A method, apparatus, equipment and storage medium for managing changes to automotive parts.

Abstract

This application discloses a method, apparatus, equipment, and storage medium for managing changes to automotive parts, relating to the field of vehicle manufacturing technology. The method includes: constructing a structured knowledge base; receiving and parsing design change input information to obtain key feature information of the design change; based on the key feature information of the design change and according to an interchangeability definition rule base, performing a change judgment to obtain a corresponding change judgment conclusion; and generating a structured report based on the change judgment process information, the change judgment conclusion, and supporting judgment evidence. This application, by constructing a structured knowledge base and rule engine, transforms enterprise standards and engineering experience into executable computer logic, enabling automatic analysis of design change content and outputting interchangeability conclusions and replacement suggestions.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of vehicle manufacturing technology, specifically to a method, device, equipment, and storage medium for managing changes to automotive parts. Background Technology

[0002] In automotive product development and lifecycle management, part design changes are frequent occurrences. Based on internal company standards (such as EQB-9-2009 "Rules for the Adoption and Modification of Automotive Product Design Documents"), designers must determine the "interchangeability" of parts before and after their evolution, deciding whether to reuse the original part number or define a new part number. Accurate determination is crucial to preventing confusion and mixing of old and new parts during production trial assembly and production switchover, directly impacting production stability and quality safety.

[0003] Currently, this work is primarily done manually. Engineers analyze the summary description in the Product Notification, combining their own experience with communication with designers to determine whether the changes violate the definition of "interchangeability" (such as affecting appearance, regulations, or requiring repairs). This method has significant drawbacks: 1. High subjectivity: Different engineers may make different judgments about the description of the same change, resulting in inconsistent implementation of standards; 2. Inefficiency: Manually reviewing each of the massive number of change notifications is time-consuming and labor-intensive. 3. Reliance on personal experience: Experienced engineers are scarce, and their knowledge is difficult to pass on effectively and standardize. 4. Prone to errors and high risk: When the information description is incomplete or there is a misunderstanding, misjudgment is likely to occur, and parts that should be "non-interchangeable" and need to be "renumbered" may be wrongly judged as "interchangeable", which will create the risk of mixed assembly in subsequent production.

[0004] Therefore, in order to address the above problems and meet practical needs, an automotive parts change management technology is proposed. Summary of the Invention

[0005] To address the shortcomings of existing technologies, the purpose of this application is to provide a method, device, equipment, and storage medium for managing changes in automotive parts. By constructing a structured knowledge base and rule engine, enterprise standards and engineering experience are transformed into executable computer logic, enabling automatic analysis of design changes and outputting interchangeability conclusions and replacement suggestions.

[0006] To achieve the above objectives, the technical solution adopted in this application is as follows: In a first aspect, this application provides a method for managing changes to automotive parts, the method comprising the following steps: Construct a structured knowledge base, which includes an interchangeability definition rule base, a historical case base, and a project and component master database; Receive and parse design change input information to obtain key feature information of the design change; Based on the key feature information of the design change, and according to the interchangeability definition rule base, a change determination is made to obtain the corresponding change determination conclusion. Based on the change determination process information, the change determination conclusion, and supporting evidence, a structured report is generated; wherein, The interchangeability definition rule base includes an interchangeability type-interchange rule relationship table and a rule number-prerequisite-conclusion relationship table; The historical case library includes multiple typical historical design change cases; The main parts database includes information on multiple projects and their associated part numbers, vehicle models / engine types, project stages, and inventory status. The key feature information of the design change includes the name / number of the changed part, the type of change, the reason for the change, the supporting parts involved, and the description of the impact on assembly / process.

[0007] Based on the above technical solution, the interchangeability type-number changing rule relationship table includes two interchangeability types and corresponding number changing rules; The interchangeability type is interchangeable and non-interchangeable; When the interchangeability type is interchangeable, the corresponding number changing rule is no number changing / number changing is allowed; When the interchangeability type is non-interchangeable, the corresponding number change rule is that the number must be changed.

