JP7572934B2 - Defect Analysis Equipment - Google Patents

Description

The present invention relates to a fault analysis device for a control system.

In recent years, control systems that communicate and control multiple devices have become widespread in various fields, and are also being adopted in integrated train control management systems (TCMS).

In developing such control systems, there is a need to reduce development and operation costs and shorten the downtime of a system when a malfunction occurs, by making it more efficient to identify the cause of the malfunction. Patent Document 1 proposes a log analysis device that compares logs output by multiple devices that are highly similar, and calculates the severity of the malfunction based on the differences.

JP 2012-203431 A

In Patent Document 1, the analysis only targets the output to the control device of the controlled device, and therefore does not anticipate obtaining information to identify which control device is causing a malfunction in a control system in which data flows vertically and horizontally between multiple control devices, including those with different functions.
Therefore, an object of the present invention is to provide information that is useful for identifying which part of a control system is causing a malfunction, for a control system that is composed of multiple control devices, including those with different functions.

In order to solve the above problem, one representative fault analysis device of the present invention has an analysis target range of at least a plurality of control device groups of a control system, and has a suspected fault log detection unit that compares the output logs of the control device groups to detect suspected fault logs, a suspected fault log designation screen display unit that displays a screen that accepts the designation of a suspected fault log if no suspected fault log is detected by the suspected fault log detection unit, and a fault cause candidate extraction unit that extracts candidates for the cause of a fault in the control device group based on the suspected fault log detected by the suspected fault log detection unit or the suspected fault log designated and accepted by the suspected fault log designation screen display unit.

According to the present invention, it is possible to provide information useful for identifying which part of a control system is causing a malfunction, for a control system made up of a plurality of control devices, including those with different functions.
Problems, configurations and effects other than those described above will become apparent from the description of the following embodiments.

FIG. 1 is a diagram showing a hardware configuration of a failure analysis device. FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram of the failure analysis device. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an example of the configuration of a control system to be analyzed by the failure analysis device. FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating an example of a log specification. FIG. 5 is a diagram showing an example of a system structure. FIG. 6 is a flowchart showing the operation of the failure analysis device. FIG. 7 is a diagram showing an example of an operation of detecting a suspected fault log in the fault analysis device. FIG. 8 is a diagram showing an example of a suspected fault log designation screen of the fault analysis device. FIG. 9 is a diagram illustrating an example of the operation of the malfunction cause candidate detection unit of the malfunction analysis device. FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of a defect cause candidate display screen of the defect analysis device. FIG. 11 is a diagram showing an example of a program structure. FIG. 12 is a diagram showing an example of a program structure represented as a graph structure. FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating an example of a defect cause candidate display screen of the defect analysis device according to the second embodiment.

The embodiments will be described with reference to the drawings. Note that the embodiments described below do not limit the invention as claimed, and not all of the elements and combinations described in the embodiments are necessarily essential to the solution of the invention. In the drawings, the same parts are denoted by the same reference numerals.

[Example 1]
<Failure analysis device>
1 is a diagram showing the hardware configuration of a fault analysis device 10. As shown in the diagram, the fault analysis device 10 includes a processor 101, a main memory device 102, an auxiliary memory device 103, an input device 104, an output device 105, and a communication device 106.

The processor 101 is configured using, for example, a CPU (Central Processing Unit) or an MPU (Micro Processing Unit). The main memory device 102 is a device that stores programs and data, such as a ROM (Read Only Memory), a RAM (Random Access Memory), or a NVRAM (Non Volatile RAM). The processor 101 and the main memory device 102 configure an information processing device. The processor 101 reads and executes a program stored in the main memory device 102, thereby realizing various functions of the defect analysis device 10. The auxiliary memory device 103 is, for example, a solid state drive (SSD), a hard disk drive, an optical memory device, a read/write device for recording media, etc. Programs and data stored in the auxiliary memory device 103 are loaded into the main memory device 102 as needed.

The input device 104 is a device that acquires information from a user, such as a keyboard, a mouse, a touch panel, etc. The output device 105 is a device that provides information to a user, such as a liquid crystal monitor, an LCD (Liquid Crystal Display), a graphics card, a speaker, etc. The communication device 106 is a wired or wireless communication interface that realizes communication with other devices via a communication means such as a LAN, and examples of such a communication device include a NIC (Network Interface Card), a wireless communication module, a USB (Universal Serial Interface) module, a serial communication module, etc.

