logo

SCIENTIA SINICA Informationis, Volume 50 , Issue 10 : 1559(2020) https://doi.org/10.1360/SSI-2019-0148

A safety assessment method for a liquid launch rocket based on the belief rule base with environmental disturbance

More info
  • ReceivedJul 11, 2019
  • AcceptedOct 15, 2019
  • PublishedOct 16, 2020

Abstract


Funded by

国家自然科学基金(61751304,61833016,61873273,61702142,61773388,61603398)


References

[1] Zhao L Y, Gu J F. The application of probabilistic risk assessment approach to the safety analysis of one specific type of launch vehicle in China. Systems Engineering-Theory and Practice, 2000, 20: 91--97. Google Scholar

[2] Zhang X, Xu H P, An X Y, et al. Discussion on the fault level evaluation method for the steady process of liquid propellant rocket engine based on cluster analysis. Missiles Space Veh, 2015, 4: 24--35. Google Scholar

[3] Yang J B, Liu J, Wang J. Belief rule-base inference methodology using the evidential reasoning Approach-RIMER. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A, 2006, 36: 266-285 CrossRef Google Scholar

[4] Yang J B, Xu D L. Evidential reasoning rule for evidence combination. Artificial Intelligence, 2013, 205: 1-29 CrossRef Google Scholar

[5] Kong G, Xu D L, Yang J B. Belief rule-based inference for predicting trauma outcome. Knowl-Based Syst, 2016, 95: 35-44 CrossRef Google Scholar

[6] Hu G Y, Zhou Z J, Zhang B C. A method for predicting the network security situation based on hidden BRB model and revised CMA-ES algorithm. Appl Soft Computing, 2016, 48: 404-418 CrossRef Google Scholar

[7] Feng Z C, Zhou Z J, Hu C H. A New Belief Rule Base Model With Attribute Reliability. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst, 2019, 27: 903-916 CrossRef Google Scholar

[8] He W, Liu L C, Yang J P. Reliability analysis of stiffened tank-roof stability with multiple random variables using minimum distance and Lagrange methods. Eng Failure Anal, 2013, 32: 304-311 CrossRef Google Scholar

[9] Zhou Z J, Hu C H, Hu G Y. Hidden Behavior Prediction of Complex Systems Under Testing Influence Based on Semiquantitative Information and Belief Rule Base. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst, 2015, 23: 2371-2386 CrossRef Google Scholar

[10] Zhou Z G, Liu F, Li L L. A cooperative belief rule based decision support system for lymph node metastasis diagnosis in gastric cancer. Knowl-Based Syst, 2015, 85: 62-70 CrossRef Google Scholar

[11] Li G L, Zhou Z J, Hu C H. A new safety assessment model for complex system based on the conditional generalized minimum variance and the belief rule base. Saf Sci, 2017, 93: 108-120 CrossRef Google Scholar

[12] Zhou Z J, Hu G Y, Zhang B C. A Model for Hidden Behavior Prediction of Complex Systems Based on Belief Rule Base and Power Set. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst, 2018, 48: 1649-1655 CrossRef Google Scholar

[13] Zhou Z J, Chang L L, Hu C H. A New BRB-ER-Based Model for Assessing the Lives of Products Using Both Failure Data and Expert Knowledge. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst, 2016, 46: 1529-1543 CrossRef Google Scholar

[14] Zhou Z J, Feng Z C, Hu C H, et al. A hidden fault prediction model based on the belief rule base with power set and considering attribute reliability. Sci China Inf Sci, 2019, 62: 202202. Google Scholar

[15] Chen Y W, Yang J B, Pan C C. Identification of uncertain nonlinear systems: Constructing belief rule-based models. Knowl-Based Syst, 2015, 73: 124-133 CrossRef Google Scholar

[16] Feng Z C, Zhou Z J, Hu C H. Fault Diagnosis Based on Belief Rule Base With Considering Attribute Correlation. IEEE Access, 2018, 6: 2055-2067 CrossRef Google Scholar

[17] Zhao F J, Zhou Z J, Hu C H. A New Evidential Reasoning-Based Method for Online Safety Assessment of Complex Systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst, 2018, 48: 954-966 CrossRef Google Scholar

[18] Yin X J, Zhang B C, Zhou Z J. A new health estimation model for CNC machine tool based on infinite irrelevance and belief rule base. MicroElectron Reliability, 2018, 84: 187-196 CrossRef Google Scholar

  • Figure 1

    (Color online) The indicator system of safety assessment for large liquid launch vehicles

  • Figure 2

    (Color online) The safety assessment model for liquid launch vehicles based on BRB

  • Figure 3

    (Color online) Wireless sensor network test platform of the liquid launch vehicle

  • Figure 4

    (Color online) Observation data of the liquid launch vehicle

  • Figure 5

    (Color online) The training and testing process of safety assessment model for the liquid launch vehicle

  • Figure 6

    (Color online) The correlation analysis between the average distance of observation data and the characteristic uncertainty: (a) vibration; (b) incline

  • Figure 7

    (Color online) Comparative studies of safety assessment for the liquid launch vehicle

