Method for identifying and prioritizing fault location in a cable plant

• US 10,477,199 B2
• Filed: 03/15/2013
• Issued: 11/12/2019
• Est. Priority Date: 03/15/2013
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: ARRIS Enterprises LLC (CommScope Holding Company, Inc.)
• Original Assignee: ARRIS Enterprises LLC (CommScope Holding Company, Inc.)
• Inventors: Bowler, David B, Basile, Brian M
• Primary Examiner(s): Cho, Un C
• Assistant Examiner(s): Preval, Voster
• Application Number:
  US13/844,523
• Publication Number:
  US 20140267788A1
• Time in Patent Office: 2,433 Days
• Field of Search: 348192, 709223-262, 370241-253
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 41/0677 Localisation of faults
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 41/12 Discovery or management of network topologies
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 41/22 comprising specially adapted graphical user interfaces [GUI]
• CPC Class Codes: H04N 17/00 Diagnosis, testing or measuring for television systems or their details
• CPC Class Codes: H04N 17/004 for digital television systems
• CPC Class Codes: H04N 7/10 Adaptations for transmission by electrical cable H04N7/12 takes precedence

Abstract

A method of prioritizing estimated fault locations within a network includes monitoring multiple different performance parameters for unacceptable threshold levels via communications with a set of terminal network elements and separately analyzing the different performance parameters to identify potential network fault locations on the network. Accordingly, a plurality of priority rankings of potential network fault locations can be generated, one for each performance parameter monitored, and then combined to generate an overall priority ranking of potential fault locations including at least a highest priority inspection point estimated as being a most likely source of a fault on the network.

Claims

1. A method of prioritizing estimated fault locations within a network, comprising the steps of:

in at least one processor communicatively coupled to the network, monitoring a plurality of different performance parameters for unacceptable threshold levels via communications with a set of terminal network elements on the network;

in the at least one processor, separately analyzing each one of the plurality of different performance parameters identifying unacceptable threshold levels to identify potential network fault locations on the network;

in the at least one processor, generating a plurality of priority rankings of potential network fault locations, each of the plurality of priority rankings associated respectively with a most likely estimated fault location, and each of the plurality of priority rankings being determined from a different one of the plurality of different performance parameters identifying unacceptable threshold levels; and

in the at least one processor, combining information of each of the plurality of priority rankings to generate an overall priority ranking of potential network fault locations, wherein the overall priority ranking is associated with at least a highest priority inspection point, and wherein generating the overall priority ranking further includes estimating that one of the potential network fault locations is a most likely source of a fault on the network, and identifying said most likely source of a fault on the network as being the highest priority inspection point.

2. A method according to claim 1, further comprising the step of, for each of the plurality of priority rankings, assigning scores of pre-determined values to at least the most likely estimated fault location and a second most likely estimated fault location.

3. A method according to claim 2, wherein said combining step includes a step of totaling the scores attributed to each corresponding potential network fault location across the plurality of priority rankings to generate the overall priority ranking.

4. A method according to claim 3, wherein, for different potential network fault locations having an equal score as determined during said totaling step, a potential network fault location that is most upstream on a network path relative to a node component is assigned a higher ranking than other potential network fault locations having the equal score.

5. A method according to claim 1, further comprising a step of automatically generating a list of network components that require inspection and that includes at least the highest priority inspection point.

6. A method according to claim 1, wherein the set of terminal network elements includes terminal network elements sharing at least one of the potential network fault locations in common.

7. A method according to claim 4, wherein the set of terminal network elements are connected to a headend of the network via a common node of the network via paths arranged in a tree and branch network structure.

8. A method according to claim 1, further comprising the step of receiving information electronically of a physical topology of the network.

9. A method according to claim 8, wherein said receiving step including data pulls of information concerning network components and geographic locations of the network components and terminal network elements and geographic locations of the terminal network elements.

10. A method according to claim 9, further comprising the step of automatically and electronically populating a geographically-accurate map with a geographic location of a network component determined to be the most likely source of the fault, a geographic location of each the terminal network elements impacted by the network fault, and a diagnostic alarm identifying the network fault.