2 is a functional block diagram of the failure analysis device. The log acquisition unit 201 acquires logs recorded in a plurality of control devices included in the control system 21 via the communication device 106, and is executed by the processor 101, the main memory device 102, the input device 104, and the communication device 106.
The control system 21 is a system that controls equipment, and is the subject of analysis by the failure analysis device 10 .
The log acquired by the log acquisition unit 201 is communication data between the control devices that constitute the control system 21 .

The log specification memory unit 202 stores the specifications of the logs recorded in the control device included in the control system 21, and is performed in the auxiliary storage device 103.

The suspected malfunction log detection unit 203 analyzes the logs acquired by the log acquisition unit 201 based on the log specifications stored in the log specification storage unit 202, and detects logs (suspected malfunction logs) that are presumed to have been output due to a malfunction of the control system 21. It is executed by the processor 101 and the main memory device 102.

The suspected malfunction log specification screen display unit 204 accepts specification of a suspected malfunction log from the user of the malfunction analysis device 10 when the suspected malfunction log detection unit 203 is unable to detect a suspected malfunction log. It is executed by the processor 101, the main memory device 102, and the output device 105.

The system structure memory unit 205 stores information about the structure of the control system 21, and is performed in the auxiliary storage device 103.

The malfunction candidate cause detection unit 206 analyzes the suspected malfunction log obtained by the suspected malfunction log detection unit 203 or the suspected malfunction log designation screen display unit 204 based on the system structure stored in the system structure storage unit 205, and detects candidate causes of malfunctions in the control system 21. It is executed by the processor 101 and the main memory device 102.

The defect cause candidate display unit 207 displays the defect cause candidates detected by the defect cause candidate detection unit 206 to the user of the defect analysis device 10. It is executed by the processor 101, the main memory device 102, and the output device 105.

<Control System>
3 is a diagram showing an example of the configuration of a control system 21 that is the subject of analysis by the failure analysis device 10. The control system 21 includes an information display device 301, a system control device 302, a communication device group 303, and an equipment control device group 304. Each of these has a different function. The communication device group 303 and the equipment control device group 304 include a plurality of devices having the same function. That is, the communication device group 303 includes a communication device A3031, a communication device B3032, and a communication device C3033, and the equipment control device group 304 includes an equipment control device A3041, an equipment control device B3042, and an equipment control device C3043 that have the same function.
However, it goes without saying that the devices included in the control system 21 are not limited to these in terms of functionality, and the number of devices and the combination of devices that communicate with each other are also examples.

The information display device 301 is an interface that monitors the control status and inputs instructions between the system control device 302. The system control device 302 controls the operation of each equipment control device via a communication device. Communication devices A3031-C3033 manage the distribution and transfer of information between the system control device and other communication devices and equipment control devices. Equipment control devices A3041-C3043 refer to devices that control the movement of machines and the flow of electricity within the equipment, and include devices such as air conditioning and brakes.

In this embodiment, the term "control device" refers simply to the individual devices included in the control system 21 that are the subject of failure analysis, i.e., the information display device, system control device, communication device, and equipment control device.

In this embodiment, control devices that have the same function and operate in a similar manner are classified into groups (hereinafter, such groups may be referred to as "device groups" or "controller groups"). Equipment control devices A to C that have similar functions (e.g., air conditioning) are collectively referred to as an equipment control device group. Thus, for example, a train will have an equipment control device (air conditioning) group consisting of the air conditioning of each car (equipment control device (air conditioning) A of car 1, equipment control device (air conditioning) B of car 2, equipment control device (air conditioning) C of car 3) or an equipment control device (brake) group consisting of the brakes of each car (equipment control device (brake) A of car 1, equipment control device (brake) B of car 2, equipment control device (brake) C of car 3). However, it is not necessary for there to be multiple control devices in a control device group, and there may be cases where there is only one control device in a control device group.

<Log specifications>
The log specifications stored in the log specification storage unit 202 will be described below. Fig. 4 is a diagram showing an example of a log specification. Each line of the log specification 40 represents a specification related to one piece of data, and includes a transmission path 401, a data position 402, data contents 403, a data change classification 404, and device specific data 405 as data items.
The contents of the communication data log include the time, source, destination, data position, and data content value (data value). The log is collected at intervals of approximately several hundred milliseconds to several seconds, but is not limited to this. The log may be called an output log from the source side.

