Abstract: This paper demonstrates the possibility to detect suspension failures of railway
vehicles using a multiple-model approach from on-board measurement data. The railway vehicle
model used includes the lateral and yaw motions of the wheelsets and bogie, and the lateral
motion of the vehicle body, with sensors measuring the lateral acceleration and yaw rate of the
bogie, and lateral acceleration of the body. The detection algorithm is formulated based on the
Interacting Multiple-Model (IMM) algorithm. The IMM method has been applied for detecting
faults in vehicle suspension systems in a simulation study. The mode probabilities and states
of vehicle suspension systems are estimated based on a Kalman Filter (KF). This algorithm
is evaluated in simulation examples. Simulation results indicate that the algorithm effectively
detects on-board faults of railway vehicle suspension systems.
1. INTRODUCTION
Railway maintenance is important for ensuring safety
and avoiding accidents. An inspection to detect faults in
railway vehicles is especially important. Some faults could
cause serious accidents while the vehicle is travelling.
Condition monitoring is necessary in order to immediately
detect vehicle faults. For condition monitoring, it is necessary to detect the fault from the signals of sensors attached
to the vehicles. Condition monitoring can be considered to
be a part of the well-established and well-developed area
of Fault Detection and Isolation (or Identification) (FDI).
Many research works on FDI are summarized in numerous publications, Patton et al. [2000], Gustafsson. [2001].
Condition monitoring is mainly applicable to systems that
deteriorate with time and seeks to detect and identify deterioration before it causes a failure. This is a key element
of condition-based maintenance, Buruni et al. [2007].
Often, only output signals can be measured, in which
case signal-based methods can be applied. A measured
signal, essentially the response to a disturbance input(s), is
analyzed in the time domain, frequency domain, or timefrequency domain. Band-pass filters, spectral analysis,
maximum-entropy estimation, and wavelet analysis can
all be used as signal-processing methods. If the relation
? This study was supported by the Program for Promoting Fundamental Transport Technology Research from the Japan Railway
Construction, Transport and Technology Agency (JRTT).
8299
10.3182/20080706-5-KR-1001.1923
yw1 + K b +
yt1
r0
r0
2f22
mw1 yw2 +
y w2 + Ky yw2 =
v
2f22 w2 + Ky yb + a0 Ky b
(2)
(3)
2f11 l02
w2 + K w2 =
v
2f11 l0
2f11 l0
yw2 + K b +
yt2
r0
r0
mb yb + (Cylb + Cyrb )y b
+{2Ky + (Kylb + Kyrb )}yb = Ky yw1 + Ky yw2
+(Cylb + Cyrb )y bd + (Kylb + Kyrb )ybd
Iw2 w2 +
(5)
& w1
yw1
(7)
yb
& w 2
yw 2
yt
ut
Model 2
based filter
yt
ut
Model i
based filter
xt1
xt2
xt
xti
Bogie frame
K yrb
Model 1
based filter
Wheelset
C yrb
yt
ut
ybd
& b
(9)
j=1
K yrb
Ky / 2
K
m
X
p(xt Y t ) =
p(xt mj , Y t )p(mj Y t )
Fusion
C rb C yrb
(6)
(4)
Anti-yaw damper
t
p(yt mj , Y t1 )p(mj Y t1 )
p(mj Y ) = P
(8)
p(yt |mj , Y t1 )p(mj |Y t1 )
C rb
p(yt M t , Y t1 )p(mt M t1 , Y t1 )
t t
p(M Y ) = P
t
t1 )p(M t , Y t1 )
(10)
p(yt |M
,Y
t1 t1
p(M
Y
)
The overall estimate is obtained by the mode-conditioned
estimate and the mode probability as
3. MULTIPLE-MODEL APPROACH
m
X
p(xt Y t ) =
p(xt M t , Y t )p(M t Y t )
(11)
j=1
The number of the mode history M t increases exponentially with time, which is a fatal problem for implementation. In order to avoid the exponentially increasing number of mode history, generalized pseudo-Bayesian of first
order(GPB1) and second order(GPB2) and Interacting
Multiple-Model(IMM) algorithm, Blom et al. [1988], Li
et al. [1993], are proposed.
