Method and device for determining vehicle system maintenance convenience evaluation score

Abstract

The invention provides a vehicle system maintenance convenience evaluation score determination method and device. The method comprises the following steps: setting a plurality of evaluation indexes for evaluating maintenance convenience of a to-be-evaluated system, and an evaluation standard of each evaluation index under each evaluation grade; determining an evaluation result of the vehicle part under each evaluation index according to the evaluation standard of each evaluation index under each evaluation grade; constructing an index evaluation matrix based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under each evaluation index, and obtaining a comprehensive evaluation matrix based on the index evaluation matrix and a preset weight set; and determining an evaluation score corresponding to the maintenance convenience of the to-be-evaluated system based on the score corresponding to each evaluation grade and the comprehensive evaluation matrix. Through the method and the device, the characteristics of all parts in the vehicle system are fully considered through an objective quantifiable method, and the finally obtained evaluation result is presented as a numerical value, so that the maintenance convenience is objectively evaluated.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the field of automobile technology, and in particular to a method and device for determining a vehicle system maintainability evaluation score. Background Art

[0002] As the number of cars in use continues to increase, the ease of maintenance of vehicle systems has received more and more attention. Good ease of maintenance can reduce customer waiting time, reduce maintenance costs, and help improve customers' overall evaluation of the car.

[0003] At present, the evaluation of vehicle system maintainability is mainly concentrated in the after-sales field, and maintenance personnel usually use maintenance time and maintenance cost as indicators for evaluation. However, since designers usually lack actual maintenance experience and lack simulation methods that conform to the actual situation, the two indicators of maintenance time and maintenance cost of different design schemes cannot be accurately estimated during the design stage, and thus cannot guide designers to improve the maintainability of vehicle systems. Therefore, how to accurately evaluate the maintainability of vehicle systems during the design stage has become a technical issue that cannot be underestimated. Summary of the invention

[0004] In view of this, the purpose of this application is to provide a method and device for determining a vehicle system maintainability evaluation score, which fully considers the characteristics of all parts in the vehicle system and avoids a single part from having a decisive influence on the system evaluation result. The final evaluation result is presented in a numerical value to facilitate the comparison of maintainability between different systems and models; at the same time, it can be applied to the product development stage to help designers identify maintainability issues in advance.

[0005] In a first aspect, an embodiment of the present application provides a method for determining a vehicle system maintainability evaluation score, the determination method comprising:

[0006] For a system to be evaluated in a vehicle that needs to be evaluated for maintainability, a plurality of vehicle parts belonging to the system to be evaluated are determined;

[0007] Setting a plurality of evaluation indicators for evaluating the maintainability of the system to be evaluated, and an evaluation standard for each evaluation indicator at each evaluation level;

[0008] For each vehicle part, according to the evaluation criteria of each evaluation index at each evaluation level, determine the evaluation result of the vehicle part under each evaluation index;

[0009] An index evaluation matrix is ​​constructed based on the evaluation results of each vehicle part under each evaluation index, and a comprehensive evaluation matrix is ​​obtained based on the index evaluation matrix and a preset weight set; wherein the preset weight set includes a weight value corresponding to each evaluation index;

[0010] The evaluation score corresponding to the maintenance convenience of the system to be evaluated is determined based on the score corresponding to each evaluation level and the comprehensive evaluation matrix.

[0011] Further, the evaluation index includes a repeatability index, a weight index, a disassembly step index, a disassembly torque index, a peripheral part disassembly step index, a visibility index, an operation space index, a maintenance personnel index, a special equipment requirement index, and a fatigue index;

[0012] The evaluation levels include excellent, good, fair and unsatisfactory.

[0013] Furthermore, the index evaluation matrix is ​​constructed based on the evaluation results of each vehicle part under each evaluation index, including:

[0014] For each evaluation index, the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of the evaluation index is calculated based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under the evaluation index;

[0015] The indicator evaluation matrix is ​​constructed based on the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of each evaluation indicator.

[0016] Furthermore, the calculation of the degree of membership corresponding to each evaluation level of the evaluation index based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under the evaluation index includes:

[0017] For each evaluation level of the evaluation indicator, the number of vehicle parts evaluation results belonging to the evaluation level under the evaluation indicator is counted;

[0018] The degree of membership corresponding to the evaluation level is calculated based on the quantity and the total quantity of the plurality of vehicle parts.

