NASA Prognostics

Prognostics
Prognostics Center of Excellence

TEAM MEMBERS Kai Goebel Ph.D. (Center Lead) Vadim Smelianskyi, Ph.D. (Center Co-Director) Scott Poll (ADAPT) Edward Balaban Jose Celaya, Ph.D. Matt Daigle, Ph.D. Bhaskar Saha, Ph.D. Sankalita Saha, Ph.D. Abhinav Saxena, Ph.D. Phil Wysocki
12/09/2009
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field CA 94035
Kai Goebel
April 27, 2010
http://prognostics.nasa.gov
DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS
1
Prognostics CoE
The Prognostics Center of Excellence (PCoE) at Ames Research Center provides an umbrella for prognostic technology development, specifically addressing technology gaps within the application areas of aeronautics and space exploration. En route to becoming a national asset Expertise in prediction technology and
uncertainty management for systems

health monitoring
12/09/2009
Prognostics
4.2 4 3.8
E (measured)
Prediction points
E (from PF)
health (V) voltage
3.6 3.4 3.2 3 2.8 2.6 0
EOD
EOD pdfs
tEOD
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
time (secs)
Definition: Predict damage progression of a fault based on current and future operational and environmental conditions to estimate the time at which a component no longer fulfils its intended function within desired bounds (Remaining Useful Life)
12/09/2009
Key Ingredients for Prognostics

Run-to-failure data
Measurement data Ground truth data Operational conditions
Load profiles Environmental conditions
Failure threshold
Physics of Failure models

For each fault in the fault catalogue
Uncertainty information
Sources of uncertainty Uncertainty characterization
12/09/2009
Prognostics Algorithms
Data Driven Algorithms
Gaussian Process Regression Relevance Vector Machine Neural Networks Polynomial Regression
Model Based Algorithms Hybrid Algorithms

Particle Filters
Classical PF Rao-Blackwellized PF Risk Sensitive PF
Kalman Filters
Classical KF Extended KF
12/09/2009
Metrics Example
Establishing a common ground to compare different prognostic efforts Metrics must not only measure accuracy and precision but also the convergence of both properties Data/time requirement of algorithms (prognostic horizon) before they produce consistent predictions is also important
Particle Filter Prediction

1
- Metric ( = 0.2, = 0.5)

40 End of Life (EOL) 80% accuracy zone actual RUL RVM-PF RUL GRP RUL Baseline Statistics RUL
C/1 capacity (mAh); RUL pdf (biased by 0.7)
0.95 0.9
Real data
35 30
0.85 0.8
25
RUL
RUL threshold RUL pdfs 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0.75 0.7 0.65
20 15 10
0.6
Time (weeks) Prediction Spread (weeks)

l l l
Prediction Horizon (weeks) 32 16 32
4.23 3.25 5.34
0 30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
Time (weeks)
12/09/2009
Uncertainty Management
Model System complexity Insufficient knowledge Usage Load profile Temperature Noise Internal, external Electrical, mechanical, thermal Sensors
Sources of Uncertainty
Uncertainty Management
Training data based extrapolation Probabilistic state space model Online model adaptation Noise modeling Probabilistic regression Hyperparameters to prevent overfitting
12/09/2009
Ames Research Center
Modeling, Algorithms, Metrics
Application Example: Valves
12/09/2009
Valve Prognostics
Apply model-based prognostics to pneumatic valves Develop high-fidelity simulation model
Progressive damage models include seal wear (internal and external leaks), spring degradation, and increase in friction.
Investigate performance under different circumstances using prognostic performance metrics for comparison
Impact of using different filters Effects of increased sensor noise Effects of increased process noise and model uncertainty Feasibility of different sensor sets (e.g. continuous position sensor vs. discrete open/closed indicators) Computational Architecture
Source: M. Daigle and K. Goebel, "Model-based Prognostics with Fixed-lag Particle Filters Accepted for publication at PHM09
12/09/2009
Problem Formulation
Prognostics goal
Compute EOL = time point at which component no longer meets specified performance criteria Compute RUL = time remaining until EOL
System model
Output
State
Parameters
Input
Process Noise
Sensor Noise
Define condition that determines if EOL has been reached EOL and RUL defined as
Compute
and/or
12/09/2009
10 5/
Prognostics Architecture
1
System receives inputs, produces outputs
yk Fault Detection Isolation & Identification F yk
Estimate current state and parameter values

