Third International Conference on

Advances in Control and Optimization of Dynamical Systems

March 13-15, 2014. Kanpur, India

Fault Detection and Isolation using an Adaptive Unscented Kalman Filter

Manasi Das*. Smita Sadhu**
Tapan Kumar Ghoshal***

*Electrical Engineering Department, Jadavpur University
India (Tel: +919804122571; e-mail: manasiju@gmail.com).
** Electrical Engineering Department, Jadavpur University India (e-mail:
ssadhuju@gmail.com)
*** Electrical Engineering Department, Jadavpur University,
Kolkata, India, (e-mail: tkghoshal@gmail.com)}

Abstract: An enhanced Fault Detection and Isolation (FDI) technique based on ‘t’ statistical test is
presented here employing a residual based R-Adaptive Unscented Kalman Filter (AUKF). Although the
use of AUKF is common for estimation problem, employing AUKF for FDI duty is quite rare. Adaptive
Unscented Kalman filtering framework is chosen here due to its derivative free calculations in the
algorithm and reportedly better accuracy. Monitoring the ‘t’ statistic of the innovation sequence,
measurement faults are detected and corresponding alarm signals are generated here. The presented ‘t’
statistic based FDI technique comprising of consistency checking and abruptness checking is straight
forward, demands less computational burden and minimizes false alarms. The superiority of the proposed
AUKF based FDI method compared to non adaptive, nonlinear filtering based FDI techniques is
demonstrated here by an extensive simulation study executed on a nonlinear LEO satellite planar model.
The use of AUKF has provided faster convergence speed and is also found to be advantageous for the
situations where the measurement noise statistics are unknown.
Keywords: Adaptive filters, Fault detection, Fault isolation, Nonlinear systems, Unscented Kalman filter.


1. INTRODUCTION To surmount the difficulties of the EKF based FDI schemes

Three stages of model based FDI techniques [Gertler1988]
are: (i) residual/ innovation generation (ii) statistical testing
and (iii) logical analysis. In this paper an AUKF is employed
for innovation generation purpose. Though adaptive filters
are getting increasing attentions for their promising
performances, involving them for FDI duties are still very
rare in literature.
Among the existing model based FDI schemes, Extended
Kalman filtering (EKF) based schemes have the most
prevalent use [Hajiyev2009, Mehra1995, Pirmoradi2005,
Pirmoradi2007, Pirmoradi2009]. In [Hajiyev2009] FDI
technique for a LEO satellite is shown based on the
mathematical expectation of the spectral norm of the
normalized innovation matrix provided by the EKF. In
[Mehra1995] a multi-hypothesis EKF (MEKF) approach is
developed for the detection and identification of faults, where
several EKFs, each based on a particular hypothesis, run in
parallel. A multi-stage FDI scheme for a spacecraft attitude
determination system depending on a bank of EKF has been
shown in [Pirmoradi2005, Pirmoradi2007, Pirmoradi2009].
Although EKF approaches are the mostly used techniques,
the problems associated with the EKF based schemes are the
possibility of divergence for strongly nonlinear systems even
when fault is not present and the complexity of the Jacobian
calculations.
various UKF based FDI methods may also be found in
literature [Xiong2007, Bae2010, Bae2011, Cornejo2010]. In
[Xiong2007] the advantages of the UKF approaches over the
EKF approaches are described and a chi-square test on the
normalized residual sequences, generated by the UKF, within
a fixed length sliding window is shown to detect the sensor
faults in the measurement of satellite attitude. Instead of
monitoring the residual sequences a sensitivity factor is
utilized to detect and isolate fault in [Bae2010, Bae2011],
where a federated structure consisting of several UKFs is
employed. The cumulative sum of the residual sequences
generated by UKF, are monitored to detect fault in
[Cornejo2010].
The advantages of AUKF over EKF and UKF in estimation
problems are shown in [Das2013], from where it may be
found that AUKF can perform satisfactorily even when the
priori knowledge about the noise statistics are wrong or not
available at all. But the possibilities of AUKF for FDI are
still to be explored. [Hajiyev2013] & [Soken2010] are the
only contributions regarding this area. However, both of this
work is concerned mainly about fault tolerance not fault
detection and isolation. Only when the innovation sequences
fail in chi-square test in consequence of any fault, the noise
covariances are changed adaptively in these works, so that
the fault can be tolerated. Although the technique used in
[Hajiyev2013] can identify whether there is any process fault
or measurement fault, but this is not exactly the Fault

978-3-902823-60-1 © 2014 IFAC 326 10.3182/20140313-3-IN-3024.00075

2014 ACODS
March 13-15, 2014. Kanpur, India

Isolation/ Identification in true sense. Moreover, as in the 2n

W {( Xˆ k  xˆ k )( Xˆ k  xˆ k ) }  Q k (4)
 c     T
healthy mode (fault free mode) these AUKFs work as UKFs, Pk  i
i i
i0
the performances of these filters may degrade if the prior
knowledge about the noise covariances is wrong in any Correction (Measurement Update)
healthy mode.

