CN102722636A - Method for quantitative evaluation of complexity of electromagnetic environment faced by avionics system - Google Patents

Abstract

The invention discloses a method of quantitative evaluation of complexity of an electromagnetic environment faced by an avionics system. The method comprises the steps of: first, using an expert evaluation method to evaluate efficiency of various subsystems in the avionics system in an electromagnetic environment faced by themselves; then, realizing evaluation on the efficiency of the avionics system by determining weight relationships of the various subsystems in the avionics system; and finally, completing the evaluation on complexity of an electromagnetic environment faced by the avionics system by comparing failure probability of the system. Based on influencing factors of the avionics system and determining factors of work efficiency of the subsystems, the D-S matrix theory method is adopted in the invention to process evaluation results obtained by expert evaluation and to complete comprehensive evaluation on various subsystems. With the method adopted, errors caused by an arithmetic averaging method in statistical algorithm can be avoided, thus making evaluation results more objective.

Description

A kind of quantitative estimation method that faces electromagnetic environment complexity to avionics system

Technical field

The present invention relates to the electromagnetic compatibility field, more particularly say, is a kind of quantitative estimation method that faces electromagnetic environment complexity to avionics system.

Background technology

Raising along with the aircraft system digitized degree; Integrated a large amount of electronic equipments in limited, narrow space; When these equipment co-operation; The problem that can occur the phase mutual interference between air environment, this is that they are the principal elements that constitute the interior of aircraft electromagnetic environment because the Radiation Emission of each equipment causes with the conduction emission.Because present generation aircraft is of a great variety, it is various to execute the task, and makes its external electromagnetic environment that under the various tasks state, faces have very big-difference.For example: aircraft can run into the influence from nature electromagnetic environment factor, perhaps runs into the influence from other electronic equipments, and these all are the principal elements that constitutes aircraft external electromagnetic environment.The acting in conjunction of comprehensive interior of aircraft and the outside two kinds of electromagnetic environment factors of aircraft makes aircraft when executing the task, be faced with very complex electromagnetic environments.

For aircraft, avionics system is the main effective object of electromagnetic environment, also is the main existing way of air environment.In " military aviation electronic system " the 20th page, avionics system is divided into navigation subsystem, communication subsystem, sensing subsystem, shows subsystem, 5 parts of task/Control Subsystem.Under the electromagnetic environment effect, phenomenons such as that navigating can appear in avionics system is malfunctioning, communication disruption, directly the normal flight to aircraft impacts, and consequence is hardly imaginable.

If can be in the aircraft conceptual level; Complexity to electromagnetic environment that avionics system faces is assessed; Through assessment; Take corresponding anti-electromagnetic interference (EMI) means and electromagnetic compatibility measure, and implement to avionics system and each subsystem thereof design, make in the middle of, thereby can reliable guarantee be provided for the operate as normal of aircraft total life cycle.So the complexity that avionics system is faced electromagnetic environment is assessed has crucial meaning.Yet; For the electromagnetic environment complexity; Do not have uniform definition and quantization method in the industry, be difficult to provide clear and definite defining for the complexity of an electromagnetic environment that aircraft system faces, how the electromagnetic environment complexity being assessed becomes a difficult problem.

Summary of the invention

The present invention proposes a kind of quantitative estimation method that faces electromagnetic environment complexity to avionics system.This method at first adopts expert's scoring that the usefulness of each subsystem under the electromagnetic environment that it faced in the avionics system is assessed; Then, through confirming the weight relationship of each subsystem in avionics system, realize assessment to avionics system usefulness; At last, through comparison, accomplish assessment to electromagnetic environment complexity that avionics system faces to the failure probability of system.In the processing of data, the present invention adopts D-S matrix theory method that the assessment result that expert's marking obtains is handled, and accomplishes the comprehensive assessment to each subsystem.This method error that the method for averaging is brought of having avoided counting in the statistic algorithm makes assessment result more accurately credible.

