Analysis of modern evaluation and modeling methods of contingencies occurrence risks onboard a spacecraft

Аuthors

Donskov A. V.

e-mail: aleksej_ne@mail.ru

Abstract

The purpose of the article consists in analysis of modern evaluation and modelling methods of contingencies occurrence onboard a spacecraft and substantiation of methods selection for their subsequent application in the process of operative flight control. The process of the aircraft flight control while contingencies occurrence onboard a spacecraft (time limitation for the decision making on contingencies parrying and their type, high dynamics of the processes flow, multicriteriality of the spacecraft current state, the presence of sources of uncertainty) was studied. The inference was drawn, that all considered methods of the onboard contingencies risks evaluation and modelling were not exhaustive. Depending of the current situation, any of the considered methods and on account of the problems being solved could be employed for the contingency risk occurrence onboard a spacecraft evaluation and modelling. The accumulated experience of flight control in manned astronautics revealed that the most interest was provoked by those methods of contingencies risks evaluation and modelling, which reflect the ways of their evolution and aftermath. The selection of the contingencies occurrence risks onboard a spacecraft methods (logic-linguistic and theory of fuzzy sets) is being substantiated by the fact that it allows develop scenarios of the contingencies occurrence onboard a spacecraft and prepare initial data for the decision making on contingencies parrying in case of uncertainty. Methods of contingencies occurrence risks onboard a spacecraft considered in the article may be implemented as tools both in the systems for decision making support on contingencies onboard a spacecraft parrying and in expert systems.

Keywords:

spacecraft, risk, risks modelling, state analysis, flight, spacecraft flight control, contingency

References

1. Kravets V.G., Lyubinskii V.E. Osnovy upravleniya kosmicheskimi poletami (Space flight control fundamentasl), Moscow, Mashinostroenie, 1983, 224 p.

2. Solov'ev V.A., Lysenko L.N., Lyubinskii V.E. Upravlenie kosmicheskimi poletami (Space flight control), Moscow, MGTU im. N.E. Baumana, 2010, part 2, 426 p.

3. Solov'ev V.A., Lyubinskii V.E., Matyushin M.M. Vestnik MGTU im. N.E. Baumana. Mashinostroenie, 2013, no. 3, pp. 39-52.

4. Donskov A.V., Mishurova N.V., Solov'ev S.V. Vestnik Moskovskogo aviatsionnogo instituta, 2018, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 151-160.

5. L. von Bertalanffy. General System Theory. New York, George Braziller, 1968, 289 p.

6. Mesarovic M.D., Takabara Ya. General systems theory: mathematical foundations. New York – San Francisco – London, Academic Press, 1975, 279 p.

7. Belov P.G. Teoreticheskie osnovy sistemnoi inzhenerii bezopasnosti (Theoretical basics of system safety engineering), Moscow, GNTB Bezopasnost', 1996, 424 p.

8. Obukhov Yu.V., Popov A.S., Orlov A.S., Kotova A.O. Trudy MAI, 2015, no. 81. URL: http://trudymai.ru/eng/published.php?ID=57729

9. Vishnyakov Ya.D., Radaev N.N. Obshchaya teoriya riskov (General theory of risks), Moscow, Akademiya, 2008, 368 p.

10. Venttsel' E.S. Issledovanie operatsii (Operations research), Moscow, Sovetskoe radio, 1972, 551 p.

11. Dubois D., Prade A. Theґґ aґ, Masson, Paris, 1988, 292 p.

12. RMG 91-2009. Rekomendatsii po mezhgosudarstvennoi standartizatsii. Sovmestnoe ispol'zovanie ponyatii “pogreshnost” izmereniya” i “neopredelennost” izmereniya”. Obshchie printsipy (Recommendations on interstate standardization. Joint use of the concepts of “measurement error” and “measurement uncertainty”. General principle. RMG 91-2009), Moscow, Standarty, 2010, 81 p.

13. Sluchainye protsessy i dinamicheskie sistemy. GOST 21878-76 (Random processes and dynamic systems. State Standard 21878-76), Moscow, Standarty, 1976, 45 p.

14. Grazhdankin A.I. Bezopasnost' zhiznedeyatel'nosti, 2001, no. 2, pp. 6-10.

15. Beleshev S.D., Gurvich F.G. Ekspertnye otsenki (Expert evaluations), Moscow, Nauka, 1973, 161 p.

16. Henley E.J., Kumamoto H. Reliability engineering and risk assessment. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1981, 568 p.

17. Zadeh L.A. The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning. American Elsevier Publishing Company, New York, 1973.

18. Pospelov D.A. Logiko-lingvisticheskie modeli v sistemakh upravleniya (Logical-linguistic models in control systems), Moscow, Energoatomizdat, 1981, 231 p.

19. Gavrilova T.A. Novosti iskusstvennogo intellekta, 2002, no. 6, pp. 45-60.

20. Borisov A.N., Alekseev A.B., Krumber O.A. Modeli prinyatiya reshenii na osnove lingvisticheskoi peremennoi (Decision making models based on linguistic variable), Riga, Zinatie, 1982, 256 p.

21. Donskov A.V. Inzhenernyi zhurnal: nauka i innovatsii, 2016, no. 5(23). DOI: 10.18698/2308-6033-2016-05-1488