Calculate the sigma points of x̂ k as:
In our work an AUKF [Das2013] which is quite different in (5)
Xˆ 1k  [ xˆ k
    
..... xˆ k ] n( 2 n 1)  ( n   ) [ zeros ( n  1) Pk  Pk ]
structural viewpoint from the AUKFs mentioned in
[Hajiyev2013] & [Soken2010], is employed for FDI purpose. Transform the sigma points ( X̂ 1 ) through the function h as: 
k

In the healthy mode, even when the prior knowledge about Zˆ k  h ( Xˆ 1k )

 
(6)
the noise covariances is wrong, this AUKF algorithm does 2n
not degrade its performance. T statistics of the innovation Predict the measurement as: zˆ k  (7)
W
m 
i
Ẑ k
sequences, generated by this AUKF, are monitored here to i0
i

detect and isolate faults. T statistical test is a ‘direct parallel Calculate the predicted measurement’s covariance as:
test’ which is relatively easier to execute compared to the 2n

W {( Zˆ k  zˆ k )( Zˆ k  zˆ k ) }  Rˆ k 1 (8)
c     T
‘compound scalar tests’ (like chi square test) and it yields Pz  i
i i
distinct binary signature for each of the measurement i0

variables which in turn helps to isolate the faults also Calculate the cross covariance between the predicted state
[Gertler1988]. So like the multi-hypothesis fault isolation and measurement as:
2n
technique this ‘t’ statistics based fault isolation technique
W {( Xˆ k  xˆ k )( Zˆ k  zˆ k ) } (9)
c     T
Pxz 
doesn’t require any bank of filter and consequently needs less i0
i
i i

computational efforts. Furthermore the simulation results Calculate the Kalman gain Kk as: K k  Pxz Pz 1 (10)
have shown that, inspite of the presence of abrupt faults, the
estimation errors of the AUKF don’t increase drastically. Find the innovations as: inn  ( z k  zˆ ) 
k
(11)
This feature provides enough fault recovery time without any Estimate the state as: xˆ k  xˆ  K k * inn 
(12)
k
estimation malfunction.
Calculate the estimated state error covariance
as: Pk  Pk  K k Pz K kT (13)
The organization of rest of the paper is as follows. Section 2
briefly describes the proposed AUKF based FDI technique. Adaptation of Rk
In section 3 a case study on a LEO satellite planar model and
the simulation results are shown. Section 4 provides the Calculate the sigma points of x̂ k as:
discussions and section 5 draws the conclusions.
Xˆ k  [ xˆ k ..... xˆ k ] n( 2 n 1)  ( n   ) [ zeros ( n  1) Pk  Pk ] (14)
2. PROPOSED AUKF BASED FDI TECHNIQUE Transform the sigma points ( X̂ ) through the function h as: k

Zˆ k  h ( X
 ˆ )
k
(15)
2.1 AUKF Algorithm 2n

W
 m 
Estimate the measurement as: zˆ k  i
Ẑ k
i
(16)
i0
The residual based AUKF as proposed in [Das2013] by the Find the residual as: res k  z k  zˆ k (17)
present authors is employed here for FDI. The AUKF
algorithm is shown in Table 1. Calculate the residual covariance as:
k
1 (18)
 ( res
T
Pres  )( res i )
Table 1. Residual based R adaptive UKF kw i  k  k w 1
i

Initialization
(If, ' ws ' is the window size then, k w  k if, k  ws
Initialize, State error covariance (Pk-1), Estimated states & k w  ws if, k  ws )
( xˆ k 1 ) & Measurement noise covariance ( Rˆ k 1 ). Estimate the diagonal elements of Rk as:
2n
Prediction (Time Update) Rˆ k  diag ( Pres )  diag [  W i {( Zˆ k  zˆ k )( Zˆ k  zˆ k ) }]
c     T (19)
d ia g i i
i0