[0008] Based on the above technical solution, the rule number-prerequisite-conclusion relationship table includes multiple rule numbers and their corresponding prerequisites and conclusions.

[0009] Based on the above technical solution, when the rule number is R001, the corresponding precondition is "Regulatory certification status changed?", and the corresponding conclusion is "No interchange". When the rule number is R002, the corresponding precondition is "Quality improvement with an urgency level of S4, S5, S6?", and the corresponding conclusion is "No interchangeability". When the rule number is R003, the corresponding precondition is "significant functional / configuration change that is perceptible to the customer?", and the corresponding conclusion is "no interchange". When the rule number is R004, the corresponding precondition is "customer-perceptible appearance change? (and does not trigger R001, R002)", and the corresponding conclusion is "repair". When the rule number is R005, the corresponding precondition is "requires special tools, calibration or software flashing to use? (and does not trigger the above rules)", and the corresponding conclusion is "repair". When the rule number is R999, the corresponding precondition is "not satisfying any of the above conditions", and the corresponding conclusion is "interchange".

[0010] Secondly, this application provides an automotive parts change management device, the device comprising: The knowledge base construction module is used to build a structured knowledge base, which includes an interchangeability definition rule base, a historical case base, and a project and parts master database. The change parsing module is used to receive and parse design change input information to obtain key feature information of the design change. The change determination module is used to determine the change based on the key feature information of the design change and according to the interchangeability definition rule base, and to obtain the corresponding change determination conclusion. The report generation module is used to generate a structured report based on the change determination process information, the change determination conclusion, and supporting evidence; wherein, The interchangeability definition rule base includes an interchangeability type-interchange rule relationship table and a rule number-prerequisite-conclusion relationship table; The historical case library includes multiple typical historical design change cases; The main parts database includes information on multiple projects and their associated part numbers, vehicle models / engine types, project stages, and inventory status. The key feature information of the design change includes the name / number of the changed part, the type of change, the reason for the change, the supporting parts involved, and the description of the impact on assembly / process.

[0011] Based on the above technical solution, the interchangeability type-number changing rule relationship table includes two interchangeability types and corresponding number changing rules; The interchangeability type is interchangeable and non-interchangeable; When the interchangeability type is interchangeable, the corresponding number changing rule is no number changing / number changing is allowed; When the interchangeability type is non-interchangeable, the corresponding number change rule is that the number must be changed.

[0012] Based on the above technical solution, the rule number-prerequisite-conclusion relationship table includes multiple rule numbers and their corresponding prerequisites and conclusions.

[0013] Based on the above technical solution, when the rule number is R001, the corresponding precondition is "Regulatory certification status changed?", and the corresponding conclusion is "No interchange". When the rule number is R002, the corresponding precondition is "Quality improvement with an urgency level of S4, S5, S6?", and the corresponding conclusion is "No interchangeability". When the rule number is R003, the corresponding precondition is "significant functional / configuration change that is perceptible to the customer?", and the corresponding conclusion is "no interchange". When the rule number is R004, the corresponding precondition is "customer-perceptible appearance change? (and does not trigger R001, R002)", and the corresponding conclusion is "repair". When the rule number is R005, the corresponding precondition is "requires special tools, calibration or software flashing to use? (and does not trigger the above rules)", and the corresponding conclusion is "repair". When the rule number is R999, the corresponding precondition is "not satisfying any of the above conditions", and the corresponding conclusion is "interchange".

[0014] Thirdly, this application provides an apparatus, characterized in that it includes a processor and a memory, the memory being coupled to the processor, the memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the apparatus to perform the steps of the method described in the first aspect.

[0015] Fourthly, this application provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that the program, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the method described in the first aspect.

[0016] Compared with the prior art, the advantages of this application are: This application transforms enterprise standards and engineering experience into executable computer logic by constructing a structured knowledge base and rule engine, enabling automatic analysis of design changes and outputting interchangeability conclusions and number change suggestions. Attached Figure Description

[0017] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of this application, the accompanying drawings used in the description of the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the accompanying drawings described below are only some embodiments of this application. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0018] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating the steps of the automotive parts change management method according to an embodiment of this application. Figure 2 This is a structural block diagram of an automotive parts change management device according to an embodiment of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0019] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of this application clearer, the technical solutions of the embodiments of this application will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of this application, not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of this application, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of this application.

