The present invention relates generally to diagnostic equipment. More particularly, the present invention relates to the generation of optimized diagnostic test plans, such as vehicle diagnostic test plans, for diagnostic systems.
Diagnostic systems are used by technicians and professionals in virtually all industries to perform basic and advanced system testing functions. For example, in the automotive, trucking, heavy equipment and aircraft industries, diagnostic test systems provide for vehicle onboard computer fault or trouble code display, interactive diagnostics, multiscope and multimeter functions, and electronic service manuals. In the medical industry, diagnostic systems provide for monitoring body functions and diagnosis of medical conditions, as well as system diagnostics to detect anomalies in the medical equipment.
In many industries, diagnostic systems play an increasingly important role in manufacturing processes, as well as in maintenance and repair throughout the lifetime of the equipment or product. Some diagnostic systems are based on personal computer technology and feature user-friendly, menu-driven diagnostic applications. These systems assist technicians and professionals at all levels in performing system diagnostics on a real-time basis.
A typical diagnostic system includes a display on which instructions for diagnostic procedures are displayed. The system also includes a system interface that allows the operator to view real-time operational feedback and diagnostic information. Thus, the operator may view, for example, vehicle engine speed in revolutions per minute, or battery voltage during start cranking; or a patient's heartbeat rate or blood pressure. With such a system, a relatively inexperienced operator may perform advanced diagnostic procedures and diagnose complex operational or medical problems.
The diagnostic procedures for diagnostic systems of this sort are typically developed by experienced technical experts or professionals. The technical expert or professional provides the technical experience and knowledge required to develop complex diagnostic procedures. Thus, the efficacy of the diagnostic procedures, in particular the sequence in which the diagnostic procedures are performed, is highly dependent on the expertise of the technical expert or professional authoring the procedures.
Thus, existing diagnostic systems have a disadvantage in that the sequence of execution of diagnostic procedures is highly dependent upon the expertise of the technical experts and professionals who author the diagnostic procedures. The technical experts and professionals often do not have access to complete information regarding historical outcomes of diagnostic testing that has been performed, and in particular, statistical information regarding the historical outcomes of diagnostic testing. As a result, diagnostic testing can consume unnecessary time and cost, because it is based on incomplete information.
Accordingly, it is desirable to provide a method and apparatus for generating an optimized diagnostic test plan that can be executed on diagnostic systems.
The foregoing needs are met, to a great extent, by the present invention, wherein in one aspect an apparatus and method are provided that in some embodiments provide for generating an optimized diagnostic test plan that can be executed on a diagnostic system.
Embodiments of the present invention advantageously provide a method and apparatus for optimizing the simultaneous performance of multiple steps, either diagnostic steps or test preparation steps.
An embodiment of the invention includes computer-implemented method for generating testing and diagnosis procedures for vehicle diagnosis, the method including determining if a first procedure remains to be performed, if a first procedure remains to be performed, then determining whether: there is a second procedure dependent on the first procedure, or the first procedure can run in parallel to the second procedure, if there is a second procedure dependent on the first procedure, then performing the first procedure, if the first procedure can run in parallel to the second procedure, then performing the first procedure, and determining if the second procedure remains to be performed.
Another embodiment of the invention includes a diagnostic tool for generating testing and diagnosis procedures for vehicle diagnosis, the diagnostic tool including a sequencing module configured to optimize an order of a plurality of diagnostic test procedures. The sequencing module is further configured to determine if a first procedure remains to be performed, if a first procedure remains to be performed, then determine whether: there is a second procedure dependent on the first procedure, or the first procedure can run in parallel to the second procedure, if there is a second procedure dependent on the first procedure, then perform the first procedure, if the first procedure can run in parallel to the second procedure, then perform the first procedure, and determine if the second procedure remains to be performed. The diagnostic tool also includes a display module configured to format at least a step of a first diagnostic test procedure from among the plurality of diagnostic test procedures for display on a display device.
Another embodiment of the invention includes a diagnostic tool for generating testing and diagnosis procedures for vehicle diagnosis, the tool including means for determining whether there is a first procedure remaining to be performed, means for determining whether the first procedure is dependent or independent if it is determined that there is a first procedure remaining to be performed, means for performing the first procedure if it is determined that the first procedure is dependent, means for performing the first procedure if it is determined that the first procedure is independent, and means for determining whether there is a second procedure remaining to be performed if it is determined that the first procedure is independent.
There has thus been outlined, rather broadly, certain embodiments of the invention in order that the detailed description thereof herein may be better understood, and in order that the present contribution to the art may be better appreciated. There are, of course, additional embodiments of the invention that will be described below and which will form the subject matter of the claims appended hereto.
In this respect, before explaining at least one embodiment of the invention in detail, it is to be understood that the invention is not limited in its application to the details of construction and to the arrangements of the components set forth in the following description or illustrated in the drawings. The invention is capable of embodiments in addition to those described and of being practiced and carried out in various ways. Also, it is to be understood that the phraseology and terminology employed herein, as well as the abstract, are for the purpose of description and should not be regarded as limiting.
As such, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the conception upon which this disclosure is based may readily be utilized as a basis for the designing of other structures, methods and systems for carrying out the several purposes of the present invention. It is important, therefore, that the claims be regarded as including such equivalent constructions insofar as they do not depart from the spirit and scope of the present invention.
In the following detailed description, reference is made to the accompanying drawings, which form a part hereof and show by way of illustration specific embodiments in which the invention may be practiced. These embodiments are described in sufficient detail to enable those skilled in the art to practice them, and it is to be understood that other embodiments may be utilized, and that structural, logical, processing, and electrical changes may be made. It should be appreciated that any list of materials or arrangements of elements is for example purposes only and is by no means intended to be exhaustive. The progression of processing steps described is an example; however, the sequence of steps is not limited to that set forth herein and may be changed as is known in the art, with the exception of steps necessarily occurring in a certain order.
A diagnostic test sequence can navigate a vehicle technician through a step-by-step test sequence based on a vehicle onboard computer trouble code or codes, or a vehicle operational symptom or symptoms. During vehicle diagnostics, for example, test step instructions and information can be displayed to the vehicle technician on a display screen panel.
A dynamic diagnostic plan generator can include a diagnostic test sequence optimizer that can arrange, or order, a sequence of diagnostic tests related to one or more symptoms to diagnose a failure mode of a vehicle based at least in part on a failure mode analysis. In addition, the sequence can be modified during test execution based on intermediate test results. The initial and iterative test sequence optimization, combined with the features below, can be referred to as “dynamic decision sequencing.”
The diagnostic plan generator can also include a vehicle state tracker that can track the state of the vehicle during and between diagnostic test procedures, and a test preparation step formatter that can format a test preparation step for display on a display device based at least in part on the vehicle state. The diagnostic plan generator can further include a test procedure formatter that can format a sequence of test steps for display on a display device to provide instructions to a vehicle technician for diagnosing the failure mode. The diagnostic plan generator can also include an interactive diagnostic schematic generator that can illustrate a diagnostic test procedure, such as a wiring diagram, for display on a display device.