11. A method according to claim 10, further comprising the step of displaying the map with geospatial software.

12. A method according to claim 9, wherein the network components are selected from a group consisting of drop cables, taps, trunk cables, amplifiers, splitters, and node components.

13. The method according to claim 1, wherein the network is a cable network interconnecting the terminal network elements which include cable modems to a headend of the network having a cable modem termination system (CMTS), and wherein the communications include upstream communications in a direction from the terminal network elements to the headend.

14. The method according to claim 1, wherein a performance parameter of the plurality of different performance parameters monitored comprises one of:

a downstream signal-to-noise ratio, an upstream signal-to-noise ratio, an absolute and delta downstream power level, an absolute and delta upstream power level, an upstream echo level, a downstream micro-reflection level, an upstream filter coefficient ratio, a carrier-to-noise ratio, and a modulation error ratio.

15. A signal processing electronic device for prioritizing estimated fault locations within a network, comprising at least one processing unit configured to:

monitor a plurality of different performance parameters for unacceptable threshold levels via communications with a set of terminal network elements on the network;

separately analyze each one of the plurality of different performance parameters identifying unacceptable threshold levels to identify potential network fault locations on the network;

generate a plurality of priority rankings of potential network fault locations, each of the plurality of priority rankings associated respectively with a most likely estimated fault location, and each of the plurality of priority rankings being determined from a different one of the plurality of different performance parameters identifying unacceptable threshold levels; and

combine information of each of the plurality of priority rankings to generate an overall priority ranking of potential network fault locations, wherein the overall priority ranking is associated with at least a highest priority inspection point, and wherein to generate the overall priority ranking further includes to estimate that one of the potential network fault locations is a most likely source of a fault on the network, and to identify said most likely source of a fault on the network as being the highest priority inspection point.

16. A signal processing electronic device according to claim 15, the at least one processing unit being further configured to:

assign scores of pre-determined values to at least the most likely estimated fault location and a second most likely estimated fault location for each of the plurality of priority rankings and being configured to total the scores attributed to each corresponding potential network fault location across the plurality of priority rankings to generate the overall priority ranking.

17. A signal processing electronic device according to claim 15, the at least one processing unit being further configured to:

automatically generate a list of network components that require inspection and that includes the at least highest priority inspection point estimated as being the most likely source of the fault on the network.

18. A signal processing electronic device according to claim 15, the at least one processing unit being further configured to:

populate a geographically-accurate map with a geographic location of a network component determined to be the most likely source of the fault, a geographic location of each the terminal network elements impacted by the network fault, and a diagnostic alarm identifying the network fault.

19. A signal processing electronic device according to claim 15, the at least one processing unit being further configured to:

monitor performance parameters including at least one of a downstream signal-to-noise ratio, an upstream signal-to-noise ratio, an absolute and delta downstream power level, an absolute and delta upstream power level, an upstream echo level, a downstream micro-reflection level, an upstream filter coefficient ratio, a carrier-to-noise ratio, and a modulation error ratio.

20. At least one non-transitory computer readable storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform the following operations:

monitor a plurality of different performance parameters for unacceptable threshold levels via communications with a set of terminal network elements on a network;

separately analyze each one of the plurality of different performance parameters identifying unacceptable threshold levels to identify potential network fault locations on the network;

generate a plurality of priority rankings of potential network fault locations, each of the plurality of priority rankings associated respectively with a most likely estimated fault location, and each of the plurality of priority rankings being determined from a different one of the plurality of different performance parameters identifying unacceptable threshold levels; and

combine information of each of the plurality of priority rankings to generate an overall priority ranking of potential network fault locations, wherein the overall priority ranking is associated with at least a highest priority inspection point, and wherein to generate the overall priority ranking further includes to estimate that one of the potential network fault locations is a most likely source of a fault on the network, and to identify said most likely source of a fault on the network as being the highest priority inspection point.