Comprehensive fault design method based on servitization

Abstract

The invention belongs to the field of avionics testability engineering, and relates to a servitization-based fault comprehensive design method, which comprises the following steps of: 1, establishing a fault comprehensive matrix to characterize correlation between a test item and a fault in a fault list; 2, constructing a correlation matrix DFL of the system function failure mode and faults in the fault list; 3, determining the correlation from the system function failure mode to a lower-level function failure mode; step 4, analyzing the correlation between the test item and the function failure mode of each level; 5, calculating the correlation between the system function failure mode and the test item; 6, calculating a fault comprehensive matrix; and step 7, forming fault comprehensive logic.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention belongs to the field of avionics product testability engineering and relates to a service-based fault comprehensive design method. Background Art

[0002] With the increasing integration of aviation products, the hardware and software components of avionics systems and their failure mechanisms are becoming more complex. Large-volume, multi-level, and strongly coupled fault information poses a huge challenge to fault integration. The current fault detection data of airborne electronic products is huge and complex. Many faults follow the principle of single fault reporting and display the fault name in the fault list. A few designs with fault integration only perform simple logical operations on a small number of key signals, and often when a fault occurs, the fault is not reported or the reported fault is irrelevant. At the same time, the traditional fault integration design is limited by the progress of test item design and development, and often lags behind the progress of product development, resulting in insufficient product fault integration design, and the field joint test cannot fully verify the accuracy of the fault integration design. Summary of the invention

[0003] The purpose of the present invention is to provide a fault comprehensive design method based on service, decouple the test item design and fault comprehensive design based on the service-oriented idea, form the service party to publish event requirements before the development of the fault comprehensive software, define the requirements for the interface provided by the test item, and then perform fault comprehensive design for the event of the interface, so that the fault comprehensive design is not affected by the progress of the test item design and development. At the same time, according to the fault comprehensive logic of multi-fault tree identification of fault modes between different levels, the algorithm eliminates non-related items, generates the correlation matrix between the test item results and the reported faults, and realizes the fault comprehensive logic.

[0004] The technical solution of the present invention:

[0005] A comprehensive fault design method based on service, comprising the following steps:

[0006] Step 1: Establish a comprehensive fault matrix to characterize the correlation between test items and faults in the fault list;

[0007] Step 2: Construct the correlation matrix D between the system functional failure mode and the faults in the fault list FL ;

[0008] Step 3: Determine the relevance of system functional failure modes to lower-level functional failure modes;

[0009] Step 4: Analyze the correlation between test items and functional failure modes at each level;

[0010] Step 5: Calculate the correlation between system functional failure modes and test items;

[0011] Step 6: Calculate the comprehensive fault matrix;

[0012] Step 7: Form fault synthesis logic.

[0013] Further, in step one, the process is as follows:

[0014] Define the test item as T num , num is the BIT test item number;

[0015] Define the test item interface function as bit_[T num ](), the function return value is 1 when the function detected by the test item fails, and the function return value is 0 when the function is normal; when the test item design is changed, the function return value is inconvenient;

[0016] Fault comprehensive matrix C FL as follows:

[0017]

[0018] Where m is the number of faults in the fault list. z is the total number of test items;

[0019] c mz Indicates that the mth item reports a fault FL m With the zth test item T z The correlation, c mz =1 indicates correlation, c mz =0 means no correlation.

[0020] Furthermore, in step 2, the correlation matrix D between the system functional failure mode and the faults in the fault list is FL It is expressed as follows:

[0021]

[0022] Where n is the total number of system functional failure modes listed, d mn is the nth system functional failure mode FM sys_n The mth item reports a fault FL m The correlation, d mn =1 indicates correlation, d mn =0 means no correlation.

[0023] Further, in step three, the process is as follows:

[0024] For each system functional failure mode FM listed sys_n , obtain the fault tree with it as the highest level event, the number of fault trees is consistent with the number of system function failure modes;

[0025] Define the functional failure mode in the fault tree as FM v_u ;

[0026] Where: v is the level of the functional failure mode, the lowest level is level 1, the previous level of the lowest level is 2, and it increases step by step upward until the next level of the highest level;

[0027] u is the serial number of the functional failure mode at this level. The first one from the left of the first fault tree is 1, the second one is 2, and so on, increasing in sequence until the last functional failure mode at this level in all fault trees. The same functional failure mode is not numbered repeatedly.

