Robots Atlas>ROBOTS ATLAS
Safety

FDI

1971ActivePublished: 4 May 2026Updated: 4 May 2026Published
Key innovation
Systematic methodology for fault detection, isolation, and identification in dynamic systems by comparing observed signals against a nominal model.
Category
Safety
Abstraction level
Building block
Operation level
Robot controlDeployment
Use cases
FDI module in Active FTCPredictive maintenanceMonitoring aircraft enginesFault detection in robot sensorsMonitoring autonomous vehiclesSafety instrumented systems for chemical processes (SIS)Detection of faults in multirotor drones

How it works

Generate residuals: r(t) = y(t) - ŷ(t), where ŷ(t) is the model/observer output. Apply a statistical test or threshold: r > γ → detection. Use an observer bank (each sensitive to a single component) or parity equations for isolation. Identification: online adaptive methods (e.g., least squares) to estimate fault magnitude.

Problem solved

How to automatically detect, localize, and characterize faults in a dynamic system based on input and output signals, without operator intervention.

Components

Residual GeneratorPrimary diagnostic signal.

Module computing residuals r(t) = y(t) - ŷ(t) from the nominal model or observer.

Residual Evaluator / Decision LogicFault detection and isolation.

Module comparing residuals against thresholds or applying statistical tests (CUSUM, GLR, χ²) to make fault decisions.

Observer BankIsolation — locating the faulty component.

Set of observers (Luenberger, KF) designed for different fault scenarios — each generating residuals sensitive to one fault type.

Fault Identification ModuleDetection and identification — entry point to the FTC reconfiguration mechanism.

Estimates the magnitude and character of the fault (adaptive parameter estimation, LS, Bayesian methods) after isolation.

Implementation

Implementation pitfalls
False Alarm Rate vs Missed Detection RateHigh

Lowering the detection threshold increases FAR; raising it increases MDR. Application-dependent trade-off is required.

Fix:Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC), adaptive thresholds, Bayesian decision theory.
Fault–Disturbance IndistinguishabilityHigh

Observer-based FDI may confuse external disturbances with faults (lack of robustness).

Fix:Robust FDI methods (unknown input observers, H∞ observers) separate disturbances from faults through observer design.
Isolation Under Simultaneous FaultsMedium

Standard observer bank schemes designed for single faults fail with two simultaneous faults.

Fix:Combinatorial methods, machine learning, and generalized likelihood ratio tests.

Evolution

1971
Beard — first formal FDI
Inflection point

R. V. Beard (MIT) formalises fault accommodation — the beginning of model-based FDI.

1984
Frank — observer-based FDI survey

P. M. Frank systematises observer-based FDI methods; Dedicated Observer Scheme (DOS) and GOS.

1991
Gertler — parity equations

J. Gertler formalises the parity equations approach to FDI as an alternative to observers.

1993
IFAC SAFEPROCESS — dedicated conference
Inflection point

First IFAC SAFEPROCESS conference — FDI/FTC becomes a distinct subdiscipline.

2010
Data-driven FDI — ML classifiers

Rise of SVM, random forests, and neural networks for data-driven FDI on industrial data (predictive diagnostics).

2020
Deep learning FDI

Autoencoders, LSTM, and Transformer-based anomaly detection applied to FDI in robotics and Industry 4.0.

Hardware requirements

Primary

FDI runs on the RT CPU in the control loop (typically the same platform as the controller).

Possible

Deep learning FDI (autoencoders, LSTM) may use GPU for offline training or inference in non-hard-RT systems.

Good fit

Model-based FDI is hardware-agnostic; a deterministic RT scheduler is the key requirement.