Method and system for analyzing quality characteristics of an armored vehicle protection system based on a quality target

Abstract

The application provides a kind of armored vehicle protection system quality feature analysis method and system based on quality target, comprising: step S1: based on FRACAS failure mode library database establishes failure mode manual and failure statistical analysis information;Step S2: according to the agreed level of armored vehicle protection system, severity category, failure mode, failure cause and the influence analysis of armored vehicle protection system forms FMEA table;Step S3: based on analytic hierarchy process, the importance of user demand is determined by user demand weight vector, the relationship matrix between user demand and design demand is obtained by establishing quality house, the importance of armored vehicle protection system design quality feature value is obtained, and the correlation of armored vehicle protection system quality user demand and design demand is established;Step S4: check whether armored vehicle protection system design quality target meets preset requirement, when not satisfied, then gradually return to the above step and carry out requirement analysis, until armored vehicle protection system design quality target is obtained.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of product quality design, specifically to a method and system for analyzing the quality characteristics of armored vehicle protection systems based on quality objectives, and more specifically to a method and R&D design system for analyzing the quality characteristics of armored vehicle protection systems based on quality objectives. Background Technology

[0002] In the past, the design and manufacturing of fire suppression and explosion protection systems for armored vehicles were constrained by traditional manufacturing models. The quality assurance system was fragmented, and the quality management activities of each department and link were relatively closed and decentralized. The quality control model that focused solely on meeting product design specifications and was implemented after the fact was prevalent. The design review after the design was completed controlled the design result rather than the design process, making it difficult to control the overall quality level of the product formation process.

[0003] In the product quality design process, designers often simply use quality methods such as "failure reporting, analysis and corrective action system", "failure mode and effects analysis", and "quality function deployment" to analyze failures or configure quality functions in isolation.

[0004] Patent document CN106228248A (application number: 201610561683.7) discloses an automatic fault diagnosis method for systems based on fuzzy FMEA analysis, relating to the field of electronic communication fault detection technology. It achieves effective quantification of fault mode occurrence, fault mode severity, and fault mode detectability through a fuzzy FMEA analysis system, overcoming the challenge of system fault diagnosis and ensuring accuracy. Simultaneously, it achieves automatic fault diagnosis, saving manpower and time. The key technical points are: acquiring diagnostic data sources; analyzing and processing the diagnostic data sources, and inputting the processed diagnostic data sources into the fuzzy FMEA analysis system; the fuzzy FMEA analysis system analyzes the processed diagnostic data sources to obtain fault diagnosis results. However, the designers of this patent relied on simple "brainstorming" during the analysis process, leading to incomplete and inadequate analysis of some issues, resulting in omissions. For example, in analyzing customer needs and product development technical conditions around Quality Function Deployment (QFD), the importance of user needs is a crucial step, mainly determined through inquiry surveys and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The importance of user requirements for complex products is determined primarily through the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) based on expert scoring. However, the expert scoring mechanism itself suffers from biases due to individual engineering experience, limiting its effectiveness and lacking a robust reliability analysis of the product system. Furthermore, Quality First Determination (QFD) cannot effectively uncover hidden quality issues arising during the manufacturing process.

[0005] In existing technologies, the three methods of "fault reporting, analysis and corrective action system", "failure mode and effects analysis" and "quality function deployment" are independent of each other and fail to be effectively combined. They also fail to accurately extract product design quality characteristics and objectives from a design perspective and plan and deploy them for the entire product life cycle. Summary of the Invention

[0006] In view of the deficiencies in the prior art, the purpose of this invention is to provide a method and system for analyzing the quality characteristics of armored vehicle protection systems based on quality objectives.

[0007] A method for analyzing the quality characteristics of an armored vehicle protection system based on quality objectives, provided by the present invention, includes:

[0008] Step S1: Establish a fault mode manual and fault statistical analysis information based on the FRACAS fault mode library database;

[0009] Step S2: Analyze the structural composition and mission functions of the armored vehicle protection system to obtain the agreed-upon hierarchy of the armored vehicle protection system. Based on the agreed-upon hierarchy, severity category, failure mode, failure cause, and impact on the armored vehicle protection system, form an FMEA table. Feedback on the potential design requirements of the product based on the formed FMEA table.

[0010] Step S3: Classify user needs and obtain design requirements. Based on the analytic hierarchy process, determine the importance of user needs through the user need weight vector. Establish a quality house to obtain the relationship matrix between user needs and design requirements. Obtain the importance values ​​of the design quality characteristics of the armored vehicle protection system. Establish the correlation between user needs and design requirements for the quality of the armored vehicle protection system.

[0011] Step S4: Check whether the design quality target of the armored vehicle protection system meets the preset requirements. If it does not meet the requirements, return to steps S3 to S1 to re-perform the armored vehicle protection system requirements analysis until the design quality target of the armored vehicle protection system is accurately obtained.

[0012] Preferably, step S1 employs:

[0013] Step S1.1: Establish the FRACAS armored vehicle protection system, comprehensively covering all stages of product development, testing, trial production, mass production, and user use;

[0014] Step S1.2: Based on the FRACAS armored vehicle protection system, obtain the armored vehicle protection system fault record table, fault analysis table, and fault correction measure table;

[0015] Step S1.3: Based on the armored vehicle protection system fault record table, fault analysis table, and fault correction measure table, compile statistics on various faults, fault causes, and solutions at each stage of armored vehicle protection system product development, testing, trial production, mass production, and user use;

[0016] Step S1.4: Establish the FRACAS fault mode library database;

[0017] Step S1.5: Establish a fault mode manual and fault statistical analysis information through the established FRACAS fault mode library database, and conduct reliability weakness analysis.

[0018] Preferably, step S2 employs:

[0019] Step S2.1: Perform structural analysis on the armored vehicle protection system to obtain a structural block diagram of the armored vehicle protection system;

[0020] Step S2.2: Perform functional analysis on the armored vehicle protection system to obtain the functional block diagram of the armored vehicle protection system;

[0021] Step S2.3: Divide the armored vehicle protection system into functional and structural levels according to its functions and structure.

[0022] Step S2.4: Obtain the corresponding diagram of the functional and structural levels of the armored vehicle protection system by analyzing the functional and structural levels of the armored vehicle protection system;

[0023] Step S2.5: Conduct a comprehensive analysis of the structural block diagram, functional block diagram, and functional and structural hierarchy correspondence diagram of the armored vehicle protection system. Perform failure mode and impact analysis on the armored vehicle protection system based on the agreed hierarchy, severity category, failure mode, and failure cause of the armored vehicle protection system, and form a failure mode list.

[0024] Step S2.6: Analyze the agreed-upon levels, severity categories, failure modes, failure causes, and impacts on the armored vehicle protection system to form an FMEA table;

[0025] Step S2.7: Feedback on potential product design requirements based on the generated FMEA table.

[0026] Preferably, step S3 employs the following methods:

[0027] Step S3.1: Classify user needs and obtain design requirements;

[0028] Step S3.2: Organize user requirements and design requirements according to the structure of product quality requirements Q, price requirements C, time requirements T, environmental requirements E, and after-sales requirements S, and initially establish the relationship between user requirements and design requirements.