  • Table 1   The semantic and referential values of shaking
    Reference degree $L$ $M$ $SH$ $H$
    Reference value 3.12 9.38 31.24 65.63
  • Table 2   The semantic and referential values of inclining
    Reference degree $L$ $BM$ $M$ $SH$ $H$
    Reference value 0.003 0.03 0.045 0.06 0.0944
  • Table 3   The semantic and referential values of safety
    Reference degree $H$ $M$ $L$
    Reference value 1 0.5 0
  • Table 4   The initial safety assessment model for the rocket
    Number Vibration Incline Rule weight Output $\left\{~{H,M,L}~\right\}$ Number Vibration Incline Rule weight Output $\left\{~{H,M,L}~\right\}$
    1 $L$ $L$ 1 $\left\{~{1,0,0}~\right\}$ 11 $SH$ $L$ 1 $\left\{~{0,0.5,0.5}~\right\}$
    2 $L$ $BM$ 1 $\left\{~{0.8,0.2,0}~\right\}$ 12 $SH$ $BM$ 1 $\left\{~{0,0.4,0.6}~\right\}$
    3 $L$ $M$ 1 $\left\{~{0.7,0.3,0}~\right\}$ 13 $SH$ $M$ 1 $\left\{~{0,0.3,0.7}~\right\}$
    4 $L$ $SH$ 1 $\left\{~{0.5,0.5,0}~\right\}$ 14 $SH$ $SH$ 1 $\left\{~{0,0.2,0.8}~\right\}$
    5 $L$ $H$ 1 $\left\{~{0,0.4,0.6}~\right\}$ 15 $SH$ $H$ 1 $\left\{~{0,0.1,0.9}~\right\}$
    6 $M$ $L$ 1 $\left\{~{0.5,0.5,0}~\right\}$ 16 $H$ $L$ 1 $\left\{~{0,0.4,0.6}~\right\}$
    7 $M$ $BM$ 1 $\left\{~{0.3,0.7,0}~\right\}$ 17 $H$ $BM$ 1 $\left\{~{0,0.3,0.7}~\right\}$
    8 $M$ $M$ 1 $\left\{~{0,1,0}~\right\}$ 18 $H$ $M$ 1 $\left\{~{0,0.2,0.8}~\right\}$
    9 $M$ $SH$ 1 $\left\{~{0,0.3,0.7}~\right\}$ 19 $H$ $SH$ 1 $\left\{~{0,0.1,0.9}~\right\}$
    10 $M$ $H$ 1 $\left\{~{0,0.2,0.8}~\right\}$ 20 $H$ $H$ 1 $\left\{~{0,0,1}~\right\}$
  • Table 5   The optimized safety assessment model for the rocket
    Number Vibration Incline Rule weight Output $\left\{~{H,M,L}~\right\}$ Number Vibration Incline Rule weight Output $\left\{~{H,M,L}~\right\}$
    1 $L$ $L$ 0.18 $\left\{~{0.12,0.70,0.18}~\right\}$ 11 $SH$ $L$ 0.06 $\left\{~{0.12,0.75,0.13}~\right\}$
    2 $L$ $BM$ 0.42 $\left\{~{0.65,0.01,0.34}~\right\}$ 12 $SH$ $BM$ 0.44 $\left\{~{0.00,0.06,0.94}~\right\}$
    3 $L$ $M$ 1 $\left\{~{0.55,0.21,0.24}~\right\}$ 13 $SH$ $M$ 0.01 $\left\{~{0.15,0.28,0.57}~\right\}$
    4 $L$ $SH$ 0.43 $\left\{~{0.43,0.31,0.26}~\right\}$ 14 $SH$ $SH$ 0.07 $\left\{~{0.04,0.30,0.66}~\right\}$
    5 $L$ $H$ 0.87 $\left\{~{0.44,0.26,0.30}~\right\}$ 15 $SH$ $H$ 0.49 $\left\{~{0.02,0.34,0.64}~\right\}$
    6 $M$ $L$ 0.82 $\left\{~{0.61,0.15,0.24}~\right\}$ 16 $H$ $L$ 0.38 $\left\{~{0.67,0.13,0.20}~\right\}$
    7 $M$ $BM$ 0.09 $\left\{~{0.56,0.08,0.36}~\right\}$ 17 $H$ $BM$ 0.98 $\left\{~{0.00,0.00,1.00}~\right\}$
    8 $M$ $M$ 0.03 $\left\{~{0.03,0.64,0.33}~\right\}$ 18 $H$ $M$ 0.01 $\left\{~{0.71,0.18,0.11}~\right\}$
    9 $M$ $SH$ 0.08 $\left\{~{0.20,0.74,0.06}~\right\}$ 19 $H$ $SH$ 0.75 $\left\{~{0.00,0.18,0.82}~\right\}$
    10 $M$ $H$ 0.06 $\left\{~{0.60,0.10,0.30}~\right\}$ 20 $H$ $H$ 0.01 $\left\{~{0.12,0.52,0.36}~\right\}$
  • Table 6   Comparative studies of MSE
    Model Our model BRB BP Fuzzy inference
    MSE 0.0044 0.0169 0.0171 0.0570