Calculate the sigma points of xˆ k 1 as: Estimate Rk as: Rˆ k  diag ( Rˆ k ) (20)

diag

Xˆ k 1  [ xˆ k 1 ..... xˆ k 1 ] n( 2 n 1)  ( n   ) [ zeros ( n  1) Pk 1  Pk 1 ] (1)

Transform the sigma points ( Xˆ ) through the function fd as: k 1 Obtaining new sigma points X̂ k as shown in (14) do not add
Xˆ k  f d ( Xˆ k  1 ) (2)

computational load as these would be used in the next cycle
Project the state ahead as: of the UKF algorithm.
2n

W (3)
 m 
xˆ k  i
X̂ k
i
i0

Project the state error covariance ahead as:

327
2014 ACODS
March 13-15, 2014. Kanpur, India

2.2 ‘t’ Statistics of Innovation Sequences windows, as shown in (24). The absolute difference between
the two means is then thresholded as shown in (25).
The ‘t’ statistic test is done on each of the two innovations k 1 k
1
generated by the adaptive filter to detect and isolate the diff mean

L
t i
( j)  t i
( j ) ; (24)
faults. jk L j   k  L 1

If, diff  T 2  Abrupt jump. (25)

For ith (i may be either 1 or 2, as there are two innovation mean

sequences corresponding to two measurement variables)
innovation ( inn i ), the t statistic is calculated for consecutive
N samples [Pirmoradi2005] at kth time instant as:
___ _
Where, L = Window size for abruptness checking and T 2 =
Threshold for abruptness checking (empirically chosen as 10
and 0.35 respectively for the case study).

inn i (2) Consistency Checking:

t i(k)  . (21)
S/ N
When any significant abrupt jump is detected in the
____ computed ‘t’ statistic, we should also check the consistency
Where, inn i = Sample mean of the innovation sequence in of the abrupt jump (i.e., the number of time instants for which
the sliding window the ‘t’ statistic persists with its higher value) before
k
generating any alarm for fault. This checking is indispensable
1 (22) to reduce the false alarms specially at the presence of any

N
 inn i
( j)
abrupt fault. It is done here as shown in (26).
j  k  N 1

S = Sample standard deviation of the innovation sequence If,  j  1 to M  1, t i k  j   T1  Consistent jump. (26)

1 k ____
(23) Where, M = Window size for consistency checking and T1 =
 ( inn
2
 i
( j )  inn i )
N 1 j  k  N 1 Threshold for consistency checking (chosen as 5 and 3
respectively for the case study). Note that T1 should be
N= suitably chosen window size to calculate t statistic = 30,
for the case study. chosen from the ‘t’ statistic table for a given confidence level
and degree of freedom.
(For both these summations, the lower bound is unity when
k<N). The parameter values for these two above stated tests should
be chosen carefully because the thresholds provide the trade
The used ‘t’ test indeed is a test to detect any change in the off between the False Alarms and Missed Detection and the
sample mean of the innovation sequences. The calculated ‘t’ window sizes provide the trade off between the False Alarms
statistic implies to the normalized difference between the and Detection Delay.
sample mean and the expected population mean (which is
zero in our case) as can be seen from (21). Whenever this An alarm is generated after executing these two tests in
sample mean rises significantly from the expected zero mean sequence as shown in the flow chart in Fig. 1.
value, the ‘t’ statistic crosses its threshold declaring a fault.
Therefore employing ‘t’ statistic test for detecting any fault is
quite justified.

2.3 Proposed Logical Analysis of the Calculated ‘t’ Statistic

for Alarm Generation

The calculated ‘t’ statistic is then processed logically to

generate the alarms. The logical analysis step is devised here
to reduce false alarms. It consists of two test named as: (1)
abruptness checking and (2) consistency checking. The flow
chart for generating the alarms through these tests is shown in
Fig.1.

(1) Abruptness Checking:

To detect any fault the alarm should be generated when the t-

statistic of innovation sequence changes abruptly and
significantly. This is checked here by comparing the two
means of the t-statistic sequence with in two overlapping
Fig. 1. Flow chart of Alarm Generation.