The transmission path 401 indicates the source and destination of the data. The data position 402 indicates the position of the data in the log. The data content 403 describes the content of the data, such as the device number (a number that identifies the device, such as 1 for air conditioning and 2 for brakes), control abnormality (whether a control abnormality has been detected), and control mode A validity (whether control mode A (e.g., air conditioning) is valid or not). The data change classification 404 classifies the form of change in the value of the data, such as discrete (changes at regular intervals such as 0, 1, ...), continuous (continuous changes due to physical actions such as current, voltage, pressure), and Boolean (binary change such as the presence or absence of an abnormality). The device-specific data 405 indicates whether or not it is expected that the values will be different for each device, even if they are the same type of device.

<System Structure>
The system structure stored in the system structure storage unit 205 will be described below. Fig. 5 is a diagram showing an example of the system structure. Each row of the system structure 50 represents one device, and includes a device 501, a group 502, a connected device (controlled) 503, and a connected device (controlling) 504 as items.

Device 501 is a name that identifies a device. Group 502 is a group to which the device belongs, and devices with the same type of function belong to a group with the same name. Connecting device (controlled) 503 and connecting device (controlling) 504 are the names of devices to which the device connects via communication means. Here, within the control system 21, data giving control commands flows from the connecting device (controlled) to the connecting device (controlling), and data showing the results of control flows from the connecting device (controlling) to the connecting device (controlled). Therefore, for example, with regard to the system control device, data of control commands flows from the information display device to the system control device and then from the system control device to communication device A, while data of the control results flows from communication device A to the system control device and then from the system control device to the information display device.

<Steps of defect analysis>
6 is a flowchart showing the operation of the failure analysis device. The operation based on the flowchart of FIG.
Step 601: Select the extraction target range of the logs to be analyzed in the following steps. The selection is made by specifying conditions such as the start time, end time, target device, etc. When specifying the target device, at least two or more control device groups can be specified.
Step 602: Suspected malfunction logs are detected from the logs in the range specified in step 601.
Step 603: It is determined whether a suspected malfunction log has been detected in step 602.
Step 604: If no suspected malfunction log has been detected in step 603, a suspected malfunction log designation from the user is accepted.
Step 605: Based on the suspected malfunction log from step 603 or step 604, the cause of the malfunction is analyzed.
Step 606: The analysis results of step 605 are displayed as possible causes of the defect.

<Method for detecting suspicious logs>
Step 602 will be further described. Fig. 7 is a diagram showing an example of the operation of the malfunction analysis device for detecting a suspected malfunction log. Log 70 shows a log related to communication data from the device control device A3041 to the communication device A3031, log 71 shows a log related to communication data from the device control device B3042 to the communication device B3032, and log 72 shows a log related to communication data from the device control device C3043 to the communication device C3033, all at the same time and with the same data. Here, the device control device A3041, the device control device B3042, and the device control device C3043 are expected to operate in the same way, and the same data is provided from the communication device A3031, the communication device B3032, and the communication device C3033 except for data that is dependent on the devices.

Dates and times 701, 711, 721 indicate the times when each log was acquired, data positions 702, 712, 722 indicate the positions of data in each log, and data values 703, 713, 723 indicate data items related to the values of the data contents in each log. For example, if the data contents at data position 1 indicate an equipment number, the data contents at data position 2 indicate a control abnormality, and the data contents at data position 3 indicate that control mode A is enabled, log 70 indicates that for equipment number 1 (e.g., air conditioning), the control abnormality (whether an abnormality is detected on the air conditioning side (True) or not (False)) is False (no abnormality detected), and control mode A enabled (whether mode A (cooling) is enabled or not) is True (enabled).

When comparing logs 70, 71, and 72, only log 71 has data value 713 set to False for the data in data position 3. In this way, when the logs of a group of devices that are expected to operate in a similar manner are compared, if data exists that indicates that the devices are not operating in a similar manner, this is detected as a suspected malfunction log.

Methods for detecting that operations are not similar include detecting that the number of logs with the same data value is small, or detecting that the data value deviates by a certain amount from the average or median of all data. This method can be determined according to the data change classification 404 in the log specifications 40, and is appropriate for the form in which the data value changes. Also, data that corresponds to the device-specific data 405 is not subject to detection, since it is normal for each device to have a different value.

<Method of specifying suspicious logs>
Step 604 will be further described. 8 is a diagram showing an example of a suspected fault log specification screen 80 of the fault analysis device. The suspected fault log specification screen 80 includes an OK button 801, a condition specification section 802, and a log specification section 803.