In addition, the dynamic diagnostic plan generator can include an information object producer that can create a data structure including information related to the diagnostic test procedures. Furthermore, the diagnostic plan generator can include a failure mode identifier sender that can send a failure mode identifier over a communication network to a central database, a historical data receiver that can receive historical data regarding the outcomes of previous diagnostic testing, and a failure mode analyzer updater that can update the failure mode analysis based on the historical data. Moreover, the diagnostic plan generator can include a failure mode test authoring system that can be used by an expert vehicle technician to create new failure mode tests.
The invention will now be described with reference to the drawing figures, in which like reference numerals refer to like parts throughout.
An embodiment of the present inventive method and apparatus can generate a dynamic diagnostic plan to diagnose a failure mode of a vehicle based on one or more symptoms.
The dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10 can include a processor 12, a memory 14, an input/output device 16, a sequencing module (e.g., a diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18), a state module (e.g., a vehicle state tracker 20), a test preparation step formatter 22, a test procedure formatter 24, a schematic module (e.g., an interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26), an object module (e.g., an information object producer 28), a failure mode identifier sender 30, a historical data receiver 32, a display module (e.g., a display device 34), and a failure mode test author 36, all of which can be interconnected by a data link 38. The processor 12, the memory 14, the input/output device 16 and the display device 34 can be part of a general computer, such as a personal computer (PC), a notebook, a UNIX workstation, a server, a mainframe computer, a personal digital assistant (PDA), or some combination of these. Alternatively, the processor 12, the memory 14 and the input/output device 16 can be part of a specialized computing device, such as a vehicle diagnostics scan tool. The remaining components can include programming code, such as source code, object code or executable code, stored on a computer-readable medium that can be loaded into the memory 14 and processed by the processor 12 in order to perform the desired functions of the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10.
In various embodiments, the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10 can be coupled to a communication network, which can include any viable combination of devices and systems capable of linking computer-based systems, such as the Internet; an intranet or extranet; a local area network (LAN); a wide area network (WAN); a direct cable connection; a private network; a public network; an Ethernet-based system; a token ring; a value-added network; a telephony-based system, including, for example, T1 or E1 devices; an Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) network; a wired system; a wireless system; an optical system; a combination of any number of distributed processing networks or systems or the like.
An embodiment of the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10 can be coupled to the communication network by way of the local data link, which in various embodiments can incorporate any combination of devices—as well as any associated software or firmware—configured to couple processor-based systems, such as modems, network interface cards, serial buses, parallel buses, LAN or WAN interfaces, wireless or optical interfaces and the like, along with any associated transmission protocols, as may be desired or required by the design.
Additionally, an embodiment of the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10 can communicate information to the user and request user input by way of an interactive, menu-driven, visual display-based user interface, or graphical user interface (GUI). The user interface can be executed, for example, on a personal computer (PC) with a mouse and keyboard, with which the user may interactively input information using direct manipulation of the GUI. Direct manipulation can include the use of a pointing device, such as a mouse or a stylus, to select from a variety of selectable fields, including selectable menus, drop-down menus, tabs, buttons, bullets, checkboxes, text boxes, and the like. Nevertheless, various embodiments of the invention may incorporate any number of additional functional user interface schemes in place of this interface scheme, with or without the use of a mouse or buttons or keys, including for example, a trackball, a touch screen or a voice-activated system.
The diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 can select and arrange in order a group of diagnostic test procedures that are related to a symptom, a vehicle operational problem or an onboard computer trouble code. An example of a diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 that is compatible with the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10 is disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/452,249, filed Jun. 14, 2006, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
The diagnostic test procedure sequence can be based, for example, on a diagnostic Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) or on an author priority setting. A FMEA, or equivalently, a Failure Mode and Effects Criticality Analysis (FMECA), is a widely used tool in manufacturing industries, for example, the aerospace industry, the automotive industry, the heavy equipment industry and the digital electronics industry.
A typical FMEA can include a list of failure modes, causes and effects associated with each of the failure modes, a severity of each failure mode, a risk or probability of the occurrence of each failure mode, and additional information that can be useful in designing and manufacturing the associated product. For example, the FMEA can include estimated probability information based on engineering analysis or statistical probability estimates based on empirical data from actual failures. Thus, each diagnostic test procedure can be an individual failure mode test based on the failure modes identified in the FMEA, and the FMEA information can be used to determine which of the diagnostic test procedures is most likely to identify the cause of the symptom.
In addition, the diagnostic test procedure sequence can be based on multiple symptoms. For example, the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 can evaluate two or more simultaneously occurring or intermittent symptoms in order to identify a possible common cause. Furthermore, the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 can dynamically reorder the test procedure sequence during test execution based on an interrelation of two or more symptoms. For example, the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 may identify a common voltage source for two sensors that simultaneously have symptoms, and reorder the test sequence to verify the functionality of the common voltage source before performing failure mode tests on the individual sensors. Once again, the test sequence can also be based on the comparative failure rates of the individual sensors and the common voltage source.
Moreover, in some embodiments of the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10, the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 can dynamically reorder the test sequence during test execution based on intermediate results, for example, based on the results of a particular failure mode test or a combination of failure mode tests. For example, even though a particular failure mode test does not result in a final diagnosis, the failure mode test, alone or in combination with one or more other failure mode tests, can validate the correct functionality of a component. As a result, the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 can dynamically reorder the test sequence, for example, to omit further failure mode tests corresponding the validated component, or to move remaining failure mode tests corresponding the validated component to a later position of lesser priority in the test sequence.
Similarly, in some embodiments of the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10, the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 can dynamically reorder the test sequence during diagnostic test execution based on new information derived from a particular failure mode test, although the failure mode test does not result in a final diagnosis. For example, the discovery of an additional symptom during a particular failure mode test can result in the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 modifying the test sequence based on the interrelation of the newly discovered symptom and the previously known symptom or symptoms. Thus, the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 can perform iterative, dynamic, run-time reevaluations during diagnostic test execution to continually modify or recreate the test sequence.
Some existing diagnostic test systems include sequences of diagnostic test procedures that can performed on a vehicle or other product to determine a cause of a symptom. However, in some existing systems the sequence of the diagnostic tests is determined based solely on the priority assigned by an expert diagnostic author.
An embodiment of the present invention can have the advantage that the diagnostic test procedure sequence can be optimized using statistical probability information based on historical outcomes of actual diagnostic testing in order to more accurately determine the efficacy of each of the diagnostic procedures. As a result, the diagnostic test procedure sequence can be customized to minimize or optimize the time required to resolve the problem, the cost required to resolve the problem, additional factors that can affect the problem resolution, a combination of these factors, or the like.
The diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 can perform an analysis of the comparative utility of each of the individual diagnostic procedures based on various factors that can affect problem resolution. For example, the failure mode analysis factors can include, but are not limited to, any of the following:
an estimated time required to perform a diagnostic test;
the difficulty of performing the diagnostic test;
an estimated time required to remove and replace a component associated with the diagnostic test;
the difficulty of removing and replacing the component;
the level of expertise of a vehicle service technician performing the diagnostic procedure;
the availability of a replacement component;
the estimated cost or the actual cost of the component;
the estimated or actual cost of labor;
empirical data regarding the probability that a failure mode associated with the individual diagnostic procedure exists given the existence of a specified symptom (e.g., FMEA data);
an estimate of the probability that the failure mode exists given the existence of the symptom;
a frequency or rate of the failure mode associated with the diagnostic procedure;
the mileage of the subject vehicle;
the year of the subject vehicle;
the specific configuration of the vehicle or a modification that has been performed on the vehicle;
the vehicle maintenance record;
a service center maintenance record regarding the vehicle or associated vehicles;
a manufacturer warranty record associated with the specific vehicle or a type of vehicle;
a manufacturer warranty record associated with the specific component;
a recommended maintenance schedule, such as a manufacturer recommended maintenance schedule; or
a technical service bulletin issued by the vehicle manufacturer.
In addition, the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 can assign a weight, or weighting, to each of the factors used in the failure mode analysis. For example, a heavier weighting can be given to the time required to perform an individual diagnostic procedure versus the cost of performing the procedure and replacing an associated component. Conversely, the cost can be weighted heavier than the time required. Similarly, a greater weight can be assigned to the difficulty of performing the diagnostic procedure, for example, in relation to the expertise level of the vehicle technician.
In other cases, a greater weighting may be placed on the availability of a replacement component. For example, a diagnostic procedure related to a component that is not available may be given a particularly low weighting. In yet other cases, a heavier weighting can be assigned to a diagnostic procedure associated with a recommended maintenance procedure that is coming due, for example, based on the vehicle mileage, and has not been performed on the subject vehicle. Similarly, a heavy weighting can be placed on a diagnostic procedure related to a technical service bulletin, such as a recommended technical service bulletin issued by the vehicle manufacturer.
Furthermore, the weights can be partially determined based on user preferences. For example, a user preference setting can be set by a diagnostic procedure author, by a service center, by a vehicle technician, or by a combination thereof, and subsequently factored into the individual weightings of the factors. For example, a service center or a vehicle technician may prefer to minimize either time or cost, depending on the vehicle type, customer feedback or the like. Thus, a user input can be used by the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 in determining the weightings of certain critical factors in accordance with user preferences.
Moreover, the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 can receive a history of the vehicle (e.g., over the data link 38), for example, a maintenance or repair record kept with the vehicle, at a service center, or by the manufacturer. For example, the vehicle history can include information such as the mileage on the subject vehicle, the specific configuration of the vehicle, a modification such as a technical service bulletin that has been performed on the vehicle, a vehicle maintenance record, a service center maintenance record associated with the specific vehicle or type of vehicle, or a manufacturer warranty record associated with the specific vehicle or type of vehicle or component having problems.
Accordingly, the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 can use the results of the failure mode analysis, the vehicle history, user settings received by way of user input, a diagnostic FMEA or other input factors to order the diagnostic test procedures in a sequence. The sequence can be optimized in accordance with, for example, a priority input by a diagnostic test procedure author, a user preference input and any combination of the failure mode analysis factors. Thus, the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 is highly configurable to allow customization of the sequence optimization process.
In addition, the vehicle state tracker 20 can track the state of the vehicle during and between individual diagnostic test procedures. The vehicle state tracker can help to eliminate duplication of efforts during a diagnostic test sequence by keeping track of the current vehicle test configuration and providing test preparation steps to reconfigure the vehicle between individual diagnostic procedures without redundant steps. The vehicle state tracker can track the current state of the vehicle by maintaining a current list of preconditions, or vehicle test configuration information.
An example of a method for tracking the vehicle state for use with a vehicle diagnostic system is disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/452,243, filed Jun. 14, 2006, the disclosure of which is incorporated by reference in its entirety.
The vehicle state tracker 20 can determine a set of preconditions, or vehicle test configuration requirements, necessary for an individual diagnostic test procedure. Preconditions and corresponding test preparation steps can be created, or authored, for example, by an expert diagnostics technician. Preconditions can also be formatted to be reusable in various diagnostic test procedures, which can save time during the authoring phase of diagnostic test procedures.
In operation, the vehicle state tracker 20 typically can determine the preconditions required for a subsequent diagnostic test procedure before the completion of a current diagnostic test procedure in order to prevent or minimize redundant efforts at the completion of the current diagnostic procedure and at the initiation of the subsequent diagnostic procedure. The vehicle state tracker 20 can read the current state of the vehicle, for example, from a memory register. In some embodiments, the vehicle state can be stored in a processor register, while in other embodiments the vehicle state can be stored in a main memory register or in a memory register of a storage device associated with the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10.
The vehicle state tracker 20 can verify a current setting of the vehicle state with regard to a specific precondition, or a group of current settings corresponding to a number of preconditions. If a precondition is required for the subsequent test procedure and the corresponding vehicle state setting is currently not valid, the test preparation step formatter 22 can format a test preparation step for display on the display device 34 to instruct the vehicle technician to set up the required precondition or vehicle test configuration. As an example,
In addition, the vehicle state tracker 20 can receive feedback indicating when the precondition has been satisfied. For example, the vehicle state tracker 20 can receive a data signal from the vehicle onboard computer indicating that the precondition has been satisfied. In some embodiments, the vehicle state tracker 20 can receive a feedback signal from test equipment, such as a digital multimeter coupled to the vehicle. Similarly, the vehicle state tracker 20 can receive user input from the vehicle technician by way of the input/output device 16 indicating that the precondition has been satisfied, or that the vehicle technician has complied with the test preparation step instructions.
Once the precondition has been satisfied, the vehicle state tracker 20 can update the vehicle state, for example, in a memory register, to reflect a valid setting corresponding to the precondition. Thus, the vehicle state can be continually updated to maintain a current and accurate vehicle state that is available to the diagnostic system at any time in order to determine test preparation steps required to reconfigure the vehicle between diagnostic procedures in a diagnostic test sequence.
In the case that the vehicle condition is currently valid but is not required for a subsequent test procedure, the test preparation step formatter 22 can format a test preparation step for display instructing the vehicle technician to reverse, or undo, the vehicle condition. Correspondingly, the vehicle state tracker 20 can receive feedback as described above indicating that the condition has been reversed, and can update the vehicle state, for example, in a memory register, to reflect an invalid setting corresponding to the condition, or precondition.