A kind of quantitative estimation method that avionics system faces electromagnetic environment complexity that is directed against of the present invention, this quantitative evaluation includes the following step:

The first step: make up avionics system sets of factors U

It is U={u that the influence factor that constitutes avionics system is adopted the set formal representation ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅, be designated as u for any influence factor in the avionics system _i, i=1,2,3,4,5; Wherein: communication subsystem is designated as u ₁, navigation subsystem is designated as u ₂, the sensing subsystem is designated as u ₃, show that subsystem is designated as u ₄, task/Control Subsystem is designated as u ₅

Second step: make up avionics system task performance decision factor set V

It is V={v that the factor that constitutes the judgement of avionics system task performance is adopted the set formal representation ₁, v ₂, v ₃, be designated as v for any task performance decision factor in the avionics system _p, p=1,2,3; Wherein: subsystem room in proper working order is designated as v ₁, subsystem usefulness descends and to be designated as v ₂, can't judge and be designated as v ₃

The 3rd step: make up avionics system weight vectors matrix W

According to the kind and the quantity of three kind equipments that comprise in each subsystem in the avionics system, constitute and satisfy the weight matrix of each subsystem with respect to avionics system, i.e. relative weighting matrix W=[w ₁w ₂w ₃w ₄w ₅]; w ₁Expression communication subsystem u ₁Weighted value with respect to avionics system; w ₂Expression navigation subsystem u ₂Weighted value with respect to avionics system; w ₃Expression sensing subsystem u ₃Weighted value with respect to avionics system; w ₄Expression shows subsystem u ₄Weighted value with respect to avionics system; w ₅Expression task/Control Subsystem u ₅Weighted value with respect to avionics system;

The 4th step: adopt the D-S evidence theory, make up and estimate matrix R

The 401st step: choose the expert group that constitutes by n name expert, the usefulness under the electromagnetic environment that each subsystem faces is assessed;

The 402nd step: take D-S evidence theory method, the assessment result of each subsystem is carried out comprehensive assessment;

With avionics system influence factor set U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In i subsystem be judged to be probability in proper working order and be designated as u _iExpression U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In some factors;

With avionics system sets of factors U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In i subsystem be judged to be the probability that usefulness descends and be designated as

u _iExpression U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In some factors;

To avionics system sets of factors U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In the probability that can't judge of the task performance of i subsystem be designated as

u _iExpression U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In some factors.

Adopt the D-S evidence theory that the data that each expert's marking obtains are handled, when judging u _iUsefulness just often, the synthetic suggestion for the expert has

Wherein, A ₁Expression m ₁Burnt unit, A ₂Expression m ₂Burnt unit, K representes normaliztion constant,

$\{A_1,A_2\}\⋐\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}{v}_1& v_2& v_3\end{array}\right\}.$

When judging u _iUsefulness just often, promptly there is m in the synthetic suggestion for n name expert ₁, m ₂, m ₃M _nThe time, have $(m_1\⊕m_2\⊕\·\·\·\⊕m_n)\left(v_1\right)=\frac{1}{K}\underset{A_1\∩A_2\∩\·\·\·\∩A_n=v_1}{\mathrm{\Σ}}{m}_1\left(A_1\right)\×m_2\left(A_2\right)\×\·\·\·\×m_n\left(A_n\right);$ A wherein ₁Expression m ₁Burnt unit, A ₂Expression m ₂Burnt unit, A _nExpression m _nBurnt unit, K representes normaliztion constant,

The 403rd step:, obtain for avionics system influence factor set U={u through the calculating of step 401 and step 402 ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅Synthetic effectiveness evaluation matrix R=[r ₁r ₂r ₃r ₄r ₅]; Wherein: r ₁Expression is to the measures of effectiveness of communication subsystem, and $r_1=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_1,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_1,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_1,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$ r ₂Expression is to the measures of effectiveness of navigation subsystem, and $r_2=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_2,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_2,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_2,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$ r ₃Expression is to the measures of effectiveness of sensing subsystem, and $r_3=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_3,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_3,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_3,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$ r ₄Expression is to showing the measures of effectiveness of subsystem, and $r_4=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_4,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_4,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_4,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$ r ₅Expression is to the measures of effectiveness of task/Control Subsystem, and $r_5=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_5,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_5,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_5,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$

Said synthetic effectiveness evaluation matrix R=[r ₁r ₂r ₃r ₄r ₅] conversion table is shown $R=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_1,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_1,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_1,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_2,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_2,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_2,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_3,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_3,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_3,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_4,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_4,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_4,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_5,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_5,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_5,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$

The 5th step: the task performance evaluating matrix B that makes up avionics system

Weight matrix W=[w with avionics system ₁w ₂w ₃w ₄w ₅] and the synthetic effectiveness evaluation matrix $R=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_1,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_1,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_1,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_2,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_2,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_2,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_3,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_3,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_3,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_4,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_4,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_4,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_5,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_5,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_5,v_3)}\end{array}\right]$ Carry out the matrix multiple computing, obtain the task performance judgement matrix B=[b of avionics system ₁b ₂b ₃]; Avionics system is judged to be probability in proper working order and is designated as b ₁The probability that avionics system is judged to be usefulness decline is designated as b ₂The probability that can't judge the task performance of avionics system is designated as b ₃

The 6th step: the assessment of electromagnetic environment complexity

The probability b that the usefulness that step 5 is obtained descends ₂The contrast of tabling look-up obtains to face for avionics system the assessment of electromagnetic environment complexity.

The present invention is directed to the advantage that avionics system faces the quantitative estimation method of electromagnetic environment complexity is:

1. based on aviation electronics influence factor and system works usefulness decision factor; The present invention adopts D-S evidence theory method that the result that the expert gives a mark is carried out overall treatment; The error that the method that having avoided counts in the statistic algorithm averages is brought makes assessment result more objective.

2. quantitative estimation method of the present invention is on evaluation object, and through each subsystem usefulness in the airplane avionics system is assessed, the parameter that relates in the assessment quantizing process is more comprehensive, ensures avionics system total life cycle operate as normal.

3. owing to quote the guidance that a plurality of standards influence parameter in the quantitative estimation method of the present invention, the complexity that makes the inventive method can become other equipment, subsystem and electromagnetic environment that complete machine faces has directive significance.

Description of drawings

Fig. 1 is the FB(flow block) of the quantitative evaluation of the task performance of avionics system under the electromagnetic environment of the present invention.

Embodiment

To combine accompanying drawing and embodiment that the present invention is done further detailed description below.

The present invention is a kind of quantitative estimation method that avionics system faces electromagnetic environment complexity that is directed against, and this quantitative evaluation includes the following step:

The first step: make up avionics system sets of factors U

In " military aviation electronic system " the 20th page; Avionics system is divided into navigation subsystem, communication subsystem, sensing subsystem, shows subsystem, 5 parts of task/Control Subsystem; These 5 parts are designated as 5 influence factors that constitute avionics system, and wherein: communication subsystem is designated as u ₁, navigation subsystem is designated as u ₂, the sensing subsystem is designated as u ₃, show that subsystem is designated as u ₄, task/Control Subsystem is designated as u ₅

In the present invention, the influence factor that constitutes avionics system being adopted the set formal representation is U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅.For the sake of clarity of hereinafter, be designated as u for any influence factor in the avionics system _i, i=1,2,3,4,5.

Second step: make up avionics system task performance decision factor set V

The present invention passes through the judgement to each the subsystem task performance that constitutes avionics system, accomplishes the judgement to the avionics system task performance.

Because avionics system self has anti-electromagnetic interference capability, under the electromagnetic environment effect, each subsystem functional performance index is normal, can keep operate as normal, and in this case, with the subsystem record that carries out in proper working order, symbol is designated as v ₁(abbreviate subsystem v in proper working order as ₁);

Increase along with electromagnetic environment strength; Each subsystem of avionics system occurs: phenomenons such as communicating interrupt, navigation are malfunctioning, sensor failure, demonstration disappearance, task/Control Subsystem are out of control; Degradation appears in each subsystem functional performance index, can't keep operate as normal, in this case; Carry out record with the decline of subsystem task performance, symbol is designated as v ₂(abbreviate subsystem usefulness decline v as ₂);

Under how strong electromagnetic environment effect; Each minute is just can not keep operate as normal; Can't provide and clearly define, the situation that can each subsystem in the avionics system operate as normal therefore can occur clearly to judge, in this case; Can't judge with the subsystem working condition and to carry out record, symbol is designated as v ₃(abbreviate as and can't judge v ₃);

In the present invention, the factor that constitutes the judgement of avionics system task performance being adopted the set formal representation is V={v ₁, v ₂, v ₃.For the sake of clarity of hereinafter, be designated as v for any task performance decision factor in the avionics system _p, p=1,2,3.