The condition specification unit 802 accepts specification of a date and time range and a transmission route as conditions related to the log to be displayed in the log specification unit 803. For example, if there is a device at the site that is suspected of malfunctioning, a range that includes the device is specified. The log specification unit 803 displays the logs specified in the condition specification unit 802 and accepts specification of the suspected malfunction log. There are no particular limitations on the method of specification, and it may be, for example, by clicking on a location on the screen to be specified (for example, a location where control mode A enable of the device control device B is set to False).
When the user designates the suspected malfunction log in the log designation section 803 and then presses the decision button 801, step 604 ends.

<Method of analyzing the cause of defects>
Step 605 will be further explained. FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of the operation of the malfunction cause candidate detection unit 206 of the malfunction analysis device. The arrows in FIG. 9 represent the flow of data from the connected device (controlling) to the connected device (controlled) in the system structure 50. An example in which a suspected malfunction log is detected as shown in legend 91 is shown. In this case, the method of analyzing the malfunction cause is to trace the flow of data in the specified analysis range back from the destination control device group to the source control device group, and detect the suspected malfunction log by comparing the output log of the control device in the control device group (hereinafter, for convenience, may be referred to as the "output log of the control device group"). The source device of the suspected malfunction log detected on the most source control device group side is set as the main candidate for the malfunction cause. In addition, the source devices of other suspected malfunction logs are also set as candidates for the malfunction cause.

For example, in FIG. 9, the system control device 302 analyzes the log of the information display device 301 for a malfunction, then the communication device group 303 analyzes the log of the system control device 302 for a malfunction, then the log between the communication control devices is analyzed, and then the device control device group 304 analyzes the log of the communication device group 303 for a malfunction, in order to detect possible causes of the malfunction.

<Cause of defect display>
Step 606 will be further described. Fig. 10 is a diagram showing an example of a malfunction cause candidate display screen. The malfunction cause candidate display screen 100 is a component of the malfunction cause candidate display unit 207, and includes a device display indicator 1001, a malfunction cause candidate indication indicator 1002, and a malfunction cause candidate indication indicator 1003.

The device display indicator 1001 displays a graphic representing each device included in the control system 21. The malfunction cause candidate indicator 1002 and the malfunction cause candidate indicator 1003 display a graphic representing the malfunction cause candidate and the malfunction cause candidate identified in step 605, respectively.

<Action and Effects>
This embodiment can provide useful information for identifying which part of a control system is causing a malfunction in a control system consisting of multiple control devices (multiple control device groups), including those with different functions.

[Example 2]
This embodiment differs from the first embodiment in that information about the program that runs the device is added to the information stored in the system structure storage unit 205, and the program is included in the candidates for the cause of the malfunction detected by the malfunction cause candidate detection unit 206 for more detailed analysis. In the following description, components that are the same as or equivalent to those in the first embodiment described above are given the same reference numerals, and the description thereof will be simplified or omitted.

First, the program structure stored in the system structure storage unit 205 will be described. FIG. 11 is a diagram showing an example of the program structure. Each line of the program structure 110 represents a structural unit of a program executed in one of the devices (e.g., air conditioning) of the control system 21, and includes a function 1101, a called function 1102, and external device communication data 1103 as items. The function 1101 is a name that identifies a structural unit of the program. Normally, a function is related to various calculations executed when the device operates and functions. Note that the structural unit of the program handled in the program structure 110 may be a structural unit other than a function, such as a component, a module, or a class, but in this embodiment, the function is handled as the structural unit of the program. The called function 1102 is the name of the function that the function calls when it is executed. The external device communication data 1103 is data that is accessed in the function and communicates with the outside of the device. For example, the data at data position 2 is output by function_d of the equipment control device (e.g., air conditioning).

Next, the method in which the malfunction cause candidate detection unit 206 analyzes the malfunction cause in step 605 will be described with reference to FIG. 12. FIG. 12 is a diagram showing an example of the program structure 110 represented as a graph structure. The functions include function_a 1201, function_b 1202, function_c 1203, and function_d 1204, and function_b 1202 accesses communication data (1) 1205, and function_d accesses communication data (2) 1206. Here, when communication data (2) is detected as a suspected malfunction log, function_d, which accesses it, is set as the first candidate for the malfunction cause (e.g., a bug). Furthermore, function_a, which affects the operation of function_d, is set as the second candidate for the cause of the malfunction, and function_b and function_c, which further affect the operation of function_a, are set as the third candidate for the cause of the malfunction. Here, in addition to the function call relationship shown in FIG. 12, indicators such as the complexity of the function may be taken into consideration when ranking the causes of the malfunction. For example, it is considered that the higher the complexity of a function, the higher the possibility of the occurrence of a malfunction.