The vehicle state tracker 20 can maintain vehicle state settings for any number of vehicle preconditions associated with the diagnostic test procedures which can be configured to be readily available for use, or reuse, with any existing test procedure or with a new test procedure. For example, preconditions can include, but are not limited to, any of the following:
an ignition switch position;
a light switch position;
an engine run condition;
a throttle position;
an engine speed;
a vehicle speed;
a test equipment connection;
a vehicle electrical connection condition;
an ambient air temperature;
an engine inlet temperature;
an engine lubricant pressure;
engine lubricant temperature;
an engine lubricant level;
an engine coolant temperature;
an engine coolant specific gravity;
an engine exhaust gas temperature;
an engine exhaust gas content;
a transmission setting;
a brake pedal position;
a parking brake position;
a brake fluid pressure;
a fuel level;
a fuel supply pressure;
a battery voltage;
a battery charging system voltage;
a battery charging system current;
an ignition voltage;
an ignition current;
an engine cylinder compression;
a vehicle configuration; or
a vehicle modification.
In addition, the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10 can include a test procedure formatter 24 that can prepare the sequence of diagnostic test procedures for display on the display device. As an example,
An embodiment of the present invention communicates information to the user and requests user input by way of an interactive, menu-driven, visual display-based user interface. The dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10 can include input/output devices 16, such as a mouse and keyboard, with which the user may interactively input information using direct manipulation of a graphical user interface (GUI). Direct manipulation includes using a pointing device, such as a mouse, to select from a variety of selectable fields, including selectable menus, tabs, buttons, bullets, checkboxes, text boxes, and the like. Nevertheless, other embodiments of the invention may incorporate any number of additional functional user interface schemes in place of this interface scheme, with or without the use of a mouse or buttons or keys, including for example, a trackball, a touchscreen or a voice-activated system.
Similarly, the test procedure formatter 24 can prepare detailed test step instructions, as shown in display image 43, such as the representative test instruction 48, “Set Multimeter select knob to DC Volts,” shown in
Furthermore, the test procedure formatter 24 and the test preparation step formatter 22 can cooperate to prepare combined display windows 50, such as the test step display image 42, the test preparation step display image 40 and the diagnostic procedure display image 43 shown in
Moreover, the test procedure formatter 24 can prepare additional informational display images, such as a “description” display image (not shown) or an “information” display image 56, as shown in
The interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can generate a diagnostic schematic, such as the representative diagnostic schematic 64 illustrated in
The interactive diagnostic schematic 64 can illustrate any number of vehicle components 66. For example, the vehicle components 66 in
In order to generate the interactive diagnostic schematic 64, the interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can read a schematic data file associated with a diagnostic test procedure, for example, a wiring diagram data file. For example, the interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can read a data file from a main memory or from a peripheral memory device associated with the processor 12. In a preferred embodiment of the invention, the schematic data file can be stored in a scalable vector graphics (SVG) file format, which is an XML-based markup language for describing two-dimensional vector graphics, both static and animated (i.e., either declarative or scripted). Thus, the schematic data file can be stored as a text file.
SVG formatting can allow various types of graphic objects, for example, vector graphic shapes consisting of straight lines and curves and the areas bounded by them, raster graphics images or text. SVG formatting further can allow graphical objects to be grouped, styled, transformed and composited into previously rendered objects. SVG formatting can also permit nested transformations, clipping paths, alpha masks, filter effects, template objects and extensibility. In addition, SVG formatting can enhance searchability and accessibility of the graphics.
The interactive diagnostic schematic 64 can be dynamic and interactive. For example, a document object model (DOM) in SVG formatting can allow straightforward and efficient animation of graphics by way of script languages. The SVG graphics file format is also compatible with popular communications network standards, such as World Wide Web standards on the Internet. Additionally, SVG images can be stored using compression techniques.
SVG data files can be prepared for display on a display device 34 by any number of commercially available SVG viewers, such as the Adobe SVG Viewer, produced by Adobe Systems Incorporated of San Jose, Calif., or the Corel SVG Viewer, produced by the Corel Corporation of Ottawa, Canada.
The interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can modify the schematic data file to indicate a test subject in the schematic. For example, the interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can alter the color of the vehicle component 66, electrical connector 68, wire 70, or the like, and can highlight the test subject by surrounding the test subject with a highlighting color to make the test subject stand out from the background and the remaining items in the schematic.
Likewise, the interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can shade the test subject, fade the color of the test subject, gray out the test subject, or animate the test subject. For example, the interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can animate the test subject by making the vehicle component 66, electrical connector 68, wire 70, or the like, blink or flash in the schematic 64 when displayed on a display device 34. This can be accomplished, for example, by adding executable code in a scripting language to the schematic data file.
Similarly, the interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can animate the test subject by adding motion to the schematic 64, for example, demonstrating the connection or disconnection of an electrical connector 68. The interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can also zoom in on a specific component 66, for example, when a user clicks on the component 66 using a pointing device, such as a mouse. Furthermore, the interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can add properties to the component 66, for example, a part number, inventory information regarding the component, a link to a help file, or the like.
The interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can illustrate a location on the schematic 64 where a test equipment connection is required. For example, the interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can highlight or otherwise locate a location or multiple locations where electrical connectors, pins, clamps, or the like associated with test equipment are to be connected to the vehicle component 66 or electrical connector 68. The interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can further illustrate required test equipment, such as a digital multimeter, in the schematic 64. This can aid a vehicle technician to quickly and efficiently connect test equipment for a diagnostic test procedure.
The diagnostic schematic generator 26 can format the originally stored schematic or a modified schematic for display on the display device 34. For example, the diagnostic schematic generator 26 can include an SVG viewer or cooperate with an SVG viewer to display the diagnostic schematic generator 26.
The interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can receive feedback, for example, by direct manipulation such as a user selecting a portion of the schematic using a mouse or the equivalent. For example, a user can “click” on a wire, a component, or another test subject within a schematic currently displayed on the screen, and the feedback receiver 36 can uniquely identify the selected test subject.
In response to the feedback, the interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can, for example, remove or discontinue the indication of the test subject in the schematic. That is to say, the test subject indicator 30 can remove or discontinue the highlighting, fading, graying out or animation of the test subject in the diagnostic schematic 10. Furthermore, in some embodiments, online help can be accessed by way of direct manipulation of displayed objects in the schematic.
In addition, in response to the feedback, the interactive diagnostic schematic generator 26 can mark the test subject to indicate that a diagnostic procedure, test step or other action has been performed on the test subject. Once again, the schematic generator 26 can use highlighting, shading, fading, graying out or animation of the test subject to indicate that the action has been performed. For example, the marking style used to mark the test subject to indicate that the action has been performed can be visually distinct from the indicating style used to indicate the test subject on which an action is required.
The information object producer 28 can create a diagnostic data structure, or information object, based on information related to the diagnostic test procedures. For example, the information object can include the diagnostic test procedure instructions, a list of possible causes of the symptom, the vehicle history, the current state of the vehicle, a diagnostic schematic, a Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) compiled by the vehicle manufacturer, or the like.