[0020] The embodiments of this application will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0021] This application provides a method, apparatus, device, and storage medium for managing changes to automotive parts. By constructing a structured knowledge base and rule engine, enterprise standards and engineering experience are transformed into executable computer logic, enabling automatic analysis of design changes and outputting interchangeability conclusions and number change suggestions.

[0022] To achieve the aforementioned technical effects, the overall concept of this application is as follows: A method for managing changes to automotive parts, comprising the following steps: S1. Construct a structured knowledge base, which includes an interchangeability definition rule base, a historical case base, and a project and component master database; S2. Receive and parse the design change input information to obtain the key feature information of the design change; S3. Based on the key feature information of the design change, and according to the interchangeability definition rule base, make a change judgment and obtain the corresponding change judgment conclusion. S4. Based on the change determination process information, change determination conclusion, and supporting evidence, generate a structured report; among which, The interchangeability definition rule base includes an interchangeability type-interchange rule relationship table and a rule number-prerequisite-conclusion relationship table; The historical case library includes multiple typical historical design change cases; The main parts database includes information on multiple projects and their associated part numbers, vehicle models / engine types, project stages, and inventory status. Key features of design changes include the name / number of the changed part, the type of change, the reason for the change, the related parts, and a description of the impact on assembly / process.

[0023] The embodiments of this application will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0024] Firstly, see [the following] Figure 1 As shown in the figure, this application provides a method for managing changes to automotive parts, which includes the following steps: S1. Construct a structured knowledge base, which includes an interchangeability definition rule base, a historical case base, and a project and component master database; S2. Receive and parse the design change input information to obtain the key feature information of the design change; S3. Based on the key feature information of the design change, and according to the interchangeability definition rule base, make a change judgment and obtain the corresponding change judgment conclusion. S4. Based on the change determination process information, change determination conclusion, and supporting evidence, generate a structured report; among which, The interchangeability definition rule base includes an interchangeability type-interchange rule relationship table and a rule number-prerequisite-conclusion relationship table; The historical case library includes multiple typical historical design change cases; The main parts database includes information on multiple projects and their associated part numbers, vehicle models / engine types, project stages, and inventory status. Key features of design changes include the name / number of the changed part, the type of change, the reason for the change, the related parts, and a description of the impact on assembly / process.

[0025] It should be noted that the background knowledge for this application is explained as follows: Interchangeability: If either a new or old part can replace the other without any repairs during manufacturing or after-sales use, and such replacement does not involve or affect factors such as customer-perceived appearance, regulatory certification, significant quality improvements, or the addition, removal, or change of significant configurations or functions perceived by the customer, then the two parts are said to be interchangeable.

[0026] Non-interchangeable: If either or both of the new and old parts require modification during manufacturing or after-sales use to replace the other, or if the replacement involves or affects factors such as customer-perceived appearance, regulatory certification, significant quality improvement, customer-perceived significant addition, removal, or change of configuration or function, then the two parts are said to be non-interchangeable.

[0027] Repair and maintenance: refers to the additional work required to replace parts in new or old condition during the assembly or after-sales parts replacement process on the production line. This includes, but is not limited to, using parts in conjunction with other parts, requiring machining of dimensions or shapes, requiring replacement of tools and fixtures for assembly, and requiring updates to manufacturing or after-sales process equipment or process equipment programs.

[0028] Completely non-interchangeable and one-way non-interchangeable: Based on the degree of non-interchangeability, non-interchangeability is divided into two types: complete non-interchangeability and single-item non-interchangeability. This distinction helps in better managing and implementing design changes.

[0029] For detailed definitions, please refer to Table 1 below:

[0030] Table 1 In this embodiment of the application, by constructing a structured knowledge base and rule engine, enterprise standards and engineering experience are transformed into executable computer logic, enabling automatic analysis of design changes and outputting interchangeability conclusions and number change suggestions.