[0019] Furthermore, the step of determining the evaluation score corresponding to the maintainability of the system to be evaluated based on the score corresponding to each evaluation level and the comprehensive evaluation matrix includes:

[0020] Set the score corresponding to the evaluation level to obtain an evaluation score set;

[0021] Transposing the comprehensive evaluation matrix to obtain a transposed matrix;

[0022] The transposed matrix is ​​multiplied by the evaluation score set to obtain the evaluation score.

[0023] In a second aspect, an embodiment of the present application further provides a device for determining a vehicle system maintainability evaluation score, the device comprising:

[0024] A vehicle parts determination module, for determining a plurality of vehicle parts belonging to a system to be evaluated that needs to be evaluated for maintainability in a vehicle;

[0025] An evaluation standard setting module, used to set a plurality of evaluation indicators for evaluating the maintenance convenience of the system to be evaluated, and an evaluation standard for each evaluation indicator at each evaluation level;

[0026] An evaluation result determination module is used to determine the evaluation result of each vehicle part under each evaluation index according to the evaluation criteria of each evaluation index under each evaluation level;

[0027] An evaluation matrix determination module, used to construct an index evaluation matrix based on the evaluation results of each vehicle part under each evaluation index, and obtain a comprehensive evaluation matrix based on the index evaluation matrix and a preset weight set; wherein the preset weight set includes a weight value corresponding to each evaluation index;

[0028] The evaluation score determination module is used to determine the evaluation score corresponding to the maintenance convenience of the system to be evaluated based on the score corresponding to each evaluation level and the comprehensive evaluation matrix.

[0029] Further, the evaluation index includes a repeatability index, a weight index, a disassembly step index, a disassembly torque index, a peripheral part disassembly step index, a visibility index, an operation space index, a maintenance personnel index, a special equipment requirement index, and a fatigue index;

[0030] The evaluation levels include excellent, good, fair and unsatisfactory.

[0031] Furthermore, when the evaluation matrix determination module is used to construct an index evaluation matrix based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under each evaluation index, the evaluation matrix determination module is also used to:

[0032] For each evaluation index, the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of the evaluation index is calculated based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under the evaluation index;

[0033] The indicator evaluation matrix is ​​constructed based on the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of each evaluation indicator.

[0034] In a third aspect, an embodiment of the present application further provides an electronic device, comprising: a processor, a memory and a bus, wherein the memory stores machine-readable instructions executable by the processor, and when the electronic device is running, the processor and the memory communicate via the bus, and when the machine-readable instructions are executed by the processor, the steps of the method for determining the vehicle system maintainability evaluation score as described above are performed.

[0035] In a fourth aspect, an embodiment of the present application further provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps of the method for determining the vehicle system maintainability evaluation score as described above are executed.

[0036] The embodiment of the present application provides a method and device for determining a vehicle system maintainability evaluation score. First, for a system to be evaluated in a vehicle that needs to be evaluated for maintainability, multiple vehicle parts belonging to the system to be evaluated are determined; multiple evaluation indicators for evaluating the maintainability of the system to be evaluated, and evaluation criteria for each evaluation indicator at each evaluation level are set; for each vehicle part, the evaluation result of the vehicle part under each evaluation indicator is determined according to the evaluation criteria for each evaluation indicator at each evaluation level; an indicator evaluation matrix is ​​constructed based on the evaluation results of each vehicle part under each evaluation indicator, and a comprehensive evaluation matrix is ​​obtained based on the indicator evaluation matrix and a preset weight set; wherein the preset weight set includes weight values ​​corresponding to each evaluation indicator; finally, the evaluation score corresponding to the maintainability of the system to be evaluated is determined based on the score corresponding to each evaluation level and the comprehensive evaluation matrix.

[0037] This application uses a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to construct multiple evaluation indicators, each evaluation level, indicator evaluation matrix and weight set, and finally constructs a comprehensive evaluation matrix, assigns values ​​to the evaluation levels, and calculates the score of the vehicle system's maintainability. This application assists designers in optimizing design solutions through an objective and quantifiable evaluation score determination method. The determination method provided by this application can be applied to both simple systems with fewer parts and complex systems with more parts, and has a wide range of applications. In addition, the characteristics of all parts in the vehicle system are fully considered to avoid a single part from having a decisive impact on the system evaluation results. The evaluation results can represent the comprehensive level of all parts in the system. The final evaluation results are presented in numerical values, which is convenient for comparison of the maintainability between different systems and models; at the same time, it can be applied to the product development stage to help designers identify maintainability issues in advance.