328
2014 ACODS
March 13-15, 2014. Kanpur, India

The above stated analysis of the calculated ‘t’ statistic can z k 1  X r  r cos   x k 1 cos x k 3  v k 1 (31)
generate alarms for each of the two measurement variables
individually which not only detects the faults but also can z k 2  Z r  r sin   x k 1 sin x k 3  v k 2 (32)
isolate the faults.
Where, vk1 and vk2 are the measurement noises with standard
deviation 100 m and 10 m respectively. The measurement
3. CASE STUDY
equation can be written as z k  h ( x k )  v d . Measurement
To compare the performances of the proposed adaptive filter noise covariance would be denoted by the symbol R k .
based FDI scheme with the non adaptive EKF, UKF based
schemes; a Low Earth Orbit space vehicle planar model is
considered. The simulation results here show the superiorities
of the AUKF over the UKF and EKF for detecting and
isolating the faults.

3.1 LEO Satellite Planar Model

(1) Process Model

This is a classic example of nonlinear problem. Consider a

near earth satellite in a nearly circular orbit [Dan2006], Fig. 2. LEO satellite planar model.
[Grover1983 pp. 298] as shown below in Fig. 2.

With reference to the Fig. 2, the system can be modelled as: 3.2 Simulation Data and Parameters

x1  r  x 2 (27)
Extensive simulation studies have been carried out in
GM MATLAB for the comparative studies of the proposed
x 2  r  r    w
2
2 adaptive filter based scheme with the non adaptive filter
r (28)
GM based schemes. The relevant parameters for the filters and
2
 x1 x 4  2
 w FDI algorithm are provided in Table 2.
x1

x 3    x 4 (29) Table 2. Simulation Parameters

2 r 2 x2 x4 A. Filter Parameters

x 4       (30)
r x1 Symbol Value Comment/description
Where, r is the distance of the satellite from the center of the α 0.6 Determines the spread of
earth, θ is the angular position of the satellite in its orbit. G sigma points.
(=6.6742 x 10-11 m3/kg/s2 ) is the universal gravitational
β 2 Incorporates prior knowledge
constant, M (=5.98 x 1024 kg) is the mass of the earth and w  about the noise distribution.
is the random noise due to space debris, atmospheric drag,
out gassing etc. and act here as the process noise. σwd 0.001 m./sec2. Standard deviation (S.d.) of
the discrete process noise.
The above non linear system equations are in continuous time Qk Diag([0,σwd2,0,0]) Discrete process noise
domain in the form, x  f ( x )  w . Where, x=[x1; x2; x3; x4] covariance
& w=[0; w  ; 0; 0]. It needs to be discretized for filter σv1 100 m. S.d. of the discrete
implementation. The discretized form can be represented as, measurement noise1.
x k  f d ( x k 1 )  w d . Where, fd is the discretized nonlinear
σv2 10 m. S.d. of the discrete
function, wd is the discretized process noise and xk is the measurement noise2.
discretized state. The discrete process noise covariance is
denoted by Qk. R_true Diag([σv12, σv22]) True value of discrete
measurement noise covariance.
(2) Measurement Model x0 [6.57x106 m; True value of the initial states.
0 m/sec;
The projection of the satellite radius along X and Z axes as 0 rad;
can be seen in Fig. 2, are taken as the measurement variables
and are represented as: GM
3
rad./sec.]
r

329
2014 ACODS
March 13-15, 2014. Kanpur, India

x̂ 0 x0 Initial state estimation of all Fig.4 shows the ‘t’ statistics of the innovation sequences
the employed filters. generated by the AUKF. It may be observed from this figure
that only the ‘t’ statistics of the corresponding innovation
P0 Diag([0 0 0 0]) Initial error covariance of all sequence in which measurement the fault has occurred (i.e.,
the employed filters. innovation(2) of the corresponding measurement(2)), rises
wS 150 Window size for adaptation above the threshold declaring an occurrence of a fault. So, it
may be claimed that the proposed ‘t’ statistic based technique
Ts 0.1 sec. Sampling time. can detect as well as isolate the fault at the same time.

B. FDI Parameters In Fig.5 the second innovation sequence by AUKF, UKF and
EKF are plotted which clearly shows the superiority of the
Symbol Value Comment/description
AUKF over the UKF and EKF. It may be observed that the
N 30 Window size to calculate t rise of ‘t’ statistics in AUKF is more compared to the others
statistic and also it persists for longer duration above the threshold.
This property of AUKF is in turn helpful to easily isolate the
L 10 Window size for abruptness faults.
checking
M 5 Window size for consistency The plot of the second diagonal element of the measurement
checking noise covariance as shown in Fig 6, illustrates that the
measurement fault is immersed in the measurement noise
T1 3 Threshold for consistency covariance by the AUKF which leads to satisfactory
checking estimation performance even after the occurrence of fault.
T2 0.35 Threshold for abruptness
checking

All the window sizes are empirically chosen here as shown in

Table 2. The process noise covariance (Qk) is assumed to be
constant and same as the true value for all the filters. The true
measurement noise covariance (R_true) is given in Table 2.
The non adaptive filters measurement noise covariance
values are same as R_true, whereas the AUKF is only
initialized by R_true.

