INERTIAL MEASUREMENT UNIT FAULT DETECTION ISOLATION RECONFIGURATION USING PARITY LOGIC

• US 20080262729A1
• Filed: 04/18/2007
• Published: 10/23/2008
• Est. Priority Date: 04/18/2007
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Honeywell International Inc.
• Original Assignee: Honeywell International Inc.
• Inventors: Zubkow, Zygmunt, Bacon, Robert R.
• Granted Patent: US 7,805,245 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 701/220
• CPC Class Codes: G01C 21/183 Compensation of inertial measurements, e.g. for temperature effects
• CPC Class Codes: G01C 25/005 initial alignment, calibration or starting-up of inertial devices
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/183 by voting, the voting not being performed by the redundant components
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/20 using active fault-masking, e.g. by switching out faulty elements or by switching in spare elements

Abstract

A method of implementing a fault-tolerant-avionic architecture in a vehicle includes using parity logic to monitor the functionality of at least three non-fault-tolerant inertial measurement units during a parity check and calculating a threshold from expected inertial measurement unit performance during a parity check. If a failure of an inertial measurement unit is detected based on the calculated threshold, then the method further includes identifying the failed inertial measurement units based on a direction of a parity vector in parity space. Each inertial measurement unit comprises at least one triad of sensors

Claims

1. A method of implementing a fault-tolerant-avionic architecture in a vehicle comprising:

using parity logic to monitor the functionality of at least three non-fault-tolerant inertial measurement units during a parity check, each inertial measurement unit comprising at least one triad of sensors;

calculating a threshold from expected inertial measurement unit performance during a parity check; and

if a failure of an inertial measurement unit is detected based on the calculated threshold, identifying the failed inertial measurement units based on a direction of a parity vector in parity space.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least three inertial measurement units comprise four inertial measurement units, the method further comprising:

suspending operation of the failed inertial measurement unit responsive to detecting the failure; and

operating three fully functioning operational inertial measurement units to track the vehicle responsive to detecting the failure.

3. The method of claim 2, wherein the failure is a first failure and the failed inertial measurement unit is a first failed inertial measurement unit, the method further comprising:

detecting a second failure of an inertial measurement unit.

4. The method of claim 3, further comprising:

operating a backup inertial measurement unit in the fault tolerant-avionic architecture to track the vehicle responsive to the second inertial measurement unit failure; and

continuing to use parity logic to monitor the functionality of operational measurement units including the backup inertial measurement unit.

5. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

operating a backup inertial measurement unit in the fault tolerant-avionics architecture to track the vehicle responsive to the inertial measurement unit failure; and

continuing to use parity logic to monitor the functionality of the operational inertial measurement units, including the backup inertial measurement unit.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein using parity logic to monitor the functionality of the at least three non-fault-tolerant inertial measurement units, comprises:

receiving information indicative of measurements of one of acceleration, rate and both rate and acceleration from the inertial measurement units;

forming measurement vectors based on a square of a magnitude of the received information indicative of measurements, wherein the measurement vectors are one of an acceleration vector, a rate vector and both the rate vector and the acceleration vector;

transposing the measurement vectors in a measurement space into parity vectors in a parity space, the parity space being orthogonal to the measurement space; and

dynamically calculating a magnitude squared of the parity vectors, and wherein calculating a threshold from expected inertial measurement unit performance comprises;

dynamically calculating a threshold for the magnitude squared of the measurement, the method further comprising;

comparing the magnitude squared of the parity vector to the threshold; and

when a magnitude of a parity vector is greater than the threshold, determining a failure of an inertial measurement unit.

7. The method of claim 6, wherein identifying the failed inertial measurement unit comprises:

determining a direction of the parity vector, wherein the parity vector points toward the failed inertial measurement unit.

8. The method of claim 7, the method further comprising:

filtering the received information indicative of the measurements with one of a short time constant, a long time constant, and both the long time constant and the short time constant, wherein forming measurement vectors based on the square of the magnitude of the received information indicative of measurements, comprises forming measurement vectors based on a square of a magnitude of the filtered information indicative of measurements.