[0028] According to the transmission relationship of the fault tree, confirm each level of functional failure mode FM step by step from the bottom event to the top v_u The functional failure mode FM (v+1)_u relevance;

[0029]

[0030] Where a, b, and w are the serial numbers of all functional failure modes of this level in the fault tree that are related to a functional failure mode of a certain previous level; Represents the correlation calculation function.

[0031] Furthermore, in step 4, the correlation between the test items and the functional failure modes at each level is divided into direct correlation and indirect correlation;

[0032] When a test item can detect the functional failure mode, it is considered that the test item is directly related to the functional failure mode; when a test item can detect a functional failure mode at one or several levels below the functional failure mode, it is considered that the test item is indirectly related to the functional failure mode.

[0033] Furthermore, in step 4, the direct correlation matrix T between the test items and the functional failure modes is FMv_u It is expressed as:

[0034] T FMv_u =[t 1FMv_u … t xFMv_u …t zFMv_u ]

[0035] Where z is the total number of product test items, t xFMv_u For the xth test item and the functional failure mode FM v_u Direct correlation, t xFMv_u =1 means that the design of the test item can detect the functional failure mode, t xFMv_u =0 means that the design of the test item cannot detect the functional failure mode;

[0036] The total correlation matrix M between test items and functional failure modes FMv_u Expressed as

[0037] M FMv_u =[m 1FMv_u … m xFMv_u … m zFMv_u ]

[0038] M FMv_u For the xth test item and the functional failure mode FM v_u The total correlation, m xFMv_u =1 means that the test item is directly or indirectly related to the functional failure mode, m xFMv_u =0 means that the test item is not related to the functional failure mode.

[0039] Further, in step five, the process is as follows:

[0040] For the lowest level event function failure mode correlation matrix M FM1_u

[0041] M FM1_u =T FM1_u =[t 1FM1_u … t xFM1_u … t zFM1_u ]

[0042] For each level of functional failure mode except the lowest level event, confirm each level of functional failure mode FM step by step from the lowest level event upward v_u The functional failure mode FM (v+1)_u The correlation matrix M is constructed according to the logic gate types in the fault tree. FMv_u Recursive algorithms;

[0043] When the logic gate is an AND gate:

[0044] M FM(v+1)_u =(M FMu_a *M FMv_b *...*M FMv_w )|T FM(v+1)_u

[0045] =[m 1FM(v+1)_u … m xFM(v+1)_u … m zFM(v+1)_u ]

[0046] m xFM(v+1)_u =Min(t xFMv_a ×t xFMv_b ×...×t xFMv_w +t xFM(v+1)_u , 1)

[0047] When the logic gate is an OR gate:

[0048] M FM(v+1)_u =MFMv_a 「M FMv_b "…[M FMv，_w 「T FM(v+1)_u

[0049] =[m 1FM(v+1)_u … m xFM(v+1)_u … m zFM(v+1)_u ]

[0050] m xFM(v+1)_u =Min(t xFMv_a +t xFMv_b +…+t xFMv_w +t xFM(v+1)_u , 1)

[0051] According to the recursive formula, the correlation matrix between the test items of the highest level event and the functional failure mode is finally obtained.

[0052] M FMsys_1 =[t 1FMsys_1 … t xFMsys_1 … t zFMsys_1 ]

[0053] M FMsys_2 =[t 1FMsys_2 … t xFMsys_2 … t zFMsys_2 ] ...

[0055] M FMsys_n =[t 1FMsys_n … t xFMsys_n … t zFMsys_n ]

[0056] Through the logical operation of the matrix, the direct or indirect correlation between the test items and the functional failure modes is integrated, and the correlation matrix between the test items and the system functional failure modes is calculated.

[0057] Further, in step 6, the correlation matrix D between the system function failure mode and the fault list is used FL And the correlation matrix M between system function failure mode and test items FMsys , and obtain the fault comprehensive matrix C FL as follows:

[0058]

[0060] Further, in step seven, the comprehensive fault matrix is ​​as follows:

[0061]

[0062] If c ij=1, then determine whether there is any bit_[T j ]() function return value is 1, reporting fault FL i .

[0063] Beneficial effects of the present invention:

[0064] Based on the service-oriented design concept, the present invention decouples the BIT diagnostic software design work and the fault synthesis software design work, provides a unified fault diagnosis function interface definition, and realizes the parallel development of fault synthesis work and product test item design work. At the same time, the method performs fault synthesis based on multiple fault trees, traverses and analyzes all test items, and eliminates irrelevant test item results through matrix logic operations, ensuring the accuracy and completeness of the fault synthesis logic, effectively solving the problem of lagging progress in the comprehensive development of avionics products, and the inability to accurately identify the reported faults due to the complexity of the faults, and has strong practical value. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0065] Figure 1 Fault tree and failure mode sequence diagram of system function failure mode 1;

[0066] Figure 2 Fault tree and failure mode sequence diagram of system function failure mode 2;

[0067] Figure 3 Schematic diagram of test item correlation for system functional failure mode 1;

[0068] Figure 4 Schematic diagram of the correlation of test items for system functional failure mode 2. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0069] The following will be combined with the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention to clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0070] The present invention provides a fault synthesis design method based on service, and provides a specific fault synthesis program generation process. The method includes seven steps: establishing a fault synthesis matrix, determining a system functional failure mode related to a system fault list, determining the association of the system functional failure mode to a functional failure mode of a lower level, analyzing the correlation between test items and functional failure modes, calculating the correlation between the highest level event and the test item, calculating the fault synthesis matrix, and forming a fault synthesis logic:

[0071] (1) Establish a comprehensive fault matrix

[0072] Fault synthesis refers to the process of aggregating the result set of test items and finally reporting the faults in the fault list when the pilot fault list or similar high priority fault list has been determined.

[0073] Due to the diversity of test items, the test item results exist in various forms, such as voltage, current, register data, sensor readings, communication protocol check bits, and traditional fault synthesis design needs to analyze the logical relationship between the test item results and the reported faults to form fault synthesis logic. Affected by the test item design, fault synthesis design will lag behind the test item development, and will be frequently changed due to changes in the test item design.

[0074] Servitization refers to the transformation of a business, function or process into a service that can be called and used by other departments, teams or systems.

[0075] Based on the service-oriented idea, the interface function name and return value of the test item are defined. The design of the fault synthesis logic is based on the return value of the test item interface function and is not affected by the design of the test item, thereby realizing the decoupling of fault synthesis design and test item design.

[0076] Define the test item as T num , num is the BIT test item number.

[0077] Define the test item interface function as bit_[T num ](), when the function detected by the test item fails, the function return value is 1, and when the detected function is normal, the function return value is 0. When the test item design is changed, the function return value is inconvenient, which has no effect on the fault synthesis design.

[0078] The fault comprehensive matrix C is established FL To indicate the correlation between the test item and the fault in the fault list.

[0079]

[0080] in

[0081] m is the number of faults in the fault list

[0082] z is the total number of test items

[0083] c mz Indicates that the mth item reports a fault (FL m ) and the zth test item (T z ), c mz =1 indicates correlation, c mz =0 means no correlation

[0084] (2) Determine the system functional failure modes associated with the fault list

[0085] Combined with the actual design of the system, list the system functional failure modes (FM) associated with each fault (FL) in the fault list. sys_n ), construct the correlation matrix D between the system functional failure mode and the faults in the fault list FL .

[0086]

[0087] In the formula

[0088] n is the total number of system functional failure modes listed

[0089] d mn is the nth system functional failure mode (FM sys_n ) and the mth fault report (FL m ), d mn =1 indicates correlation, d mn =0 means no correlation

[0090] (3) Determine the relevance of system failure modes to lower-level failure modes

[0091] For each system functional failure mode (FM) listed sys_n ), obtain the fault tree with it as the highest level event, the number of fault trees is consistent with the number of system function failure modes.

[0092] The functional failure mode in the fault tree is defined as

[0093] FM v_u

[0094] in:

[0095] v is the level of the functional failure mode, the lowest level is level 1, the previous level of the lowest level is 2, and it increases step by step upward until the next level of the highest level.

[0096] u is the serial number of the functional failure mode at this level. The first one from the left of the first fault tree is 1, the second one is 2, and so on, increasing successively until the last functional failure mode of this level in all fault trees. The same functional failure mode is not numbered repeatedly.

[0097] According to the transmission relationship of the fault tree, confirm each level of functional failure mode FM step by step from the bottom event to the top v_u The functional failure mode FM (v+1)_u Relevance

[0098]

[0099] in

[0100] a, b, w are the serial numbers of all functional failure modes of this level in the fault tree that are related to a functional failure mode of a previous level; Represents the correlation calculation function.