[0031] Furthermore, the interchangeability type-number change rule relationship table includes two interchangeability types and corresponding number change rules; The interchangeability type is interchangeable and non-interchangeable; When the interchangeability type is interchangeable, the corresponding number changing rule is no number changing / number changing is allowed; When the interchangeability type is non-interchangeable, the corresponding number change rule is that the number must be changed.

[0032] Furthermore, the rule number-prerequisite-conclusion relationship table includes multiple rule numbers and their corresponding prerequisites and conclusions.

[0033] Furthermore, when the rule number is R001, the corresponding precondition is "Regulatory certification status changed?", and the corresponding conclusion is "No interchange". When the rule number is R002, the corresponding precondition is "Quality improvement with an urgency level of S4, S5, S6?", and the corresponding conclusion is "No interchangeability". When the rule number is R003, the corresponding precondition is "significant functional / configuration change that is perceptible to the customer?", and the corresponding conclusion is "no interchange". When the rule number is R004, the corresponding precondition is "customer-perceptible appearance change? (and does not trigger R001, R002)", and the corresponding conclusion is "repair". When the rule number is R005, the corresponding precondition is "requires special tools, calibration or software flashing to use? (and does not trigger the above rules)", and the corresponding conclusion is "repair". When the rule number is R999, the corresponding precondition is "not satisfying any of the above conditions", and the corresponding conclusion is "interchange".

[0034] In specific implementation, the technical solution based on the embodiments of this application is as follows: Step 1, Build a structured knowledge base: The knowledge base mainly includes: an interchangeability definition rule base, a historical case base, and project and component master data.

[0035] ① Interchangeability Definition Rule Base: The definitions of "interchangeable", "non-interchangeable", and "repair" as well as negative judgment elements such as "customer-perceptible appearance", "regulatory certification", "major quality improvement (such as urgency level S4 - immediate execution, repairing, scrapping or modifying inventory parts for vehicles sold and for users; S5 - immediate execution, repairing, scrapping or modifying inventory parts (factory and supplier) for vehicles to be sold; S6 - immediate execution, scrapping or modifying inventory parts (factory and supplier), the scrapping or modification of inventory parts can be all or part)", and "customer-perceptible major configuration / function changes" are transformed into structured logical conditions (IF-THEN rules).

[0036]

[0037]

[0038] ② Historical Case Library: Stores typical historical design change cases. Each case is associated with its change description text, extracted key features, final interchangeability result (interchangeable / completely non-interchangeable / unilaterally non-interchangeable), and change number decision. The case library is used for rule validation, model training, and fuzzy matching.

[0039] Scenario: Changes between old and new parts affect appearance or regulatory certification. Case 1: The style of the seat fabric of a certain car model has changed, affecting the appearance that customers can perceive, so the parts in the old and new states are not interchangeable.

[0040] Case 2: Design tire pressure labels for models exported to Russia to replace the original tire pressure labels used for domestic models. Due to regulations, the old and new parts are not interchangeable.

[0041] Scenario: One of the parts, in its new and old states, needs to be repaired before the other can be replaced. Case 1: The engine bracket assembly of a certain model has evolved. New tooling and fixtures need to be designed for the new parts in order to complete mass production on the production line. Therefore, the parts in the old and new states are not interchangeable.

[0042] Case 2: The instrument cluster of a certain car model has evolved. For the new instrument cluster, new software parameters need to be flashed on the production line for it to work properly. Therefore, the parts of the instrument cluster are not interchangeable between the old and new versions.

[0043] ③ Project and Part Master Data: Associated part number, vehicle / engine model, project stage (e.g., ET, PT, SOP), inventory status, etc. Theoretically, changes before PT do not require part number changes, but changes to parts after PT that meet interchangeability rules must have their part numbers changed.

[0044] Step 2: Receive and parse design change input information: Receive electronic data from Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) or Change Management System, including Product Notifications or Design Change Requests. Parse the change summary or description text using a Natural Language Processing (NLP) module to extract key entities and intents, including but not limited to: the name / number of the changed part, the type of change (e.g., size optimization, material replacement, adding / removing features, software update, etc.), the reason for the change (e.g., cost reduction, quality improvement, regulatory compliance, performance optimization, etc.), the related components, and a description of the impact on assembly / process.

[0045] Step 3: Perform automatic reasoning and judgment based on the rule engine: Using the key features extracted in step 2 as input, the corresponding rule chains in the rule base are activated for logical reasoning: Forward reasoning: First, assume the change is "interchangeable". Then, check if the changed feature triggers any negative "non-interchangeable" rules. For example: If keywords such as "label code", "GB / T", or "national standard" are parsed out, the "involving regulatory certification" rule is triggered, and the system is determined to be "non-interchangeable".

[0046] If the urgency level is found to be S4 / S5 / S6, the "major quality improvement" rule is triggered, and the decision is "not interchangeable".

[0047] If the analysis reveals "add mounting hole", "new tool required", or "software flashing required", then the "repair required" rule is triggered, and the system is determined to be "not interchangeable".

[0048] Relationship Determination: If determined as "non-interchangeable", further analyze the relationships between parts involved in the change description (e.g., a change to part A necessitates a simultaneous change to part B), and combine this with the definition of "one-way non-interchangeable" to determine whether it is "completely non-interchangeable" or "one-way non-interchangeable". If determined as "interchangeable", reflecting a progression in part change markers, then it is determined as "interchangeable".

[0049] Step 4: Generate number change judgment suggestions and consider special scenarios: Based on the interchangeability determination result in step 3, the basic number change rules are applied (interchangeable → number change not required; non-interchangeable → number change mandatory). Simultaneously, a business-specific scenario logic module is integrated. This module receives additional contextual information from external systems or manual input (e.g., the estimated implementation timelines for all vehicle models involved in this change, current inventory status, old parts return plans, etc.) to correct the results of the basic rules. ① If it is "No interchange", but meets one of the predefined exception conditions such as "All involved projects are implemented before PT and the risk of mixed installation is controllable", "The involved models have been out of production for a long time and there is no old parts inventory", or "All old parts have been confirmed to have been repaired before the "Product Notification" is issued, then the output "It is recommended not to change the number (manual confirmation and recording of reasons)" will be generated.

[0050] ②Otherwise, adhere to the principle that "numbers must be changed".

[0051] Step 5, Output Results and Learning Optimization: The system generates a structured report, including the decision-making process (triggered rules, reasoning path), the final conclusion (interchangeability type, number change suggestion), and key evidence supporting the conclusion (original sentences extracted from the change description), and provides this report to the review engineer. The engineer can then "confirm" or "correct" the system's decision. The system uses the engineer's final confirmation as a new positive sample, along with the input features of this change, and stores it in the historical case library. This data is used to optimize the NLP model and supplement / adjust the rule base, enabling self-learning and continuous improvement.

[0052] Step 6, Risk Warning and Mandatory Control: For operations that the system determines to be "non-interchangeable" but the designer attempts to select "no number change," the system will force the submission of an exception reason and trigger the approval process. For changes involving "regulations" or "major quality (S4-S6)," the system will highlight and issue a warning.

[0053] Based on the above technical content, it can be understood that the key technical points of the embodiments of this application are as follows: ① The fusion decision-making model of the "multi-dimensional rule engine": It integrates multi-dimensional judgment engines such as structured rules (IF-THEN), historical case matching, natural language parsing (NLP), and business scenario logic into a unified framework; it is not a single rule system, but a composite intelligent engine with the ability of "positive reasoning + exception scenario correction + case learning".

[0054] ② Automatic conversion from natural language to structured features: The NLP module automatically parses unstructured texts such as "Product Notification" to extract key information such as "change type", "reason for change", and "impact description"; the engineer's natural language description is converted into structured features that the rule engine can recognize, realizing end-to-end automation.

[0055] ③ A two-tiered decision-making mechanism combining "basic rules" and "special scenarios": Basic layer: Strictly enforce the rule of "no swapping → number must be changed".