Thus, the information object can include, but is not limited to, information such as the following:
an estimated time required to perform the diagnostic test procedures;
a difficulty level of performing the diagnostic test procedures;
an estimated time required to remove and replace a component associated with the diagnostic test procedures;
a difficulty level of removing and replacing a component;
an availability of a replacement component;
an estimated cost of the component;
an actual cost of the component;
an estimated cost of performing the diagnostic test procedures;
empirical data regarding the probability that a failure mode exists given the existence of the symptom;
an estimate of the probability that a failure mode exists given the existence of the symptom;
a frequency or rate of the failure mode;
a vehicle mileage;
a vehicle configuration;
a vehicle modification;
a vehicle maintenance record;
a service center maintenance record;
a manufacturer warranty record;
the recommended maintenance schedule for the vehicle; or
a technical service bulletin.
The failure mode identifier sender 30 can send a failure mode identifier (ID) indicating the failure mode over a communication network to a central database. For example, the failure mode identifier can be sent to a service center database, a manufacturer warranty database, or the like, over the Internet, an intranet, or a wireless network. In addition, the failure mode identifier can include additional information associated with the diagnostic case, such as observed symptoms, diagnostic trouble codes (DTCs), a vehicle identification, a vehicle history, a vehicle state as measured and observed, systematic data readings, specific parameters relevant to the optimization process (for example, any of the factors enumerated above), and the final diagnostic conclusion. The final diagnostic conclusion, can include a failure-mode identifier or a no-failure-mode-identified diagnosis. In this manner, the failure mode occurrences can automatically be gathered in a central database in order to allow analysis of failure mode occurrences to continually update the statistical failure mode information.
The historical data receiver 32 can receive failure mode historical data over a communication network from a central database, for example, the results of a Failure Mode and Effects Analysis performed by the vehicle manufacturer using automatically-updated information from a region, a country, or an entire fleet of vehicles. The historical failure mode data can be used by the diagnostic test sequence optimizer 18 to order the diagnostic test procedures in an optimal sequence based on the latest updated information available. As a result, the diagnostic test sequence compiled by the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10 can change over time in a dynamic manner, based on actual failure mode occurrences.
Furthermore, the failure mode test author 36 can provide a vehicle diagnostic system authoring capability to facilitate the creation of failure mode test procedures by an individual who is an expert in vehicle diagnostics but is not necessarily knowledgeable concerning a computer programming language. The failure mode test author 36 can accelerate development and reduce errors in diagnostic software by eliminating the need for a computer programmer to code the process as explained by an expert in vehicle diagnostics. Thus, the failure mode test author 36 can be particularly useful to an original equipment manufacturer for developing electronic diagnostic sequences.
A related method for authoring diagnostic procedures for use with a vehicle diagnostic system is disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/052,118, filed Feb. 8, 2005, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
A representative failure mode authoring display image is shown in
For example, the test structure display image 74 can include a hierarchical breakdown, for example, by vehicle make 80, vehicle model 82, symptom type 84, vehicle component 86, and symptom 88. Each symptom 88 can be associated with a group of failure mode tests 90 and preconditions 92. The symptom properties display image 78 can display properties or information stored by the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10 regarding a specific symptom. For example, symptom properties can include a name or nametag 94 corresponding to the symptom, a code 96 corresponding to the symptom, a component identifier 98 and a symptom type identifier 100. The symptom properties can further include additional information, such as an introduction identifier 102, a priority 104, a key word 106, a description 108, and one or more flags 110 associated with the symptom.
The FMEA details editor display image 76 can display FMEA information stored by the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10, such as statistical probability factors based on actual failure mode occurrences corresponding to the symptom. For example, the FMEA information can include a nametag field 112, a name field 114, and a listing of records 116 associated with individual failure mode tests. Each of the records can include, for example, a name tag 118, a component 120 associated with the failure mode, a test identifier 122, an author rank assigning an estimated probability to the failure mode test 124, a cost 126 associated with performing the failure mode test, a risk 128 associated with the failure mode test, a difficulty factor 130, or other information associated with the failure mode test.
In operation, an expert diagnostic author can use an authoring work environment 72 to create a new failure mode test. The author can define the system to which the failure mode corresponds, for example, by specifying the vehicle make 80 and model 82. The author can also specify the symptom type 84 or category, for example, a vehicle-defined symptom such as a diagnostic trouble code (DTC), or a user-defined symptom. The author can further define a pertinent system or unit 86 and a specific symptom 88 to be diagnosed.
The author can then define an introduction associated with the symptom to provide information about the symptom to the vehicle technician. The introduction can include, for example, a failure mode description, circuit diagrams, tips, or the like. In addition, the author can define multiple failure modes 90 associated with the symptom. The author can create a reusable failure mode test for each failure mode and associate preconditions 92 required for each failure mode test. Preconditions 92 can be procedures that must be completed prior to the performance of the failure mode test, as previously discussed. Once created, a precondition 92 can be reused for additional failure mode tests.
The author can further specify a sequence associated with the preconditions for a failure mode test, an indication as to whether the precondition must be removed or reversed after the failure mode test, and associated procedures for removing or reversing preconditions after the failure mode test.
In addition, in some embodiments, the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10 can perform a reverse failure analysis that can identify symptoms, or operational problems, of a vehicle and correlate each symptom to a specific failure mode or vehicle component that is the cause of the symptom. An example of a method for reverse failure analysis for use with a vehicle diagnostic system is disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/452,273, filed Jun. 14, 2006, the disclosure of which is incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Furthermore, in some embodiments, the dynamic diagnostic plan generator 10 can gather and organize information corresponding to an optimized diagnostic test plan from a diverse set of information sources and generate an information object. The information object can be organized, for example, in a sequence or data structure that corresponds to the optimized diagnostic test plan. Thus, the information object can be interpreted as a dynamically-created manual that has been customized in accordance with a specific optimized diagnostic test plan, and which a user can access during execution of the corresponding diagnostic test plan, or at any time during diagnosis and repair, or treatment. An example of a method for generating an information object for use with a vehicle diagnostic system is disclosed in a copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/452,240, filed Jun. 14, 2006, the disclosure of which is incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Next, in step 152, “Track Vehicle State,” a current state of the vehicle can be read from a memory and updated, as explained above. Then, based on the diagnostic test sequence and vehicle state, in step 154, “Format Test Prep Step,” a test preparation step or steps can be formatted for display on a display device to provide instructions for a vehicle technician, as described above.
In turn, an interactive diagnostic schematic can be generated in step 156, “Generate Interactive Diagnostic Schematic.” As explained above, the interactive diagnostic schematic can illustrate a diagnostic test procedure when displayed on a display device. Subsequently, in step 158, “Produce Information Object,” an information object can be created as a data structure containing information regarding the interactive diagnostic procedures as a supplemental resource for the vehicle technician.