[0029] Step S3.3: Establish a pairwise comparison and judgment table of user requirements for armored vehicle protection system based on the relationship between the initially established user requirements and design requirements;

[0030] Step S3.4: Establish a pairwise comparison judgment matrix for user requirements of armored vehicle protection system based on the pairwise comparison judgment table for user requirements of armored vehicle protection system. Normalize the maximum eigenvalue and corresponding eigenvector of the current judgment matrix to obtain the user requirement weight vector.

[0031] Step S3.6: Based on the relationship between user requirements and design requirements for the quality of armored vehicle protection systems, establish a quality house to obtain a matrix showing the relationship between user requirements and design requirements, thereby obtaining numerical values ​​for the importance of product design quality features and establishing the correlation between user requirements and design requirements for the quality of armored vehicle protection systems.

[0032] Preferably, the design requirements are based on documents including the "Task Book", technical coordination card, user evaluation feedback follow-up, and FMEA table.

[0033] Preferably, step S4 involves checking whether the design quality objectives of the armored vehicle protection system meet the quality requirements Q, price requirements C, time requirements T, environmental requirements E, and after-sales requirements S of the armored vehicle protection system. If not, the process gradually returns to steps S3, S2, and S1 to re-analyze the product requirements until the product design quality objectives are accurately obtained.

[0034] A quality characteristic analysis system for armored vehicle protection systems based on quality targets, provided by the present invention, includes:

[0035] Module M1: Establishes a fault mode manual and fault statistical analysis information based on the FRACAS fault mode library database;

[0036] Module M2: Analyzes the structural composition and mission functions of the armored vehicle protection system to obtain the agreed-upon hierarchy of the armored vehicle protection system. Based on the agreed-upon hierarchy, severity category, failure mode, failure cause, and impact on the armored vehicle protection system, an FMEA table is formed. The potential design requirements of the product are then fed back based on the formed FMEA table.

[0037] Module M3: Classifies user requirements and obtains design requirements. Based on the analytic hierarchy process, it determines the importance of user requirements through the user requirement weight vector, establishes a quality house to obtain the relationship matrix between user requirements and design requirements, obtains the importance values ​​of the design quality characteristics of the armored vehicle protection system, and establishes the correlation between user requirements and design requirements for the quality of the armored vehicle protection system.

[0038] Module M4: Checks whether the design quality objectives of the armored vehicle protection system meet the preset requirements. If not, it gradually returns to Module M3 to Module M1 to re-analyze the requirements of the armored vehicle protection system until the design quality objectives of the armored vehicle protection system are accurately obtained.

[0039] Preferably, module M1 adopts:

[0040] Module M1.1: Establishes the FRACAS armored vehicle protection system, comprehensively covering all stages of product development, testing, prototyping, mass production, and user use;

[0041] Module M1.2: Based on the FRACAS armored vehicle protection system, obtain the armored vehicle protection system fault record table, fault analysis table, and fault correction measure table;

[0042] Module M1.3: Based on the fault record table, fault analysis table and fault correction measure table of armored vehicle protection system, statistics are compiled on various faults, fault causes and solutions at each stage of product development, testing, trial production, mass production and user use of armored vehicle protection system products;

[0043] Module M1.4: Establishes the FRACAS fault mode library database;

[0044] Module M1.5: Establishes a fault mode manual and fault statistical analysis information through the established FRACAS fault mode library database, and performs reliability weakness analysis.

[0045] Preferably, the module M2 adopts:

[0046] Module M2.1: Performs structural analysis on the armored vehicle protection system to obtain a structural block diagram of the armored vehicle protection system;

[0047] Module M2.2: Performs functional analysis on the armored vehicle protection system and obtains the functional block diagram of the armored vehicle protection system;

[0048] Module M2.3: Based on the function and structure of the armored vehicle protection system, a hierarchical division is made to obtain the functional hierarchy and structural hierarchy of the armored vehicle protection system;

[0049] Module M2.4: A diagram showing the functional and structural hierarchy of armored vehicle protection systems is obtained through analysis of the functional and structural levels of these systems.

[0050] Module M2.5: Conducts a comprehensive analysis of the structural block diagram, functional block diagram, and functional and structural hierarchy correspondence diagram of the armored vehicle protection system. Through the agreed hierarchy, severity category, failure mode, and failure cause of the armored vehicle protection system, it performs failure mode and impact analysis and forms a failure mode list.

[0051] Module M2.6: An FMEA table is generated by analyzing the convention levels, severity categories, failure modes, failure causes, and impacts on armored vehicle protection systems.

[0052] Module M2.7: Feedback on potential product design requirements based on the generated FMEA table.

[0053] Preferably, the module M3 adopts:

[0054] Module M3.1: Classifies user needs and obtains design requirements;

[0055] Module M3.2: Organize user requirements and design requirements according to the structure of product quality requirements Q, price requirements C, time requirements T, environmental requirements E, and after-sales requirements S, and initially establish the relationship between user requirements and design requirements.

[0056] Module M3.3: Establish a pairwise comparison and judgment table for user requirements of armored vehicle protection system based on the relationship between the initially established user requirements and design requirements;

[0057] Module M3.4: Based on the pairwise comparison judgment table of user requirements for armored vehicle protection system, establish a pairwise comparison judgment matrix of user requirements for armored vehicle protection system. After normalization of the maximum eigenvalue and corresponding eigenvector of the current judgment matrix, obtain the user requirement weight vector.

[0058] Module M3.6: Based on the relationship between user requirements and design requirements for the quality of armored vehicle protection systems, a quality house is established to obtain a matrix showing the relationship between user requirements and design requirements, thereby obtaining numerical values ​​for the importance of product design quality features and establishing the correlation between user requirements and design requirements for the quality of armored vehicle protection systems.

[0059] The design requirements were based on documents including the "Task Book", technical coordination card, user feedback and follow-up, and FMEA form.

[0060] Module M4 checks whether the design quality objectives of the armored vehicle protection system meet the quality requirements Q, price requirements C, time requirements T, environmental requirements E, and after-sales requirements S of the armored vehicle protection system. If not, it gradually returns to Module M3, Module M2, and Module M1 to re-analyze the product requirements until the product design quality objectives are accurately obtained.

[0061] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0062] 1. The quality characteristic analysis method of armored vehicle protection system based on quality objectives disclosed in this invention conducts in-depth research on the application of the quality objective R&D design system in new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression systems, and integrates design quality control throughout the entire process of product design quality formation.

[0063] 2. This invention establishes a forward R&D design system for a quality characteristic analysis method of armored vehicle protection system based on quality objectives. It designs, optimizes, and implements product design quality characteristics, and constructs a process for product design quality, including scheme design, optimization design, process assembly and production design, and quality acceptance. It repeatedly traces whether the "product quality objectives are met" at each model stage and makes timely modifications and adjustments when necessary, realizing the transformation of product quality control from late-stage inspection to early-stage preventive management.