[0056] Exception layer: Integrates special business scenario modules (such as inventory status, project stage, rework plan), allowing the basic rules to be overridden under strict conditions, generating "suggestion not to change number (requires manual confirmation)".

[0057] It ensures both rigidity and business flexibility.

[0058] ④ "One-way non-interchangeable" relationship determination logic: It can not only determine "completely interchangeable / non-interchangeable", but also identify "one-way non-interchangeable" caused by assembly relationship (change of part A causes B to be changed, but the reverse is not true).

[0059] ⑤ Closed-loop learning and optimization mechanism: The final manually confirmed results are fed back to the case library as new samples to optimize the NLP model and supplement rules; the system has continuous iteration capabilities, forming a "use-feedback-optimization" loop mechanism.

[0060] ⑥ Risk warning and mandatory control: Highlight and warn changes involving "regulations" and "major quality"; for operations where "the system judges that the number cannot be changed but the manual attempts not to change the number", force the trigger of the exception approval process to achieve systematic risk control.

[0061] In summary, the technical advantages of the technical solutions in this application are as follows: 1. Standardization and Consistency: Make implicit engineering knowledge and corporate standards explicit and digitized, ensuring that all changes are judged according to the same set of rules, eliminating subjective differences from human intervention, and improving the standardization of processes and the consistency of results.

[0062] 2. Significantly improved efficiency: Automated processing greatly shortens the review cycle, freeing data engineers from repetitive tasks and allowing them to focus on more complex business tasks and scenario analysis.

[0063] 3. Reduce the risk of human error: The system performs verification and inspection based on a complete set of rules, avoiding misjudgments caused by human review due to negligence or information omission, thus reducing the risk of mixed packaging in production from the source.

[0064] 4. Knowledge Transfer and Skills Consolidation: The system's built-in knowledge and case library provides new employees with authoritative and standardized learning and reference tools, shortening their path to becoming qualified engineers and improving the overall decision-making efficiency of the team.

[0065] 5. Traceability and Auditability: The entire judgment process is fully recorded (inputs, rule paths, outputs), which facilitates problem tracing and process auditing, meeting the requirements of the quality management system.

[0066] 6. Flexibility and scalability: The rule engine and special scenario modules support flexible configuration, can be quickly adjusted according to changes in enterprise standards and regulatory requirements, and can be easily integrated into existing PLM / ERP systems.

[0067] Secondly, see Figure 2 As shown in the figure, this application provides an automotive parts change management device, which includes: The knowledge base construction module is used to build a structured knowledge base, which includes an interchangeability definition rule base, a historical case base, and a project and parts master database. The change parsing module is used to receive and parse design change input information to obtain key feature information of the design change. The change determination module is used to determine the change based on the key feature information of the design change and according to the interchangeability definition rule base, and to obtain the corresponding change determination conclusion. The report generation module is used to generate a structured report based on the change determination process information, the change determination conclusion, and supporting evidence; wherein, The interchangeability definition rule base includes an interchangeability type-interchange rule relationship table and a rule number-prerequisite-conclusion relationship table; The historical case library includes multiple typical historical design change cases; The main parts database includes information on multiple projects and their associated part numbers, vehicle models / engine types, project stages, and inventory status. The key feature information of the design change includes the name / number of the changed part, the type of change, the reason for the change, the supporting parts involved, and the description of the impact on assembly / process.

[0068] In this embodiment of the application, by constructing a structured knowledge base and rule engine, enterprise standards and engineering experience are transformed into executable computer logic, enabling automatic analysis of design changes and outputting interchangeability conclusions and number change suggestions.

[0069] Furthermore, the interchangeability type-number change rule relationship table includes two interchangeability types and corresponding number change rules; The interchangeability type is interchangeable and non-interchangeable; When the interchangeability type is interchangeable, the corresponding number changing rule is no number changing / number changing is allowed; When the interchangeability type is non-interchangeable, the corresponding number change rule is that the number must be changed.

[0070] Furthermore, the rule number-prerequisite-conclusion relationship table includes multiple rule numbers and their corresponding prerequisites and conclusions.