p(xk,k|y0:k) Prediction p(EOLk|y0:k) p(RULk|y0:k)
uk
System
Damage Estimation
Identify active damage mechanisms
Predict EOL and RUL as probability distributions
12/09/2009
11 5/
Case Study
Apply framework to pneumatic valve
Complex mechanical devices used in many domains including aerospace Failures of critical valves can cause significant effects on system function Top
Pneumatic valve operation
Pneumatic Port Return Spring Piston
Valve opened by opening bottom port to supply pressure and top Bottom port to atmosphere Pneumatic Port Valve closed by opening bottom port to atmosphere and top port Fluid Flow to supply pressure Return spring ensures valve will close upon loss of supply pressure
12/09/2009
Plug
5 2 12 /
Case Study
Faults
External leaks at ports & internal leaks across piston Friction buildup due to lubrication breakdown, sliding wear, buildup of particulate matter Spring degradation
Defining EOL
Limits defined for open and close times of valves
Top Pneumatic Port Return Spring Piston
E.g., main fill valve opens in 20 seconds (26 req.), closes in 15 (20 req.)
Limits placed on valve leakage rates Bottom (pneumatic gas) Pneumatic Port Valve must be able to fully close upon fail-safe Valve is at EOL when any of above conditions Fluid Flow violated (defines CEOL)
Function of amount of damage, parameterized in model
Plug
12/09/2009
13 5/
Physics-based Modeling
Valve state defined by
Valve position Valve velocity Gas mass above piston Gas mass below piston
State derivatives given by

Velocity Acceleration Gas flow above piston Gas flow below piston
Inputs given by
Fluid pressure (left) Fluid pressure (right) Input pressure at top port Input pressure at bottom port
14 5/
12/09/2009
Physics-based Modeling: Forces

Piston movement governed by sum of forces, including
Pneumatic gas: Process fluid: Weight: Spring: Friction: Contact forces:
Valve Stroke Length
12/09/2009
15 5/
Physics-based Modeling: Flows

Gas flows determined by choked/non-choked orifice flow equations:
Fluid flow determined by orifice flow equation:
12/09/2009
16 5/
Pneumatic Valve Modeling

Possible sensors include
Valve position Gas pressure (top) Gas pressure (bottom) Fluid flow Open indicator Closed Indicator
where,
12/09/2009
17 5/
Modeling Damage
Increase in friction Based on sliding wear equation Describes how friction coefficient changes as function of friction force, piston velocity, and wear coefficient
Degradation of spring Assume form similar to sliding wear equation Describes how spring constant changes as function of spring force, piston velocity, and wear coefficient
Growth of internal leak Based on sliding wear equation Describes how leak size changes as function of friction force, piston velocity, and wear coefficient
Growth of external leak Based on environmental factors such as corrosion Assume a linear change in absence of known model
12/09/2009
18 5/
Damage Progression
4 3.5
Friction Coefficient (Ns/m)
6 x 10 Damage Progression of Friction Coefficient
x 10 1.1
10 9
Spring Constant (N/m)
x 10
Damage Progression of Spring Constant x 10 6.94 6.92 6.9 6.88 6.86 6.84 40 41
4
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 20 40 60 Time (cycles) 80 100 1.05 40 41
8 7 6 5 4
20
40 60 Time (cycles)
80
100
x 10
-6
Damage Progression of Internal Leak 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0
-5 x 10 Damage Progression of Top External Leak
1.5
1 7 0.5 6.9 6.8 0
x 10
-7
40 0 20 40 60 Time (cycles)
41 80 100
Top External Leak Area (m2)
Internal Leak Area (m2)
20
40 60 Time (cycles)
80
100
12/09/2009
19 5/
Damage Estimation
Wear parameters are unknown, and must be estimated along with system state
Position Velocity Gas mass above piston Gas mass below piston Friction coefficient Spring rate Internal leak area External leak area (top) External leak area (bottom) Friction wear Spring wear Internal leak wear External leak wear (top) External leak wear (bottom)
20 5/
Augment system state with unknown parameters and use state observer
12/09/2009
Particle Filters
Employ particle filters for joint state-parameter estimation
Represent probability distributions using set of weighted samples Help manage uncertainty (e.g., sensor noise, process noise, etc.) Similar approaches have been applied successfully to actuators, batteries, and other prognostics applications
w
State represented with discrete probability distribution

x
Distribution evolves in time

t
12/09/2009
21 5/
Damage Estimation with PF

Particle filters (PFs) are state observers that can be applied to general nonlinear processes with non-Gaussian noise
Approximate state distribution by set of discrete weighted samples:
Suboptimal, but approach optimality as N
Parameter evolution described by random walk:

Selection of variance of random walk noise is important Variance must be large enough to ensure convergence, but small enough to ensure precise tracking
PF approximates posterior as
12/09/2009
22 5/
Sampling Importance Resampling

Begin with initial particle population Predict evolution of particles one step ahead Compute particle weights based on likelihood of given observations Resample to avoid degeneracy issues
Degeneracy is when small number of particles have high weight and the rest have very low weight Avoid wasting computation on particles that do not contribute to the approximation
x Initial Particle Population Compute Weights Predict Evolution Resample
12/09/2009
23 5/
Prediction
Particle filter computes
Prediction n steps ahead approximated as
Similarly, EOL prediction approximated as
General idea
Propagate each particle forward until EOL reached (condition on EOL evaluates to true) Use particle weights for EOL weights
12/09/2009
24 5/
Prediction
Hypothesized inputs
Friction progression EOL prediction
12/09/2009
25
25 5/
Validation of Methodology
Internal Leak EOL Predictions
Estimate of wear parameter converges after a few cycles, after this, leak area can be tracked well.
EOL predictions all contain true EOL, and get more accurate and precise as EOL is approached.
12/09/2009
26
26 5/
- Performance
Plot summarizes performance of internal leak prognosis Over 50% of probability mass concentrated within the bounds at all prediction points except at 20 and 30 cycles
Mean RULs are within the bounds at these points
=0.1, =0.5
For =0.122, metric is satisfied at all points
12/09/2009
27
27 5/
Prediction Performance
- metric for spring damage prediction, where =0.1, =0.4, M={x,f,pt,pb} - metric for spring damage prediction, where =0.1, =0.4, M={open,closed}
Both cases have similar accuracy, but the case with continuous measurements has much better precision, as the metric evaluates to true for all but one point.
12/09/2009
28
28 5/
Discussion
Different sensor sets have comparable estimation and prediction accuracy, but some differences are observed Wide differences observed in precision of estimation and prediction Results reveal that some sensors are more useful for certain faults than others
Flow measurement can be dropped with little effect For friction and spring faults, sensor sets with position measurement perform best For leak faults, sensor sets with pressure measurements perform best Helps decide importance of sensors based on which faults are most important
Overall performance still reasonable with higher levels of noise

Sensor sets with continuous measurements impacted most
12/09/2009
29
29 5/
Application Example: Electronics
12/09/2009
30
Prognostics for Electronics

Line Replaceable Unit: Power Controller
Component: Power Transistor
12/09/2009
31
Motivation
Electronic components have increasingly critical role in onboard, autonomous functions for
Vehicle controls, Communications, Navigation, Radar systems
Future aircraft systems will rely more on electric & electronic components
More electric aircraft Next Generation Air Traffic System (NGATS)
Move toward lead-free electronics and microelectromechanical devices (MEMS) Assumption of new functionality increases number of electronics faults with perhaps unanticipated fault modes Needed
Understanding of behavior of deteriorated components to develop capability to anticipate failures/predict remaining RUL
12/09/2009
32
Current Research Efforts

Thermal overstress aging of MOSFETs and IGBTs Electrical overstress aging testbed (isothermal) Modeling of MOSFETs Identification of precursors of failure for different IGBT technologies* Prognostics for output capacitor in power supplies+ Effects of lightning events of MOSFETS Effects of ESD events of MOSFETS and IGBTs Effects of radiation on MOSFETS and IGBTs
In collaboration with
* University of Maryland + Vanderbilt University
12/09/2009
33
Accelerated aging system

A platform for aging, characterization, and scenario simulation of gate controlled power transistors. The platform supports:
Thermal cycling Simulation of operation conditions Isothermal aging
In situ state monitoring is supported at varying gate and drain voltage levels.
12/09/2009
34
Experiment on IGBT
Collector-emitter voltage turn-OFF transient
Collector-Emmiter Voltage (V) Collector-Emmiter and Gate (V)
10 Vce 5 Vg T = ~ 330C Vd = 4v Vg = 10v
Switching Transient peak(V)
11.5 11 10.5 Degradation time (s) 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 7.5 1000 7 326 326.5 327 327.5 328 328.5 329 temperature (C) 329.5 330 330.5 331
10 9.5 9 8.5 8
4.15
4.2
4.25 time (s)
4.3
4.35 x 10 180 min 150 min 110 min 65 min 30 min