[0064] 3. This invention comprehensively acquires user needs and design requirements, establishes the correlation between user needs and design requirements, and, based on the acquisition of product design quality characteristics and objectives, establishes a design process oriented towards product design quality characteristics. This integrates system product design quality objectives and design quality content into the design process, and, based on the accurately extracted product design quality characteristics and objectives, plans and deploys them throughout the entire product lifecycle. Attached Figure Description

[0065] Other features, objects, and advantages of the present invention will become more apparent from the following detailed description of non-limiting embodiments with reference to the accompanying drawings:

[0066] Figure 1 A schematic diagram of the overall design model for the "Quality Target R&D Design System".

[0067] Figure 2 This is a structural block diagram of an armored vehicle protection system.

[0068] Figure 3 This is a functional block diagram of an armored vehicle protection system.

[0069] Figure 4 This is a diagram showing the functional and structural levels of an armored vehicle protection system. Detailed Implementation

[0070] The present invention will now be described in detail with reference to specific embodiments. These embodiments will help those skilled in the art to further understand the present invention, but do not limit the invention in any way. It should be noted that those skilled in the art can make several changes and improvements without departing from the concept of the present invention. These all fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

[0071] Example 1

[0072] A method for analyzing the quality characteristics of an armored vehicle protection system based on quality objectives, provided by the present invention, includes:

[0073] Step S1: Establish a fault mode manual and fault statistical analysis information based on the FRACAS fault mode library database;

[0074] Step S2: Analyze the structural composition and mission functions of the armored vehicle protection system to obtain the agreed-upon hierarchy of the armored vehicle protection system. Based on the agreed-upon hierarchy, severity category, failure mode, failure cause, and impact on the armored vehicle protection system, form an FMEA table. Feedback on the potential design requirements of the product based on the formed FMEA table.

[0075] Step S3: Classify user needs and obtain design requirements. Based on the analytic hierarchy process, determine the importance of user needs through the user need weight vector. Establish a quality house to obtain the relationship matrix between user needs and design requirements. Obtain the importance values ​​of the design quality characteristics of the armored vehicle protection system. Establish the correlation between user needs and design requirements for the quality of the armored vehicle protection system.

[0076] Step S4: Check whether the design quality target of the armored vehicle protection system meets the preset requirements. If it does not meet the requirements, return to steps S3 to S1 to re-perform the armored vehicle protection system requirements analysis until the design quality target of the armored vehicle protection system is accurately obtained.

[0077] Specifically, step S1 employs the following:

[0078] Step S1.1: Establish the FRACAS armored vehicle protection system, comprehensively covering all stages of product development, testing, trial production, mass production, and user use;

[0079] Step S1.2: Based on the FRACAS armored vehicle protection system, obtain the armored vehicle protection system fault record table, fault analysis table, and fault correction measure table;

[0080] Step S1.3: Based on the armored vehicle protection system fault record table, fault analysis table, and fault correction measure table, compile statistics on various faults, fault causes, and solutions at each stage of armored vehicle protection system product development, testing, trial production, mass production, and user use;

[0081] Step S1.4: Establish the FRACAS fault mode library database;

[0082] Step S1.5: Establish a fault mode manual and fault statistical analysis information through the established FRACAS fault mode library database, and conduct reliability weakness analysis.

[0083] Specifically, step S2 employs the following:

[0084] Step S2.1: Perform structural analysis on the armored vehicle protection system to obtain a structural block diagram of the armored vehicle protection system;

[0085] Step S2.2: Perform functional analysis on the armored vehicle protection system to obtain the functional block diagram of the armored vehicle protection system;

[0086] Step S2.3: Divide the armored vehicle protection system into functional and structural levels according to its functions and structure.

[0087] Step S2.4: Obtain the corresponding diagram of the functional and structural levels of the armored vehicle protection system by analyzing the functional and structural levels of the armored vehicle protection system;

[0088] Step S2.5: Conduct a comprehensive analysis of the structural block diagram, functional block diagram, and functional and structural hierarchy correspondence diagram of the armored vehicle protection system. Perform failure mode and impact analysis on the armored vehicle protection system based on the agreed hierarchy, severity category, failure mode, and failure cause of the armored vehicle protection system, and form a failure mode list.

[0089] Step S2.6: Analyze the agreed-upon levels, severity categories, failure modes, failure causes, and impacts on the armored vehicle protection system to form an FMEA table;

[0090] Step S2.7: Feedback on potential product design requirements based on the generated FMEA table.

[0091] Specifically, step S3 employs the following:

[0092] Step S3.1: Classify user needs and obtain design requirements;

[0093] Step S3.2: Organize user requirements and design requirements according to the structure of product quality requirements Q, price requirements C, time requirements T, environmental requirements E, and after-sales requirements S, and initially establish the relationship between user requirements and design requirements.

[0094] Step S3.3: Establish a pairwise comparison and judgment table of user requirements for armored vehicle protection system based on the relationship between the initially established user requirements and design requirements;

[0095] Step S3.4: Establish a pairwise comparison judgment matrix for user requirements of armored vehicle protection system based on the pairwise comparison judgment table for user requirements of armored vehicle protection system. Normalize the maximum eigenvalue and corresponding eigenvector of the current judgment matrix to obtain the user requirement weight vector.

[0096] Step S3.6: Based on the relationship between user requirements and design requirements for the quality of armored vehicle protection systems, establish a quality house to obtain a matrix showing the relationship between user requirements and design requirements, thereby obtaining numerical values ​​for the importance of product design quality features and establishing the correlation between user requirements and design requirements for the quality of armored vehicle protection systems.

[0097] Specifically, the design requirements are based on documents including the Task Book, Technical Coordination Card, User Feedback and FMEA Table.

[0098] Specifically, step S4 involves checking whether the design quality objectives of the armored vehicle protection system meet the quality requirements Q, price requirements C, time requirements T, environmental requirements E, and after-sales requirements S of the armored vehicle protection system. If not, the process gradually returns to steps S3, S2, and S1 to re-analyze the product requirements until the product design quality objectives are accurately obtained.

[0099] The quality characteristic analysis method for armored vehicle protection systems based on quality objectives provided by this invention can be implemented through the steps and flow of the method provided by this invention. Those skilled in the art can understand the aforementioned quality characteristic analysis method for armored vehicle protection systems based on quality objectives as a preferred example of a quality characteristic analysis method system based on quality objectives.

[0100] Example 2

[0101] Example 2 is a preferred example of Example 1.

[0102] A method for analyzing the quality characteristics of an armored vehicle protection system based on quality objectives, provided by the present invention, includes:

[0103] FRACAS Weakness Analysis Steps: Establish a Failure Mode Manual and Failure Statistical Analysis information through the FRACAS Failure Mode Library database, which serves as input for the FMEA Failure Mode and Effects Analysis steps.

[0104] FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) steps: A thorough analysis of the product's structure and functionalities is conducted. Based on the product's defined hierarchy, severity category, and the impact of failure modes and causes on the fire suppression system, FMEA potential failure analysis is performed. Failure modes with higher severity and higher probability of occurrence identified in the FMEA are used as inputs for the QFD (Quality Function Deployment) steps.