[0071] Furthermore, when the rule number is R001, the corresponding precondition is "Regulatory certification status changed?", and the corresponding conclusion is "No interchange". When the rule number is R002, the corresponding precondition is "Quality improvement with an urgency level of S4, S5, S6?", and the corresponding conclusion is "No interchangeability". When the rule number is R003, the corresponding precondition is "significant functional / configuration change that is perceptible to the customer?", and the corresponding conclusion is "no interchange". When the rule number is R004, the corresponding precondition is "customer-perceptible appearance change? (and does not trigger R001, R002)", and the corresponding conclusion is "repair". When the rule number is R005, the corresponding precondition is "requires special tools, calibration or software flashing to use? (and does not trigger the above rules)", and the corresponding conclusion is "repair". When the rule number is R999, the corresponding precondition is "not satisfying any of the above conditions", and the corresponding conclusion is "interchange".

[0072] In summary, the automotive parts change management device provided in this application embodiment has the same technical principle as the automotive parts change management method provided in the first aspect in terms of technical problems, technical solutions and technical effects, so it will not be described again here.

[0073] Thirdly, this application provides an apparatus, characterized in that it includes a processor and a memory, the memory being coupled to the processor, the memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the apparatus to perform the steps of the method described in the first aspect.

[0074] Fourthly, this application provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that the program, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the method described in the first aspect.

[0075] In the description of this application, it should be noted that the terms "upper," "lower," etc., indicating the orientation or positional relationship based on the orientation or positional relationship shown in the accompanying drawings, are only for the convenience of describing this application and simplifying the description, and do not indicate or imply that the system or component referred to must have a specific orientation, or be constructed and operated in a specific orientation, and therefore should not be construed as a limitation of this application. Unless otherwise expressly specified and limited, the terms "installed," "connected," and "linked" should be interpreted broadly. For example, they can refer to a fixed connection, a detachable connection, or an integral connection; they can refer to a mechanical connection or an electrical connection; they can refer to a direct connection or an indirect connection through an intermediate medium; they can refer to the internal communication between two components. For those skilled in the art, the specific meaning of the above terms in this application can be understood according to the specific circumstances.

[0076] It should be noted that in this application, relational terms such as "first" and "second" are used merely to distinguish one entity or operation from another, and do not necessarily require or imply any such actual relationship or order between these entities or operations. Furthermore, the terms "comprising," "including," or any other variations thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, method, article, or apparatus that comprises a list of elements includes not only those elements but also other elements not expressly listed, or elements inherent to such a process, method, article, or apparatus. Without further limitations, an element defined by the phrase "comprising one..." does not exclude the presence of other identical elements in the process, method, article, or apparatus that includes said element.

[0077] The above description is merely a specific embodiment of this application, enabling those skilled in the art to understand or implement this application. Various modifications to these embodiments will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art, and the general principles defined herein may be implemented in other embodiments without departing from the spirit or scope of this application. Therefore, this application is not to be limited to the embodiments shown herein, but is to be accorded the widest scope consistent with the principles and novel features claimed herein.

Claims

1. A method for managing changes to automotive parts, characterized in that, The method includes the following steps: Construct a structured knowledge base, which includes an interchangeability definition rule base, a historical case base, and a project and component master database; Receive and parse design change input information to obtain key feature information of the design change; Based on the key feature information of the design change, and according to the interchangeability definition rule base, a change determination is made to obtain the corresponding change determination conclusion. Based on the change determination process information, the change determination conclusion, and supporting evidence, a structured report is generated; wherein, The interchangeability definition rule base includes an interchangeability type-interchange rule relationship table and a rule number-prerequisite-conclusion relationship table; The historical case library includes multiple typical historical design change cases; The main parts database includes information on multiple projects and their associated part numbers, vehicle models / engine types, project stages, and inventory status. The key feature information of the design change includes the name / number of the changed part, the type of change, the reason for the change, the supporting parts involved, and the description of the impact on assembly / process.

