Equipment has dual nature: physical objects existing in nature, and artificial objects designed by human. The decision on the configuration and structural parameters of equipment is made by engineers based on technical-physical effects which control the behavioral parameters of the equipment. Sensors are mounted on the equipment to monitor the equipment state. Current methods for state monitoring and diagnosis mostly use mathematics and artificial intelligence technology to construct evaluation methods. This paper presents an integrated design and state maintenance method, in which graph and dual graph are used for recording design data and sensor arrangement and for mapping method from signals to substructures and connection pairs. An example of state maintenance of hydro power generating equipment is illustrated.
state maintenance technical-physical effect signal-behavior-structure mapping graph
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
SHU Y D, ZHAO J S. A simplified Markov-based approach for safety integrity level verification [J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2014, 29: 262–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KHAKZAD N, KHAN F, AMYOTTE P. Safety analysis in process facilities: Comparison of fault tree and Bayesian network approaches [J]. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2011, 96: 925–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PODOFILLINI L, DANG V N, SCHERRER P. A Bayesian approach to treat expert-elicited probabilities in human reliability analysis model construction [J]. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2013, 117: 52–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LIU H H, HAN M H. A fault diagnosis method based on local mean decomposition and multi-scale entropy for roller bearings [J]. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 2014, 75: 67–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BREGONA A, DAIGLEB M, ROYCHOUDHURYC L, et al. An event-based distributed diagnosis framework using structural model decomposition [J]. Artificial Intelligence, 2014, 210: 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DENG X G, TIAN X M, CHEN S. Modified kernel principal component analysis based on local structure analysis and its application to nonlinear process fault diagnosis [J]. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 2013, 127: 195–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KAZARAS K, KONTOGIANNIS T, KIRYTOPOULOS K. Proactive assessment of breaches of safety constraints and causal organizational breakdowns in complex systems: A joint STAMP-VSM framework for safety assessment [J]. Safety Science, 2014, 62: 233–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SIMEU-ABAZI Z, MASCOLO M D, KNOTEK M. Fault diagnosis for discrete event systems: Modelling and verification [J]. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2010, 95: 369–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
POPPER K. Three worlds: The tanner lecture on human values [R]. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan, 1978.Google Scholar
ZHANG W, HOU Y M. Systematic safety analysis method for power generating equipment [J]. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University (Science), 2015, 20(4): 508–512.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar