Product function failure analysis method and device, storage medium and electronic equipment

Abstract

The application provides a product function failure analysis method and device, a storage medium and an electronic device; the method comprises the following steps: dividing a product into multiple function modules according to different functions, and dividing the product into multiple action state units according to the time sequence of performing different actions, obtaining the working state unit of each function module of the product in each action state through combination; multiple risk categories are set, and the working state units with risks in all working state units are determined as working state risk units; the output states of each working state risk unit are determined; multiple input factors are set for each working state risk unit, and the effect of each input factor on the output state of the working state risk unit is determined; the processing mechanism, the design parameter and the influence factor affecting the output state when the working state risk unit is executed are determined, and the abnormal output is analyzed by using the processing mechanism, the design parameter, the influence factor and the input factor.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] Embodiments of this application relate to the technical field of quality management, and more particularly to a method, apparatus, storage medium, and electronic device for product function failure analysis. Background Technology

[0002] The methods used to analyze product function failure risks are often relatively macro-level and lack close integration with the product's design details. In practical applications, these methods are easily disconnected from the product's design details. For example, during analysis, they may be disconnected from the product's actual functions or actions, resulting in incomplete failure cause analysis and insufficient risk identification.

[0003] It is evident that the relevant failure analysis methods can only identify some routine or superficial problems, making it difficult to identify potential failure risks in product details and thus difficult to effectively manage product quality.

[0004] Therefore, a solution is needed that can avoid the need for failure risk analysis of product details. Summary of the Invention

[0005] In view of this, the purpose of this application is to provide a method, apparatus, storage medium and electronic device for product function failure analysis.

[0006] To achieve the above objectives, this application provides a product function failure analysis method, including:

[0007] Based on the actions performed and functions implemented by the product, determine the working state unit corresponding to each function when each action is performed;

[0008] Multiple risk categories are set up, and the working status unit with any risk category among all working status units is determined as the working status risk unit.

[0009] The various output states of each working state risk unit are determined, including normal output that outputs normal functions, non-functional output that outputs non-functional results, and abnormal output that indicates a failure of normal functions.

[0010] Identify at least one input factor that each operational state risk unit is subject to, and analyze the cause of failure of each operational state risk unit based on the effect of each input factor on each operational state risk unit.

[0011] Furthermore, based on the actions performed and functions implemented by the product, the working state units corresponding to each function are determined when each action is performed, including:

[0012] The product is divided into multiple functional modules according to the different functions it performs;

[0013] The product is divided into multiple different action state units according to the timing of the different actions performed;

[0014] By combining the various functional modules and the various action state units, the working state unit of each functional module of the product is obtained when executing the various action state units.

[0015] Furthermore, multiple risk categories are set up, including:

[0016] Work status units that have experienced functional or operational failures during historical work processes are designated as historically high-risk.

[0017] Work state units that contain functions or actions of entirely new, unproven designs are designated as new design risks;

[0018] The working state units where the working environment of the functional module changes, the working state units where the execution of the action changes, and the working state units where the constituent hardware changes are all set as change risk.

[0019] Furthermore, based on the effect of each input factor on each working state risk unit, the causes of failure of each working state risk unit are analyzed, including:

[0020] Determine the effect of each input factor on the output state of the risk unit in this working state;

[0021] Determine the processing mechanisms, design parameters, and influencing factors that affect the output state when executing the risk unit of this working state;

[0022] The abnormal outputs of the working state risk unit are analyzed using the processing mechanism, design parameters, influencing factors, and input factors.

[0023] Furthermore, determine the effect of each input factor on the output state of the risk unit in this working state, including:

[0024] The effect of each input factor on each working state risk unit is determined according to the length of time it affects the action or function, and can be categorized as either long-term effect, short-term effect, or no effect.

[0025] Furthermore, the processing mechanisms, design parameters, and influencing factors affecting the output state when executing the working state risk unit are determined, including:

[0026] The process by which the risk unit in the work status is determined to perform the corresponding action to achieve the corresponding function;

[0027] The parameters set for executing the processing mechanism are determined for the working state risk unit;

[0028] And identify the factors that affect the risk unit in the working state from performing corresponding actions to achieve the corresponding function.

[0029] Furthermore, the abnormal outputs of the working state risk unit are analyzed using the aforementioned processing mechanism, design parameters, influencing factors, and input factors, including:

[0030] For each abnormal output of each working state risk unit, at least one of the input factors, processing mechanisms, design parameters, and influencing factors corresponding to that abnormal output will be used as a cause of failure for that working state risk unit.

[0031] Based on the same inventive concept, this application also provides a product function failure analysis device, including: a product action and function analysis module, a risk identification module, an output analysis module and a failure analysis module;

[0032] The product action and function analysis module is configured to determine the working state unit corresponding to each function when each action is performed, based on the actions performed and functions implemented by the product.

[0033] The risk identification module is configured to set multiple risk categories and identify all working status units with any risk category as working status risk units.

[0034] The output analysis module is configured to determine various output states of each working state risk unit, including normal output with normal function, non-functional output with non-functional result, and abnormal output with normal function failure.

[0035] The failure analysis module is configured to determine at least one input factor that each working state risk unit is subjected to, and to analyze the cause of failure of each working state risk unit based on the effect of each input factor on each working state risk unit.

[0036] Based on the same inventive concept, this application also provides an electronic device, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor executes the program to implement the failure analysis method for the product functions described in any of the above.

[0037] Based on the same inventive concept, this application also provides a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium stores computer instructions for causing the computer to perform a failure analysis method for the product functions described above.

[0038] As can be seen from the above, the product function failure analysis method, apparatus, storage medium, and electronic device provided in this application obtain the corresponding working state units for each action and function based on the actions performed and functions implemented by the product. It comprehensively considers multiple risk categories to identify risky working state units from multiple working state units, and analyzes each risky working state unit. Specifically, it determines the output state and input factors of each risky working state unit, and analyzes the abnormal output in the output state in combination with the processing mechanism, design parameters, and influencing factors of the risky working state unit, thereby obtaining the failure cause of the risky working state unit. Attached Figure Description

[0039] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in this application or related technologies, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments or related technologies will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only embodiments of this application. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0040] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of a product function failure analysis method according to an embodiment of this application;

[0041] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of the product function failure analysis device according to an embodiment of this application;

[0042] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the electronic device structure according to an embodiment of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0043] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this application clearer, the following detailed description is provided in conjunction with specific embodiments and the accompanying drawings.

[0044] It should be noted that, unless otherwise defined, the technical or scientific terms used in the embodiments of this application should have the ordinary meaning understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this application pertains. The terms "first," "second," and similar terms used in the embodiments of this application do not indicate any order, quantity, or importance, but are merely used to distinguish different components. Terms such as "comprising" or "including" mean that the element or object preceding the word encompasses the elements or objects listed following the word and their equivalents, without excluding other elements or objects. Terms such as "connected" or "linked" are not limited to physical or mechanical connections, but can include electrical connections, whether direct or indirect. Terms such as "upper," "lower," "left," and "right" are only used to indicate relative positional relationships; when the absolute position of the described object changes, the relative positional relationship may also change accordingly.

[0045] As described in the background section, the existing failure analysis methods for related product functions are still insufficient to meet the actual needs of product failure analysis.

[0046] In the process of implementing this application, the applicant discovered that the main problem with the relevant product function failure analysis methods is that the analysis methods for product function failure risks are often relatively macro-level guiding methods that are not closely integrated with the product design details. In actual application, they are prone to being disconnected from the product design details. For example, during the analysis, they are disconnected from the product's actual functions or actions, resulting in incomplete failure cause analysis and insufficient risk identification.

[0047] Therefore, the relevant failure analysis methods can only identify some routine or superficial problems, making it difficult to identify potential failure risks in product details and thus difficult to effectively manage product quality.

[0048] Based on this, one or more embodiments in this application provide a method for analyzing product functionality failures.

[0049] In the embodiments of this application, the pre-installed product can perform multiple actions and is composed of different modules.

[0050] The embodiments of this application are described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0051] refer to Figure 1 One embodiment of this application provides a product function failure analysis method, which includes the following steps:

[0052] Step S101: Based on the actions performed and functions implemented by the product, determine the working state unit corresponding to each function when each action is performed.

[0053] In the embodiments of this application, by decomposing the actions and functions of the product, multiple action state units for each action and multiple functional modules for each function can be obtained. By combining the action state units and functional modules, multiple working state units corresponding to different functions when different actions are performed can be obtained.

[0054] Specifically, a product can be decomposed into multiple different functional modules according to its components and constituent parts, or according to the implementation logic of its functions. When decomposing functional modules, it can be done according to the physical components of the product, or according to the various functions implemented by the product.

[0055] For example, a controller with an integrated chip circuit board integrates multiple control functions. Therefore, when decomposing the controller into functional modules, the controller can be decomposed into corresponding control circuit modules according to the specific functions it implements, such as voltage control modules, output modules, and input modules.

[0056] Furthermore, when decomposing functional modules, the decomposition level can be determined according to the design responsibility. For example, for components that did not participate in the specific design, they can be decomposed only to the level of that component, without having to continue decomposing the component into the next sub-level.

[0057] In this embodiment, the actions performed by the product can be decomposed into multiple action state units.

[0058] Specifically, in the process of implementing various functions of a product, its workflow can be broken down into multiple actions according to the execution sequence of different actions.

[0059] The decomposed actions can include: functional actions that implement specific functions, judgment actions that execute judgment logic, and combined actions that loop through multiple actions. Each functional action or judgment action can be a state unit. Arranging all state units in sequence yields the workflow of the product.

[0060] Furthermore, in the above workflow, each branch can be regarded as an independent unidirectional process for the judgment action that forms a branch.

[0061] In a specific example, the product can be broken down into F. n Each functional action, and J n-1 Based on the decision-making actions and the execution sequence of each action of the product, a single-item flow for the product is obtained as shown below:

[0062] F1→J1→F2→J2→... →F j →Jj →...→F n-1 →J n-1 →F n

[0063] Among them, F j J represents any functional action in the process. j This represents any judgment action between functional actions in the process, where j = 1~n. In this single process, if any functional action F j If no action is subsequently determined, then the corresponding J can be... j Take a null value.

[0064] Furthermore, based on the aforementioned determined functional modules and action state units, a combination of a functional module and an action state unit is taken as a working state unit. This working state unit specifically represents the working state of the corresponding functional module when the product executes the action state unit. Based on this, the working state unit of each functional module when the product executes each action state unit can be obtained.

[0065] Specifically, the interaction matrix of action state unit-functional module shown in Table 1 below serves as a concrete example:

[0066] Table 1. Interaction Matrix of Action State Units and Functional Modules

[0067]

[0068] As shown in Table 1, each action state unit is constructed into a vertical column according to the workflow, and each functional module is constructed into a horizontal column. Based on this, for each action state unit, it is expanded in the horizontal direction according to the corresponding functional modules to obtain the working state units of each functional module under the corresponding action state unit. Thus, the action state unit-functional module interaction matrix can be obtained.

[0069] In the specific example in Table 1, this interaction matrix can be used to identify the changes in the working status of each functional module of the product during operation, and then analyze the potential risks involved.

[0070] Where CF(i, j) represents functional module C i In action state unit F j The working state during the execution process, that is, the corresponding C i and F j The working state unit, CJ(i, j), represents the functional module C. i In action state unit J j The working state during the execution process, that is, the corresponding C i and Jj The working status unit.

[0071] Furthermore, since each functional module can only be decomposed into a limited number of working states, numerical codes can be used in the matrix to represent the working state corresponding to the current working state unit, thus simplifying the representation of the matrix.

[0072] For example, solenoid valves generally have three working states: closed, suction valve, and maintain open valve. 0 can represent closed, 1 can represent suction valve, and 2 can represent maintain open valve.

[0073] As can be seen, in the action state unit-functional module interaction matrix, the working state of the product can be represented by a combination of codes that describe the working state of each functional module corresponding to different action state units. It is evident that this interaction matrix contains a large number of repeated values. Therefore, when performing the failure analysis below, we can focus on actions that change the working state.

[0074] Step S102: Set multiple risk categories and determine the working status unit with any risk category among all working status units as the working status risk unit.

[0075] In the embodiments of this application, based on the multiple working state units determined in the foregoing steps, multiple risk categories can be set for them, and according to the set risk categories, the working state risk units with failure risk are determined from all working state units and are used as working state risk units.

[0076] Specifically, when setting risk categories, the historical working information of each functional module during the use of the product can be used to determine whether a working state unit that has been fully verified in actual use has a lower risk.

[0077] Furthermore, three risk categories can be set for the working status unit: historical high risk, new design risk, and change risk.

[0078] Specifically, a work status risk unit classified as historically high-risk refers to a work status unit that has experienced functional failure or failed in its executed actions during historical operation; a work status risk unit classified as newly designed risk refers to a work status risk unit that contains unverified, newly designed functions or unverified, newly designed execution actions; and a work status risk unit classified as change risk refers to a work status risk unit in which the working environment of its related functional modules has changed, or the executed actions have changed, or the conditions for executing the actions have changed, or the hardware components of the functional modules related to the work status risk unit have changed.

[0079] Furthermore, based on the three risk categories of historical high risk, new design risk, and change risk set above, each working state unit can be analyzed one by one, and the working state risk units that have the above three types of risks can be identified.

[0080] Step S103: Determine the various output states of each working state risk unit. The output states include normal output with normal function, non-functional output with non-functional result, and abnormal output with normal function failure.

[0081] In the embodiments of this application, based on the working state risk units determined in the aforementioned steps, various output states that each working state risk unit can achieve can be determined, including normal output, non-functional output and abnormal output. In this embodiment, the output state can also be simply referred to as output.

[0082] Specifically, the implementation of each function of the product is accomplished through a series of multiple action state units, and each action state unit is determined by the corresponding working state unit of each functional module. By identifying the failure modes of the working state units, the failure modes of the product in the process of implementing the functions can be determined.

[0083] In this context, a failure mode refers to a state in which the expected function cannot be achieved. In this embodiment, the failure modes of the product or the working state unit may specifically include: loss of some or all functions of the product or the working state unit; intermittent loss of function of the product or the working state unit; excessively low performance of the product or the working state unit, resulting in a performance below a preset reasonable performance threshold; functional degradation of the product or the working state unit; and unexpected actions of the product or the working state unit.

[0084] In this embodiment, each working state unit of the product can consist of three parts: input, processing mechanism, and output. The function of the working state unit is realized through the output. That is, if the output of the working state unit meets the expected requirements, it means that the working state unit has achieved the expected function.

[0085] As can be seen, the output is the external response made by the working state unit after receiving the input and processing it through the processing mechanism. This response includes the expected response, that is, the normal output, as well as the unexpected response, such as non-functional outputs that are unrelated to the functional result, such as heat generation or noise, and abnormal outputs that belong to the aforementioned failure modes.

[0086] It should be noted that in some embodiments, non-functional outputs can also be considered as a type of failure mode.

[0087] Furthermore, the risk units of each working state identified above are analyzed. Specifically, all possible outputs are determined for each risk unit to identify the functional and non-functional outputs and any possible abnormal outputs.

[0088] In a specific example, as shown in Table 2 below, all possible outputs can be represented as a list:

[0089] Table 2. Functional Output Analysis Table

[0090]

[0091] In the first column, CX(i, j) represents the functional module C decomposed from Table 1 above. i Within all working state units, the working state risk units are identified; the second column represents the functional output of the working state risk unit; the third column represents the non-functional output that the working state risk unit may have; and the fourth column represents the abnormal output that the working state risk unit may have.

[0092] Step S104: Determine at least one input factor that each working state risk unit is subject to, and analyze the cause of failure of each working state risk unit based on the effect of each input factor on each working state risk unit.

[0093] In the embodiments of this application, based on each functional module determined in the foregoing steps, the input factors that each working state risk unit of the functional module is subjected to are determined. Based on this, according to the effect of each input factor on each working state risk unit, the causes of all possible failures of the working state risk unit are determined.

[0094] Specifically, as mentioned above, each working state unit consists of inputs, processing mechanisms, and outputs, where the outputs are determined by the inputs and processing mechanisms.

[0095] In this embodiment, the effect of the external environment on the functional module can be defined as the input of the functional module, such as substances, energy, or information received from outside the product; and the effects of other functional modules can also be defined as the input of the functional module.

[0096] It can be seen that the input to any functional module can be regarded as the input to the working state risk unit related to that functional module.

[0097] Furthermore, the inputs to a functional module can be divided into necessary inputs for achieving the function, and interference inputs that are irrelevant to achieving the function.

[0098] It should be noted that the input factors to be analyzed here include necessary inputs and interference inputs. Interference inputs may include, for example, various environmental stresses, positional interferences, or electromagnetic interferences. It should be noted that when analyzing the inputs, only the direct inputs of the functional module need to be analyzed, and indirect inputs transmitted through other modules need not be considered.

[0099] In specific examples, see Table 3 below:

[0100] Table 3 Input Factors - Work Status Risk Unit Interaction Matrix

[0101]

[0102] Among them, C i Let CX(i, j) represent any functional module of the product. i For any corresponding working state risk unit, E S Indicates functional module C i Any input factor that is subjected to.

[0103] Furthermore, as shown in Table 3, functional modules C are listed vertically. i Given all possible input factors Es in the product's workflow, list all the operational risk units CX(i, j) of the functional module horizontally. Based on this, an input factor-operational risk unit interaction matrix can be obtained.

[0104] The intersection point J(s, j) of the input factor-work state risk unit interaction matrix represents the effect of the input factor on the output state of the corresponding work state risk unit. Specifically, if there is a short-term effect, that is, a direct influence, then let J(s, j) = 1; if there is a long-term effect, that is, a cumulative effect, then let J(s, j) = 2; if there is no influence, then let J(s, j) = 0.

[0105] Based on this, the interaction matrix between input factors and work status risk units can be used to identify the effect of each input factor on the work status risk unit, and then the potential risks can be analyzed in the following way.

[0106] In this embodiment, it is necessary to analyze the processing mechanism of each working state risk unit. Specifically, it is possible to determine the specific processing procedure of the product when executing each working state risk unit, and identify the design parameters and influencing factors related to the processing procedure.

[0107] The influencing factors specifically include various factors that may affect normal output, such as design flaws, consistency differences, aging, or wear and tear, during the processing.

[0108] Based on this, the influence of design parameters and influencing factors on failure modes can be analyzed according to physical or logical relationships.

[0109] In a specific example, as shown in Table 4, the impact of processing mechanisms, design parameters, and influencing factors on the working state risk unit can be analyzed by listing them.

[0110] Table 4 Impact Analysis of Treatment Mechanisms

[0111]

[0112] Based on this, we can use Table 4 above, along with the input factors input to the working state risk unit CX(i, j), to analyze each abnormal output of the working state risk unit CX(i, j).

[0113] Specifically, the input factors, processing mechanisms, design parameters, and influencing factors corresponding to the abnormal output of the working state risk unit CX(i, j) are taken as a failure cause, and the specific effect of the current input factors on the abnormal output is determined to be either long-term or short-term, according to Table 3.

[0114] In another specific embodiment of this application, a gas water heater is used as a specific example of the product.

[0115] In this embodiment, by decomposing the functions and actions of the gas water heater, Table 5, described in the form of numerical codes, can be obtained as shown below. Each numerical code represents the working state executed by the corresponding working state unit.

[0116] Table 5. Interaction Matrix of Operation Status Units and Functional Modules of Gas Water Heaters

[0117]

[0118] The numerical codes in Table 5 above are explained in Table 6 below:

[0119] Table 6. Explanation of Numerical Codes

[0120]

[0121] Furthermore, based on the three risk categories of historical high risk, new design risk, and change risk set in the aforementioned embodiments, since the main solenoid valve's suction valve working state is a change design, the change is that the operating environment is changed from natural gas to liquefied gas; and since the proportional valve's proportional regulation working state has historical high risk, the main solenoid valve's suction valve working state and the proportional valve's proportional regulation working state in the working state unit can be determined as two working state risk units.

[0122] Furthermore, by analyzing the output states of the two working state risk units mentioned above, the functional output analysis table of the gas water heater shown in Table 7 below can be obtained:

[0123] Table 7. Functional Output Analysis of Gas Water Heaters

[0124]

[0125] Based on this, according to Table 7, the possible failure modes are: main solenoid valve not opening; main solenoid valve impact vibration; main solenoid valve noise; main solenoid valve overheating; proportional valve adjustment error; proportional valve noise; and proportional valve overheating.

[0126] Furthermore, by analyzing the inputs and outputs of the operational risk unit, risk-related input factors are identified. Among these, the inputs of solenoid valves and proportional valves, which are components of the gas system's electronic control operation, include electrical input, gas input, and environmental stress input, as detailed in Table 8 below:

[0127] Table 8 Input and Output Analysis Table

[0128]

[0129] Based on this, using Table 8 in conjunction with the input of environmental stress, we can obtain Tables 9 and 10 as shown below:

[0130] Table 9. Input Influence Analysis of Main Solenoid Valve Suction Valve

[0131]

[0132] Table 10. Input Influence Analysis of Proportional Valve Proportional Control

[0133]

[0134] Based on this, we can analyze the handling mechanism, input factors, design parameters, and influencing factors of two working state risk units: the suction valve working state of the main solenoid valve and the proportional regulation working state of the proportional valve. The results are shown in Table 11 below:

[0135] Table 11. Impact Analysis of Gas Water Heaters

[0136]

[0137] Furthermore, based on the analysis of input factors and processing mechanisms, failure cause analysis is performed on all possible failure modes identified. In this embodiment, the abnormal outputs of the two working state risk units, namely the suction valve working state of the main solenoid valve and the proportional regulation working state of the proportional valve, are analyzed.

[0138] Specifically, analyzing the interaction between input factors and processing mechanisms in abnormal output yields the following tables 12 and 13:

[0139] Table 12 Abnormal Output Analysis of Main Solenoid Valve's Suction Valve Operating Status

[0140]

[0141] Table 13. Abnormal Output Analysis Table for Proportional Valve Proportional Regulation Operation

[0142]

[0143] Based on this, and according to the analysis results listed in Tables 12 and 13, the abnormal output of the main solenoid valve's suction valve operation state can be obtained as follows: When the valve is not open, the cause of its failure is:

[0144] Insufficient drive voltage results in insufficient suction force to open the valve;

[0145] Alternatively, the valve may be designed with insufficient suction force, making it unable to open when the gas pressure is high.

[0146] Alternatively, the solenoid valve coil may degrade, resulting in a decrease in valve suction force and failure to open the valve.

[0147] Furthermore, the abnormal output of the proportional valve in its proportional control operation can be obtained as follows: When the proportional valve's control exceeds the tolerance, the cause of its failure is:

[0148] The proportional valve has an insufficient pressure regulation range and cannot meet the secondary pressure regulation performance requirements when the gas pressure is too low or too high.

[0149] Alternatively, the proportional valve may have an insufficient pressure regulation range, and may not be able to meet the secondary pressure regulation performance requirements when the gas pressure is too high or too low.

[0150] Alternatively, the proportional valve may have poor linearity in its IP curve under different pressures.

[0151] Alternatively, the driving current range may not match the proportional valve's regulating current range, resulting in insufficient secondary pressure regulation range.

[0152] As can be seen, the product function failure analysis method of the embodiments of this application obtains the working state units corresponding to each action and function based on the actions performed and functions implemented by the product, and comprehensively considers multiple risk distinctions to determine the risk units of the working state units with risks from multiple working state units. In this way, each working state risk unit is analyzed, and specifically, by determining the output state and input factors of each working state risk unit, and combining the processing mechanism, design parameters and influencing factors of the working state risk unit, abnormal outputs in the output state are analyzed, thereby obtaining the failure cause of the working state risk unit.

[0153] It should be noted that the method of the embodiments of this application can be executed by a single device, such as a computer or server. The method of this embodiment can also be applied in a distributed scenario, where multiple devices cooperate to complete the task. In such a distributed scenario, one of these devices may execute only one or more steps of the method of the embodiments of this application, and the multiple devices will interact with each other to complete the method described.

[0154] It should be noted that the above description describes some embodiments of this application. Other embodiments are within the scope of the appended claims. In some cases, the actions or steps recorded in the claims can be performed in a different order than that shown in the above embodiments and still achieve the desired result. Furthermore, the processes depicted in the drawings do not necessarily require a specific or sequential order to achieve the desired result. In some embodiments, multitasking and parallel processing are also possible or may be advantageous.

[0155] Based on the same inventive concept, and corresponding to the methods of any of the above embodiments, the embodiments of this application also provide a product function failure analysis device.

[0156] refer to Figure 2 The product function failure analysis device includes: a product action and function analysis module 201, a risk identification module 202, an output analysis module 203, and a failure analysis module 204.

[0157] The product action and function analysis module 201 is configured to determine the working state unit corresponding to each function when each action is performed, based on the actions performed and functions implemented by the product.

[0158] The risk identification module 202 is configured to set multiple risk categories and identify all working status units with any risk category as working status risk units.

[0159] The output analysis module 203 is configured to determine various output states of each working state risk unit, including normal output with normal function, non-functional output with non-functional result, and abnormal output with normal function failure.

[0160] The failure analysis module 204 is configured to determine at least one input factor that each working state risk unit is subjected to, and to analyze the cause of failure of each working state risk unit based on the effect of each input factor on each working state risk unit.

[0161] For ease of description, the above apparatus is described in terms of its functions, divided into various modules. Of course, in implementing the embodiments of this application, the functions of each module can be implemented in one or more software and / or hardware.

[0162] The apparatus described above is used to implement the failure analysis method for the corresponding product function in any of the foregoing embodiments, and has the beneficial effects of the corresponding method embodiments, which will not be repeated here.

[0163] Based on the same inventive concept, corresponding to the methods of any of the above embodiments, embodiments of this application also provide an electronic device, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor executes the program to implement the failure analysis method for the product function as described in any of the above embodiments.

[0164] Figure 3 This embodiment illustrates a more specific hardware structure of an electronic device. The device may include a processor 1010, a memory 1020, an input / output interface 1030, a communication interface 1040, and a bus 1050. The processor 1010, memory 1020, input / output interface 1030, and communication interface 1040 are interconnected internally via the bus 1050.

[0165] The processor 1010 can be implemented using a general-purpose CPU (Central Processing Unit), microprocessor, application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), or one or more integrated circuits, and is used to execute relevant programs to implement the technical solutions provided in the embodiments of this application.

[0166] The memory 1020 can be implemented in the form of ROM (Read Only Memory), RAM (Random Access Memory), static storage device, dynamic storage device, etc. The memory 1020 can store the operating system and other applications. When the technical solutions provided in the embodiments of this application are implemented by software or firmware, the relevant program code is stored in the memory 1020 and is called and executed by the processor 1010.

[0167] The input / output interface 1030 is used to connect input / output modules to realize information input and output. The input / output modules can be configured as components in the device (not shown in the figure) or externally connected to the device to provide corresponding functions. Input devices may include keyboards, mice, touch screens, microphones, various sensors, etc., and output devices may include displays, speakers, vibrators, indicator lights, etc.

[0168] The communication interface 1040 is used to connect a communication module (not shown in the figure) to enable communication between this device and other devices. The communication module can communicate via wired means (such as USB, Ethernet cable, etc.) or wireless means (such as mobile network, WIFI, Bluetooth, etc.).

[0169] Bus 1050 includes a pathway for transmitting information between various components of the device, such as processor 1010, memory 1020, input / output interface 1030, and communication interface 1040.

[0170] It should be noted that although the above-described device only shows the processor 1010, memory 1020, input / output interface 1030, communication interface 1040, and bus 1050, in specific implementations, the device may also include other components necessary for normal operation. Furthermore, those skilled in the art will understand that the above-described device may only include the components necessary for implementing the embodiments of this application, and not necessarily all the components shown in the figures.

[0171] The apparatus described above is used to implement the failure analysis method for the corresponding product function in any of the foregoing embodiments, and has the beneficial effects of the corresponding method embodiments, which will not be repeated here.

[0172] Based on the same inventive concept, corresponding to the methods of any of the above embodiments, this application also provides a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing computer instructions for causing the computer to execute the failure analysis method for the product function as described in any of the above embodiments.

[0173] The computer-readable medium of this embodiment includes permanent and non-permanent, removable and non-removable media, and information storage can be implemented by any method or technology. Information can be computer-readable instructions, data structures, program modules, or other data. Examples of computer storage media include, but are not limited to, phase-change memory (PRAM), static random access memory (SRAM), dynamic random access memory (DRAM), other types of random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), flash memory or other memory technologies, CD-ROM, digital versatile optical disc (DVD) or other optical storage, magnetic tape, magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other non-transfer medium that can be used to store information accessible by a computing device.

[0174] The computer instructions stored in the storage medium of the above embodiments are used to cause the computer to execute the product function failure analysis method as described in any of the above embodiments, and have the beneficial effects of the corresponding method embodiments, which will not be repeated here.

[0175] Those skilled in the art should understand that the discussion of any of the above embodiments is merely exemplary and is not intended to imply that the scope of this application (including the claims) is limited to these examples; within the framework of this application, the technical features of the above embodiments or different embodiments can also be combined, the steps can be implemented in any order, and there are many other variations of different aspects of the embodiments of this application as described above, which are not provided in the details for the sake of brevity.

[0176] Additionally, to simplify the description and discussion, and to avoid obscuring the embodiments of this application, the well-known power / ground connections to integrated circuit (IC) chips and other components may or may not be shown in the provided drawings. Furthermore, the apparatus may be shown in block diagram form to avoid obscuring the embodiments of this application, and this also takes into account the fact that the details of implementation of these block diagram apparatuses are highly dependent on the platform on which the embodiments of this application will be implemented (i.e., these details should be fully understood by those skilled in the art). While specific details (e.g., circuits) have been set forth to describe exemplary embodiments of this application, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that the embodiments of this application may be implemented without these specific details or with variations thereof. Therefore, these descriptions should be considered illustrative rather than restrictive.

[0177] Although this application has been described in conjunction with specific embodiments thereof, many substitutions, modifications, and variations of these embodiments will be apparent to those skilled in the art from the foregoing description. For example, other memory architectures (e.g., dynamic RAM (DRAM)) may be used with the embodiments discussed.

[0178] The embodiments of this application are intended to cover all such substitutions, modifications, and variations that fall within the broad scope of the appended claims. Therefore, any omissions, modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the spirit and principles of the embodiments of this application should be included within the protection scope of this application.

Claims

1. A method for failure analysis of product functions, characterized in that, include: Based on the actions performed and functions implemented by the product, determine the working state unit corresponding to each function when each action is performed; Multiple risk categories are set up, and the working status unit with any risk category among all working status units is determined as the working status risk unit. The various output states of each working state risk unit are determined, including normal output that outputs normal functions, non-functional output that outputs non-functional results, and abnormal output that indicates a failure of normal functions. Identify at least one input factor that each working state risk unit is subject to, and analyze the cause of failure of each working state risk unit based on the effect of each input factor on each working state risk unit; The setting of multiple risk categories includes: Work status units that have experienced functional or operational failures during historical work processes are designated as historically high-risk. Work state units that contain functions or actions of entirely new, unproven designs are designated as new design risks; The working state units where the working environment of the functional module changes, the working state units where the execution of the action changes, and the working state units where the constituent hardware changes are all set as change risk.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process of determining the working state unit corresponding to each function when performing each action, based on the actions performed and functions implemented by the product, includes: The product is divided into multiple functional modules according to the different functions it performs; The product is divided into multiple different action state units according to the timing of the different actions performed; By combining the various functional modules and the various action state units, the working state unit of each functional module of the product is obtained when executing the various action state units.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The analysis of the causes of failure of each working state risk unit based on the effect of each input factor on each working state risk unit includes: Determine the effect of each input factor on the output state of the risk unit in this working state; Determine the processing mechanisms, design parameters, and influencing factors that affect the output state when executing the risk unit of this working state; The abnormal outputs of the working state risk unit are analyzed using the processing mechanism, design parameters, influencing factors, and input factors.

4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, Determining the effect of each input factor on the output state of the working state risk unit includes: The effect of each input factor on each working state risk unit is determined according to the length of time it affects the action or function, and can be categorized as either long-term effect, short-term effect, or no effect.

5. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The determination of the processing mechanisms, design parameters, and influencing factors affecting the output state when executing the working state risk unit includes: The process by which the risk unit in the work status is determined to perform the corresponding action to achieve the corresponding function; The parameters set for executing the processing mechanism are determined for the working state risk unit; And identify the factors that affect the risk unit in the working state from performing corresponding actions to achieve the corresponding function.

6. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The analysis of the abnormal outputs occurring in the working state risk unit using the processing mechanism, design parameters, influencing factors, and input factors includes: For each abnormal output of each working state risk unit, at least one of the input factors, processing mechanisms, design parameters, and influencing factors corresponding to that abnormal output will be used as a cause of failure for that working state risk unit.

7. A product function failure analysis device, characterized in that, include: Product action and function analysis module, risk identification module, output analysis module, and failure analysis module; The product action and function analysis module is configured to determine the working state unit corresponding to each function when each action is performed, based on the actions performed and functions implemented by the product. The risk identification module is configured to set multiple risk categories and identify all working status units with any risk category as working status risk units. The output analysis module is configured to determine various output states of each working state risk unit, including normal output for normal functions, non-functional output for non-functional results, and abnormal output for normal function failure. The failure analysis module is configured to determine at least one input factor that each working state risk unit is subjected to, and analyze the cause of failure of each working state risk unit based on the effect of each input factor on each working state risk unit. The risk identification module includes: The historical high-risk setting unit is configured to set working state units that have experienced functional or operational failures during historical operation as historical high-risk. The new design risk setting unit is configured to set working state units containing functions or actions of unverified new designs as new design risks. The change risk setting unit is configured to set the working state unit where the working environment of the functional module changes, the working state unit where the execution of the action changes, and the working state unit where the constituent hardware changes as change risks.

8. An electronic device comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable by the processor, characterized in that, When the processor executes the computer program, it implements the method as described in any one of claims 1 to 6.

9. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that, The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium stores computer instructions for causing the computer to perform the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6.

Images