JP2011022651A - System failure analysis method - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a system failure analysis method allowing prompt specification of a failure part needing preferential repair by failure contents and a place wherein failure occurs, and allowing concealment of unnecessary failure information. <P>SOLUTION: First, a failure hierarchy setting table is searched to specify a failure hierarchy (S1). Next, data on the failure hierarchy are updated as data on a failure hierarchy of a failure analysis work table (S2). Next, position information of a failure information table is updated as position information of the failure analysis work table (S3). Next, the data are rearranged by hierarchical information and the position information of the failure analysis work table (S4). Next, a hierarchy analysis result is decided by use of the failure hierarchical information and the position information (S5). Finally, only first data in the same hierarchy group are set as a display target, and the other data are set as a non-display target (S6). <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2011,JPO&INPIT

Description

  The present invention relates to a system failure analysis method for managing failure information of a system in which a plurality of devices are connected hierarchically.

  Conventionally, in a system in which multiple devices are connected hierarchically in a network such as an aircraft, the fault location is detected by detecting faults in the system and obtaining the fault information from the fault information central management device. And repairs were done.

  FIG. 8 is a diagram showing a network configuration in an aircraft. In FIG. 8, 1 is a failure information centralized management device, 2 is a network relay device, and 2a, 2b, 2c, and 2d indicate each relay device. Reference numeral 3 denotes a terminal device connected to the relay device 2, and 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e, 3f, and 3g denote the respective terminal devices.

  These are connected in a hierarchical manner, the upper relay device 2a is connected to the terminal devices 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e and the lower relay device 2d, and further, the lower relay device 2d is connected to the terminal device 3f, 3g is connected.

  The upper relay devices 2b and 2c are further connected with a terminal device and a lower relay device, but are omitted in this figure because of complexity.

  In the system configured as described above, the failure information central management device 1 collects and manages failure information of all the relay devices 2 and all the terminal devices 3 that are connected hierarchically.

  All the relay devices 2 and all the terminal devices 3 detect their own failure and transmit failure information to the failure information central management device 1. The failure information central management device 1 detects the communication failure by monitoring the states of all the relay devices 2 and all the terminal devices 3. The failure information central management apparatus 1 notifies the maintenance staff of such failure information by display or the like.

  In addition, the error management system of Patent Document 1 acquires a plurality of remote devices connected to a network and error information of the remote devices, and the acquired error information is related to the first hierarchy by a predetermined relationship. And a master device that manages the error information in the second hierarchy.

JP 2001-326637 A

  In the above conventional configuration, the failure information centralized management device 1 monitors the statuses of all the relay devices 2 and all the terminal devices 3 to detect a communication failure. When a communication failure is detected, all the lower-level terminal devices 3 connected to the relay device 2 are detected as having a communication failure, and therefore all of these are displayed as failure information.

  When a failure occurs due to a connection problem between the relay device 2a and the terminal device 3a, all the terminal devices 3a, 3b, and 3c are also detected as having a communication failure and are displayed as failure information.

  As described above, since all the failure information is displayed, it has been difficult for the maintenance staff to quickly identify the failure location requiring repair with priority.

  In particular, when the maintenance time is limited, such as in an aircraft, such as an aircraft, it is impossible to spend time dealing with useless troubles. Is desired.

  Also, in Patent Document 1, error information is hierarchized to make it easy to manage, but when there is an error in part, an error display such as “all station error” of the entire system, “CH1 error” of each transmission path, etc. The error can be grasped hierarchically, but it is not possible to quickly identify the faulty part that requires priority repair.

  It is an object of the present invention to provide a system failure analysis method capable of quickly identifying a failure location requiring repair with priority according to a failure content and a location where the failure has occurred, and concealing unnecessary failure information. And

  In order to solve the above-described problems, the system failure analysis method of the present invention stratifies failure information collected by the failure information centralized management apparatus according to a predetermined standard and displays only specific failure information. .

  As a result, it is possible to quickly identify a fault location requiring repair with priority.

  According to the failure analysis method of the present invention, priorities for failure handling are clarified, maintenance contents can be clarified when maintenance time is limited, etc., and there is no need for wasteful failure handling. In addition, by making it possible to change the severity level (failure hierarchy) of a failure with the setting information, it is possible to cope with changes in the failure content and network configuration by changing the setting information, and various management can be performed according to the situation.