8300
0j
P(t1)
=
m
X
i
i|j( t1) P(t1)
i=1
x
i(t1)
x
0j
(t1)
ih
x
i(t1)
x
0j
(t1)
iT
(13)
Disturbance
d (t )
i|j (t1) =
y (t )
u (t )
1
pij i (t1)
cj
i, j = 1, ..., m
(14)
where
Mode 1
Spring failure model
based estimator
Mode
Probability
cj =
Fault
pij i (t1)
j = 1, ..., m
(15)
i=1
Mode 2
Damper failure model
based estimator
m
X
In this study, the KF was designed based on the reducedorder linear model, where the motions of wheelsets are
excluded.
The discrete system is expressed by
x(t+1) = F x(t) + Gu(t) + w(t)
(16)
(17)
y( t )
Vehicle
where
Mixing
01
01
x ( t ) , P( t )
x( t 1) , P( t 1)
Model 1 based KF
p
02
02
x( t 1) , P( t 1)
x ( t ) , P( t )
x ( t )
Model 2 based KF
0m
0m
x( t 1) , P( t 1)
x ( t ) , P( t )
Model m based KF
T
x(t) = y b yb b b y bd ybd , u(t) = u01 u02 ,
T
T
w(t) = [ w1 w2 w3 w4 w5 w6 ] , y(t) = yb b ybd ,
T
v(t) = [ v1 v2 v3 ]
Fusion
Filter equations
Mode Probability
Fusion
j
x
j(t|t1) = F j (
x0j
(t1|t1) ) + D u(t1)
(18)
x
j(t|t) = x
j(t|t1)
h
i
j
+K(t)
y(t) H j (
xj(t|t1) ) + Lj u(t)
(19)
Kalman gain
T
j
j
j
j
S(t)
H(t1)
= P(t|t1)
K(t)
j
j
j
j
j
H(t1)
+ R(t1)
P(t|t1)
= H(t1)
S(t)
j
0j
j
j
F(t1)
P(t|t1)
= F(t1)
P(t|t1)
j
j
j
j
j
K(t)
S(t)
K(t)
= P(t|t1)
P(t|t)
i
t(t = 0, 1, 2, ) as P(t)
, the mixed estimated value x
0j
(t)
i=1
(21)
Covariance equations
4.1 Mixing
0j
and the mixed estimated covariance matrix as P(t)
can be
expressed by the following equations.
m
X
=
(12)
x
0j
x
i(t1) i|j (t1) j = 1, ..., m
(t1)
(20)
(22)
(23)
Here, x
j(t) is the estimated state obtained by using the
KF. The system noise w(t) and measurement noise v(t)
are assumed to be white Gaussian with a zero mean and
covariance of Q(w(t) ) and R(v(t) ).
8301
1
1
j 2
j 1
j (t) = 2S(t)
exp[ e(t) T S(t) e(t) ]
(24)
2
e(t) = y(t) (H j x
j(t|t1) + Lj u(t) )
Therefore, the mode probability for Mode j at time t is
given by
j (t) cj
j (t) = Pm
(25)
i
i=1 i (t) c
The mode probabilities obtained vary with time and are
smoothed by using a moving-average window.
4.4 Estimate and Covariance Combination
The estimated state x
(t) and combination of covariance
P(t) are finally obtained by weighting the estimated state
j
x
j(t) and the mixed covariance P(t)
for each mode with the
mode probabilities.
m
X
x
j(t) j (t)
(26)
x
(t) =
j=1
P(t) =
m
X
j
j (t) P(t)
+ [
xj(t) x
(t) ] [
xj(t) x
(t) ]T
i
(27)
j=1
5. SIMULATION EXAMPLE
5.1 Simulation Condition
We verified the validity of the proposed method for two
cases: (1) a secondary lateral damper failure (the damping
coefficient reduced from its nominal value) occurs while the
train is running; (2) a lateral accelerometer failure occurs
when the train is running. In this simulation, the vehicle
response is generated when passing along a track with an
irregularity. We created a track irregularity by using white
Gaussian noise passed through a shaping filter.
In case 1, the damping coefficient changes as shown in Fig.
5.
8302
8303
8304