In step 160, “Format Diagnostic Test Procedure,” a diagnostic test procedure can be formatted for display on a display device to provide instructions for the vehicle technician, as described above. In addition, in step 162, “Receive Input,” input can be received indicating that the test procedures have been performed and that the associated failure mode has been verified or eliminated, as described above.
Once the failure mode has been verified, in step 164, “Send Failure Mode ID,” a failure mode identifier can be sent over a communication network to a central database, for example, at a service center or a manufacturer, as described above. Correspondingly, in step 166, “Receive Historical Data,” historical data regarding actual failure mode occurrences can be received, for example, from a service center, regional database, a country database, a fleet database, or the like. Consequently, in step 168, “Update Failure Mode Analysis,” failure mode frequency or rate information can be updated with the historical data for use in subsequent diagnostic test sequence optimizations.
In this regard,
An embodiment of the present invention can also include one or more input or output devices 16, such as a mouse, keyboard, monitor, and the like. A display can be provided for viewing text and graphical data, as well as a user interface to allow a user to request specific operations. Furthermore, an embodiment of the present invention may be connected to one or more remote computers via a network interface. The connection may be over a local area network (LAN) wide area network (WAN), and can include all of the necessary circuitry for such a connection.
Typically, computer program instructions may be loaded onto the computer or other general purpose programmable machine to produce a specialized machine, such that the instructions that execute on the computer or other programmable machine create means for implementing the functions specified in the block diagrams, schematic diagrams or flowcharts. Such computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable medium that when loaded into a computer or other programmable machine can direct the machine to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer-readable medium produce an article of manufacture including instruction means that implement the function specified in the block diagrams, schematic diagrams or flowcharts.
In addition, the computer program instructions may be loaded into a computer or other programmable machine to cause a series of operational steps to be performed by the computer or other programmable machine to produce a computer-implemented process, such that the instructions that execute on the computer or other programmable machine provide steps for implementing the functions specified in the block diagram, schematic diagram, flowchart block or step.
Accordingly, blocks or steps of the block diagram, flowchart or control flow illustrations support combinations of means for performing the specified functions, combinations of steps for performing the specified functions and program instruction means for performing the specified functions. It will also be understood that each block or step of the block diagrams, schematic diagrams or flowcharts, as well as combinations of blocks or steps, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-based computer systems, or combinations of special purpose hardware and computer instructions, that perform the specified functions or steps.
As an example, provided for purposes of illustration only, a data input software tool of a search engine application can be a representative means for receiving a query including one or more search terms. Similar software tools of applications, or implementations of embodiments of the present invention, can be means for performing the specified functions. For example, an embodiment of the present invention may include computer software for interfacing a processing element with a user-controlled input device, such as a mouse, keyboard, touchscreen display, scanner, or the like. Similarly, an output of an embodiment of the present invention may include, for example, a combination of display software, video card hardware, and display hardware. A processing element may include, for example, a controller or microprocessor, such as a central processing unit (CPU), arithmetic logic unit (ALU), or control unit.
At step 210, a decision is made as to whether there are any procedures remaining to be done. If “NO,” then the logic flow is complete and the process ends at step 215. If “YES,” then the method proceeds to step 220. Next, at step 220, a decision is made as to whether the remaining procedures are waiting for other steps to finish, or if there are some steps waiting that can now be taken. The “NO” branch is taken back to step 210 if there are procedures that are remaining to be performed, but they cannot proceed because they are waiting for other steps to be completed. Either there may be a logical error in the step sequencing, or there may be a procedure (e.g., warming up an engine) that is running, but not yet completed. If “YES,” then there is at least one procedure that can be performed at that time.
At step 230, the highest priority procedure is selected. Among the procedures that can be done, the most important (e.g., highest priority) procedure, is determined. This will be the next one to be done. The priority may be determined, for example, by the dependency among procedures, for example, a procedure to acquire a Volt-Ohm meter must be completed before a procedure to set the Volt-Ohm meter to read Ohms can be done, so the second procedure is dependent on the first. The priority may also be determined based on the received vehicle history (e.g., received over the
In the third decision step 240, a determination of whether the selected procedure is serial or parallel. In the terms chosen here, a serial procedure has to be completed before the next procedure can be started, e.g., the next procedure is dependent on the first being finished. A serial procedure is an atomic function, i.e., a function that, once-started, must be completed before continuing. In the terminology chosen here, a parallel procedure is chosen to mean that the procedure that can be started and can finish in parallel with other procedures being started and performed. For example, during the process of warming up the engine, which involves starting the engine and then simply waiting for the temperature to be at an appropriate level, other procedures can be performed.
If it is determined that the procedure is serial, it is completed at step 250, then the logic flows back to step 210. Again, a determination is made as to whether any procedures remain to be performed.
If the procedure is parallel, then the procedure is begun at step 260, for example, the engine of a vehicle 116 (
The processes and devices in the above description and drawings illustrate examples of only some of the methods and devices that could be used and produced to achieve the objects, features, and advantages of embodiments described herein. Thus, they are not to be seen as limited by the foregoing description of the embodiments, but only limited by the appended claims. Any claim or feature may be combined with any other claim or feature within the scope of the invention.
The many features and advantages of the invention are apparent from the detailed specification, and, thus, it is intended by the appended claims to cover all such features and advantages of the invention which fall within the true spirit and scope of the invention. Further, since numerous modifications and variations will readily occur to those skilled in the art, it is not desired to limit the invention to the exact construction and operation illustrated and described, and, accordingly, all suitable modifications and equivalents may be resorted to that fall within the scope of the invention.