The 3rd step: make up avionics system weight vectors matrix W

According to 2.1.56 joint among the national military standard GJB 72A-2002 " electromagnetic interference (EMI) and Electro Magnetic Compatibility term "; The regulation of the key classification of subsystem and equipment: all are installed in intrasystem, or the subsystem relevant and equipment with system all should to delimit be a certain type among crucial type of the EMC.These divide the influence that possibly cause based on electromagnetic interference (EMI), failure rate or for the degradation program of assign task.Can be divided into following three kinds:

A) this type of I class electromagnetic compatibility problem possibly cause that the lost of life, delivery vehicle are impaired, tasks interrupt, emission of a high price postpones or unacceptable system effectiveness descends;

B) this type of II class electromagnetic compatibility problem possibly cause delivery vehicle fault, system effectiveness to descend, and cause task to accomplish;

C) this type of III class electromagnetic compatibility problem possibly cause noise, slight discomfort or performance degradation, but can not reduce the expection validity of system.

According to the kind and the quantity that comprise this three kind equipment in each subsystem in the avionics system, constitute and satisfy the weight matrix of each subsystem with respect to avionics system, i.e. relative weighting matrix W=[w ₁w ₂w ₃w ₄w ₅]; w ₁Expression communication subsystem u ₁Weighted value with respect to avionics system; w ₂Expression navigation subsystem u ₂Weighted value with respect to avionics system; w ₃Expression sensing subsystem u ₃Weighted value with respect to avionics system; w ₄Expression shows subsystem u ₄Weighted value with respect to avionics system; w ₅Expression task/Control Subsystem u ₅Weighted value with respect to avionics system.

The 4th step: adopt the D-S evidence theory, make up and estimate matrix R

Expert's scoring is meant the suggestion of seeking the opinion of the relevant expert through anonymous way; Expert opinion is added up, handles, analyzed and concludes; Comprehensive objectively most expertises and subjective judgement are made reasonable estimation to the factor that is difficult in a large number adopt technical method to carry out quantitative test.In the present invention, said relevant expert is meant electromagnetic compatibility expert and avionics system expert.

The 401st step: choose the expert group that constitutes by n name (n >=2) electromagnetic compatibility expert and avionics system expert, the usefulness under the electromagnetic environment that each subsystem faces is assessed;

The 402nd step: take D-S evidence theory method, the assessment result of each subsystem is carried out comprehensive assessment;

In the present invention, with avionics system influence factor set U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In i subsystem be judged to be probability in proper working order and be designated as

u _iExpression U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In some factors;

With avionics system sets of factors U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In i subsystem be judged to be the probability that usefulness descends and be designated as

u _iExpression U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In some factors;

To avionics system sets of factors U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In the probability that can't judge of the task performance of i subsystem be designated as

u _iExpression U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In some factors.

With u _iBe example, adopt the D-S evidence theory that the data that each expert's marking obtains are handled, its result is as shown in table 1.

Table 1 expert judges the synthetic table of suggestion

m ₁(v ₁) represent that the 1st expert judges u _iThe normal probability of usefulness;

m ₂(v ₁) represent that the 2nd expert judges u _iThe normal probability of usefulness;

m _n(v ₁) represent that n expert judges u _iThe normal probability of usefulness;

m ₁(v ₂) represent that the 1st expert judges u _iThe probability that usefulness descends;

m ₂(v ₂) represent that the 2nd expert judges u _iThe probability that usefulness descends;

m _n(v ₂) represent that n expert judges u _iThe probability that usefulness descends;

m ₁(v ₃) represent that the 1st expert is to u _iThe probability that usefulness can't be judged;

m ₂(v ₃) represent that the 2nd expert is to u _iThe probability that usefulness can't be judged;

m _n(v ₃) represent that n expert is to u _iThe probability that usefulness can't be judged;

m ₁Represent the judgement probable value that the 1st expert shows;

m ₂Represent the judgement probable value that the 2nd expert shows;

m _nRepresent the judgement probable value that n expert shows.