3.3 Simulation Results

The fault detection and identification efficacy of the proposed

AUKF based FDI scheme is examined against the standard Fig. 3. RMS errors of ‘r’by the AUKF, UKF and EKF at the
algorithm like EKF and UKF based schemes in two presence of fault.
simulation scenarios: (1) at the presence of abrupt fault and
(2) at the presence of transient fault.

(1) At the Presence of Abrupt Fault:

From the extensive simulation studies carried out, it is found

that the proposed AUKF based technique performs
prominently better than the non adaptive filter based
techniques especially at the presence of large abrupt faults. A
large abrupt fault of 100m is introduced in measurement 2
(Zk2) on 200 sec.

In Fig.3 the RMS errors of state1 (r) by the filters with 100
Monte Carlo runs have been shown when the fault has
occurred. It may be observed from this figure that the error
by the AUKF doesn’t increase rapidly and drastically even on Fig. 4. ‘t’ statistics of the innovation sequences by the
the occurrence of large measurement fault. This phenomenon AUKF. (inn(1) & inn(2) are respectively the innovations
provides sufficient time to the user to recover the fault. corresponding to first and second measurements)

330
2014 ACODS
March 13-15, 2014. Kanpur, India

202.2 1 1 0
202.3 1 1 1
It may be found from the above table that type1 error i.e.,
False Alarms are generated by both EKF and UKF at 57.2
sec. and 108.3 sec. but AUKF does not generate any False
Alarms due to these transient faults. In that context it should
be noted that when any alarm signal goes from its 0 value to
1, that time instant is considered as the fault detection time. It
may also be observed from Table 3 that the detection delay is
almost same for the proposed AUKF, UKF and EKF.

Fig. 5. ‘t’ statistics of the innovation of second measurement 4. DISCISSIONS

only.
 The t-statistic based proposed FDI method is found to
be straightforward and simple, with less
computational burden.
 After the generation of ‘t’ statistic, the logical analysis
step comprising of consistency checking and
abruptness checking presented here reduces the false
alarms.
 The use of AUKF here instead of UKF/ EKF to
generate the innovation sequences has the following
advantages:
 The change of amplitude in the t-statistic
when fault is encountered is more in the
AUKF compared to the UKF and EKF, i.e.,
AUKF is more sensitive to the faults which in
Fig. 6. Second diagonal element of the measurement noise turn may be advantageous in fault detection.
covariance (R).  At the presence of abrupt faults, the alarm
signals persist for longer durations in the
(2) At the Presence of Transient Fault: AUKF based scheme. For which, it can detect
and isolate the faults more easily leading to
Transient faults of magnitude 50 m, 80 m and 100 m are reduced false alarms and quick identification.
introduced in measurement 2 (z2) respectively on 50 sec.,  At the presence of transient fault also, it is
100 sec. and 200 sec. The representative alarm signals for observed that the EKF and UKF based
these faults are presented in Table3. standard algorithm generate more false alarms
compared to proposed AUKF based scheme.
Table 3. Generated Alarm Signals for Transient Faults
 Use of AUKF provides longer time to recover
Alarms for measurement 2 the fault compared to the UKF and EKF, with
Time (sec.) EKF UKF AUKF in which the estimation results remain
52.6 0 0 0 satisfactory inspite of the presence of fault.
52.7 1 1 1  The residual based R adaptive UKF is chosen here
due to its inherent positive definiteness property.
57.1 0 0 0
 The ‘t’ statistics of both the residual and the
57.2 1 1 0 innovation sequences may be applied for FDI
purpose. However, in this particular problem no
101.3 0 0 0 significant difference is discerned between these two
101.4 0 0 1 options and hence only innovation based ‘t’ statistics
results are shown.
102.4 0 0 1  The following assumptions should be kept in mind to
102.5 1 1 1 apply the proposed scheme: (i) the process noise
covariance should be constant, (ii) while the
108.2 0 0 0 measurement noise covariance (in fault free case) may
either be constant or may vary slowly.
108.3 1 1 0
The performance of the FDI depends mildly on the window
202.1 0 0 0 size chosen for the ‘t’ test. Too large window may slowed

