Active System Control: Realisation
This chapter continues the discussion of how our approach of using active system control (ASC) can be applied to aircraft design. First we introduce a generic model of ASC as it applies to detecting and coping with faults of system elements. We also briefly introduce our graph logic model (GLM) and describe its logic and algebraic properties. Then we describe, in terms of a GLM, the key algorithms to detect fault elements of the system and recover, followed by a more formal definition of how the algorithms of fault detection work iteratively, seeking to resolve the uncertainty of system conditions.
The recovery scheme for a system, based on dependency matrices introduced in previous chapters, is explained, outlining how the recovery activities can be chosen when faulty elements are discovered.
Finally, we give a practical example, based on Pitot tubes—which are widely used in aircraft for measuring air pressure—to illustrate how the whole scheme can work in practice using the GLM and detection algorithms for modelling an air pressure control system.
KeywordsActive system control (ASC) Active system safety Graph logic model (GLM) Localisation of faults Recovery schemes Air pressure monitoring system
Dr. V. Bukov, working as a consultant for the ONBASS project , contributed to the “algebraic” description of the GLM representation, while his colleagues contributed to modelling and simulation of an experimental aircraft air pressure monitoring system. We sincerely appreciate the help of our colleagues and friends and offer our heartfelt thanks.
- 1.Schagaev I, Sogomonyan E (1988) Hardware and software of fail-safe computing systems Automat. i Telemekh 2:3–39Google Scholar
- 3.Schagaev I, Kirk B, Schagaev A (2006) Method and apparatus of active system. UK Patent GB 2448351Google Scholar
- 4.Schagaev I Reliability of malfunction tolerance. In: Proceedings of the international multi-conference on computer science and information technology pp.733–738, ISBN:978-83-60810-14-9, issn:1896–7094, 2011Google Scholar
- 5.Castano V, Schagaev I (2015) Resilient computer system design. Springer, ISBN 978-3-319-15069-7Google Scholar
- 6.Schagaev I, Kaegi T (2015) Software design for resilient computer systems. Springer-NatureGoogle Scholar
- 7.Deliverable D1.2 (2005) ONBASS project, FP 6, ECGoogle Scholar
- 8.Schagaev I., Control operators vs graph logic model, Proceedings of the International Conference on Foundations of Computer Science (FCS), WorldComp 2014, USAGoogle Scholar
- 10.Kirk B et al. (2007) Active safety for aviation, 6th INO workshop, Eurocontrol Experimental Centre, 04 December 2007Google Scholar
- 11.Kirk B et al. (2007) Analytical synthesis of aircraft control laws. Paper presented at the 2nd European conference for Aerospace Sciences (EUCASS), 11 July 2007Google Scholar
- 12.Schagaev I (1990) Using software recovery for determining the type of hardware fault. Autom Remote Control 51((3) Part 2):400–409Google Scholar
- 13.Fault tree handbook with aerospace applications (2002). www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codeq/doctree/fthb.pdf
- 14.Шагаев И.В (1990) Определение типа неисправности аппаратуры программными средствами восстановления вычислительного процесса. Автомат.и телемех выпуск 3:151–160Google Scholar
- 15.Blaeser L et al. (2014) Evolving systems. CSREA PressGoogle Scholar
- 16.Schagaev I (1986) Detecting defective computer in two-unit, fault-tolerant system using a sliding stand-by unit. Autom Remote Control 47(5)part 2: 717–723Google Scholar
- 17.PASS: Principle of active system safety, Report on visit Airbus HQ 29.03.06 http://www.it-acs.co.uk/files/Airbus_visit.pdf