When judging u _iUsefulness just often, the synthetic suggestion for two experts has Wherein, A ₁Expression m ₁Burnt unit, A ₂Expression m ₂Burnt unit, K representes normaliztion constant,

When judging u _iUsefulness just often, promptly there is m in the synthetic suggestion for n name expert ₁, m ₂, m ₃M _nThe time, have $(m_1\⊕m_2\⊕\·\·\·\⊕m_n)\left(v_1\right)=\frac{1}{K}\underset{A_1\∩A_2\∩\·\·\·\∩A_n=v_1}{\mathrm{\Σ}}{m}_1\left(A_1\right)\×m_2\left(A_2\right)\×\·\·\·\×m_n\left(A_n\right);$ A wherein ₁Expression m ₁Burnt unit, A ₂Expression m ₂Burnt unit, A _nExpression m _nBurnt unit, K representes normaliztion constant,

In the present invention, the use of DS evidence theory method, you can get the work performance of each subsystem determines probabilities communication subsystem working probability Communication System Efficiency decreased probability

communication subsystem can not determine the probability

Navigation subsystems working probability

Navigation Subsystem performance degradation probability

Navigation subsystem can not determine the probability

sensing subsystems working probability

Sensing System Efficiency decreased probability

sensing subsystem can not determine the probability

Display Subsystem working probability

Display subsystem performance degradation probability Display subsystem can not determine the probability Task / control subsystem work probability Task / control subsystem performance degradation probability

and task / control subsystem can not determine the probability

The 403rd step:, obtain for avionics system influence factor set U={u through the calculating of step 401 and step 402 ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅Synthetic effectiveness evaluation matrix R=[r ₁r ₂r ₃r ₄r ₅];

Wherein: r ₁Expression is to the measures of effectiveness of communication subsystem;

r ₂Expression is to the measures of effectiveness of navigation subsystem;

r ₃Expression is to the measures of effectiveness of sensing subsystem;

r ₄Expression is to showing the measures of effectiveness of subsystem;

r ₅Expression is to the measures of effectiveness of task/Control Subsystem.

In the present invention, obtain the measures of effectiveness matrix of i subsystem, be designated as $r_i=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_i,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_i,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_i,v_3)}\end{array}\right],$ Then have:

The measures of effectiveness matrix that makes up communication subsystem does $r_1=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_1,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_1,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_1,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$

The measures of effectiveness matrix that makes up navigation subsystem does $r_2=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_2,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_2,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_2,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$

The measures of effectiveness matrix that makes up the sensing subsystem does $r_3=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_3,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_3,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_3,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$

Making up the measures of effectiveness matrix that shows subsystem does $r_4=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_4,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_4,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_4,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$

The measures of effectiveness matrix of structure task/Control Subsystem does $r_5=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_5,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_5,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_5,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$

Said synthetic effectiveness evaluation matrix R=[r ₁r ₂r ₃r ₄r ₅] conversion table is shown $R=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_1,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_1,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_1,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_2,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_2,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_2,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_3,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_3,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_3,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_4,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_4,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_4,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_5,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_5,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_5,v_3)}\end{array}\right].$

The 5th step: the task performance evaluating matrix B that makes up avionics system

Weight matrix W=[w with avionics system ₁w ₂w ₃w ₄w ₅] and the synthetic effectiveness evaluation matrix $R=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_1,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_1,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_1,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_2,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_2,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_2,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_3,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_3,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_3,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_4,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_4,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_4,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_5,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_5,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_5,v_3)}\end{array}\right]$ Carry out the matrix multiple computing, obtain the task performance judgement matrix of avionics system $B=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}{\mathrm{\ω}}_1& {\mathrm{\ω}}_2& {\mathrm{\ω}}_3& {\mathrm{\ω}}_4& {\mathrm{\ω}}_5\end{array}\right]\×\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{r}_{(u_1,v_1)}& r_{(u_1,v_2)}& r_{(u_1,v_3)}\\ r_{(u_2,v_1)}& r_{(u_2,v_2)}& r_{(u_2,v_3)}\\ r_{(u_3,v_1)}& r_{(u_3,v_2)}& r_{(u_3,v_3)}\\ r_{(u_4,v_1)}& r_{(u_4,v_2)}& r_{(u_4,v_3)}\\ r_{(u_5,v_1)}& r_{(u_5,v_2)}& r_{(u_5,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$

For brief, avionics system be judged to be probability in proper working order be designated as b ₁The probability that avionics system is judged to be usefulness decline is designated as b ₂The probability that can't judge the task performance of avionics system is designated as b ₃The second task performance evaluating matrix B=[b then ₁b ₂b ₃].

The 6th step: the assessment of electromagnetic environment complexity

The probability b that the usefulness that step 5 is obtained descends ₂(table 2) contrast of tabling look-up, thus obtain to face the assessment of electromagnetic environment complexity for avionics system.