[0101] (4) Analyze the correlation between test items and functional failure modes at each level

[0102] The correlation between test items and functional failure modes is divided into direct correlation and indirect correlation. When a test item can detect the functional failure mode, it is considered that the test item is directly related to the functional failure mode. When a test item can detect a functional failure mode in the next or next level of the functional failure mode, it is considered that the test item is indirectly related to the functional failure mode.

[0103] Direct correlation matrix T between test items and functional failure modes FMv_u It is expressed as:

[0104] T FMv_u =[t 1FMv_u … t xFMv_u … t zFMv_u ]

[0105] In the formula

[0106] z is the total number of product test items

[0107] t xFMv_u For the xth test item and the functional failure mode (FM v_u ), t xFMv_u =1 means that the design of the test item can detect the functional failure mode, t xFMv_u =0 means that the design of the test item cannot detect the functional failure mode

[0108] The total correlation matrix M between test items and functional failure modes FMv_u Expressed as

[0109] M FMv_u =[m 1FMv_u … m xFMv_u … m zFMv_u ]

[0110] M FMv_u For the xth test item and the functional failure mode (FM v_u )’s total correlation, m xFMv_u =1 means that the test item is directly or indirectly related to the functional failure mode, m xFMv_u =0 means that the test item is not related to the functional failure mode.

[0111] Combined with the actual product test items, all test items are listed, and each functional failure mode (FM v_u) to traverse the test items and list the direct correlation matrix T with all test items FMv_u .

[0112] In actual design, a test item may detect one or more functional failure modes, or they may be unrelated. Multiple test items may also detect the same functional failure mode. Traversing through the data form of the matrix can ensure the accuracy and completeness of the analysis process and ensure that the correlation will not be missed before the next recursion.

[0113] (5) Correlation between the calculation system functional failure mode and test items

[0114] For the lowest level event function failure mode correlation matrix M BM1_u

[0115] M FM1_u =T FM1_u =[t 1FM1_u … t xFM1_u … t zFM1_u ]

[0116] For each level of functional failure mode except the lowest level event, confirm each level of functional failure mode FM step by step from the lowest level event upward v_u The functional failure mode FM (v+1)_u The correlation matrix M is constructed according to the logic gate types in the fault tree. FMv_u Recursive algorithm.

[0117] When the logic gate is an AND gate

[0118] M FM(v+1)_u -(M FMv_a *M FMv_b *...*M FMv_w )[T FM(v+1)_u

[0119] =[m 1FM(v|1)_u … m xFM(v+1)_u … m zFM(v|1)_u ]

[0120] m xFM(v+1)_u =Min(t xFMv_a ×t xFMv_b ×...×t xFMv_w +t xFM(v+1)_u , 1)

[0121] When the logic gate is an OR gate

[0122] M FM(v+1)_u =M FMv_a 「M FMv_b "..."M FMv_w 「TFM(v+1)_u

[0123] =[m 1FM(v+1)_u … m xFM(v+1)_u … m zFM(v+1)_u ]

[0124] m xFM(v+1)_u =Min(t xFMv_a +t xFMv_b +…+t xFMv_w +t xFM(v+1)_u , 1)

[0125] According to the recursive formula, the correlation matrix between the test items of the highest level event and the functional failure mode can be obtained.

[0126] M FMsys_1 =[t 1FMsys_1 … t xFMsys_1 … t zFMsys_1 ]

[0127] M FMsys_2 =[t 1FMsys_2 … t xFMsys_2 … t zFMsys_2 ] ...

[0129] M FMsys_n =[t 1FMsys n … t xFMsys_n … t zFMsys n ]

[0130] Through the logical operation of the matrix, the direct or indirect correlation between the test items and the functional failure modes can be integrated to calculate the correlation matrix between the test items and the functional failure modes.

[0131] For the functional failure modes under the AND gate, only the common related test items will be related to the functional failure modes of the upper layer. The conventional method needs to analyze and identify the common test items one by one during analysis, while the logical operation of the matrix can accurately eliminate non-common test items in the recursive process, which is faster and more efficient.

[0132] (6) Calculate the comprehensive fault matrix

[0133] Through the correlation matrix D of the system function failure mode and fault list FL And the correlation matrix M between system function failure mode and test items FMsys , we can get the comprehensive fault matrix C FL , the method is as follows:

[0134]

[0135] (7) Forming fault synthesis logic

[0136] According to the comprehensive fault matrix The logic of fault synthesis is simplified to each fault (FL i ) Just confirm the return value of the related detection item interface function, that is, c in the matrix ij =1 bit_[T j ]() function return value. When any of the return values ​​of these related detection item interface functions is 1, the fault is reported.