[0038] In order to make the above-mentioned objects, features and advantages of the present application more obvious and easy to understand, preferred embodiments are specifically cited below and described in detail with reference to the attached drawings. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0039] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present application, the drawings required for use in the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. It should be understood that the following drawings only show certain embodiments of the present application and therefore should not be regarded as limiting the scope. For ordinary technicians in this field, other related drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without paying creative work.

[0040] Figure 1 A flowchart of a method for determining a vehicle system maintainability evaluation score provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0041] Figure 2 A visual window area division diagram provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0042] Figure 3 A schematic diagram of the structure of a device for determining a vehicle system maintainability evaluation score provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0043] Figure 4 A schematic diagram of the structure of an electronic device provided in an embodiment of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0044] To make the purpose, technical scheme and advantages of the embodiments of the present application clearer, the technical scheme in the embodiments of the present application will be clearly and completely described below in conjunction with the drawings in the embodiments of the present application. Obviously, the described embodiments are only a part of the embodiments of the present application, rather than all of the embodiments. The components of the embodiments of the present application usually described and shown in the drawings here can be arranged and designed in various different configurations. Therefore, the following detailed description of the embodiments of the present application provided in the drawings is not intended to limit the scope of the application claimed for protection, but merely represents the selected embodiments of the present application. Based on the embodiments of the present application, each other embodiment obtained by those skilled in the art without making creative work belongs to the scope of protection of the present application.

[0045] First, the application scenarios to which the present application is applicable are introduced. The present application can be applied in the field of automotive technology.

[0046] As the number of cars in use continues to increase, the ease of maintenance of vehicle systems has received more and more attention. Good ease of maintenance can reduce customer waiting time, reduce maintenance costs, and help improve customers' overall evaluation of the car.

[0047] Research has found that, at present, the evaluation of vehicle system maintainability is mainly concentrated in the after-sales field, and maintenance personnel usually use maintenance time and maintenance cost as indicators for evaluation. However, since designers usually lack actual maintenance experience and lack simulation methods that conform to the actual situation, the two indicators of maintenance time and maintenance cost of different design schemes cannot be accurately estimated during the design stage, and thus cannot guide designers to improve the maintainability of vehicle systems. Therefore, how to objectively evaluate the maintainability of vehicle systems during the design stage has become a technical issue that cannot be underestimated.

[0048] Based on this, an embodiment of the present application provides a method for determining a vehicle system maintainability evaluation score, which fully considers the characteristics of all parts in the vehicle system and avoids a single part from having a decisive influence on the system evaluation result. The final evaluation result is presented in a numerical value to facilitate the comparison of maintainability between different systems and models. It can also be applied to the product development stage to help designers identify maintainability issues in advance.

[0049] See also Figure 1 , Figure 1 This is a flow chart of a method for determining a vehicle system maintenance convenience evaluation score provided in an embodiment of the present application. Figure 1 As shown in , the determination method provided in the embodiment of the present application includes:

[0050] S101, for a system to be evaluated in a vehicle that needs to be evaluated for maintainability, a plurality of vehicle parts belonging to the system to be evaluated are determined.

[0051] Here, the system to be evaluated refers to a certain parts system in the vehicle, and the vehicle parts are multiple parts belonging to the parts system.

[0052] For the above step S101, in the specific implementation, first determine the system to be evaluated in the vehicle that needs to be evaluated for ease of maintenance, and determine multiple vehicle parts belonging to the system to be evaluated. Here, as an example, the front bumper and surrounding parts of a certain vehicle are taken as a system to be evaluated, and the ease of maintenance of the system to be evaluated is studied. The system to be evaluated includes the front bumper mask, front bumper wiring harness, sensor 1, sensor 2, radiator grille, upper left decorative plate of the grille, upper right decorative plate of the grille, left front combination lamp 1, right front combination lamp 1, left front combination lamp 2, right front combination lamp 2, left lower air deflector, right lower air deflector and upper air deflector of the vehicle, a total of 14 vehicle parts.

[0053] S102, setting a plurality of evaluation indicators for evaluating the maintainability of the system to be evaluated, and an evaluation standard for each evaluation indicator at each evaluation level.

[0054] Regarding the above step S102, in a specific implementation, multiple evaluation indicators for evaluating the maintainability of the system to be evaluated, as well as evaluation criteria for each evaluation indicator at each evaluation level are set.

[0055] Please refer to Table 1 below, which is a classification table of evaluation indicators provided in the embodiments of the present application. Specifically, according to the embodiments provided in the present application, the multiple evaluation indicators for evaluating the maintenance convenience of the system to be evaluated include a repeatable disassembly index, a weight index, a disassembly step index, a disassembly torque index, a peripheral part disassembly step index, a visibility index, an operating space index, a maintenance personnel index, a special equipment requirement index, and a fatigue index. The evaluation levels include excellent, good, medium, and unsatisfactory.

[0056] Table 1 Classification of evaluation indicators

[0057]

[0058]

[0059] Here, mathematical statistics, CATIA assembly simulation, ergonomics analysis and qualitative analysis are used to set the evaluation criteria for each evaluation indicator at each evaluation level.

[0060] Specifically, the evaluation criteria for the repeatable disassembly index at each evaluation level are: repeatable disassembly is excellent, and non-repeatable disassembly is unsatisfactory;

[0061] The evaluation criteria for weight standards at each evaluation level are as follows: the weight of a vehicle part is counted and arranged in ascending order, with the top 15%, top 50%, and top 95% of all weight data as grading nodes, (0, 23]g as excellent, (23, 193.3]g as good, (193.3, 6803.5]g as medium, and (6803.5, +∞]g as unqualified;

[0062] The evaluation criteria for the disassembly step index at each evaluation level are as follows: the disassembly steps of a vehicle part are counted and arranged in ascending order, with the top 15%, top 50%, and top 95% of all disassembly steps as grading nodes, (0, 2] steps as excellent, (2, 4] steps as good, (4, 17] steps as medium, and (17, +∞] steps as unsatisfactory;

[0063] The evaluation criteria for the disassembly torque index at each evaluation level are as follows: the disassembly torque of a vehicle part is counted and arranged in ascending order, with the top 15%, top 50%, and top 95% of all disassembly torques as grading nodes, (0, 21] N·m as excellent, (21, 65] N·m as good, (65, 229] N·m as medium, and (229, +∞] N·m as unqualified;

[0064] The evaluation criteria for the number of disassembly steps of peripheral parts at each evaluation level are as follows: the same as the disassembly step grading criteria, that is, (0, 2] steps are excellent, (2, 4] steps are good, (4, 17] steps are medium, and (17, +∞] steps are unsatisfactory;

[0065] The evaluation criteria for visibility indicators at each evaluation level are: Based on the CATIA ergonomics design and analysis module, static simulation of maintenance personnel's working posture is performed, and the Open Vision Window command is used to observe the target parts. Figure 2 , Figure 2 A visual window area division diagram provided in an embodiment of the present application. Figure 2 As shown, the visual range is divided into three areas of "Ⅰ, Ⅱ, and Ⅲ". If all target parts fall in area "Ⅰ", it is excellent; if part of the target parts fall in area "Ⅰ" and part of the target parts fall in area "Ⅱ", it is good; if part of the target parts fall in area "Ⅲ", it is medium; if the target parts do not fall in the visual window, it is unsatisfactory.

[0066] The evaluation criteria for the operating space index at each evaluation level are as follows: Based on the CATIA assembly design module, the operating tool is assembled and simulated. α is the maximum movement angle of the torque wrench, α≥60° ​​is excellent, 30°≤α<60° is good, and 0°<α<30° is medium;

[0067] The evaluation criteria for the maintenance personnel indicator at each evaluation level are: 1 person is excellent, 2 people are good, 3 people are average, and more than 3 people are unsatisfactory;

[0068] The evaluation criteria for the special equipment demand indicator at each evaluation level are: no special equipment required is excellent, and special equipment required is unsatisfactory;

[0069] The evaluation criteria for the fatigue level index at each evaluation level are: using CATIA ergonomics design and analysis module, adopting the RULA method to analyze human posture, green for excellent, yellow for good, orange for medium, and red for unsatisfactory.

[0070] S103, for each vehicle part, according to the evaluation criteria of each evaluation indicator at each evaluation level, determining the evaluation result of the vehicle part under each evaluation indicator.

[0071] With respect to the above step S103, in the specific implementation, for each vehicle part, according to the evaluation criteria of each evaluation index at each evaluation level, the evaluation result of the vehicle part under each evaluation index is determined. Continuing with the above embodiment, please refer to the following Table 2, which is a table of evaluation results of each vehicle part under each evaluation index provided in the embodiment of the present application. As shown in the following Table 2, the evaluation result of each vehicle part under each evaluation index can be determined.

[0072] Table 2 Evaluation results of various vehicle parts under various evaluation indicators

[0073]

[0074] S104, constructing an index evaluation matrix based on the evaluation results of each vehicle part under each evaluation index, and obtaining a comprehensive evaluation matrix based on the index evaluation matrix and a preset weight set.

[0075] Here, the preset weight set includes the weight value corresponding to each evaluation index. Specifically, construct a weight set W, W = {w1, w2, w3, w4, w5, w6, w7, w8, w9, w 10 According to the embodiment provided by the present application, the weights of repeatable disassembly, weight, number of disassembly steps, disassembly torque, number of disassembly steps of peripheral parts, visibility, operating space, number of maintenance personnel, special equipment requirements, and fatigue level are 0.0483, 0.0199, 0.0107, 0.0096, 0.1666, 0.1522, 0.1206, 0.2027, 0.2166, and 0.0528, respectively. Therefore, the preset weight set is expressed as: W = {0.0483, 0.0199, 0.0107, 0.0096, 0.1666, 0.1522, 0.1206, 0.2027, 0.2166, 0.0528}.

[0076] For the above step S104, in the specific implementation, after determining the evaluation result of each vehicle part under each evaluation index, an index evaluation matrix R is constructed based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under each evaluation index. Then, the index evaluation matrix is ​​multiplied by the preset weight set to obtain a comprehensive evaluation matrix. Here, the comprehensive evaluation matrix Z=W·R is calculated by the following formula.

[0077] As an optional embodiment, with respect to the above step S104, constructing an index evaluation matrix based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under each evaluation index includes:

[0078] Step 1041 , for each evaluation indicator, the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of the evaluation indicator is calculated based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under the evaluation indicator.

[0079] Regarding the above step 1041, during the specific implementation, for each evaluation indicator, the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of the evaluation indicator is calculated based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under the evaluation indicator.

[0080] Specifically, with respect to the above step 1041, the calculation of the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of the evaluation index based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under the evaluation index includes:

[0081] Step 10411, for each evaluation level of the evaluation indicator, count the number of evaluation results of vehicle parts belonging to the evaluation level under the evaluation indicator.

[0082] Step 10412, calculating the degree of membership corresponding to the evaluation level based on the quantity and the total quantity of multiple vehicle parts.

[0083] In the specific implementation of the above steps 10411 to 10412, for each evaluation level of the evaluation indicator, the number of vehicle parts evaluation results belonging to the evaluation level under the evaluation indicator is first counted, and then the membership degree corresponding to the evaluation level is calculated based on the above number and the total number of multiple vehicle parts. Specifically, the membership degree corresponding to the evaluation level is calculated by the following formula:

[0084]

[0085] Among them, r ij is the evaluation index u i The membership degree corresponding to the evaluation level j, n is the total number of all vehicle parts in the system to be evaluated, n ij is the evaluation index u of all vehicle parts in the system to be evaluated i The number of vehicle parts that are at level j (j = excellent, good, fair, unsatisfactory).

[0086] Step 1042, constructing the indicator evaluation matrix based on the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of each evaluation indicator.

[0087] For the above step 1042, in the specific implementation, after calculating the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of each evaluation indicator, the indicator evaluation matrix R is constructed based on the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of each evaluation indicator. Here, the indicator evaluation matrix R is expressed as:

[0088]

[0089] Here, continuing the embodiment in Table 2, the constructed index evaluation matrix R is expressed as:

[0090]

[0091] Furthermore, according to the above indicator evaluation matrix R, it can be determined that the comprehensive evaluation matrix Z is: Z=W·R=(0.71166, 0.10876, 0.01454, 0.16504).

[0092] S105: Determine the evaluation score corresponding to the maintainability of the system to be evaluated based on the score corresponding to each evaluation level and the comprehensive evaluation matrix.

[0093] Regarding the above step S105, in specific implementation, based on the score corresponding to each evaluation level and the comprehensive evaluation matrix Z, the evaluation score corresponding to the maintainability of the system to be evaluated is determined.

[0094] With respect to the above step S105, the step of determining the evaluation score corresponding to the maintainability of the system to be evaluated based on the score corresponding to each evaluation level and the comprehensive evaluation matrix includes:

[0095] Step 1051, setting the score corresponding to the evaluation level to obtain an evaluation score set.

[0096] In the specific implementation of step 1051, the scores corresponding to the evaluation levels are first set. Here, as an example, the score corresponding to the excellent level is 100, the score corresponding to the good level is 80, the score corresponding to the medium level is 60, and the score corresponding to the failing level is 40. Then the evaluation score set is expressed as V = {v1, v2, ..., v m}={100,80,60,40}.

[0097] Step 1052, transpose the comprehensive evaluation matrix to obtain a transposed matrix.

[0098] Step 1053: multiply the transposed matrix by the evaluation score set to obtain the evaluation score.

[0099] Regarding the above steps 1052 to 1053, in the specific implementation, the comprehensive evaluation matrix Z obtained in step S104 is transposed to obtain a transposed matrix Z T Then transpose the matrix Z T Multiplying it with the evaluation score set V, we can get the evaluation score, which is expressed as S = V·Z T Continuing with the above embodiment, when the comprehensive evaluation matrix Z = (0.71166, 0.10876, 0.01454, 0.16504), the evaluation score S = V·Z T =87.34.

[0100] A method for determining a vehicle system maintainability evaluation score provided in an embodiment of the present application comprises the following steps: first, for a system to be evaluated in a vehicle that needs to be evaluated for maintainability, a plurality of vehicle parts belonging to the system to be evaluated are determined; a plurality of evaluation indicators for evaluating the maintainability of the system to be evaluated, and an evaluation standard for each evaluation indicator at each evaluation level are set; for each vehicle part, an evaluation result of the vehicle part under each evaluation indicator is determined according to the evaluation standard for each evaluation indicator at each evaluation level; an indicator evaluation matrix is ​​constructed based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under each evaluation indicator, and a comprehensive evaluation matrix is ​​obtained based on the indicator evaluation matrix and a preset weight set; wherein the preset weight set includes a weight value corresponding to each evaluation indicator; finally, an evaluation score corresponding to the maintainability of the system to be evaluated is determined based on the score corresponding to each evaluation level and the comprehensive evaluation matrix.

[0101] This application uses a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to construct multiple evaluation indicators, each evaluation level, indicator evaluation matrix and weight set, and finally constructs a comprehensive evaluation matrix, assigns values ​​to the evaluation levels, and calculates the score of the vehicle system's maintainability. This application assists designers in optimizing design solutions through an objective and quantifiable evaluation score determination method. The determination method provided by this application can be applied to both simple systems with fewer parts and complex systems with more parts, and has a wide range of applications. In addition, the characteristics of all parts in the vehicle system are fully considered to avoid a single part from having a decisive impact on the system evaluation results. The evaluation results can represent the comprehensive level of all parts in the system. The final evaluation results are presented in numerical values, which is convenient for comparison of the maintainability between different systems and models; at the same time, it can be applied to the product development stage to help designers identify maintainability issues in advance.

[0102] See also Figure 3 , Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of a device for determining a vehicle system maintenance convenience evaluation score provided in an embodiment of the present application. Figure 3 As shown in , the determining device 300 includes:

[0103] The vehicle parts determination module 301 is used to determine a plurality of vehicle parts belonging to the system to be evaluated for the system to be evaluated for the maintainability of the vehicle;

[0104] An evaluation standard setting module 302 is used to set a plurality of evaluation indicators for evaluating the maintenance convenience of the system to be evaluated, and an evaluation standard for each evaluation indicator at each evaluation level;

[0105] An evaluation result determination module 303 is used to determine, for each vehicle part, an evaluation result of the vehicle part under each evaluation index according to the evaluation criteria of each evaluation index under each evaluation level;

[0106] An evaluation matrix determination module 304 is used to construct an index evaluation matrix based on the evaluation results of each vehicle part under each evaluation index, and obtain a comprehensive evaluation matrix based on the index evaluation matrix and a preset weight set; wherein the preset weight set includes a weight value corresponding to each evaluation index;

[0107] The evaluation score determination module 305 is used to determine the evaluation score corresponding to the maintenance convenience of the system to be evaluated based on the score corresponding to each evaluation level and the comprehensive evaluation matrix.

[0108] Further, the evaluation index includes a repeatability index, a weight index, a disassembly step index, a disassembly torque index, a peripheral part disassembly step index, a visibility index, an operation space index, a maintenance personnel index, a special equipment requirement index, and a fatigue index;

[0109] The evaluation levels include excellent, good, fair and unsatisfactory.

[0110] Furthermore, when the evaluation matrix determination module 304 is used to construct an index evaluation matrix based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under each evaluation index, the evaluation matrix determination module 304 is also used to:

[0111] For each evaluation index, the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of the evaluation index is calculated based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under the evaluation index;

[0112] The indicator evaluation matrix is ​​constructed based on the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of each evaluation indicator.

[0113] Furthermore, when the evaluation matrix determination module 304 is used to calculate the degree of membership corresponding to each evaluation level of the evaluation index based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under the evaluation index, the evaluation matrix determination module 304 is also used to:

[0114] For each evaluation level of the evaluation indicator, the number of vehicle parts evaluation results belonging to the evaluation level under the evaluation indicator is counted;

[0115] The degree of membership corresponding to the evaluation level is calculated based on the quantity and the total quantity of the plurality of vehicle parts.

[0116] Furthermore, when the evaluation score determination module 305 is used to determine the evaluation score corresponding to the maintenance convenience of the system to be evaluated based on the score corresponding to each evaluation level and the comprehensive evaluation matrix, the evaluation score determination module 305 is also used to:

[0117] Set the score corresponding to the evaluation level to obtain an evaluation score set;

[0118] Transposing the comprehensive evaluation matrix to obtain a transposed matrix;

[0119] The transposed matrix is ​​multiplied by the evaluation score set to obtain the evaluation score.

[0120] See also Figure 4 , Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of an electronic device provided in an embodiment of the present application. Figure 4 As shown in , the electronic device 400 includes a processor 410 , a memory 420 and a bus 430 .

[0121] The memory 420 stores machine-readable instructions executable by the processor 410. When the electronic device 400 is running, the processor 410 communicates with the memory 420 via the bus 430. When the machine-readable instructions are executed by the processor 410, the above-mentioned Figure 1 The steps of the method for determining the vehicle system maintainability evaluation score in the method embodiment shown in the embodiment and the specific implementation thereof can be referred to the method embodiment, which will not be described in detail here.

[0122] The present application also provides a computer-readable storage medium on which a computer program is stored. When the computer program is executed by a processor, the computer program can execute the above-mentioned Figure 1 The steps of the method for determining the vehicle system maintainability evaluation score in the method embodiment shown in the embodiment and the specific implementation thereof can be referred to the method embodiment, which will not be described in detail here.

[0123] Those skilled in the art can clearly understand that, for the convenience and brevity of description, the specific working processes of the systems, devices and units described above can refer to the corresponding processes in the aforementioned method embodiments and will not be repeated here.

[0124] In the several embodiments provided in the present application, it should be understood that the disclosed systems, devices and methods can be implemented in other ways. The device embodiments described above are merely schematic. For example, the division of the units is only a logical function division. There may be other division methods in actual implementation. For example, multiple units or components can be combined or integrated into another system, or some features can be ignored or not executed. Another point is that the mutual coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed can be through some communication interfaces, and the indirect coupling or communication connection of devices or units can be electrical, mechanical or other forms.

[0125] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separated, and the components shown as units may or may not be physical units, that is, they may be located in one place or distributed on multiple network units. Some or all of the units may be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the solution of this embodiment.

[0126] In addition, each functional unit in each embodiment of the present application may be integrated into one processing unit, or each unit may exist physically separately, or two or more units may be integrated into one unit.

[0127] If the functions are implemented in the form of software functional units and sold or used as independent products, they can be stored in a non-volatile computer-readable storage medium that is executable by a processor. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the present application can essentially be embodied in the form of a software product, or in other words, the part that contributes to the prior art or the part of the technical solution. The computer software product is stored in a storage medium, including several instructions for a computer device (which can be a personal computer, a server, or a network device, etc.) to perform all or part of the steps of the method described in each embodiment of the present application. The aforementioned storage medium includes: various media that can store program codes, such as a USB flash drive, a mobile hard disk, a read-only memory (ROM), a random access memory (RAM), a magnetic disk or an optical disk.

[0128] Finally, it should be noted that the above-described embodiments are only specific implementation methods of the present application, which are used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present application, rather than to limit them. The protection scope of the present application is not limited thereto. Although the present application is described in detail with reference to the above-mentioned embodiments, ordinary technicians in the field should understand that any technician familiar with the technical field can still modify the technical solutions recorded in the above-mentioned embodiments within the technical scope disclosed in the present application, or can easily think of changes, or make equivalent replacements for some of the technical features therein; and these modifications, changes or replacements do not make the essence of the corresponding technical solutions deviate from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present application, and should be included in the protection scope of the present application. Therefore, the protection scope of the present application shall be based on the protection scope of the claims.

Claims

1. A method for determining a vehicle system maintainability evaluation score, characterized in that: The determination method comprises: For a system to be evaluated in a vehicle that needs to be evaluated for maintainability, a plurality of vehicle parts belonging to the system to be evaluated are determined; Setting a plurality of evaluation indicators for evaluating the maintainability of the system to be evaluated, and an evaluation standard for each evaluation indicator at each evaluation level; For each vehicle part, according to the evaluation criteria of each evaluation index at each evaluation level, determine the evaluation result of the vehicle part under each evaluation index; An index evaluation matrix is ​​constructed based on the evaluation results of each vehicle part under each evaluation index, and a comprehensive evaluation matrix is ​​obtained based on the index evaluation matrix and a preset weight set; wherein the preset weight set includes a weight value corresponding to each evaluation index; The evaluation score corresponding to the maintenance convenience of the system to be evaluated is determined based on the score corresponding to each evaluation level and the comprehensive evaluation matrix.

2. The determination method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The evaluation indicators include repeatability index, weight index, disassembly step index, disassembly torque index, peripheral parts disassembly step index, visibility index, operation space index, maintenance personnel index, special equipment requirement index and fatigue index; The evaluation levels include excellent, good, fair and unsatisfactory.

3. The determination method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The index evaluation matrix is ​​constructed based on the evaluation results of each vehicle part under each evaluation index, including: For each evaluation index, the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of the evaluation index is calculated based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under the evaluation index; The indicator evaluation matrix is ​​constructed based on the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of each evaluation indicator.

4. The determination method according to claim 3, characterized in that: The calculation of the degree of membership corresponding to each evaluation level of the evaluation index based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under the evaluation index includes: For each evaluation level of the evaluation indicator, the number of evaluation results of vehicle parts belonging to the evaluation level under the evaluation indicator is counted; The degree of membership corresponding to the evaluation level is calculated based on the quantity and the total quantity of the plurality of vehicle parts.

5. The determination method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The step of determining the evaluation score corresponding to the maintenance convenience of the system to be evaluated based on the score corresponding to each evaluation level and the comprehensive evaluation matrix includes: Set the score corresponding to the evaluation level to obtain an evaluation score set; Transposing the comprehensive evaluation matrix to obtain a transposed matrix; The transposed matrix is ​​multiplied by the evaluation score set to obtain the evaluation score.

6. A device for determining a vehicle system maintainability evaluation score, characterized in that: The determining device comprises: A vehicle parts determination module, for determining a plurality of vehicle parts belonging to a system to be evaluated that needs to be evaluated for maintainability in a vehicle; An evaluation standard setting module, used to set a plurality of evaluation indicators for evaluating the maintenance convenience of the system to be evaluated, and an evaluation standard for each evaluation indicator at each evaluation level; An evaluation result determination module is used to determine the evaluation result of each vehicle part under each evaluation index according to the evaluation criteria of each evaluation index under each evaluation level; An evaluation matrix determination module, used to construct an index evaluation matrix based on the evaluation results of each vehicle part under each evaluation index, and obtain a comprehensive evaluation matrix based on the index evaluation matrix and a preset weight set; wherein the preset weight set includes a weight value corresponding to each evaluation index; The evaluation score determination module is used to determine the evaluation score corresponding to the maintenance convenience of the system to be evaluated based on the score corresponding to each evaluation level and the comprehensive evaluation matrix.

7. The determination device according to claim 6, characterized in that: The evaluation indicators include repeatability index, weight index, disassembly step index, disassembly torque index, peripheral parts disassembly step index, visibility index, operation space index, maintenance personnel index, special equipment requirement index and fatigue index; The evaluation levels include excellent, good, fair and unsatisfactory.

8. The determination device according to claim 6, characterized in that: When the evaluation matrix determination module is used to construct an index evaluation matrix based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under each evaluation index, the evaluation matrix determination module is also used to: For each evaluation index, the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of the evaluation index is calculated based on the evaluation result of each vehicle part under the evaluation index; The indicator evaluation matrix is ​​constructed based on the membership degree corresponding to each evaluation level of each evaluation indicator.

9. An electronic device, characterized in that: include: A processor, a memory and a bus, wherein the memory stores machine-readable instructions executable by the processor, and when the electronic device is running, the processor and the memory communicate through the bus, and the machine-readable instructions are executed by the processor to execute the steps of the method for determining the vehicle system maintainability evaluation score as described in any one of claims 1 to 5.

10. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that: The computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps of the method for determining a vehicle system maintainability evaluation score according to any one of claims 1 to 5 are executed.

Images