In the present invention, table 2 is meant in the volume the 3rd phase " microwave journal " June the 25th in 2009 disclosed, " electromagnetic environment complexity quantitative analysis method research " the 2nd joint content.

The evaluation criterion of the specific complicacy of table 2 electromagnetic environment

Complexity is divided	Task performance descends
		1 (mired is complicated)	[0，0.1)
2 (slight complicated)	[0.1，0.4)
		3 (moderate is complicated)	[0.4，0.8)
4 (severe is complicated)	[0.8，1.0)

Embodiment

According to national military standard GJB 72A-2002 " electromagnetic interference (EMI) and Electro Magnetic Compatibility term " regulation, the consequence that emc issue possibly cause avionics system usefulness and the extent of injury and the influence degree that aircraft is executed the task.In " military aviation electronic system " the 20th page, avionics system is divided into navigation subsystem, communication subsystem, sensor subsystem, task subsystem system, 5 parts of demonstration/Control Subsystem.

A kind ofly face the quantitative estimation method of electromagnetic environment complexity according to what the present invention proposed,, the task performance under certain complex electromagnetic environment of each subsystem is given a mark when selecting 3 experts to avionics system.

(1) for communication subsystem:

(2) for navigation subsystem:

(3) for task/Control Subsystem:

(4) for showing subsystem:

(5) for the sensing subsystem:

(6) avionics system failure probability:

Find through contrasting 0.464 and 0.364, when calculating the avionics system failure probability, adopt the method for D-S evidence theory, than adopting traditional arithmetic mean method to exceed 10 percentage points.

When the electromagnetic environment that avionics system is faced when the criteria for classifying of employing table 2 was divided, adopting the arithmetic mean method will be " slight complicated " with the electromagnetic assessment of systems face, and the D-S method is evaluated as " moderate complicacy ".Through adopting appraisal procedure of the present invention; Can more objectively respond the electromagnetic environment that avionics system faces; Thereby take pointed anti-electromagnetic interference (EMI) means and electromagnetic compatibility measure; And implement to avionics system and each subsystem thereof design, make in the middle of, ensure avionics system total life cycle operate as normal.

Claims (3)

1. one kind is directed against the quantitative estimation method that avionics system faces electromagnetic environment complexity, it is characterized in that this quantitative evaluation includes the following step:

The first step: make up avionics system sets of factors U

It is U={u that the influence factor that constitutes avionics system is adopted the set formal representation ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅, be designated as u for any influence factor in the avionics system _i, i=1,2,3,4,5; Wherein: communication subsystem is designated as u ₁, navigation subsystem is designated as u ₂, the sensing subsystem is designated as u ₃, show that subsystem is designated as u ₄, task/Control Subsystem is designated as u ₅

Second step: make up avionics system task performance decision factor set V

It is V={v that the factor that constitutes the judgement of avionics system task performance is adopted the set formal representation ₁, v ₂, v ₃, be designated as v for any task performance decision factor in the avionics system _p, p=1,2,3; Wherein: subsystem room in proper working order is designated as v ₁, subsystem usefulness descends and to be designated as v ₂, can't judge and be designated as v ₃

The 3rd step: make up avionics system weight vectors matrix W

According to the kind and the quantity of three kind equipments that comprise in each subsystem in the avionics system, constitute and satisfy the weight matrix of each subsystem with respect to avionics system, i.e. relative weighting matrix W=[w ₁w ₂w ₃w ₄w ₅]; w ₁Expression communication subsystem u ₁Weighted value with respect to avionics system; w ₂Expression navigation subsystem u ₂Weighted value with respect to avionics system; w ₃Expression sensing subsystem u ₃Weighted value with respect to avionics system; w ₄Expression shows subsystem u ₄Weighted value with respect to avionics system; w ₅Expression task/Control Subsystem u ₅Weighted value with respect to avionics system;

The 4th step: adopt the D-S evidence theory, make up and estimate matrix R

The 401st step: choose the expert group that constitutes by n name expert, the usefulness under the electromagnetic environment that each subsystem faces is assessed;

The 402nd step: take D-S evidence theory method, the assessment result of each subsystem is carried out comprehensive assessment;

With avionics system influence factor set U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In i subsystem be judged to be probability in proper working order and be designated as u _iExpression U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In some factors;

With avionics system sets of factors U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In i subsystem be judged to be the probability that usefulness descends and be designated as

u _iExpression U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In some factors;

To avionics system sets of factors U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In the probability that can't judge of the task performance of i subsystem be designated as

u _iExpression U={u ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅In some factors.

