A Comparison of Inverse Simulation-Based Fault Detection in a Simple Robotic Rover with a Traditional Model-Based Method

Robotic rovers which are designed to work in
extra-terrestrial environments present a unique challenge in terms
of the reliability and availability of systems throughout the mission.
Should some fault occur, with the nearest human potentially millions
of kilometres away, detection and identification of the fault must
be performed solely by the robot and its subsystems. Faults in
the system sensors are relatively straightforward to detect, through
the residuals produced by comparison of the system output with
that of a simple model. However, faults in the input, that is, the
actuators of the system, are harder to detect. A step change in
the input signal, caused potentially by the loss of an actuator,
can propagate through the system, resulting in complex residuals
in multiple outputs. These residuals can be difficult to isolate or
distinguish from residuals caused by environmental disturbances.
While a more complex fault detection method or additional sensors
could be used to solve these issues, an alternative is presented here.
Using inverse simulation (InvSim), the inputs and outputs of the
mathematical model of the rover system are reversed. Thus, for a
desired trajectory, the corresponding actuator inputs are obtained.
A step fault near the input then manifests itself as a step change
in the residual between the system inputs and the input trajectory
obtained through inverse simulation. This approach avoids the need
for additional hardware on a mass- and power-critical system such
as the rover. The InvSim fault detection method is applied to a
simple four-wheeled rover in simulation. Additive system faults and
an external disturbance force and are applied to the vehicle in turn,
such that the dynamic response and sensor output of the rover
are impacted. Basic model-based fault detection is then employed
to provide output residuals which may be analysed to provide
information on the fault/disturbance. InvSim-based fault detection
is then employed, similarly providing input residuals which provide
further information on the fault/disturbance. The input residuals are
shown to provide clearer information on the location and magnitude
of an input fault than the output residuals. Additionally, they can
allow faults to be more clearly discriminated from environmental
disturbances.

Authors:

• Murray L. Ireland
• Kevin J. Worrall
• Rebecca Mackenzie
• Thaleia Flessa
• Euan McGookin
• Douglas Thomson

Keywords:

• Fault detection
• inverse simulation
• rover
• ground robot.

References:

[1] S. Kassel, “Lunokhod-1 Soviet lunar surface vehicle,” DARPA, Tech.
Rep. September, 1971.
[2] M. B. Quadrelli, L. J. Wood, J. E. Riedel, M. C. McHenry, M. Aung,
L. A. Cangahuala, R. A. Volpe, P. M. Beauchamp, and J. A.
Cutts, “Guidance, navigation and control technology assessment for
future planetary science missions,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and
Dynamics, vol. 38, no. 7, pp. 1165–1186, 2015.
[3] R. Isermann, Fault-Diagnosis Systems: An Introduction from Fault
Detection to Fault Tolerance. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2006.
[4] R. Dearden, T. Willeke, R. Simmons, V. Verma, F. Hutter, and S. Thrun,
“Real-time fault detection and situational awareness for rovers: Report
on the Mars technology program task,” in Proceedings of the IEEE
Aerospace Conference, vol. 2, Big Sky, MT, 2004, pp. 826–840.
[5] V. Verma, G. Gordon, R. Simmons, and S. Thrun, “Tractable particle
filters for rover fault diagnosis,” IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine,
vol. 11, pp. 56–66, 2004.
[6] K. Ferguson, “Towards a better understanding of the flight mechanics
of compound helicopter configurations,” PhD thesis, University of
Glasgow, November 2015.
[7] R. Hess, C. Gao, and S. Wang, “A generalized technique for inverse
simulation applied to aircraft manoeuvres,” Journal of Guidance, Control
and Dynamics, vol. 14, pp. 920–926, 1991.
[8] D. Thomson and R. Bradley, “Inverse simulation as a tool for flight
dynamics research – Principles and applications,” Progress in Aerospace
Sciences, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 174–210, May 2006.
[9] D. Murray-Smith, “The inverse simulation approach: A focused
review of methods and applications,” Mathematics and Computers in
Simulation, vol. 53, no. 4-6, pp. 239–247, October 2000.
[10] D. J. Murray-Smith, “Inverse simulation and analysis of underwater
vehicle dynamics using feedback principles,” Mathematical and
Computer Modelling of Dynamical Systems, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 45–65,
2014.
[11] D. Murray-Smith and E. McGookin, “A case study involving continuous
system methods of inverse simulation for an unmanned aerial vehicle
application,” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, vol. 229, no. 14, pp.
2700–2717, 2015.
[12] K. Worrall, D. Thomson, and E. McGookin, “Application of inverse
simulation to a wheeled mobile robot,” in Proceedings of the 6th
International Conference on Automation, Robotics and Applications
(ICARA 2015), Queenstown, February 2015.
[13] K. Worrall, D. Thomson, E. McGookin, and T. Flessa, “Autonomous
planetary rover control using inverse simulation,” in 13th Symposium
on Advanced Space Technologies in Robotics and Automation (ASTRA
2015). Noordwijk: ESA/ESTEC, May 2015. [14] S. Rutherford and D. G. Thomson, “Improved methodology for inverse
simulation,” Aeronautical Journal, vol. 100, no. 993, pp. 79–85, 1996.
[15] K. J. Worrall, “Guidance and search algorithms for mobile robots:
Application and analysis within the context of urban search and rescue,”
PhD thesis, University of Glasgow, 2008.
[16] K. J. Worrall and E. W. McGookin, “A mathematical model of a Lego
differential drive robot,” in Proceedings of the 6th UKACC Control
Conference, Glasgow, 2006.