[0105] QFD (Quality Function Deployment) analysis steps: Classify user needs and obtain design requirements; determine the importance of user needs through user requirement weight vectors based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP); establish a House of Quality to obtain the relationship matrix between user needs and design requirements; and then obtain the numerical values ​​of the importance of product design quality features. This provides design basis and requirements for obtaining product design quality goals and design processes, and establishes the correlation between user needs and design requirements.

[0106] The "FFQ" recursive analysis steps involve using three quality tools—"FRACAS," "FMEA," and "QFD"—to recursively apply the "FFQ" method during the system product design quality requirements analysis process. This method progressively identifies product design quality objectives and checks whether these objectives meet user needs such as product quality requirements (Q), price requirements (C), time requirements (T), environmental requirements (E), and after-sales requirements (S). If not, the process returns to QFD, FMEA, and FRACAS to re-analyze product requirements until the accurate product design quality objectives are obtained. This integrates system product design quality objectives and content into the design process, allowing for planning and deployment throughout the product lifecycle based on accurately extracted product design quality characteristics and objectives.

[0107] Specifically, the FRACAS weak link analysis steps include:

[0108] Step 1.1: Establish the FRACAS armored vehicle protection system, comprehensively covering all stages of product development, testing, trial production, mass production, and user use;

[0109] Step 1.2: Report the faults in a timely manner, find out the cause, correct them correctly, and accurately record the contents of the fault record form, fault analysis form, and fault correction action form;

[0110] Step 1.3: Compile statistics on various faults, problems, and their solutions at each stage of product development, testing, trial production, mass production, and user use;

[0111] Step 1.4: Establish the FRACAS Fault Mode Library database;

[0112] Step 1.5: Establish a fault mode manual, fault statistical analysis, and other information through the FRACAS fault mode library database;

[0113] Step 1.6: Integrate the failure modes and failure statistical analysis information collected in Step 1.5 to conduct a reliability vulnerability analysis;

[0114] Specifically, the FMEA failure mode and effects analysis steps include:

[0115] Step 2.1: Conduct product structure composition analysis to obtain the structural block diagram of the armored vehicle protection system;

[0116] Step 2.2: Perform product task function analysis to obtain the functional block diagram of the armored vehicle protection system;

[0117] Step 2.3: Based on the function and structure of the armored vehicle protection system, the layers are divided as follows:

[0118] (1) The initial agreed-upon level is the fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system;

[0119] (2) The agreed level is the various components of the fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system, including: fire extinguishing and explosion suppression control box, linear flame sensor, optical detector, emergency button, cable and fire extinguishing bottle;

[0120] Step 2.4: Through product functional hierarchy and structural hierarchy analysis, obtain the corresponding diagram of functional hierarchy and structural hierarchy of armored vehicle protection system;

[0121] Step 2.5: Conduct a comprehensive analysis of the structure and functions of the armored vehicle protection system. Based on the product's agreed-upon level, severity category, failure mode, and failure cause, perform failure mode and impact analysis on the armored vehicle protection system to form a failure mode list, including failure modes of severity level III, severity level II, and severity level I.

[0122] Step 2.6: Analyze the impact of the agreed-upon levels, severity categories, failure modes, and failure causes of the armored vehicle protection system on the armored vehicle protection system to form an FMEA table.

[0123] Specifically, the FRACAS weak link analysis step outputs the basic causes of product failure to the FMEA failure mode and effects analysis step; at the same time, in the FMEA failure mode and effects analysis step, the failure mode obtained in step 2.5 of the FRACAS weak link analysis step is used as the input information for the failure mode in the FMEA failure mode and effects analysis step.

[0124] Specifically, the QFD (Quality Function Deployment) analysis steps include:

[0125] Step 3.1: Classify user needs and obtain design requirements. Conduct a requirements survey on the design quality of armored vehicle protection systems. By sorting out four sources of requirements, including the "Task Book", technical coordination card, user evaluation feedback follow-up, and analysis of potential product design requirements, a wide range of "user requirements information" on the design quality of armored vehicle protection systems can be obtained.

[0126] Step 3.2: To ensure the design quality of armored vehicle protection systems, organize and summarize the relevant "design requirements" elements;

[0127] Step 3.3: Organize the "user requirement information" obtained in Step 1 and the "design requirements" in Step 2 according to the structure of product quality requirements (Q), price requirements (C), time requirements (T), environmental requirements (E), and after-sales requirements (S) to establish a user requirement structure oriented towards product design quality and establish the relationship between user requirements and design requirements, as input for Step 4;

[0128] Step 3.4: Based on the relationship between user requirements and design requirements established in Step 3.3, establish a pairwise comparison and judgment table for user requirements of armored vehicle protection system;

[0129] Step 3.5: Based on step 3.4, use linguistic variables to evaluate the importance of user requirement attributes, and convert the evaluation into precise numerical values ​​to obtain the importance of user requirements;

[0130] Step 3.6: Thus, establish a pairwise comparison judgment matrix of user requirements for armored vehicle protection system. After normalization of the maximum eigenvalue and corresponding eigenvector of the matrix, obtain the user requirement weight vector.

[0131] Step 3.7: Based on the relationship between user needs for product quality and design needs for product design quality, establish a quality house to obtain a relationship matrix between user needs and design needs, and then obtain the numerical value of the importance of product design quality features. This provides design basis and requirements for obtaining product design quality goals and design process, and establishes the correlation between user needs and design needs.

[0132] The present invention provides a research and design system for a quality characteristic analysis method of armored vehicle protection system based on quality objectives. This research and design system includes: a product requirement analysis model, a product overall scheme design process model, an optimization design process model, and a process assembly and production model. It establishes product thermal stress, electromagnetic compatibility, and finite element simulation models to design, optimize, and implement product design quality characteristics. It constructs a scheme design, optimization design, process assembly and production design, and quality acceptance process oriented towards product design quality, repeatedly verifying whether "product quality objectives are met," and making timely modifications and adjustments when necessary. This realizes the transformation of product quality control from late-stage inspection to early-stage preventive management, providing a guarantee for comprehensively improving the reliability of product design and an effective way to significantly improve the physical quality of products.

[0133] Example 3

[0134] Example 3 is a preferred example of Example 1.

[0135] Based on the quality objective of "design quality of new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system products", we will develop a system engineering theory and methodology to comprehensively and systematically study the formation process of design quality of new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression protection systems.

[0136] Firstly, taking "Quality Function Configuration," "Fault Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action System," and "Failure Mode and Effects Analysis" as the starting point for product development and design, the application of three quality tools—HOQ, FRACAS, and FMEA—innovatively integrates the advantages and characteristics of each method to comprehensively obtain user requirement classifications and design requirements. By extracting key elements such as product design quality characteristics and requirement importance, sufficient basis is provided for designers to systematically set product quality objectives. Secondly, based on the extracted product design quality characteristics and objectives, a design process oriented towards the product design quality characteristics of the new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system is established to realize these characteristics and objectives. A global design process model, an optimized design process model, a process assembly and production model, and control decisions are established for product design quality. Finally, the design quality of the new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system is verified through qualification tests and user feedback.

[0137] Simultaneously, the product design process is controlled by formulating product design quality control decisions to achieve product design quality objectives. By linking product design quality, design process, and control decisions, multiple quality methods are mutually supportive and organically combined to form a meticulous and effective scientific management system. This system operates in a closed loop, iterating repeatedly to improve the design quality of the new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system with highly reliable testing technology, thereby comprehensively enhancing the physical quality of the product. The system's principle block diagram is as follows: Figure 1 As shown.

[0138] This project will be described in detail in conjunction with the specific implementation of the "New Fire Extinguishing and Explosion Suppression System Project with High Reliability Detection Technology".

[0139] 1. Establish a global design model oriented towards product design quality

[0140] Establish a global design model for the design quality of fire suppression and explosion suppression products, integrating the design quality objectives and content into the product design process. During the design process, accurately grasp the user's design quality requirements for fire suppression and explosion suppression products, and plan and deploy throughout the entire product lifecycle. Consider numerous quality factors throughout the product lifecycle as early as possible, optimizing and verifying design quality characteristics. Predict potential contradictions and problems in the design of fire suppression and explosion suppression products and propose preventative and remedial measures to ensure the design quality of fire suppression and explosion suppression products.

[0141] The overall design principle model of the "Quality Target R&D Design System" is as follows: Figure 1 As shown.

[0142] First, from the perspective of overall product design, clarify the classification of user needs and design requirements. By analyzing key elements such as product design quality characteristics and the importance of requirements, extract product design quality characteristics and objectives. Integrate the design quality objectives and content of fire extinguishing and explosion suppression products into the design process. Accurately grasp the user's design quality requirements for fire extinguishing and explosion suppression products during the design process, and plan and deploy them for the entire life cycle of fire extinguishing and explosion suppression products.

[0143] Furthermore, a product design process model, an optimization design process model, and a process assembly production model are established to design, optimize, and implement the product design quality characteristics.

[0144] Finally, the design quality of the new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system was verified through methods such as on-site evaluation tests and user feedback.

[0145] In the global design model, during the stages of scheme design, optimization design, process assembly and production design, and quality acceptance, it is essential to repeatedly check whether the "product quality objectives have been met" and make timely modifications and adjustments as necessary. Through continuous iterative updates, the design quality assurance measures and the entire design process can be organically integrated, ultimately approaching the quality objectives and results.

[0146] 2. Establish the correlation between user needs and design requirements.

[0147] By applying three quality tools—FRACAS, FMEA, and HOQ—and innovatively integrating the advantages and characteristics of each method, we can accurately convert between user needs and design requirements for product design quality.

[0148] By establishing a failure mode manual and failure statistical analysis through the FRACAS failure mode library database, various information can be statistically analyzed and reliability data can be calculated, providing data for designers to conduct project FMEA in the system. Furthermore, based on the failure modes with high severity and high probability of occurrence determined by the system FMEA, the user requirements of HOQ products are input. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is applied to determine the importance of user requirements, establish the correlation between user requirements and design requirements, and accurately extract product design quality characteristics and objectives from a design perspective, providing sufficient basis for design improvement schemes.

[0149] Finally, the product design quality objectives of the new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system are tested to see if they meet the product quality requirements (Q), price requirements (T), time requirements (C), environmental requirements (E), and after-sales requirements (S). If not, the product requirements analysis is carried out again until the requirements are met.

[0150] a) Analysis of FRACAS reliability weaknesses

[0151] An effective FRACAS system was established to promptly report, investigate, and correctly correct any malfunctions that occur during the product's development, manufacturing, and usage phases, and to accurately record the contents of the malfunction record form, malfunction analysis form, and malfunction corrective action form. The project team compiled statistics on various malfunctions, problems, and solutions encountered during the development, manufacturing, and usage phases of products deployed in recent years, as shown in Table 1.

[0152] Table 1. Fault Statistics of Fire Extinguishing and Explosion Suppression Systems

[0153]

[0154] b) FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis)

[0155] By integrating the failure modes and failure statistical analysis information collected from the FRACAS failure mode library, failure mode input information is obtained, providing data support for the designer system to conduct project FMEA.

[0156] A thorough analysis of the product structure and functions of the fire suppression and explosion control system is conducted. Based on the product's agreed-upon level, severity category, failure mode, and failure cause, a potential failure analysis (FMEA) is performed to assess the impact on the fire suppression system.

[0157] 1) Structural composition

[0158] The fire suppression and explosion suppression system consists of a fire suppression and explosion suppression control box, six optical detectors, a linear flame sensor, an emergency button, fire extinguishing cylinders, and cables. Its structural block diagram is shown below. Figure 2 As shown.

[0159] 2) Task Function

[0160] The fire suppression and explosion extinguishing system is a vehicle protection system. Its function is to automatically detect fires in the passenger compartment and engine compartment, and automatically or manually control the release of extinguishing agents from explosion extinguishing cylinders and fire extinguishing cylinders to promptly suppress deflagrations in the passenger compartment and extinguish fires in the engine compartment. This effectively protects the survivability of personnel in military vehicles on the battlefield, ensuring the combat effectiveness of the troops. A functional block diagram of the fire suppression and explosion extinguishing system is shown below. Figure 3 As shown.

[0161] 3) Correspondence diagram of functional and structural levels

[0162] The fire suppression and explosion control system detects fires in the crew compartment using optical detectors. When a deflagration or fire occurs in the crew compartment, the optical detectors determine whether a fire has occurred. If a fire has occurred, the optical detectors send a fire alarm signal to the fire suppression and explosion control box. The fire suppression and explosion control box then drives the fire extinguishing bottles in the crew compartment to extinguish the fire and suppress the explosion, completing the fire suppression and explosion control task. After the fire suppression and explosion control is completed, the system continues to monitor the fire situation in the crew compartment.

[0163] The fire suppression and explosion control system detects the engine compartment temperature using a linear flame sensor. When the engine compartment temperature rises, the system samples the data to determine if a fire has occurred. If a fire is detected, the system issues a fire alarm signal and activates the engine compartment fire extinguishing cylinders to extinguish the fire. After the fire is extinguished, the system continues to monitor the engine compartment temperature. See details. Figure 4 As shown.

[0164] Based on the function and structure of the fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system, the hierarchy is as follows:

[0165] (1) The initial agreed-upon level is the fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system;

[0166] (2) The agreed level is the various components of the fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system, including: fire extinguishing and explosion suppression integrated control box, linear flame sensor, optical detector, emergency button, cable and fire extinguishing bottle;

[0167] 4) Create an FMEA table

[0168] An FMEA table was created based on the impact analysis of the product's agreed-upon level, severity category, failure mode, and failure cause on the fire suppression system.