The figure which shows the network structure in the aircraft in the system failure analysis method of Embodiment 1 of this invention. The figure which shows the failure information table of the failure information central management apparatus in the same system failure analysis method The figure which shows the failure hierarchy setting table of the failure information central management apparatus in the same system failure analysis method The figure which shows the failure analysis work table of the failure information central management apparatus in the same system failure analysis method Operation transition diagram showing operation procedure for failure information centralized management device hierarchizing failures in the system failure analysis method Diagram showing how data is sorted by hierarchy information in the system failure analysis method Flow chart showing operation procedure in the system failure analysis method Diagram showing network configuration in conventional aircraft

  Embodiments of the present invention will be described below with reference to the drawings.

(Embodiment 1)
FIG. 1 is a diagram showing a network configuration of an aircraft in the system failure analysis method according to the first embodiment of the present invention. Since the configuration is the same as that of FIG. In FIG. 1, reference numeral 1 denotes a failure information central management device, 2 denotes a network relay device, and 2a, 2b, 2c, and 2d denote each relay device. Reference numeral 3 denotes a terminal device connected to the relay device 2, and 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e, 3f, and 3g denote the respective terminal devices.

  These are connected in a hierarchical manner, the upper relay device 2a is connected to the terminal devices 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e and the lower relay device 2d, and further, the lower relay device 2d is connected to the terminal device 3f, 3g is connected.

  The upper relay devices 2b and 2c are further connected with a terminal device and a lower relay device, but are omitted in this figure because of complexity.

  In the system configured as described above, the failure information central management device 1 collects and manages failure information of all connected relay devices 2 and all terminal devices 3. All the relay devices 2 and all the terminal devices 3 detect their own failure and transmit failure information to the failure information central management device 1. The failure information central management apparatus 1 detects the communication failure by monitoring the states of all the relay devices and all the terminal devices. Up to here, it is the same as the conventional example.

  In the present embodiment, the failure information stored in the failure information central management apparatus 1 is a failure number and location information. The failure number is a number for each type of failure detected by each device, and a symbol is assigned according to the content of the failure. For example, E: communication failure of the failure information central management device, F: communication failure of the terminal device, H: hardware failure 1 of the terminal device, I: hardware failure 2 of the terminal device, and the like. The position information includes the upper relay device number (P1), the connection number from the upper relay device to the terminal device (P2), the connection order of the terminal devices (P3), and the connection order from the lower relay device to the terminal device (P4). This is information of four layers. In FIG. 1, the position information of the upper relay apparatus 2 a closest to the failure information central management apparatus 1 is represented as 1-0-0-0 with the position of P1 being “1”. In the position information of the next upper relay apparatus 2b of the upper relay apparatus 1-0-0-0-0, the position of P1 is “2” and is represented as 2-0-0-0. The position information of the terminal device 3a connected to the connection number 2 from the higher-order relay device 1-0-0-0-0 is that the position of P2 is “2” and the position of P3 is “1”. 1-2-1-0 It is expressed. In the position information of the terminal device 3b next to the terminal device 1-2-1-0, the position of P3 is “2” and is represented as 1-2-2-0. The position information of the terminal device 3f connected to the lower level relay device 2d is represented as 1-1-2-1, with the position of P2 being “1”, the position of P3 being “2”, and the position of P4 being “1”. The In the position information of the terminal device 3g next to the terminal device 1-1-2-1, the position of P4 is “2” and is represented by 1-1-2-2.

  FIG. 2 is a diagram showing a failure information table that stores failure information collected by the failure information centralized management device 1. As described above, the failure number that is the number for each type of failure detected by each device, the upper relay It consists of P1 which is the position information of the device, P2 which is the connection number from the higher-order relay device to the terminal device, P3 which is the connection order of the terminal device, and P4 which is the connection order from the lower-order relay device to the terminal device.

  For example, in the first row, since the failure number is “F”, the positions of P1, P2, and P3 are “1” and the position of P4 is “0”, the terminal device 3d corresponding to the position information 1-1-1-0. It can be seen that has caused a communication failure.

  FIG. 3 is a diagram showing a failure hierarchy setting table for setting failure hierarchy information used when the failure information centralized management device hierarchizes failure information according to importance, and is configured with failure numbers and failure hierarchy settings. ing. There are three types of information M1, M2, and M3 in the fault hierarchy setting. For example, M1: communication failure, M2: severe hardware failure, and M3: minor hardware failure.

  For example, the failure number “H” indicates a hardware failure 1 of the terminal device, and the failure hierarchy indicates that the failure levels of M1, M2, and M3 are “1”, respectively.

  FIG. 4 is a diagram showing a failure analysis work table, which is temporary data for work used when the failure information centralized management apparatus stratifies failure information, and includes failure numbers, failure hierarchies, location information, hierarchy information, It consists of a hierarchical analysis result obtained by analyzing from position information and a failure display result determined from the hierarchical analysis result.