The defect cause candidate display screen displayed in step 606 will now be described. FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of the defect cause candidate display screen of the defect analysis device according to the second embodiment. The defect cause candidate display screen 100 displays the rank 1301, device 1302, and function 1303 based on the results of step 605 described above.

<Action and Effects>
According to this embodiment, it is possible to expand the scope of possible causes of malfunctions to include the programs that operate the device, and to identify them in more detail.

Although the embodiments of the present invention have been described above, the present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiments, and various modifications are possible without departing from the spirit of the present invention.

10...fault analysis device, 101...processor, 102...main memory device, 103...auxiliary memory device, 104...input device, 105...output device, 106...communication device, 21...control system, 201...log acquisition unit, 202...log specification memory unit, 203...suspected fault log detection unit, 204...suspected fault log designation screen display unit, 205...system structure memory unit, 206...problem cause candidate detection unit, 207...problem cause candidate display unit, 3 01...information display device, 302...system control device, 303...communication device group, 304...equipment control device group, 3031...communication device A, 3032...communication device B, 3033...communication device C, 3041...equipment control device A, 3042...equipment control device B, 3043...equipment control device C, 40...log specification, 401...transmission path, 402...data position, 403...data content, 404...data change classification, 405...equipment specific data, 50...system System structure, 501...device, 502...group, 503...connected device (controlled), 504...connected device (controlling), 601-606...step, 70, 71, 72...log, 701, 711, 721...date and time, 702, 712, 722...data position, 703, 713, 723...data value, 80...suspected malfunction log specification screen, 801...decision button, 802...condition specification section, 803...log specification section, 91...legend, 100...cause of malfunction Auxiliary display screen, 1001... device display indicator, 1002... main cause of malfunction candidate indicator, 1003... malfunction candidate cause indicator, 110... program structure, 1101... function, 1102... called function, 1103... communication data outside the device, 1201-1204... function_a-function_d, 1205, 1206... communication data (1), communication data (2), 1301... order, 1302... device, 1303... function

Claims (8)

A failure analysis device for analyzing at least a plurality of control device groups of a control system,
a suspected fault log detection unit that compares output logs of the control device group and detects a suspected fault log;
a suspected malfunction log designation screen display unit that displays a screen for accepting designation of a suspected malfunction log when the suspected malfunction log detection unit does not detect the suspected malfunction log;
a malfunction cause candidate detection unit that extracts candidates for malfunction causes of the control device group based on the suspected malfunction log detected by the suspected malfunction log detection unit or the suspected malfunction log designated by the suspected malfunction log designation screen display unit;
A failure analysis device having the following. The fault analysis device according to claim 1, characterized in that the fault cause candidate detection unit detects fault cause candidates by tracing from the destination to the source based on the flow of communication data of the control device group. The fault analysis device according to claim 2, characterized in that the fault cause candidate detection unit determines the source device of the suspected fault log detected on the most source control device group side as the main candidate for the fault cause. a log acquisition unit for acquiring an output log of the control device group;
a log specification storage unit for storing specifications relating to data items of a log;
a system structure storage unit that stores a system structure;
a defect cause candidate display unit that displays the defect cause candidates;
The failure analysis apparatus according to claim 2 or 3, further comprising: The system structure storage unit stores information regarding programs of devices in the control system;
5. The fault analysis device according to claim 4, wherein the fault cause candidate detection section detects a structural unit of a program as a fault cause candidate. The defect analysis device according to claim 5, characterized in that the defect cause candidate detection unit detects program components that are defect cause candidates together with a ranking of the defect causes. A failure analysis method for analyzing at least a plurality of control device groups of a control system, comprising:
selecting a scope of log analysis;
comparing the output logs of the control device group to detect a suspected malfunction log;
accepting a designation of a suspected malfunction log when the suspected malfunction log detection unit detects no suspected malfunction log;
extracting candidates for the cause of a malfunction in the control device group based on the suspected malfunction log detected by the suspected malfunction log detection unit or the suspected malfunction log designated by the suspected malfunction log designation screen display unit;
A failure analysis method comprising: The fault analysis method according to claim 7, further comprising a step of displaying on a screen a fault cause candidate indicator indicating a fault cause candidate of the control device group.

Images