[0169] Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) of the original fire suppression system identified 27 failure modes, including 12 severity level III failure modes, 6 severity level II failure modes, and 9 severity level I failure modes. A list of severity level I and II failure modes is provided in Table 2.

[0170] Table 2 List of Failure Modes of Severity Level I and II

[0171]

[0172] Table 2 (continued)

[0173]

[0174] A comprehensive analysis of the structure and functions of the fire suppression and explosion control system was conducted. An FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) table was created based on the impact of product specifications, severity categories, failure modes, and failure causes on the fire suppression system. The failure modes with higher severity and higher probability of occurrence identified in the system FMEA served as the user requirement input for the HOQ (Hospitalization and Explosion-Quizable) product. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was applied to determine the importance of user requirements and establish the correlation between user requirements and design requirements.

[0175] c) Obtain product design quality characteristics and requirement importance through House of Quality (HOQ) technology.

[0176] 1) User needs classification and design requirements acquisition

[0177] A needs assessment was conducted to evaluate the design quality of new fire suppression and explosion suppression systems. This involved gathering information from four sources: task specifications, technical coordination cards, user feedback, and analysis of potential product design requirements. A total of 19 user requirements related to the design quality of new fire suppression and explosion suppression systems were collected. This user information was then organized and summarized, aligning the user requirements with the QCTES (Quality, Technology, Materials, Systems, and Components) structure, thus establishing a user requirements structure focused on product design quality.

[0178] The 19 user requirements are as follows: low component failure rate, meeting fire extinguishing and explosion suppression functions, meeting fire extinguishing and explosion suppression performance, meeting optical detector functions, meeting optical detector performance, meeting linear flame sensor functions, meeting linear flame sensor performance, reporting information meeting user needs, high reliability, low false alarm rate, power failure selection, low cost, short delivery time, meeting environmental adaptability, meeting electromagnetic compatibility, meeting power supply adaptability, convenient maintenance, convenient support, and testability. These are categorized into the four user needs mentioned above. The quality requirement category includes 11 items: low component failure rate, meeting fire extinguishing and explosion suppression functions, meeting fire extinguishing and explosion suppression performance, meeting optical detector functions, meeting optical detector performance, meeting linear flame sensor functions, meeting optical detector performance, meeting linear flame sensor functions, meeting linear flame sensor performance, reporting information meeting user requirements, high reliability, low false alarm rate, and the ability to select the appropriate bottle in case of power failure. The price requirement category includes low cost. The time requirement category includes short delivery time. The environmental requirement category includes 3 items: meeting environmental adaptability, meeting electromagnetic compatibility, and meeting power supply adaptability. The after-sales service requirement category includes 3 items: convenient maintenance, convenient support, and testability.

[0179] The design of the fire suppression and explosion control system was based on 10 design requirements that significantly impact its design quality. These 10 elements are: system reliability, operational stability, production timeliness, condition monitoring and controllability, performance superiority, system controllability, equipment maintainability, fault diagnosability, user-friendliness, design economy, and manufacturing economy. Table 3 shows the user requirements, classifications, and design requirements for the fire suppression and explosion control system.

[0180] Table 3 Relationship between User Needs and Design Needs

[0181]

[0182] Table 3 (continued) Relationship between User Needs and Design Needs

[0183]

[0184] 2) Determining the importance of user requirements based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

[0185] Products are defined by user needs with relative importance. For the same product, users have different requirements; some needs are very important and must be met, while others are relatively less important. Therefore, the first step in product design is to determine the relative importance of user needs.

[0186] Based on the user requirements and comparison judgment rules of the fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system shown in Table 3, a pairwise comparison judgment table for 19 user requirements of the fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system is established, as shown in Table 4.

[0187] The importance of a user need attribute is usually evaluated using linguistic variables such as unimportant or very important. The evaluation is then converted into a precise numerical value to obtain the importance of the user need. Commonly used numerical scales include 1-3-5-7-9.

[0188] Table 4. Paired Comparison and Judgment Table of User Needs for Fire Extinguishing and Explosion Suppression Systems

[0189]

[0190] The pairwise comparison judgment matrix of user requirements for fire extinguishing and explosion suppression systems is as follows:

[0191] Z=

[0192] The largest eigenvalue of the matrix is ​​λmax = 19.3279, and its corresponding eigenvector is Pm = (0.0722, 0.4148, 0.4814, 0.3348, 0.4148, 0.2244, 0.2780, 0.0722, 0.1453, 0.2780, 0.0406, 0.0722, 0.0279, 0.1453, 0.1453, 0.1453, 0.0392, 0.0392, 0.0392)T.

[0193] Normalizing the feature vector Pm yields the user demand weight vector (0.0212, 0.1217, 0.1412, 0.0982, 0.1217, 0.0658, 0.0815, 0.0212, 0.0426, 0.0815, 0.0119, 0.0212, 0.0082, 0.0426, 0.0426, 0.0426, 0.0115, 0.0115, 0.0115).

[0194] 3) Establish a house of quality to determine the correlation between user needs and design requirements.

[0195] Based on the relationship between user needs for product quality and design needs based on product design quality, a relationship matrix between user needs and design needs for fire extinguishing and explosion suppression systems is established. The quality house of the fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system is shown in Table 5.

[0196] Table 5 Quality of Fire Extinguishing and Explosion Suppression Systems

[0197]

[0198] Table 5 (continued) Quality of Fire Extinguishing and Explosion Suppression Systems

[0199]

[0200] Obtaining numerical values ​​for the importance of design quality characteristics of fire extinguishing and explosion suppression systems provides a design basis and requirements for acquiring product design quality objectives and for the design process of new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression products. Designers can clearly translate user needs into design requirements, eliminating the drawbacks of blindly determining the relationship between the two based on design experience in the past.

[0201] 3. Obtain the design quality objectives of the new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system

[0202] In the process of optimizing the functional performance of new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system products, the five design requirements with the highest importance in the House of Quality are selected through the above-mentioned quality tools such as FRACAS, FMEA, and HOQ, so as to accurately extract the design quality objectives of the new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system.

[0203] Table 6 Product Design Quality Objectives

[0204]

[0205] In addition to meeting the basic requirements of the task book, the final determination of the new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system is to focus on improving the functionality and performance of the product design quality in the following five aspects.

[0206] a) Improve sensor measurement accuracy. Focus on the dual-parameter RC characteristics of linear flame sensors, study hardware design and software algorithms to improve RC measurement accuracy, establish a reliable fire alarm judgment model based on its RC characteristics, and effectively improve performance indicators such as engine compartment alarm temperature, fire alarm response time, and fire alarm recovery time.

[0207] b) Solve the problem of false alarms and missed fire alarms in military use. Improve the high reliability of fire detection in modern military armored vehicles, solve the problem of false alarms, false sprays and missed alarms that are prone to occur in linear flame sensors under special conditions, effectively identify faults such as short circuits, open circuits, wear, and loose connectors, and ensure that linear flame sensors still have fire alarm capabilities when they are worn, or when the connectors are immersed in oil or water.