-5
8.2 8 7.8 7.6 7.4 4.22 4.222 4.224 4.226 time (s) 4.228 4.23
4.232 x 10
-5
Potential degradation Indicator
Turn-OFF collector-emitter voltage transient decreased significantly with both increases in temperature and thermal overstress aging time
35
12/09/2009
Electronics Aging
Offstate ICE 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.4 0.3
IGBT Waveforms ICE
Offstate ICE measurements curve fit measurements curve fit
Offstate ICE 1 0.9 measurements curve fit
0.7
0.6
0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4

8 7 IGBT Waveforms ICE VGE
0.35 0.3 0.25
VGE
0.2
0.3 0.2
6 5 4
3 2
0.1
33.84 33.86 33.88 33.9 33.92 Time (mins) 33.94 33.96 33.98 34 34.02
0.1
85.44 85.45 85.46 85.47 Time (min) 85.48 85.49
0 86.94
86.96
86.98
87
0 33.82
87.02 87.04 87.06 Time (mins)
87.08
87.1
87.12
5.07
5.08
5.09
5.1
5.11 5.12 Time (min)
5.13
5.14
5.15
5.16
86.88
86.89
86.9 86.91 Time (min)
86.92
86.93
0 -0.5
x 10
Coeff of Polyfit Term P 1t3 8
x 10
Coeff of Polyfit Term P 2t2

Particle Filter Parameter Estimation
1
6 -1 -1.5 -2 -2.5 0 -3 -3.5 0 -2 4

P1
0.5
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5 0
10
20
30
40
50
Prediction @ 51.875 mins
60
70
80
Time (mins)
10
20
30
40 50 Time (mins)
60
70
80
90
10
20
30
40 50 Time (mins)
60
70
80
90
12/09/2009
x 10
Coeff of Polyfit Term P 3t 20
x 10
10
Coeff of Polyfit Term P 4
36
Application Example: EMA
12/09/2009
37
Electro-Mechanical Actuators
Physical Modeling
EMA
5 metric ton load capacity
Data collection in laboratory
Model Verification
and flight conditions

309
Temperature Plot: Baseline Run 2

Motor TC Tsurf (Model)
Temperature (K)
306.5
0.5
304
301.5
-0.5
12/09/2009
Mission Statement
299 0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
-1 4000
Time (s)
Error (K)
38
Flyable Electro-mechanical Actuator (FLEA) Testbed

One load actuator and two test actuators (nominal and faulty), switcheable in flight Sensor suite includes accelerometers, current sensors, position sensors, temperature sensors and a load cell
Real-time flight surface loads simulation and data recording Data collection flights performed on C-17 (DFRC) and planned on UH-60 (ARC)
12/09/2009
39
Demonstration
Application Example: Energy Storage Devices

12/09/2009
40
Prognostics HIL Testbed

Demonstrate prognostic algorithm performance
Fast Inexpensive Control of several run-to-failure parameters Interesting dynamics
Evaluate different prediction algorithms and uncertainty management schemes
12/09/2009
41
Modeling Batteries
Freq. Domain Time Domain
1/C
Increasing Voltage E
IR drop
Eo
m=1/(rctCnf)
-> oo re re +2S2Cnf
Activation polarization Concentration polarization
Polarization Curve
re +rct
Increasing Current I
Im(Z)
Electrolyte Weakening
IncreasingOhmic ResistanceResistance Ohmic Increasing
Im(Z)
Plate Sulphation
Increasing Charge Transfer Resistance Increasing Charge Transfer Resistance
0 0
0 0
Re(Z)
Re(Z)
12/09/2009
42
Modeling SOC
Objective: Predict when Li-ion battery voltage will dip below 2.7V indicating endof-discharge (EOD) Approach
Model non-linear electro-chemical phenomena that explain the discharge process Learn model parameters from training data Let the PF framework fine tune the model during the tracking phase Use the tuned model to predict EOD
Eo Eo-E Eo-E
mt sd
voltage
Eo-E
mt: mass transfer sd: self discharge rd: reactant depletion
o
rd
E=E -E -E -E
sd rd
mt
12/09/2009
time
43
Modeling SOL
Objective: Predict when Li-ion battery capacity will fade by 30% indicating life (EOL) Approach
Model self-recharge and Coulombic efficiency that explain the aging process Learn model parameters from training data Let the PF framework fine tune the model during a few initial cycles Use the tuned model to predict EOL
discharge
self-recharge
R. Huggins, Advanced Batteries: Materials Science Aspects, 1st ed., Springer, 2008.
voltage
from measurements
from model
time
12/09/2009
44
Battery Testbed
Cells are cycled through charge and discharge under different load and environmental conditions set by the electronic load and environmental chamber respectively Periodically EIS measurements are taken to monitor the internal condition of the battery DAQ system collects externally observable parameters from the sensors Switching circuitry enables cells to be in the charge, discharge or EIS health monitoring state as dictated by the aging regime
BHM
EIS: Electro-chemical Impedance Spectroscopy