The present application is a continuation-in-part of, and claims priority to, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/452,250, filed Jun. 14, 2006, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4404639 | McGuire et al. | Sep 1983 | A |
4757463 | Ballou et al. | Jul 1988 | A |
4796206 | Boscove et al. | Jan 1989 | A |
4817092 | Denny | Mar 1989 | A |
4866635 | Kahn et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
4873687 | Breu | Oct 1989 | A |
4881230 | Clark et al. | Nov 1989 | A |
4943919 | Aslin et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
4954964 | Singh | Sep 1990 | A |
4964125 | Kim | Oct 1990 | A |
4985857 | Bajpai et al. | Jan 1991 | A |
5010487 | Stonehocker | Apr 1991 | A |
5023791 | Herzberg et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5025392 | Singh | Jun 1991 | A |
5036479 | Prednis et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5099436 | McCown et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5109380 | Ogino | Apr 1992 | A |
5111402 | Brooks et al. | May 1992 | A |
5127005 | Oda et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5161158 | Chakravarty et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5184312 | Ellis | Feb 1993 | A |
5214577 | Sztipanovits et al. | May 1993 | A |
5270920 | Pearse et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5293323 | Doskocil et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5396422 | Forchert et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5442549 | Larson | Aug 1995 | A |
5491631 | Shirane et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5524078 | Kolb et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5541840 | Gurne et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5561762 | Smith et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5572424 | Kellogg et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5586252 | Barnard et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5617039 | Kuck et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5631831 | Bird et al. | May 1997 | A |
5670939 | Rodewald et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5671141 | Smith et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5696676 | Takaba | Dec 1997 | A |
5729452 | Smith et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5742500 | Irvin | Apr 1998 | A |
5778381 | Sandifer | Jul 1998 | A |
5835871 | Smith et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5838261 | Lauta et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5852789 | Trsar et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5883586 | Tran et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5916286 | Seashore et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5964811 | Ishii et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5964813 | Ishii et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5987443 | Nichols et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6003021 | Zadik et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6003808 | Nguyen et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6006146 | Usui et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6012152 | Douik et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6032088 | Feldmann et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6041287 | Dister et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6055468 | Kaman et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6064998 | Zabloudil et al. | May 2000 | A |
6067537 | O'Connor et al. | May 2000 | A |
6067538 | Zorba et al. | May 2000 | A |
6073127 | Lannert et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6085184 | Bertrand et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6119074 | Sarangapani | Sep 2000 | A |
6122575 | Schmidt et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6134488 | Sasaki et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6141608 | Rother | Oct 2000 | A |
6167352 | Kanevsky et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6175787 | Breed | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6192302 | Giles et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6205465 | Schoening et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6226627 | Polak | May 2001 | B1 |
6236917 | Liebl et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6249755 | Yemini et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6263268 | Nathanson | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6263322 | Kirkevold et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6282469 | Rogers et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6301531 | Pierro et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6314375 | Sasaki et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6330499 | Chou et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6338148 | Gillenwater et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6363304 | Ramsey | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6370455 | Larson et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6434455 | Snow et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6477453 | Oi et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
6493615 | Johnston | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6505106 | Lawrence et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6512968 | de Bellefeuille et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6522987 | Flink et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6526340 | Reul et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6526361 | Jones et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6538472 | McGee | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6557115 | Gillenwater et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6560516 | Baird et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6574537 | Kipersztok et al. | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6591182 | Cece et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6609051 | Fiechter et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6611740 | Lowrey et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6615120 | Rother | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6636790 | Lightner et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6640166 | Liebl et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6643607 | Chamberlain et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6652169 | Parry | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6662087 | Liebl et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6694235 | Akiyama | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6708092 | Starks et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6711134 | Wichelman et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6714846 | Trsar et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6738697 | Breed | May 2004 | B2 |
6748304 | Felke et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6751536 | Kipersztok et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6768935 | Morgan et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6795778 | Dodge et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6807469 | Funkhouser et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6819988 | Dietz et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6836708 | Tripathi | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6845307 | Rother | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6845468 | James | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6868319 | Kipersztok et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6874680 | Klaus et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6928349 | Namaky et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6941203 | Chen | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6950829 | Schlabach et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6993421 | Pillar et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7010460 | Trsar et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7013411 | Kallela et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7050894 | Halm et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7062622 | Peinado | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7073120 | Torii et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7082359 | Breed | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7103610 | Johnson et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7103679 | Bonn | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7120559 | Williams et al. | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7120890 | Urata et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7124058 | Namaky et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7142960 | Grier et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7162741 | Eskin et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7165216 | Chidlovskii et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7171372 | Daniel et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7203881 | Williams et al. | Apr 2007 | B1 |
7209815 | Grier et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7209817 | Abdel-Malek et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7209860 | Trsar et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7216052 | Fountain et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7251535 | Farchmin et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7272475 | Gawlik et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7272756 | Brink et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7286047 | Oesterling et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7373225 | Grier et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
7376497 | Chen | May 2008 | B2 |
7379846 | Williams et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
7400954 | Sumcad et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7409317 | Cousin et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7428663 | Morton et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7430535 | Dougherty et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7444216 | Rogers et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7483774 | Grichnik et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7555376 | Beronja | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7565333 | Grichnik et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7610127 | D'Silva et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7643912 | Heffington | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7647349 | Hubert et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7715961 | Kargupta | May 2010 | B1 |