[0137] Example

[0138] (1) Establish a comprehensive fault matrix

[0139] The fault list of a certain system is shown in Table 1

[0140] Table 1 System Fault List

[0141] Serial number Fault name 1 xxxxxx fault 2 yyyyyyFailure

[0142] According to the test item design, all test items and their interface functions are defined, as shown in Table 2

[0143] Table 2 System test items and function name definition table

[0144]

[0145]

[0146] The fault comprehensive matrix C is established FL

[0147]

[0148] (2) Determine the system functional failure modes related to the system failure list

[0149] Combined with the actual system design, find the system function failure mode related to each fault

[0150] xxxxxx fault——system function failure mode 1

[0151] yyyyyyFault - System Function Failure Mode 1

[0152] yyyyyyFault——System Function Failure Mode 2

[0153] Construct the correlation matrix D of system functional failure mode and fault list FL

[0154]

[0155] (3) Determine the relationship between system failure modes and lower-level failure modes

[0156] For the listed system function failure mode 1 and system function failure mode 2, obtain the fault tree with them as the highest level event, and define the sequence number for each level of function failure mode, such as Figure 1 and Figure 2 Shown

[0157] The fault tree can be used to analyze the correlation between each functional failure mode and its next level functional failure mode.

[0158]

[0159]

[0160] (4) Analyze the correlation between test items and functional failure modes

[0161] Combined with the actual testability of the product, all test items are listed, all test items are traversed for each functional failure mode, and its direct correlation with all test items is analyzed, such as Figure 3 and Figure 4 ,The test items and functional failure modes connected by dotted lines indicate that the analysis shows that they have a direct correlation.

[0162] The directly related row matrix T of each functional failure mode can be obtained FMv_u

[0163] T FM1_1 =[1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0]

[0164] T FM1_2 =[0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0]

[0165] T FM1_3 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0]

[0166] TF M1_4 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0]

[0167] T FM1_b -[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1]

[0168] T FM1_6 =[0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0]

[0169] T FM1_7 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0]

[0170] T FM2_1 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0]

[0171] T FM2_2 =[0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0]

[0172] T FM2_3 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0]

[0173] T FM2_4 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0]

[0174] T FMz_b -[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1]

[0175] T FM2_6 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0]

[0176] T FM3_1 =[0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0]

[0177] T FM3_2 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0]

[0178] T FMsys_1 =[0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0]

[0179] T FMsys_2 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0]

[0180] (5) Calculate the correlation between the highest level event and the test item

[0181] For the lowest level event function failure mode correlation matrix M FM1 u , M FM1_u =T FM1_u

[0182] M FM1_1 =[1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0]

[0183] M FM1_2 =[0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0]

[0184] M FM1_3 =[0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0]

[0185] M FM1_4 =[0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0]

[0186] M FM1_b =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1]

[0187] M FM1_6 =[0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0]

[0188] M FM1_7 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0]

[0189] For events other than the lowest level, calculations are performed step by step toward the upper level based on the correlation between the functional failure modes of the upper and lower levels.

[0190] Calculate M FMz_1 When confirming FM z_1 With FM 1_1 ,FM 1_2 Related, the connection relationship on the fault tree is an OR logic gate, then

[0191] M FM2_1 =M FM1_1 [M FM1_2 [T FM2_1 =min(M FM1_1 +M FM1_2 +T FM2_1 , 1)

[0192] =[1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0]

[0193] Similarly, M FM2_2 =[1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0]

[0194] Calculate M FMsys_1 When confirming FM sys_1 With FM 2_1 ,FM 2_2 Related, the connection relationship on the fault tree is AND logic gate

[0195] M FMsys_1 =M FM2_1 *M FM2_2 [T FMsys_1 =[1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0]

[0196] According to the recursive formula, we can get

[0197] M FM2_2 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1]

[0198] M FM2_4 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0]

[0199] M FM2_3 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1]

[0200] M FM2_6 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0]

[0201] M FM3_1-[0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1]

[0202] M FM3_2 =[0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1]

[0203] M FMsys_2 =[0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1]

[0204] (6) Calculate the comprehensive fault matrix

[0205] Through the correlation matrix D of the system function failure mode and fault list FL And the correlation matrix M between system function failure mode and test items FMsys , we can get the comprehensive fault matrix C FL ,

[0206]

[0207] (7) Forming fault synthesis logic

[0208] According to the comprehensive fault matrix The fault synthesis logic is derived. When bit_[T1]()=1 or bit_[T4]()=1, "xxxxxx fault" is reported. When bit_[T1]()=1 or bit_[T4]()=1 or bit_[T5]()=1 or bit_[T8]()=1, "yyyyyy fault" is reported.