Adopt the D-S evidence theory that the data that each expert's marking obtains are handled, when judging u _iUsefulness just often, the synthetic suggestion for the expert has

Wherein, A ₁Expression m ₁Burnt unit, A ₂Expression m ₂Burnt unit, K representes normaliztion constant,

$\{A_1,A_2\}\⋐\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}{v}_1& v_2& v_3\end{array}\right\}.$

When judging u _iUsefulness just often, promptly there is m in the synthetic suggestion for n name expert ₁, m ₂, m ₃M _nThe time, have $(m_1\⊕m_2\⊕\·\·\·\⊕m_n)\left(v_1\right)=\frac{1}{K}\underset{A_1\∩A_2\∩\·\·\·\∩A_n=v_1}{\mathrm{\Σ}}{m}_1\left(A_1\right)\×m_2\left(A_2\right)\×\·\·\·\×m_n\left(A_n\right);$ A wherein ₁Expression m ₁Burnt unit, A ₂Expression m ₂Burnt unit, A _nExpression m _nBurnt unit, K representes normaliztion constant,

The 403rd step:, obtain for avionics system influence factor set U={u through the calculating of step 401 and step 402 ₁, u ₂, u ₃, u ₄, u ₅Synthetic effectiveness evaluation matrix R=[r ₁r ₂r ₃r ₄r ₅]; Wherein: r ₁Expression is to the measures of effectiveness of communication subsystem, and $r_1=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_1,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_1,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_1,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$ r ₂Expression is to the measures of effectiveness of navigation subsystem, and $r_2=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_2,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_2,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_2,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$ r ₃Expression is to the measures of effectiveness of sensing subsystem, and $r_3=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_3,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_3,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_3,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$ r ₄Expression is to showing the measures of effectiveness of subsystem, and $r_4=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_4,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_4,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_4,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$ r ₅Expression is to the measures of effectiveness of task/Control Subsystem, and $r_5=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_5,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_5,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_5,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$

Said synthetic effectiveness evaluation matrix R=[r ₁r ₂r ₃r ₄r ₅] conversion table is shown $R=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_1,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_1,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_1,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_2,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_2,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_2,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_3,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_3,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_3,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_4,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_4,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_4,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_5,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_5,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_5,v_3)}\end{array}\right];$

The 5th step: the task performance evaluating matrix B that makes up avionics system

Weight matrix W=[w with avionics system ₁w ₂w ₃w ₄w ₅] and the synthetic effectiveness evaluation matrix $R=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_1,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_1,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_1,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_2,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_2,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_2,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_3,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_3,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_3,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_4,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_4,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_4,v_3)}\\ {\mathrm{AA}}_{(u_5,v_1)}& {\mathrm{AB}}_{(u_5,v_2)}& {\mathrm{AC}}_{(u_5,v_3)}\end{array}\right]$ Carry out the matrix multiple computing, obtain the task performance judgement matrix B=[b of avionics system ₁b ₂b ₃]; Avionics system is judged to be probability in proper working order and is designated as b ₁The probability that avionics system is judged to be usefulness decline is designated as b ₂The probability that can't judge the task performance of avionics system is designated as b ₃

The 6th step: the assessment of electromagnetic environment complexity

The probability b that the usefulness that step 5 is obtained descends ₂The contrast of tabling look-up obtains to face for avionics system the assessment of electromagnetic environment complexity.

2. according to claim 1ly face the quantitative estimation method of electromagnetic environment complexity to avionics system, it is characterized in that: the n name expert in the 4th step is minimum should to satisfy n >=2.

3. according to claim 1ly face the quantitative estimation method of electromagnetic environment complexity to avionics system, it is characterized in that: the table of the contrast of tabling look-up in the 6th step is the evaluation criterion of the specific complicacy of electromagnetic environment, i.e. the following table content:

Complexity is divided Task performance descends 1 (mired is complicated) [0，0.1) 2 (slight complicated) [0.1，0.4) 3 (moderate is complicated) [0.4，0.8) 4 (severe is complicated) [0.8，1.0)

Images