[0208] c) Add system fault self-diagnosis function. Addressing the current situation where the self-diagnosis function of modern military armored vehicle fire suppression and explosion suppression systems can only diagnose specific component faults and lacks an equipment health management concept, this system will delve deeper into the fault diagnosis content within the system's data, such as fault correlation analysis, prediction, and diagnostic location, to achieve automatic fault detection, automatic diagnosis, and alarm functions, thus realizing intelligent fault self-diagnosis.

[0209] d) Reliable operation of fire extinguishing bottles in emergency situations. This addresses the issue of armored vehicle fire suppression and explosion extinguishing products failing to effectively extinguish fires in emergency situations, enabling manual dispensing of the extinguishing bottle even after a power outage (2 hours), ensuring effective protection for armored vehicles.

[0210] e) Improve the quality of product manufacturing processes.

[0211] 4. Product Solution Design

[0212] In the design phase of the new fire suppression and explosion control system, based on user requirements, quality tools such as FRACAS, FMEA, and HOQ are used to transform these user requirements into design requirements, extracting the system's design quality characteristics. These extracted characteristics are then combined with the system's task specification to develop the design scheme. The design of the new fire suppression and explosion control system is then evaluated by verifying the feasibility of its functional quality. If the design does not meet the functional requirements, it is revised until the objectives are met.

[0213] 5. Product optimization design oriented towards product design quality objectives

[0214] The new fire suppression and explosion control system is composed of multiple subsystems and components. Its functions and performance are reflected in the functions and performance of these subsystems and components. Based on a clear understanding of the product's functions and performance, the focus is on determining the content and objectives for improving the functions, performance, and quality of its components. Functional and structural hierarchical analyses are conducted, and optimization techniques are decomposed and combined to drive quality-oriented design improvements. Finally, the quality of the product and components is assessed to verify whether the optimized design meets the quality requirements of the new fire suppression and explosion control system. If not, the design is revised until the objectives are met.

[0215] To further enhance product design quality, in this phase, based on meeting the technical specifications in the product task book and according to the extracted design quality objectives for the new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system, the product design quality was optimized in five aspects: improved design of the power compartment linear flame sensor, adaptive matching measurement design of wide-area dynamic sensitive features, comparison and identification of sensitive features and fire alarm judgment algorithm under the damaged state of the linear flame sensor, intelligent self-diagnosis technology design based on network data sharing, and reliable drive design under emergency conditions.

[0216] 6. Product Manufacturing Process Design Scheme

[0217] By integrating quality objectives into the product realization process and applying the concept of quality objectives in actual production and manufacturing, we can effectively ensure process quality, assembly quality, and manufacturing quality, minimize the probability of quality problems occurring during the production and use stages, improve product quality, shorten product development cycles, save capital investment, and improve the economic benefits of enterprises.

[0218] To ensure the design quality of the fire suppression and explosion suppression system, the manufacturing processes of its components were optimized, and the assembly structure of the system was determined. Manufacturing process quality inspection further ensured the manufacturing quality of the new fire suppression and explosion suppression system and its components. Performance testing, aging, and screening processes were developed for key components such as ultraviolet and infrared phototubes and linear flame sensors. Process tracking and control requirements were established for the special surface mount soldering process of components during product manufacturing. Factors related to reliability growth were considered during process development, and project process design was implemented.

[0219] 7. Design Quality Inspection

[0220] Qualification testing is the final step in the quality target R&D design system for verifying the design quality of a completed product. The design quality verification stage primarily examines the overall design quality of the completed new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system, including its optimized design parameters. This evaluation assesses the quality of the new fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system's design and allows for timely correction of any deficiencies identified during the design process.

[0221] Those skilled in the art will understand that, in addition to implementing the system, apparatus, and their modules provided by this invention in purely computer-readable program code, the same program can be implemented in the form of logic gates, switches, application-specific integrated circuits, programmable logic controllers, and embedded microcontrollers by logically programming the method steps. Therefore, the system, apparatus, and their modules provided by this invention can be considered a hardware component, and the modules included therein for implementing various programs can also be considered structures within the hardware component; alternatively, modules for implementing various functions can be considered both software programs implementing the method and structures within the hardware component.

[0222] Specific embodiments of the present invention have been described above. It should be understood that the present invention is not limited to the specific embodiments described above, and those skilled in the art can make various changes or modifications within the scope of the claims, which do not affect the essence of the present invention. Unless otherwise specified, the embodiments and features described in this application can be arbitrarily combined with each other.

Claims

1. A method for analyzing the quality characteristics of an armored vehicle protection system based on quality objectives, characterized in that, include: Step S1: Establish a fault mode manual and fault statistical analysis information based on the FRACAS fault mode library database; Step S2: Analyze the structural composition and mission functions of the armored vehicle protection system to obtain the agreed-upon hierarchy of the armored vehicle protection system. Based on the agreed-upon hierarchy, severity category, failure mode, failure cause, and impact on the armored vehicle protection system, form an FMEA table. Feedback on the potential design requirements of the product based on the formed FMEA table. Step S3: Classify user needs and obtain design requirements. Based on the analytic hierarchy process, determine the importance of user needs through the user need weight vector. Establish a quality house to obtain the relationship matrix between user needs and design requirements. Obtain the importance values ​​of the design quality characteristics of the armored vehicle protection system. Establish the correlation between user needs and design requirements for the quality of the armored vehicle protection system. Step S4: Check whether the design quality target of the armored vehicle protection system meets the preset requirements. If it does not meet the requirements, return to steps S3 to S1 to re-perform the armored vehicle protection system requirements analysis until the design quality target of the armored vehicle protection system is accurately obtained. Step S3 employs the following: Step S3.1: Classify user needs and obtain design requirements; Step S3.2: Organize user requirements and design requirements according to the structure of product quality requirements Q, price requirements C, time requirements T, environmental requirements E, and after-sales requirements S, and initially establish the relationship between user requirements and design requirements. Step S3.3: Establish a pairwise comparison and judgment table of user requirements for armored vehicle protection system based on the relationship between the initially established user requirements and design requirements; Step S3.4: Establish a pairwise comparison judgment matrix for user requirements of armored vehicle protection system based on the pairwise comparison judgment table for user requirements of armored vehicle protection system. Normalize the maximum eigenvalue and corresponding eigenvector of the current judgment matrix to obtain the user requirement weight vector. Step S3.5: Based on the relationship between user requirements and design requirements for the quality of armored vehicle protection systems, establish a quality house to obtain a matrix relating user requirements and design requirements, thereby obtaining numerical values ​​for the importance of product design quality features and establishing the correlation between user requirements and design requirements for the quality of armored vehicle protection systems.

2. The method for analyzing the quality characteristics of armored vehicle protection systems based on quality targets according to claim 1, characterized in that, Step S1 adopts the following: Step S1.1: Establish the FRACAS armored vehicle protection system, comprehensively covering all stages of product development, testing, trial production, mass production, and user use; Step S1.2: Based on the FRACAS armored vehicle protection system, obtain the armored vehicle protection system fault record table, fault analysis table, and fault correction measure table; Step S1.3: Based on the armored vehicle protection system fault record table, fault analysis table, and fault correction measure table, compile statistics on various faults, fault causes, and solutions at each stage of armored vehicle protection system product development, testing, trial production, mass production, and user use; Step S1.4: Establish the FRACAS fault mode library database; Step S1.5: Establish a fault mode manual and fault statistical analysis information through the established FRACAS fault mode library database, and conduct reliability weakness analysis.