  FIG. 5 is an operation transition diagram showing an operation procedure in which the failure information centralized management apparatus stratifies failures using the failure information table, the failure hierarchy setting table, and the failure analysis work table. As shown in this figure, first, a failure hierarchy is specified by searching the failure hierarchy setting table using the failure number in the failure information table (S1). Subsequently, the fault hierarchy data in the fault hierarchy setting table specified in S1 is updated as fault hierarchy data in the fault analysis work table (S2). Subsequently, the position information data in the failure information table is updated as the position information data in the failure analysis work table (S3).

  Next, the data is rearranged according to the hierarchy information and position information of the failure analysis work table. FIG. 6 shows a rearrangement method from M1 to M3. In the sorting method, the failure hierarchy first sorts the data in ascending order based on the value of M1, then M1 sorts the data in ascending order based on the value of M2 with the same value, and M1 and M2 Sorts the data in ascending order based on the same value of M3, and sorts the data in ascending order based on the position information of the same value in M1, M2, and M3 based on the value of P1, M1, M2, and so on. M3 and P1 rearrange the data in ascending order based on the same value of P2, M1, M2, M3, P1, and P2 rearrange the data in ascending order based on the same value of P3, Data is rearranged in ascending order based on the value of P4 where M1, M2, M3, P1, P2, and P3 have the same value. (S4).

  Next, the hierarchy analysis result is determined using the failure hierarchy information and the position information of the failure analysis work table (S5).

  FIG. 7 is a flowchart showing an operation procedure for determining a hierarchy analysis result using a failure hierarchy and position information. As shown in this flowchart, first, all data of the hierarchical analysis result is set to an initial value of 0 (F1). Since the hierarchy group is determined from the failure hierarchy and position information of the comparison source data and the comparison destination data, the first row is set as the comparison source data (F2). A value that has not been assigned to the hierarchical group of the designated comparison source data is substituted (F3).

  Next, the comparison target data is set to the next line. The first data is the second line, and the data is sequentially moved to the third line, the fourth line, and the next line and sequentially compared with the comparison source data (F4). If the comparison destination data cannot be moved to the next line, the process moves to F21 (F5). When the value of M1 of the comparison source data is 0, it is not necessary to compare the comparison destination data, so the process moves to F8, and when it is other than 0, it is necessary to compare with the comparison destination data, the process moves to F7 (F6). If the value of M1 is other than 0, the comparison target data M1 and the comparison source data M1 value are compared. If the values are the same, the process moves to F8 for comparison of M2, and if the values are different, the comparison target data Are moved to F4 to move the comparison target data to the next line (F7).

  Next, when the value of M2 of the comparison source data is 0, it is not necessary to compare the comparison destination data, so the process moves to F10, and when it is other than 0, the comparison destination data needs to be compared, so the process moves to F9 (F8). ). If the value of M2 is other than 0, the comparison target data M2 and the comparison source data M2 are compared, and if the values are the same, the process moves to F10 for comparison of M3. Are moved to F4 in order to move the comparison target data to the next line (F9).

  Next, when the value of M3 of the comparison source data is 0, it is not necessary to compare the comparison destination data, so the process moves to F12, and when it is other than 0, the comparison destination data needs to be compared, so the process moves to F11 (F10). ). When the value of M3 is other than 0, the comparison target data M3 and the comparison source data M3 are compared. If the values are the same, the process moves to F12 to compare P1, and if the values are different, the comparison data Are moved to F4 in order to move the comparison target data to the next line (F11).

  Next, when the value of P1 of the comparison source data is 0, it is not necessary to compare the comparison destination data, so the process moves to F14, and when it is other than 0, the comparison destination data needs to be compared, so the process moves to F13 (F12). ). If the value of P1 is other than 0, P1 of the comparison destination data and the value of P1 of the comparison source data are compared. If the values are the same, the process moves to F14 for comparison of P2, and if the values are different, the comparison destination data Are moved to F4 in order to move the comparison target data to the next line (F13).

  Next, when the value of P2 of the comparison source data is 0, it is not necessary to compare the comparison destination data, so the process moves to F16, and when it is other than 0, the comparison destination data needs to be compared, so the process moves to F15 (F14). ). When the value of P2 is other than 0, P2 of the comparison destination data and the value of P2 of the comparison source data are compared. When the values are the same, the process moves to F16 for the comparison of P3. Are moved to F4 in order to move the comparison target data to the next line (F15).