2. The automotive parts change management method as described in claim 1, characterized in that: The interchangeability type-number change rule relationship table includes two interchangeability types and their corresponding number change rules; The interchangeability type is interchangeable and non-interchangeable; When the interchangeability type is interchangeable, the corresponding number changing rule is no number changing / number changing is allowed; When the interchangeability type is non-interchangeable, the corresponding number change rule is that the number must be changed.

3. The automotive parts change management method as described in claim 1, characterized in that: The rule number-prerequisite-conclusion relationship table includes multiple rule numbers, their corresponding prerequisites, and conclusions.

4. The automotive parts change management method as described in claim 3, characterized in that: When the rule number is R001, the corresponding precondition is "Regulatory certification status changed?", and the corresponding conclusion is "No interchange". When the rule number is R002, the corresponding precondition is "Quality improvement with an urgency level of S4, S5, S6?", and the corresponding conclusion is "No interchangeability". When the rule number is R003, the corresponding precondition is "significant functional / configuration change that is perceptible to the customer?", and the corresponding conclusion is "no interchange". When the rule number is R004, the corresponding precondition is "Customer-perceptible appearance change? (and does not trigger R001, R002)", and the corresponding conclusion is "repair". When the rule number is R005, the corresponding precondition is "requires special tools, calibration, or software flashing to use? (and does not trigger the above rules)", and the corresponding conclusion is "repair". When the rule number is R999, the corresponding precondition is "not satisfied with any of the above conditions", and the corresponding conclusion is "interchange".

5. An automotive parts change management device, characterized in that, The device includes: The knowledge base construction module is used to build a structured knowledge base, which includes an interchangeability definition rule base, a historical case base, and a project and parts master database. The change parsing module is used to receive and parse design change input information to obtain key feature information of the design change. The change determination module is used to determine the change based on the key feature information of the design change and according to the interchangeability definition rule base, and to obtain the corresponding change determination conclusion. The report generation module is used to generate a structured report based on the change determination process information, the change determination conclusion, and supporting evidence; wherein, The interchangeability definition rule base includes an interchangeability type-interchange rule relationship table and a rule number-prerequisite-conclusion relationship table; The historical case library includes multiple typical historical design change cases; The main parts database includes information on multiple projects and their associated part numbers, vehicle models / engine types, project stages, and inventory status. The key feature information of the design change includes the name / number of the changed part, the type of change, the reason for the change, the supporting parts involved, and the description of the impact on assembly / process.

6. The automotive parts change management device as described in claim 5, characterized in that: The interchangeability type-number change rule relationship table includes two interchangeability types and their corresponding number change rules; The interchangeability type is interchangeable and non-interchangeable; When the interchangeability type is interchangeable, the corresponding number changing rule is no number changing / number changing is allowed; When the interchangeability type is non-interchangeable, the corresponding number change rule is that the number must be changed.

7. The automotive parts change management device as described in claim 5, characterized in that: The rule number-prerequisite-conclusion relationship table includes multiple rule numbers, their corresponding prerequisites, and conclusions.

8. The automotive parts change management device as described in claim 7, characterized in that: When the rule number is R001, the corresponding precondition is "Regulatory certification status changed?", and the corresponding conclusion is "No interchange". When the rule number is R002, the corresponding precondition is "Quality improvement with an urgency level of S4, S5, S6?", and the corresponding conclusion is "No interchangeability". When the rule number is R003, the corresponding precondition is "significant functional / configuration change that is perceptible to the customer?", and the corresponding conclusion is "no interchange". When the rule number is R004, the corresponding precondition is "Customer-perceptible appearance change? (and does not trigger R001, R002)", and the corresponding conclusion is "repair". When the rule number is R005, the corresponding precondition is "requires special tools, calibration, or software flashing to use? (and does not trigger the above rules)", and the corresponding conclusion is "repair". When the rule number is R999, the corresponding precondition is "not satisfied with any of the above conditions", and the corresponding conclusion is "interchange".

9. A device, characterized in that, The device includes a processor and a memory, the memory being coupled to the processor, the memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the device to perform the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 4.

10. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that, When executed by a processor, the program implements the steps of the method described in any one of claims 1 to 4.

Images