期刊文献+

基于极值理论的飞控系统故障后风险定量评估 被引量:2

Quantitative assessment of flight risk based on extreme value theory
原文传递
导出
摘要 研究了基于极值理论(EVT)的低频高危事件定量评估方法.构建了考虑驾驶员响应的飞控系统故障后评估模型,介绍了角速率传感器故障后极值样本的获取方法.利用非线性优化模型对极值理论中常用的线性模型进行了改进,针对极值样本分布模型中参数的辨识,对比了几种优化算法对文中评估模型的适用性.采用四种优化算法对模型参数进行了对比辨识以寻求飞行风险条件概率最优解,得出了自适应粒子群算法对文中评估模型适应度最高的结论.最后将传感器故障风险概率加入有驾驶员响应环节的马尔科夫过程模型对飞控系统风险概率进行动态定量评估.其最终结果可为定量评估某型机操纵系统的动态可靠性提供理论依据. Flight risk has the characters of small probability and great hazard. In order to assess it quantitatively, extreme value theory (EVT) was adopted to analyze the distribution of decisive parameters. Firstly the fault model that takes pilot response into consideration was built, then a method of acquiring the extreme sample when the angular rate sensor breaks down was introduced. After that, the distribution of the decisive parameters was obtained using the simulation system; then non-linear model was used to replace the inaccurate linear model that is widely used in the process of identifying the extreme value distribution. In order to solve the uncertainty in the fitting process, four optimization algorithms were taken to identify the model parameters contrastively and the adaptive range particle swarm optimization (ARPSO) was found to be the best suitable algorithm. The acquired risk probability was then taken into Markov model that involves pilot mode to evaluate the compositive flight risk of control system quantitatively. The results can evaluate the dynamic reliability in some certain airplanes' control system.
出处 《系统工程理论与实践》 EI CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2013年第2期538-544,共7页 Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice
基金 国家自然科学基金(60572172 61074007)
关键词 飞行风险概率 极值理论 人-机系统 角速率传感器 自适应区间粒子群 flight risk probability extreme value theory (EVT) pilot-aircraft system angular rate sensor adaptive range particle swarm optimization (ARPSO)
  • 相关文献

参考文献5

二级参考文献12

  • 1徐浩军,吴利荣,朱建太.某型飞机高原机场放起落架的安全高度[J].空军工程大学学报(自然科学版),2002,3(1):14-17. 被引量:4
  • 2王永熙.飞行控制系统对驾驶员诱发振荡的影响[J].航空学报,1997,18(1):17-21. 被引量:3
  • 3Roelne A L C.The development of aviation safety performance indicators:An exploratory study[M].Amsterdam,Netherlands:National Aerospace Laboratory,1998:12-16. 被引量:1
  • 4Warren D.Guidelines and methods for conducting the safety assessment process on civil airborne systems and equipments[S].SAE ARP4761,U S:Aerospace Recommended Practice,1996:46~55. 被引量:1
  • 5Robert D.CFIT checklist:Evaluate the risk and take action[M].Alexandria,VA,U S:The Flight Safety Foundation.1994:43-49. 被引量:1
  • 6Biggs D,Hamilton C.Risk indicators and their link with air carrier safety[J].Flight Safety Foundation Digest,2001(10):1-6. 被引量:1
  • 7Jones S.An overview of the NASA aviation safety program assessment process[C]//Proceeding of AIAA's 3rd Annual Aviation Technology,Integration,and Operations.Denver,Colorado,U.S:AIAA.2003:17-22. 被引量:1
  • 8Amato F, et al. Analysis of pilot-induced oscillations due top osition and rate saturations [A]. Proceeding of the 39th IEEE ConIerence on Decision and Control [ C]. Sydney ,Australia, December, 2000. 3564 - 3569. 被引量:1
  • 9Dula H. Prediction of pilot-in-the-lcop oscillations due to rate saturation[J]. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics,1997,20(3) :581 - 587. 被引量:1
  • 10Chen T N, Xu H J. Research summary on longitudinal PIO for four types of supersonic fighter[R]. NPU/AIAA AFM 96-003,1996. 被引量:1

共引文献17

同被引文献14

引证文献2

二级引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部