3. The method for analyzing the quality characteristics of armored vehicle protection systems based on quality targets according to claim 1, characterized in that, Step S2 employs the following: Step S2.1: Perform structural analysis on the armored vehicle protection system to obtain a structural block diagram of the armored vehicle protection system; Step S2.2: Perform functional analysis on the armored vehicle protection system to obtain the functional block diagram of the armored vehicle protection system; Step S2.3: Divide the armored vehicle protection system into functional and structural levels according to its functions and structure. Step S2.4: Obtain the corresponding diagram of the functional and structural levels of the armored vehicle protection system by analyzing the functional and structural levels of the armored vehicle protection system; Step S2.5: Conduct a comprehensive analysis of the structural block diagram, functional block diagram, and functional and structural hierarchy correspondence diagram of the armored vehicle protection system. Perform failure mode and impact analysis on the armored vehicle protection system based on the agreed hierarchy, severity category, failure mode, and failure cause of the armored vehicle protection system, and form a failure mode list. Step S2.6: Analyze the agreed-upon levels, severity categories, failure modes, failure causes, and impacts on the armored vehicle protection system to form an FMEA table; Step S2.7: Feedback on potential product design requirements based on the generated FMEA table.

4. The method for analyzing the quality characteristics of armored vehicle protection systems based on quality targets according to claim 3, characterized in that, The design requirements are based on documents including the "Task Book", technical coordination card, user feedback and follow-up, and FMEA form.

5. The method for analyzing the quality characteristics of armored vehicle protection systems based on quality targets according to claim 1, characterized in that, Step S4 involves checking whether the design quality objectives of the armored vehicle protection system meet the quality requirements Q, price requirements C, time requirements T, environmental requirements E, and after-sales requirements S of the armored vehicle protection system. If not, the process gradually returns to steps S3, S2, and S1 to re-analyze the product requirements until the product design quality objectives are accurately obtained.

6. A quality characteristic analysis system for armored vehicle protection systems based on quality objectives, characterized in that, include: Module M1: Establishes a fault mode manual and fault statistical analysis information based on the FRACAS fault mode library database; Module M2: Analyzes the structural composition and mission functions of the armored vehicle protection system to obtain the agreed-upon hierarchy of the armored vehicle protection system. Based on the agreed-upon hierarchy, severity category, failure mode, failure cause, and impact on the armored vehicle protection system, an FMEA table is formed. The potential design requirements of the product are then fed back based on the formed FMEA table. Module M3: Classifies user requirements and obtains design requirements. Based on the analytic hierarchy process, it determines the importance of user requirements through the user requirement weight vector, establishes a quality house to obtain the relationship matrix between user requirements and design requirements, obtains the importance values ​​of the design quality characteristics of the armored vehicle protection system, and establishes the correlation between user requirements and design requirements for the quality of the armored vehicle protection system. Module M4: Checks whether the design quality objectives of the armored vehicle protection system meet the preset requirements. If not, it gradually returns to Module M3 to Module M1 to re-analyze the requirements of the armored vehicle protection system until the design quality objectives of the armored vehicle protection system are accurately obtained. The module M3 adopts: Module M3.1: Classifies user needs and obtains design requirements; Module M3.2: Organize user requirements and design requirements according to the structure of product quality requirements Q, price requirements C, time requirements T, environmental requirements E, and after-sales requirements S, and initially establish the relationship between user requirements and design requirements. Module M3.3: Establish a pairwise comparison and judgment table for user requirements of armored vehicle protection system based on the relationship between the initially established user requirements and design requirements; Module M3.4: Based on the pairwise comparison judgment table of user requirements for armored vehicle protection system, establish a pairwise comparison judgment matrix of user requirements for armored vehicle protection system. After normalization of the maximum eigenvalue and corresponding eigenvector of the current judgment matrix, obtain the user requirement weight vector. Module M3.5: Based on the relationship between user requirements and design requirements for the quality of armored vehicle protection systems, a quality house is established to obtain a matrix relating user requirements and design requirements, thereby obtaining numerical values ​​for the importance of product design quality features and establishing the correlation between user requirements and design requirements for the quality of armored vehicle protection systems.

7. The quality characteristic analysis system for armored vehicle protection systems based on quality targets according to claim 6, characterized in that, The module M1 adopts: Module M1.1: Establishes the FRACAS armored vehicle protection system, comprehensively covering all stages of product development, testing, prototyping, mass production, and user use; Module M1.2: Based on the FRACAS armored vehicle protection system, obtain the armored vehicle protection system fault record table, fault analysis table, and fault correction measure table; Module M1.3: Based on the fault record table, fault analysis table and fault correction measure table of armored vehicle protection system, statistics are compiled on various faults, fault causes and solutions at each stage of product development, testing, trial production, mass production and user use of armored vehicle protection system products; Module M1.4: Establishes the FRACAS fault mode library database; Module M1.5: Establishes a fault mode manual and fault statistical analysis information through the established FRACAS fault mode library database, and performs reliability weakness analysis.

8. The quality characteristic analysis system for armored vehicle protection systems based on quality targets according to claim 6, characterized in that, The module M2 adopts: Module M2.1: Performs structural analysis on the armored vehicle protection system to obtain a structural block diagram of the armored vehicle protection system; Module M2.2: Performs functional analysis on the armored vehicle protection system and obtains the functional block diagram of the armored vehicle protection system; Module M2.3: Based on the function and structure of the armored vehicle protection system, a hierarchical division is made to obtain the functional hierarchy and structural hierarchy of the armored vehicle protection system; Module M2.4: A diagram showing the functional and structural hierarchy of armored vehicle protection systems is obtained through analysis of the functional and structural levels of these systems. Module M2.5: Conducts a comprehensive analysis of the structural block diagram, functional block diagram, and functional and structural hierarchy correspondence diagram of the armored vehicle protection system. Through the agreed hierarchy, severity category, failure mode, and failure cause of the armored vehicle protection system, it performs failure mode and impact analysis and forms a failure mode list. Module M2.6: An FMEA table is generated by analyzing the convention levels, severity categories, failure modes, failure causes, and impacts on armored vehicle protection systems. Module M2.7: Provides feedback on potential product design requirements based on the generated FMEA table; The design requirements were based on documents including the "Task Book", technical coordination card, user feedback and follow-up, and FMEA form. Module M4 checks whether the design quality objectives of the armored vehicle protection system meet the quality requirements Q, price requirements C, time requirements T, environmental requirements E, and after-sales requirements S of the armored vehicle protection system. If not, it gradually returns to Module M3, Module M2, and Module M1 to re-analyze the product requirements until the product design quality objectives are accurately obtained.

Images