12/09/2009
45
Prognostics in Action
12/09/2009
46
References
A. Saxena, J. Celaya, B. Saha, S. Saha, K. Goebel, Metrics for Offline Evaluation of Prognostic Performance, International Journal of Prognostics and Health Management, 001, 2010 M. Daigle and K. Goebel, Model-based Prognostics under Limited Sensing, Proceeding of IEEE Aerospace conference 2010, 2010 A. Saxena, K. Goebel, Requirements Specification for Prognostics Performance - An Overview, Proceedings of AIAA@Infotech 2010, 2010 B. Saha, K. Goebel, and J. Christophersen, Comparison of Prognostic Algorithms for Estimating Remaining Useful Life of Batteries, Transactions of the Royal UK Institute on Measurement & Control, special issue on Intelligent Fault Diagnosis & Prognosis for Engineering Systems, pp. 293-308, 2009 B. Saha, K. Goebel, S. Poll and J. Christophersen, Prognostics Methods for Battery Health Monitoring Using a Bayesian Framework, IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, Vol. 58, No. 2, pp. 291-296, 2009 J. Celaya, N. Patil, S. Saha, P. Wysocki, and K. Goebel, Towards Accelerated Aging Methodologies and Health Management of Power MOSFETs, Proceedings of Annual Conference of the PHM Society 2009, 2009 B. Saha, K. Goebel, Modeling Li-ion Battery Capacity Depletion in a Particle Filtering Framework, Proceedings of Annual Conference of the PHM Society 2009, 2009 K. Goebel, B. Saha, A. Saxena, J. Celaya, and J. Christophersen, Prognostics in Battery Health Management, I&M Magazine, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 33-40, 2008 K. Goebel, B. Saha, and A. Saxena, A Comparison of Three Data-driven Techniques for Prognostics, Proceedings of MFPT 2008 2008
12/09/2009
47

NASA Prognostics

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

NASA Prognostics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Prognostics

Prognostics Center of Excellence

NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field CA 94035

April 27, 2010

uncertainty management for systems

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

health (V) voltage

3.6 3.4 3.2 3 2.8 2.6 0

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

Key Ingredients for Prognostics

Physics of Failure models

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

Model Based Algorithms Hybrid Algorithms

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

Particle Filter Prediction

- Metric ( = 0.2, = 0.5)

C/1 capacity (mAh); RUL pdf (biased by 0.7)

0.75 0.7 0.65

Time (weeks) Prediction Spread (weeks)

Prediction Horizon (weeks) 32 16 32

4.23 3.25 5.34

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

Ames Research Center

Modeling, Algorithms, Metrics

Application Example: Valves

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

Estimate current state and parameter values

Identify active damage mechanisms

Predict EOL and RUL as probability distributions

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

Pneumatic valve operation

Pneumatic Port Return Spring Piston

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

Top Pneumatic Port Return Spring Piston

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

State derivatives given by

Physics-based Modeling: Forces

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

Physics-based Modeling: Flows

Fluid flow determined by orifice flow equation:

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

Pneumatic Valve Modeling

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 20 40 60 Time (cycles) 80 100 1.05 40 41

Damage Progression of Internal Leak 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0

-5 x 10 Damage Progression of Top External Leak

1 7 0.5 6.9 6.8 0

Top External Leak Area (m2)

Internal Leak Area (m2)

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

State represented with discrete probability distribution

Distribution evolves in time

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

Damage Estimation with PF

Parameter evolution described by random walk:

DIAGNOSTICS & PROGNOSTICS

Sampling Importance Resampling

x Initial Particle Population Compute Weights Predict Evolution Resample