331
2014 ACODS
March 13-15, 2014. Kanpur, India
down the response whereas too small window may give rise
to false alarms. The window size is chosen empirically here.
5. CONCLUSIONS
A Fault Detection and Isolation (FDI) scheme to detect and
isolate faults for a highly nonlinear system using R-adaptive
UKF has been proposed, elaborated and exemplified here.
The residual based adaptation of the measurement noise
covariance matrix is recommended due to its inherent
positive definiteness. The fault detection and isolation
capability of the proposed AUKF based scheme is found to
be noticeably superior compared to the UKF and EKF based
schemes by a through simulation study on a LEO satellite
planar model. The presented logical analysis of the ‘t’
statistics comprising of consistency checking and abruptness
checking is found to minimize the false alarms. The fault
recovery time provided by this scheme is also found to be
more as the estimation results do not degrade drastically on
the occurrence of any abrupt fault. Moreover, the
computation burden of the proposed simple straightforward
FDI scheme is less as it does not require any bank of filters.
The results presented here are expected to encourage further
studies on the proposed adaptive filter based FDI scheme in
more relevant practical problems.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The first author would like to thank the Council of Scientific
and Industrial Research, India, for financial support.
Facilities for the research have been provided by the Head of
the Electrical Engineering Department and the Coordinator,
Centre for Knowledge Based Systems, Jadavpur University,
Kolkata, India.
REFERENCES
Bae J. & Kim Y. (2010). Attitude estimation for satellite fault
tolerant system using federated unscented Kalman filter.
International Journal of Aeronautical and Space
Sciences, 11(2), 80-86.
Bae J., Yoon, S. & Kim Y. (2011). Fault-Tolerant Attitude
Estimation for Satellite using Federated Unscented
Kalman Filter., the book: Advances in Spacecraft
Technologies, InTech, 213-232.
Cornejo N. E., Amini R., and Gaydadjiev G. (2010). Model-
based fault detection for the Delfi-n3Xt attitude
determination System. In Aerospace Conference, 2010
IEEE (pp. 1-8). IEEE.
Dan Simon, (2006). Optimal state estimation, Kalman, H-α
and nonlinear approaches, Chapter 14. John Wiley &
Sons Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.
Das M., Smita Sadhu and T. K. Ghoshal (2013). An adaptive
sigma point filter for nonlinear filtering problems.
International Journal of Electrical, Electronics and
Computer Engineering, 2(2), 13-19.
Gertler J. J. (1988). Survey of model-based failure detection
and isolation in complex plants. Control Systems
Magazine, IEEE, 8(6), 3-11.
332
Grover B. R. (1983). Introduction to random signal analysis
and Kalman filtering. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New
York.
Hajiyev Chingiz, (2009). Innovation approach based sensor
FDI in LEO satellite attitude determination and control
system, the book: Kalman Filter: Recent Advances and
Applications, I-Tech Education and Publishing KG,
Vienna, Austria, 347-374.
Hajiyev C., Soken H. E. (2013). Robust adaptive unscented
Kalman filter for attitude estimation of pico satellites.
International Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal
Processing.
Mehra R., Seereeram S., Bayard D. & Hadaegh F. (1995).
Adaptive Kalman filtering, failure detection and
identification for spacecraft attitude estimation. In
Control Applications, 1995., Proceedings of the 4th
IEEE Conference on (pp. 176-181). IEEE.
Pirmoradi F., (2005). Fault detection and diagnosis in a
spacecraft attitude determination system, M.A.Sc.
dissertation. Dept. Mech. Eng., University of British
Columbia, Vancouver.
Pirmoradi F., Sassani F. and de Silva C.W. (2007). An
efficient algorithm for health monitoring and fault
diagnosis in a spacecraft attitude determination system.
In Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 2007. ISIC. IEEE
International Conference on (pp. 4024-4030). IEEE.
Pirmoradi F., Sassani F. and de Silva C.W. (2009). Fault
detection and diagnosis in a spacecraft attitude
determination system. Acta Astronautica, 65(5), 710-
729.
Soken H. E., Hajiyev C. (2010). Pico satellite attitude
estimation via robust unscented Kalman filter in the
presence of measurement faults. ISA transactions, 49(3),
249-256.
Xiong K., Chan C. W. & Zhang H. Y. (2007). Detection of
satellite attitude sensor faults using the UKF. Aerospace
and Electronic Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 43(2),
480-491.