Sensor fault detection systems and methods thereof

• US 20090240467A1
• Filed: 03/21/2008
• Published: 09/24/2009
• Est. Priority Date: 03/21/2008
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Rochester Institute of Technology
• Original Assignee: Rochester Institute of Technology
• Inventors: Anbari, Omar, Thurston, Michael G.
• Granted Patent: US 8,285,514 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 702/179
• CPC Class Codes: G05B 23/0221 Preprocessing measurements, e.g. data collection rate adjustment; Standardization of measurements; Time series or signal analysis, e.g. frequency analysis or wavelets; Trustworthiness of measurements; Indexes therefor; Measurements using easily measured parameters to estimate parameters difficult to measure; Virtual sensor creation; De-noising; Sensor fusion; Unconventional preprocessing inherently present in specific fault detection methods like PCA-based methods
• CPC Class Codes: G05B 9/02 electric

Abstract

A method, computer readable medium and system for detecting a sensor fault includes identifying one or more of a plurality of tools to use with at least one of a plurality of data acquisition systems based on data obtained from and at least one characteristic of the at least one of the data acquisition systems. The identified one or more tools are utilized on the obtained data to determine at least one confidence rating. An operational status for the at least one of the data acquisition systems is determined and provided based on at least the one determined confidence rating.

Claims

1. A method for detecting a sensor fault, the method comprising:

identifying one or more of a plurality of tools to use with at least one of a plurality of data acquisition systems based on data obtained from and at least one characteristic of the at least one of the data acquisition systems;

utilizing the identified one or more tools on the obtained data to determine at least one confidence rating; and

determining and providing an operational status for the at least one of the data acquisition systems based on at least the one determined confidence rating.

2. The method as set forth in claim 1 wherein the plurality of tools comprise two or more of a limit detection tool, a slope calculation tool, an autocorrelation tool, and a cross-correlation tool.

3. The method as set forth in claim 2 wherein the utilizing the limit detection tool further comprises:

obtaining at least one of an upper boundary and a lower boundary for the obtained data from the at least one of the data acquisition systems;

comparing the obtained data against at least one of the upper boundary and the lower boundary; and

determining a limit confidence rating based on the comparison.

4. The method as set forth in claim 2 wherein the utilizing the slope calculation tool further comprises:

obtaining at least a maximum change rate for the obtained data from the at least one of the data acquisition systems;

comparing a rate of change of the obtained data against the obtained maximum change rate; and

determining a slope confidence rating based on the comparison.

5. The method as set forth in claim 2 wherein the utilizing the autocorrelation tool further comprises:

obtaining a maximum allowable difference between the obtained data and a time shifted version of the obtained data as a function of an amount of a time shift;

comparing a difference between the obtained data and the time shifted version of the obtained data against the maximum allowable difference; and

determining an autocorrelation confidence rating based on the comparison.

6. The method as set forth in claim 2 wherein the utilizing the cross-correlation tool further comprises:

identifying data related to the obtained data;

obtaining a maximum allowable difference between the obtained data and the related data;

comparing a difference between the obtained data and the related data against the maximum allowable difference; and

determining a cross-correlation confidence rating based on the comparison.

7. The method as set forth in claim 1 further comprising determining a transducer rating for the at least one of the data acquisition systems, wherein the determining and providing the operational status is further based on the determined transducer rating.

8. The method as set forth in claim 1 further comprising measuring noise associated with obtained data from the at least one of the data acquisition systems, wherein the determining and providing the operational status is further based on the measured noise.

9. A computer readable medium having stored thereon instructions for detecting a sensor fault comprising machine executable code which when executed by at least one processor, causes the processor to perform steps comprising:

identifying one or more of a plurality of tools to use with at least one of a plurality of data acquisition systems based on data obtained from and at least one characteristic of the at least one of the data acquisition systems;

utilizing the identified one or more tools on the obtained data to determine at least one confidence rating; and

determining and providing an operational status for the at least one of the data acquisition systems based on at least the one determined confidence rating.

10. The medium as set forth in claim 9 wherein the plurality of tools comprise two or more of a limit detection tool, a slope calculation tool, an autocorrelation tool, and a cross-correlation tool.

11. The medium as set forth in claim 9 wherein the utilizing the limit detection tool further comprises:

obtaining at least one of an upper boundary and a lower boundary for the obtained data from the at least one of the data acquisition systems;

comparing the obtained data against at least one of the upper boundary and the lower boundary; and

determining a limit confidence rating based on the comparison.

12. The medium as set forth in claim 9 wherein the utilizing the slope calculation tool further comprises:

obtaining at least a maximum change rate for the obtained data from the at least one of the data acquisition systems;

comparing a rate of change of the obtained data against the obtained maximum change rate; and

determining a slope confidence rating based on the comparison.

13. The medium as set forth in claim 9 wherein the utilizing the autocorrelation tool further comprises:

obtaining a maximum allowable difference between the obtained data and a time shifted version of the obtained data as a function of an amount of a time shift;

comparing a difference between the obtained data and the time shifted version of the obtained data against the maximum allowable difference; and

determining an autocorrelation confidence rating based on the comparison.

14. The medium as set forth in claim 9 wherein the utilizing the cross-correlation tool further comprises:

identifying data related to the obtained data;

obtaining a maximum allowable difference between the obtained data and the related data;

comparing a difference between the obtained data and the related data against the maximum allowable difference; and

determining a cross-correlation confidence rating based on the comparison.

15. The medium as set forth in claim 9 further comprising determining a transducer rating for the at least one of the data acquisition systems, wherein the determining and providing the operational status is further based on the determined transducer rating.

16. The medium as set forth in claim 9 further comprising measuring noise associated with obtained data from the at least one of the data acquisition systems, wherein the determining and providing the operational status is further based on the measured noise.

17. A system that detects a sensor fault, the system comprising:

an identification system that identifies one or more of a plurality of tools to use with at least one of a plurality of data acquisition systems based on data obtained from and at least one characteristic of the at least one of the data acquisition systems;

a confidence system that utilizes the identified one or more tools on the obtained data to determine at least one confidence rating; and

an operational status system that determines and provides an operational status for the at least one of the data acquisition systems based on at least the one determined confidence rating.

18. The system as set forth in claim 17 wherein the plurality of tools comprise two or more of a limit detection tool, a slope calculation tool, an autocorrelation tool, and a cross-correlation tool.

19. The system as set forth in claim 18 wherein the limit detection tool further comprises:

a boundary system that obtains at least one of an upper boundary and a lower boundary for the obtained date from the at least one of the data acquisition systems; and

a comparison system that compares the obtained data against at least one of the upper boundary and the lower boundary;

wherein the confidence system determines a limit confidence rating based on the comparison.

20. The system as set forth in claim 18 wherein the slope calculation tool further comprises:

a boundary system that obtains at least a maximum change rate for the obtained data from the at least one of the data acquisition systems; and

a comparison system that compares a rate of change of the obtained data against the obtained maximum change rate;

wherein the confidence system determines a slope confidence rating based on the comparison.

21. The system as set forth in claim 18 wherein the autocorrelation tool further comprises:

a boundary system that obtains a maximum allowable difference between the obtained data and a time shifted version of the obtained data as a function of an amount of a time shift; and

a comparison system that compares a difference between the obtained data and the time shifted version of the obtained data against the maximum allowable difference; and

wherein the confidence system determines an autocorrelation confidence rating based on the comparison.

22. The system as set forth in claim 18 wherein the utilizing the cross-correlation tool further comprises:

a data search system that identifies data related to the obtained data;

a boundary system that obtains a maximum allowable difference between the obtained data and the related data; and

a comparison system that compares a difference between the obtained data and the related data against the maximum allowable difference;

wherein the confidence system determines a cross-correlation confidence rating based on the comparison.

23. The system as set forth in claim 17 further comprising a transducer rating system that determines a transducer rating for the at least one of the data acquisition systems, wherein the operational status system determines and provides the operational status further based on the determined transducer rating.

24. The system as set forth in claim 17 further comprising a noise measurement system that measures noise associated with obtained data from the at least one of the data acquisition systems, wherein the operational status system determines and provides the operational status further based on the measured noise.