9. The method of claim 6, wherein the triad of sensors comprises a triad of accelerometers, and wherein receiving the information indicative of the measurements comprises:

receiving information indicative of acceleration of the vehicle from the triad of accelerometers in each of the at least three inertial measurement units.

10. The method of claim 9, wherein the triad of sensors additionally comprises a triad of gyroscopes, and wherein receiving the information indicative of the measurements further comprises:

receiving information indicative of rate of the vehicle from the triad of gyroscopes in each of the at least three inertial measurement units.

11. The method of claim 6, wherein the triad of sensors comprises a triad of gyroscopes, and wherein receiving the information indicative of the measurements comprises:

receiving information indicative of rate of the vehicle from a triad of gyroscopes in each of the at least three inertial measurement units.

12. A program product comprising program instructions, embodied on a storage medium, that are operable to cause a programmable processor to:

receiving information indicative of measurements of one of acceleration, rate and both rate and acceleration from the inertial measurement units;

form measurement vectors based on a square of a magnitude of received information indicative of measurements, wherein the measurement vectors are one of acceleration-measurement vectors, rate-measurement vectors, and both acceleration-measurement vectors and rate-measurement vectors and wherein the sensed parameters are one of a sensed acceleration, a sensed velocity, and both the sensed acceleration and the sensed velocity;

transpose the measurement vectors in a measurement space into parity vectors in a parity space, the parity space being orthogonal to the measurement space; and

dynamically calculate a threshold for the magnitude squared of the sensed parameters;

compare the magnitude of the parity vectors to the threshold;

when a magnitude of the parity vector is greater than the threshold, determine a failure of an inertial measurement unit; and

when the magnitude of the parity vector is greater than the threshold, determine a direction of the parity vector, wherein the parity vector points toward the failed inertial measurement unit.

13. The program product of claim 12, further comprising instructions operable to cause the programmable processor to:

filter the received information indicative of the measurements with one of a long time constant, a short time constant and both the short time constant and the long time constant.

14. The program product of claim 12, further comprising instructions operable to cause the programmable processor to:

read one of sensed acceleration and angular velocity measurements from each of non-fault tolerant inertial measurement units, sensed acceleration from each of non-fault tolerant inertial measurement units, and sensed angular velocity measurements from each of non-fault tolerant inertial measurement units.

15. The program product of claim 12, further comprising instructions operable to cause the programmable processor to:

compute parity vectors from the acceleration-measurement vectors; and

compute the parity vector direction for each parity vector having a magnitude that exceeds the threshold.

16. The program product of claim 12, further comprising instructions operable to cause the programmable processor to:

compute parity vectors from the rate-measurement vectors; and

compute parity vector direction for each parity vector having a magnitude that exceeds the threshold.

17. The program product of claim 12, further comprising instructions operable to cause the programmable processor to:

compute parity vectors from the acceleration-measurement vectors and the rate-measurement vectors; and

compute the parity vector direction for each parity vector having a magnitude that exceeds the threshold.

18. A system to implement a fault-tolerant-avionic architecture in a vehicle comprises:

means for using parity logic to monitor the functionality of at least three non-fault-tolerant inertial measurement units during a parity check, each inertial measurement unit comprising at least one triad of sensors;

means for calculating a threshold from expected inertial measurement unit performance during a parity check;

means for identifying the failed inertial measurement units based on a direction of a parity vector in parity space if a failure of an inertial measurement unit is detected based on the calculated threshold;

means for suspending operation of the failed inertial measurement unit responsive to detecting the failure; and

means for operating at least three fully functioning inertial measurement units to track the vehicle responsive to detecting the failure.

19. The system of claim 18, further comprising:

means for operating a backup inertial measurement unit in the fault tolerant-avionic architecture to track the vehicle responsive to at least one inertial measurement unit failure; and

means for continuing to use parity logic to monitor the functionality of fully functioning measurement units including the backup inertial measurement unit.

20. The system of claim 18, further comprising:

means for suspending the use of the parity logic to monitor the functionality of at least three non-fault-tolerant inertial measurement units based on an input that the vehicle is in a non-critical-maneuver stage; and

means for continuing to use parity logic to monitor the functionality of at least three non-fault-tolerant inertial measurement units based on an input that the vehicle is in a critical-maneuver stage.