7739007 | Logsdon | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7751955 | Chinnadurai et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7752224 | Davis et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7761591 | Graham | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7778746 | McLeod et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7788096 | Chelba et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7809482 | Bertosa et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7853435 | Dodge et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7860620 | Kojitani et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7882394 | Hosek et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7925397 | Underdal et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
8019501 | Breed | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8024083 | Chenn | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8055907 | Deem et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8239094 | Underdal et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
20020007237 | Phung et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020059075 | Schick et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020091736 | Wall | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020112072 | Jain | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020116669 | Jain | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020173885 | Lowrey et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030177414 | Pillutla et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20040001106 | Deutscher et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040039493 | Kaufman | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040181688 | Wittkotter | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050043868 | Mitcham | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050065678 | Smith et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050071143 | Tran et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050137762 | Rother | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050144183 | McQuown et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050177352 | Gravel | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050222718 | Lazarz et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060030981 | Robb et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060074824 | Li | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060095230 | Grier et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060129906 | Wall | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060136104 | Brozovich et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060142907 | Cancilla et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060142910 | Grier et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060149434 | Bertosa et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060210141 | Kojitani et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060229777 | Hudson et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070100520 | Shah et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070124282 | Wittkotter | May 2007 | A1 |
20070226540 | Konieczny | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070250228 | Reddy et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070293998 | Underdal et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070293999 | Underdal et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070294000 | Underdal et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070294001 | Underdal et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070294002 | Underdal et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070294003 | Underdal et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20090216584 | Fountain et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090271066 | Underdal et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100082197 | Kolbet et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100262431 | Gilbert | Oct 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1527934 | Sep 2004 | CN |
10233503 | Feb 2004 | DE |
10332203 | Feb 2005 | DE |
1674958 | Feb 2008 | EP |
2329943 | Apr 1999 | GB |
H03-087671 | Apr 1991 | JP |
06-265596 | Sep 1994 | JP |
H08-043265 | Feb 1996 | JP |
H10-253504 | Sep 1998 | JP |
2001-202125 | Jul 2001 | JP |
2001-229299 | Aug 2001 | JP |
2002-183334 | Jun 2002 | JP |
2004-299587 | Oct 2004 | JP |
2007-326425 | Dec 2007 | JP |
Entry |
---|
European Search Report for Appl. No. 07252442.4, dated Sep. 11, 2007. |
European Search Report for Appl. No. 07252441, dated Jun. 20, 2008. |
L.J. Aartman, et al., “An Independent Verification Tool for Multi-Vendor Mode S Airborne Transponder Conformance Testing,” 21st Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 2002, pp. 12.E.5-1—12.E.5-11, vol. 2. |
“Annex A Test Bit Sequence,” Methodology for Jitter and Signal Quality; Specification-MJSQ Technical Report REV 10.0, pp. 117-132, Mar. 10, 2003. |
Tariq Assaf, et al. “Automatic Generation of Diagnostic Expert Systems from Fault Trees,” 2003 Proceedings Annual Reliability & Maintainability Symposium, pp. 143-147. |
R. Belhassine-Cherif, et al., “Multiple Fault Diagnostics for Communicating Nondeterministic Finite State Machines,” 6th IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications, Jul. 3-5, 2001, pp. 661-666. |
M. Ben-Bassat, et al., “A1-Test: A Real Life Expert System for Electronic Troubleshooting (A Description and a Case Study),” 4th Conference on Artificial Intelligence Applications, 1988, pp. 2-10. |
F. Brajou, et al., “The Airbus A380—An AFDX-Based Flight Test Computer Concept,” 2004 IEEE AUTOTESTCON, pp. 460-463. |
Cantone, et al., “IN-ATE: Fault Diagnosis as Expert System Guided Search,” Computer Expert Systems, L. Bolc & M.J. Coombs (eds.), Springer-Verlag, New York 1986, pp. 298-348. |
“Computerized Diagnostic Tester at Hand,” Electrical World, Aug. 1, 1975, pp. 36-38. |
T.A. Cross, “A Digital Electronic System for Automobile Testing and Diagnosis,” IEE Conference Jul. 6-9, 1976, London, England, pp. 152-159. |
eHow Contributor, “How to Organize Computer Files,” printed Mar. 31, 2011 from http://www.ehow.com/print/how—138482—organize-computer-files.html. |
F. Esposito, et al., “Machine Learning Methods for Automatically Processing Historical Documents: from Paper Acquisition to XML Transformation,” 1st Int'l Workshop on Document Image Analysis for Libraries. Jan. 23-24. 2004, pp. 328-335. |
H. Garcia-Molina, et al., “dSCAM: Finding Document Copies Across Multiple Databases,” 4th Int'l Conference on Parallel and Distributed Information Systems, Dec. 18-20, 1996, pp. 68-79. |
I. Ghosh, et al., “Automatic Test Pattern Generation for Functional Register-Transfer Level Circuits Using Assignment Decision Diagrams,” IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, vol. 20. Issue 3. Mar. 2001. pp. 402-415. |
B. Ives et al., “After the Sale: Leveraging Maintenance with Information Technology,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 12, No. 1, Mar. 1988, pp. 7-21. |
M. Koppel, et al., “Automatically Classifying Documents by Ideological and Organizational Affiliation,” IEEE Int'l Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics, Jun. 8-11, 2009, pp. 176-178. |
J.C. Lin, et al., “Using Genetic Algorithms for Test Case Generation in Path Testing,” 9th Asian Test Symposium, Dec. 4-6, 2000, pp. 241-246. |
W. Linzhang, et al., “Generating Test Cases from UML Activity Diagram Based on Gray-Box Method,” 11th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, Nov. 30-Dec. 3, 2004, pp. 1-8. |
B.D. Liu, et al., “Efficient Global Strategy for Designing and Testing Scanned Sequential Circuits,” IEE Proceedings on Computers and Digital Techniques, vol. 142, No. 2, Mar. 1995, pp. 170-176. |
M. Mayer, “The Computerized Diagnostic Rhyme Test as a Design Tool for Armored Vehicle Intercommunications Systems,” Military Communications Conference, 1985, pp. 166-170. |
Microsoft at Work, “File Organization tips: 9 ideas for managing files and folders,” printed Mar. 30, 2011 from http://www.microsoft.com/atwork/productivity/files.aspx. |
S.M. Namburu, et al., “Systematic Data-Driven Approach to Real-Time Fault Detection and Diagnosis in Automotive Engines,” 2006 IEEE AUTOTESTCON, pp. 59-65. |
“Names files and folders—How to—Web Team—University of Canterbury, New Zealand,” printed on Mar. 31, 2011 from http://www.canterbury.ac.nz/web/how/filename.shtml. |
D. Niggemeyer, et al., “Automatic Generation of Diagnostic Mar. Tests,” 19th IEEE Proceedings on VLSI Test Symposium, 2001, pp. 299-304. |
Yiannis Papadopoulos, et al., “Automating the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis of Safety Critical Systems,” Proceedings of the Eighth IEEE Int'l Symposium on High Assurance Systems Engineering (HASE '04), 2004. |
F.C. Pembe, et al., “Heading-Based Sectional Hierarchy Identification for HTML Documents,” 22nd Int'l Symposium on Computer and Information Sciences, Nov. 7-9, 2007, pp. 1-6. |
F. Pipitone, “The FIS Electronics Troubleshooting System Guided Search,” Computer Expert Systems, vol. 19, No. 7, 1986, pp. 68-76. |
G. Qin, et al., “On-Board Fault Diagnosis of Automated Manual Transmission Control System,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 12, No. 4, Jul. 2004, pp. 564-568. |
H.M.T. Saarikoski, “2T: Two-Term Indexing of Documents Using Syntactic and Semantic Constraints,” 16th Int'l Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, Aug. 22-26, 2005, pp. 1025-1028. |
P. Samuel, et al., “UML Sequencing Diagram Based Testing Using Slicing,” An Int'l Conference of IEEE India Council, Dec. 11-13, 2005, pp. 176-178. |
F.Y. Shih, et al., “A Document Segmentation, Classification and Recognition System,” 2nd Int'l Conference on Systems Integration, 1992, pp. 258-267. |
Genichi Taguchi, et al., The Mahalanobis-Taguchi System. Published 2000, McGraw-Hill Professional. http://books.google.com/books?id=5AOuyyccV8kC&printsec=frontcover&sig=WdZNGINfzuveQpcYASuCmCvuiO (no hard copy, unable to print, must review on-line). |
H. Trier, “Further Development of the Periodical Vehicle Test by Using Diagnostic Interface,” IEE Colloquium on Vehicle Diagnostics in Europe, 1994, pp. 4/1-4/2. |
J. van Beers, et al., “Test Features of a Core-Based Co-Processor Array for Video Applications,” Int'l Test Conference, 1999, pp. 638-647. |
“Volkswagon-Audi Vehicle Communication Software Manual,” Snap-On, published Mar. 31, 2006, http://www.w124performance.com/docs/general/Snap-On/manuals/VCS—Manual—VW—Audi.pdf, XP007920392. |
J.R. Wagner, “Failure Mode Testing Tool Set for Automotive Electronic Controllers,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 43, Issue 1, Feb. 1994, pp. 156-163. |
Reuben Wright, et al., “How Can Ontologies Help Repair Your Car?” XTECH 2005: XML, the Web and beyond; May 27, 2005, Amsterdam; http://ww.idealliance.org/proceedings/xtech05/papers/02-07-02/. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100010702 A1 | Jan 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11452250 | Jun 2006 | US |
Child | 12543641 | US |