEE Digital Avionics System Conference, 2013, pp 4D3-1–4D3-11, doi: 10.1109/DASC.2013.6712592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, S. and Blanke, M. Diagnosis of Airspeed Measurement Faults for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 2014, 50, (1), pp 224–239, doi: 10.1109/TAES.2013.120420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Eykeren, L. and Chu, Q.P. Sensor fault detection and isolation for aircraft control systems by kinematic relations, Elsevier Journal of Control Engineering Practice, 2014, 31, pp 200–210, doi: 10.1016/j.conengprac.2014.02.017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fravolini, M.L., Delcore, G., Papa, U., Valigi, P. and Napolitano, M.R. Data-driven schemes for robust fault detection of air data system sensors, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 2017, 27, pp 234–248, doi: 10.1109/TCST.2017.2758345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goupil, P., Bauxell, J.B., Marcos, A., Cortet, E., Kerr, M. and Costa, H. AIRBUS efforts towards advanced real-time Fault Diagnosis and Fault Tolerant Control, IFAC Proceedings, 2014, 47, (3), pp 3471–3476, doi: 10.3182/20140824-6-ZA-1003.01945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lie, F.A.P. and Egziabher, D.G. Synthetic Air Data System, Journal of Aircraft, August 2013, 50, (4), pp 1234–1249, doi: 10.2514/1.C032177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, A., Kang, Y.S., Park, B.J. and Yoo, C.S. Airflow Angle and Wind Estimation Using GPS/INS Navigation Data and Airspeed, 13th International Conference on Control, Automation and Sys, 2013, pp 1321–1324, doi: 10.1109/ICCAS.2013.6704159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, C., Li, R.B., Liu, J.Y. and Lei, T.W. Air Data Estimation by Fusing Navigation System and Flight Control System, The Journal of Navigation, 2018, 71, (5), pp 1231–1246, doi: 10.1017/S037346331800022X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansari, A. and Bernstein, D.S. Aircraft sensor fault detection using state and input estimation, American Control Conference, 2016, pp. 5951–5956, doi: 10.1109/ACC.2016.7526603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'amato, E., Mattei, M., Notaro, I. and Scordamaglia, V. UAV Sensor FDI in Duplex Attitude Estimation Architectures Using a Set-Based Approach, IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, 2018, 67, 10, pp. 2465–2475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Havlík, J. and Straka, O. Performance evaluation of iterated extended Kalman filter with variable step-length, IOP Science Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2015, 659, doi: 10.1088/17426596/659/1/012022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, J., Netto, M. and Mili, L. A Robust Iterated Extended Kalman Filter for Power System Dynamic State Estimation, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2017, 32, (4), pp 3205–3216, doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2016.2628344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulder, J.A., Chu, Q.P., Sridhar, J.K., Breeman, J.H. and Laban, M. Non-linear aircraft fight path reconstruction review and new advances, Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 1999, 35, pp 673–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collinson, R.P.G. Introduction to Avionics Systems, Springer, 2003, US.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Julier, S.J. and Uhlmann, J.K. A new extension of the Kalman filter to nonlinear systems, Proceedings of the SPIE signal processing, sensor fusion, and target recognition, 1997, 3068, doi: 10.1117/12.280797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daum, F. Kalman Filters, Springer, 2014, London, UK. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4471-5102-9_61-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, P.M. and Ding, X. Survey of robust residual generation and evaluation methods in observer-based fault detection systems, Elsevier Journal of Process Control, 1997, 7, (6), pp 403–424, doi: 10.1016/S0959-1524(97)00016-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faitakis, Y.E., Thapliyal, S. and Kantor, J.C. Computing bounds for a simple fault detection scheme, Proceedings of the American Control Conference, 1994, pp 2638–2642, doi: 10.1109/ACC.1994.735037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, P., Van Eykeren, L., Van Kampen, V., De Visser, C.C. and Chu, Q.P. Adaptive three-step Kalman filter for air data sensor fault detection and diagnosis, AIAA Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, 2016, 39, (3), pp 590–604, doi: 10.2514/1.G001313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar