LATENCY TOLERANT FAULT ISOLATION

• US 20150149024A1
• Filed: 11/22/2013
• Published: 05/28/2015
• Est. Priority Date: 11/22/2013
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Martin Marietta Corporation)
• Original Assignee: Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Martin Marietta Corporation)
• Inventors: Magson, James S.
• Application Number:
  US14/087,214
• Publication Number:
  US 20150149024A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 701/29.1
• CPC Class Codes: G05B 23/0283 Predictive maintenance, e.g. involving the monitoring of a system and, based on the monitoring results, taking decisions on the maintenance schedule of the monitored system; Estimating remaining useful life [RUL] preventive maintenance, i.e. planning maintenance according to the available resources without monitoring the system G06Q10/06
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/20 Administration of product repair or maintenance
• CPC Class Codes: G07C 5/00 Registering or indicating the working of vehicles
• CPC Class Codes: G07C 5/0808 Diagnosing performance data testing of vehicles G01M17/00; testing of electrical installation on vehicles G01R31/005

Abstract

A method of latency tolerant fault isolation is provided. The method includes receiving, by a maintenance data computer, evidence associated with a test failure. The maintenance data computer accesses metadata to identify a system failure mode associated with the evidence and other potential evidence associated with the system failure mode. The maintenance data computer determines a maximum predicted latency to receive the potential evidence associated with the system failure mode based on the metadata. The method also includes waiting up to the maximum predicted latency to determine whether one or more instances of the potential evidence associated with the system failure mode are received as additional evidence. The maintenance data computer diagnoses the system failure mode as a fault based on the evidence and the additional evidence.

Claims

1. A method of latency tolerant fault isolation, comprising:

receiving, by a maintenance data computer, evidence associated with a test failure;

accessing, by the maintenance data computer, metadata to identify a system failure mode associated with the evidence and other potential evidence associated with the system failure mode;

determining, by the maintenance data computer, a maximum predicted latency to receive the potential evidence associated with the system failure mode based on the metadata;

waiting up to the maximum predicted latency to determine whether one or more instances of the potential evidence associated with the system failure mode are received as additional evidence; and

diagnosing the system failure mode as a fault, by the maintenance data computer, based on the evidence and the additional evidence.

2. The method of claim 1, further comprising generating a maintenance work order based on diagnosing the fault.

3. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

reading the metadata from a non-volatile memory, wherein the metadata is formatted as one or more sparse matrices in the non-volatile memory; and

expanding the metadata into one or more full matrices comprising the evidence, the potential evidence, the system failure mode, a plurality of potential system failure modes, and a predicted latency associated with each of the instances of the potential evidence.

4. The method of claim 3, wherein the one or more full matrices are each a dependency model bigraph metadata model linking test failures of monitored subsystems as the evidence and the potential evidence to the system failure mode and the potential system failure modes with the predicted latency associated with each of the instances of the potential evidence providing a weighted link to determine the maximum predicted latency.

5. The method of claim 3, wherein the one or more full matrices are partitioned to isolate unrelated subsystems of the monitored subsystem from each other, the unrelated subsystems having no common evidence.

6. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

classifying the evidence as strong evidence based on determining that there is no potential evidence associated with the system failure mode based on the metadata;

classifying the evidence as weak evidence based on determining that there is potential evidence associated with the system failure mode based on the metadata; and

processing multiple instances of the strong evidence in parallel.

7. The method of claim 6, further comprising:

processing the weak evidence after processing any instances of the strong evidence; and

diagnosing the system failure mode as the fault prior to waiting for the maximum predicted latency upon receiving all of the potential evidence associated with the system failure mode.

8. A system for latency tolerant fault isolation, comprising:

a plurality of monitored subsystems; and

a maintenance data computer coupled to the monitored subsystems, the maintenance data computer comprising a processing circuit configured to;

receive evidence associated with a test failure;

access metadata to identify a system failure mode associated with the evidence and other potential evidence associated with the system failure mode;

determine a maximum predicted latency to receive the potential evidence associated with the system failure mode based on the metadata;

wait up to the maximum predicted latency to determine whether one or more instances of the potential evidence associated with the system failure mode are received as additional evidence; and

diagnose the system failure mode as a fault based on the evidence and the additional evidence.

9. The system of claim 8, wherein the maintenance data computer is configured to generate a maintenance work order based on diagnosing the fault.

10. The system of claim 8, wherein the maintenance data computer further comprises a non-volatile memory, and the maintenance data computer is configured to:

read the metadata from the non-volatile memory, wherein the metadata is formatted as one or more sparse matrices in the non-volatile memory; and

expand the metadata into one or more full matrices comprising the evidence, the potential evidence, the system failure mode, a plurality of potential system failure modes, and a predicted latency associated with each of the instances of the potential evidence.

11. The system of claim 10, wherein the one or more full matrices are each a dependency model bigraph metadata model linking test failures of monitored subsystems as the evidence and the potential evidence to the system failure mode and the potential system failure modes with the predicted latency associated with each of the instances of the potential evidence providing a weighted link to determine the maximum predicted latency.

12. The system of claim 10, wherein the one or more full matrices are partitioned to isolate unrelated subsystems of the monitored subsystem from each other, the unrelated subsystems having no common evidence.

13. The system of claim 8, wherein the maintenance data computer is configured to:

classify the evidence as strong evidence based on determining that there is no potential evidence associated with the system failure mode based on the metadata;

classify the evidence as weak evidence based on determining that there is potential evidence associated with the system failure mode based on the metadata; and

process multiple instances of the strong evidence in parallel.

14. The system of claim 13, wherein the maintenance data computer is configured to:

process the weak evidence after processing any instances of the strong evidence; and

diagnose the system failure mode as the fault prior to waiting for the maximum predicted latency upon receiving all of the potential evidence associated with the system failure mode.

15. A non-transitory computer-readable medium, having stored thereon program code which, when executed, controls a maintenance data computer to perform a method, the method comprising:

receiving evidence associated with a test failure;

accessing metadata to identify a system failure mode associated with the evidence and other potential evidence associated with the system failure mode;

determining a maximum predicted latency to receive the potential evidence associated with the system failure mode based on the metadata;

waiting up to the maximum predicted latency to determine whether one or more instances of the potential evidence associated with the system failure mode are received as additional evidence; and

diagnosing the system failure mode as a fault based on the evidence and the additional evidence.

16. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, further having stored thereon program code which, when executed, controls the maintenance data computer to perform a method, the method further comprising:

reading the metadata from a non-volatile memory, wherein the metadata is formatted as one or more sparse matrices in the non-volatile memory; and

expanding the metadata into one or more full matrices comprising the evidence, the potential evidence, the system failure mode, a plurality of potential system failure modes, and a predicted latency associated with each of the instances of the potential evidence.

17. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the one or more full matrices are each a dependency model bigraph metadata model linking test failures of monitored subsystems as the evidence and the potential evidence to the system failure mode and the potential system failure modes with the predicted latency associated with each of the instances of the potential evidence providing a weighted link to determine the maximum predicted latency.

18. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the one or more full matrices are partitioned to isolate unrelated subsystems of the monitored subsystem from each other, the unrelated subsystems having no common evidence.

19. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, further having stored thereon program code which, when executed, controls the maintenance data computer to perform a method, the method further comprising:

classifying the evidence as strong evidence based on determining that there is no potential evidence associated with the system failure mode based on the metadata;

classifying the evidence as weak evidence based on determining that there is potential evidence associated with the system failure mode based on the metadata; and

processing multiple instances of the strong evidence in parallel.

20. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 19, further having stored thereon program code which, when executed, controls the maintenance data computer to perform a method, the method further comprising:

processing the weak evidence after processing any instances of the strong evidence; and

diagnosing the system failure mode as the fault prior to waiting for the maximum predicted latency upon receiving all of the potential evidence associated with the system failure mode.