  Next, when the value of P3 in the comparison source data is 0, it is not necessary to compare the comparison destination data, so the process moves to F18, and when it is other than 0, the comparison destination data needs to be compared, so the process moves to F17 (F16). ). When the value of P3 is other than 0, P3 of the comparison destination data and the value of P3 of the comparison source data are compared. If the values are the same, the process moves to F18 for the comparison of P4. Are moved to F4 in order to move the comparison target data to the next line (F17).

  Next, when the value of P4 of the comparison source data is 0, it is not necessary to compare the comparison destination data, so the process moves to F20, and when it is other than 0, the comparison destination data needs to be compared, so the process moves to F19 (F18). ). If the value of P4 is other than 0, P4 of the comparison destination data and the value of P4 of the comparison source data are compared. If the values are the same, the hierarchy group is determined and the process moves to F20. Are moved to F4 in order to move the comparison target data to the next line (F19).

  When the comparison source data and the comparison target data M1, M2, M3, P1, P2, P3, and P4 are compared to determine that they are the same hierarchical group, the comparison source data hierarchical group includes the comparison source data hierarchical group. The value is substituted, and the comparison destination data is moved to F4 to move to the next row (F20). When the comparison destination data cannot be moved to the next line, that is, when it becomes the last data, the comparison source data is moved to the line whose hierarchical group has an initial value of 0. If there is no row to be moved, all hierarchical groups have been determined, and the process is terminated (F21).

  As can be seen from the hierarchical analysis result of S5 in FIG. 5, the upper level relay device 2a corresponding to the location information “1-0-0-0” is in the failure information while the failure hierarchy has caused the communication failure of M1 “1”. Since it is located closest to the centralized management apparatus 1, its lower level apparatus (the apparatus whose P1 is “1”) is set as the same hierarchical group.

  Similarly, a terminal device (not shown) corresponding to the location information “2-2-1-0” causes a communication failure and a hardware failure 2 while the failure hierarchy causes a communication failure of M1 “1”. However, since there is no upper apparatus closest to the failure information central management apparatus 1, the same hierarchy group is used.

  Finally, only the first data in the same hierarchical group is set as the display target, and the other is set as the non-display target data (S6).

  As described above, according to the present embodiment, it is possible to display fault information that is not required to be hierarchized except for communication faults by displaying faults in a hierarchy and not displaying unnecessary fault information.

  In addition, since the failure information can be hierarchized by setting the hierarchy information, in the case of the severe failure and the mild failure hierarchy, if the severe failure is set to only M1, and the minor failure is set to M1 and M2, the severe failure is caused. If it occurs, you can stop displaying minor faults.

  Also, by setting location information, failures can be hierarchized by failure location even for the same failure content. In the case of a communication failure, only the upper failure can be displayed.

  As a result, the priority of failure handling is clarified, and the failure location requiring repair with priority can be quickly identified.

  The system failure analysis method according to the present invention is useful as a method for managing failure information of a plurality of devices connected to a system such as an aircraft that needs to respond in a short time because the priority of failure handling becomes clear. is there.

1 Failure information centralized management device 2a Upper relay device (1-0-0-0)
2b Upper relay device (2-0-0-0)
2c Host relay device (3-0-0-0)
2d Subordinate relay device (1-1-2-0)
3a Terminal device (1-2-1-0)
3b Terminal device (1-2-2-0)
3c terminal device (1-2-3-0)
3d terminal device (1-1-1-0)
3e terminal device (1-1-3-0)
3f Terminal device (1-1-2-1)
3g terminal device (1-1-2-2)

Claims (6)

A system failure analysis method in which failure information collected by a failure information centralized management apparatus that collectively manages failure information in a system to which a plurality of devices are connected is hierarchized according to a predetermined standard so that only specific failure information is displayed. The system failure analysis method according to claim 1, wherein the failure information is hierarchized based on at least failure position information and failure importance level. 3. The system failure analysis method according to claim 2, wherein the failure information is first hierarchized based on the importance level of the failure, and then hierarchized again based on the location information for the failure of the highest layer. The system failure analysis method according to claim 1, wherein only the failure in the highest layer of the hierarchical failure information is displayed. The system failure analysis method according to claim 2, wherein the position information is obtained by hierarchizing a connection order from the higher-level relay device to the lower-level terminal device. A step of searching the failure hierarchy setting table to identify the failure hierarchy, a step of updating the failure hierarchy data of the identified failure hierarchy setting table as failure hierarchy data of the failure analysis work table, and location information of the failure information table Updating the data as position information data of the failure analysis work table, rearranging data according to the hierarchy information and position information of the failure analysis work table, and the failure hierarchy information and position of the failure analysis work table A system failure analysis method comprising: a step of determining a hierarchy analysis result using information; and a step of setting only the first data in the same hierarchy group as a display target and the other as non-display target data.