This article presents a state evaluation model to assess the state of health of a manned spacecraft’s environmental control and life support system, which ensures the safety of astronauts and guarantees space mission success. A state evaluation based on integrated system health management is introduced into the manned spacecraft’s environmental control and life support system to deal with safety and maintenance requirements. Due to the uncertainty and the complexity of the system, there is little research concerning state evaluation for manned spacecraft’s environmental control and life support system that considers fuzziness at the system level. A numerical example illustrates the proposed fuzzy comprehensive state evaluation model that, from a holistic perspective, takes all criteria into account, combines objective tests with subjective judgments and incorporates fuzziness and uncertainty into the ranking of the manned spacecraft’s environmental control and life support system health level. The proposed model is demonstrated by solving a state evaluation problem and the comparison analysis. It also reveals the state impact factors for manned spacecraft’s environmental control and life support system health management and conducts a valuable health state evaluation framework for complex systems.
ZhuZP. The current situation of China manned aerospace technology and the direction for its further development. Acta Astronaut2009; 65: 308–311.
4.
ZhouKHFuLHanYQ. Research and development of technique of regenerative environmental control and life support system. Space Med Med Eng2003; 16: 566–572 (in Chinese).
FigueroaFHollandRSchmalzelJ. Integrated system health management (ISHM): systematic capability implementation. In: Proceeding of the 2006 IEEE sensors applications symposium, Houston, TX, 7–9 February 2006, pp.202–206. Washington, DC: IEEE.
7.
TanselINMingLYapieiA. Integrated systems health monitoring for autonomous space access vehicles and satellites. In: 3rd international conference on recent advances in space technologies, Istanbul, Turkey, 14–16 June 2007, pp.187–192. Washington, DC: IEEE.
8.
ReichardKCrowEBairT. Integrated management of system health in space applications. In: Proceedings of the reliability and maintainability symposium, Orlando, FL, 22–25 January 2007, pp.107–112. Washington, DC: IEEE.
9.
XuJPXuL. Integrated system health management-based condition assessment for manned spacecraft avionics. Proc IMechE, Part G: J Aerospace Engineering. Epub ahead of print 15March2011. DOI: 10.1177/0954410011431395.
10.
BenedettiniOBainesTSLightfootHW. State of the art in integrated vehicle health management. Proc IMechE, Part G: J Aerospace Engineering2009; 223: 157–170.
11.
DongCHouYZhangY. Model reference adaptive switching control of a linearized hypersonic flight vehicle model with actuator saturation. Proc IMechE, Part I: J Systems and Control Engineering2010; 224: 289–303.
12.
ShanJLinH. Non-linear filter-based adaptive output feedback control for spacecraft formation flying. Proc IMechE, Part I: J Systems and Control Engineering2009; 23: 683–691.
13.
GlavaskiSSubramanianDAriyurK. A nonlinear hybrid life support system: dynamic modeling, control design, and safety verification. IEEE T Contr Syst T2007; 15: 1003–1017.
14.
TheurerGEicherLLucasJ. Analysis of the MPLM pressure control function. In: Sixth European symposium on space environmental control systems, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 20–22 May 1997, paper no. 1, pp.735–741. Paris: ESA.
15.
MalinJTKowingJSchreckenghostD. Multi-agent diagnosis and control of an air revitalization system for life support in space. In: 2000 IEEE aerospace conference proceedings, Big Sky, MT, 18–25 March 2000, paper no. 6, pp.309–326. Washington, DC: IEEE.
16.
TraweekMSTataraJD. Overview of the environmental control and life support system (ECLSS) testing at MSFC. Life Support Biosph Sci1998; 5: 5–12.
17.
TataraJDRomanMC. An overview of ISS ECLSS life testing at NASA, MSFC. Life Support Biosph Sci1998; 5: 13–21.
18.
FeronPHMJacobsPPaulPG. Integrated CO2 and humidity control by membrane gas absorption. In: Sixth European symposium on space environmental control systems, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 20–22 May 1997, paper no. 1, pp.761–766. Paris: ESA.
19.
TuBLinGPRuiJB. Physical simulation of human body metabolism in sealed module on the ground. Space Med Med Eng2003; 16: 128–132 (in Chinese).
20.
HagerPCzupallaMWalterU. A dynamic human water and electrolyte balance model for verification and optimization of life support systems in space flight applications. Acta Astronaut2010; 67: 1003–1024.
21.
BuckleyJJ. Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Set Syst1985; 17(1): 233–247.
22.
DagdevirenMYukselI. Developing a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) model for behavior-based safety management. Inform Sciences2008; 178: 1717–1733.
23.
SunCC. A performance evaluation model by integrating fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods. Expert Syst Appl2010; 37: 7745–7754.
24.
XuJPXuL. Health management based on fusion prognostics for avionics systems. J Syst Eng Electron2011; 22: 428–436.
Van LaarhovenPJMPedryczW. A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Set Syst1983; 11: 199–227.
29.
ChangDY. Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur J Oper Res1996; 95: 649–655.
30.
ChengCH. Evaluating naval tactical missile systems by FAHP based on the grade value of membership function. Eur J Oper Res1997; 96: 343–350.
31.
CalabriaRPulciniG. An engineering approach to Bayes estimation for the Weibull distribution. Microelectron Reliab1994; 34(5): 789–802.
32.
ChoudharyDShankarR. An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: a case study from India. Energy2012; 42: 510–521.
33.
PiresaAChangN-BMartinhoaG. An AHP-based fuzzy interval TOPSIS assessment for sustainable expansion of the solid waste management system in Setúbal Peninsula, Portugal. Resour Conserv Recy2011; 56: 7–21.
34.
MikhailovL. A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pair-wise comparison judgments. Eur J Oper Res2004; 159: 687–704.