[0209] The above is only a specific embodiment of the present invention, and the present invention is described in detail. The unexplained part is a conventional technology. However, the protection scope of the present invention is not limited to this. Any changes or substitutions that can be easily thought of by any technician familiar with the technical field within the technical scope disclosed by the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention. The protection scope of the present invention shall be based on the protection scope of the claims.

Claims

1. A comprehensive fault design method based on service, characterized by: The following steps are involved: Step 1: Establish a comprehensive fault matrix to characterize the correlation between test items and faults in the fault list; Step 2: Construct the correlation matrix D between the system functional failure mode and the faults in the fault list FL ; Step 3: Determine the relevance of system functional failure modes to lower-level functional failure modes; Step 4: Analyze the correlation between test items and functional failure modes at each level; Step 5: Calculate the correlation between system functional failure modes and test items; Step 6: Calculate the comprehensive fault matrix; Step 7: Form fault synthesis logic.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step one, the process is as follows: Define the test item as T num , num is the BIT test item number; Define the test item interface function as bit_[T num ](), the function return value is 1 when the function detected by the test item fails, and the function return value is 0 when the function is normal; when the test item design is changed, the function return value is inconvenient; Fault comprehensive matrix C FL as follows: Where m is the number of faults in the fault list. z is the total number of test items; c mz Indicates that the mth item reports a fault FL m With the zth test item T z The correlation, c mz =1 indicates correlation, c ma =0 means no correlation.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that: In step 2, the correlation matrix D between the system functional failure mode and the faults in the fault list FL It is expressed as follows: Where n is the total number of system functional failure modes listed, d mn is the nth system functional failure mode FM sys_n The mth item reports a fault FL m The correlation, d mn =1 indicates correlation, d mn =0 means no correlation.

4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that: In step three, the process is as follows: For each system functional failure mode FM listed sys_n , obtain the fault tree with it as the highest level event, the number of fault trees is consistent with the number of system function failure modes; Define the functional failure mode in the fault tree as FM v_u ; Where: v is the level of the functional failure mode, the lowest level is level 1, the previous level of the lowest level is 2, and it increases step by step upward until the next level of the highest level; u is the serial number of the functional failure mode at this level. The first one from the left of the first fault tree is 1, the second one is 2, and so on, increasing in sequence until the last functional failure mode at this level in all fault trees. The same functional failure mode is not numbered repeatedly. According to the transmission relationship of the fault tree, confirm each level of functional failure mode FM step by step from the bottom event to the top v_u The functional failure mode FM (v+1)_u relevance; Where a, b, and w are the serial numbers of all functional failure modes of this level in the fault tree that are related to a functional failure mode of a certain previous level; Represents the correlation calculation function.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that: In step 4, the correlation between the test items and the functional failure modes at each level is divided into direct correlation and indirect correlation; When a test item can detect the functional failure mode, it is considered that the test item is directly related to the functional failure mode; when a test item can detect a functional failure mode at one or several levels below the functional failure mode, it is considered that the test item is indirectly related to the functional failure mode.

6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that: In step 4, the direct correlation matrix T between test items and functional failure modes FMv_u It is expressed as: T FMv_u -[t 1FMv_u … t xFMv_u … t zFMv_u ] Where z is the total number of product test items, t xFMv_u For the xth test item and the functional failure mode FM v_u Direct correlation, t xFMv_u =1 means that the design of the test item can detect the functional failure mode, t xFMv_u =0 means that the design of the test item cannot detect the functional failure mode; The total correlation matrix M between test items and functional failure modes FMv_u Expressed as M FMv_u =[m 1FMv_u … m xFMv_n … m zFMv_u ] M FMv_u For the xth test item and the functional failure mode FM v_u The total correlation, m xFMv_u =1 means that the test item is directly or indirectly related to the functional failure mode, m xFMv_u =0 means that the test item is not related to the functional failure mode.

7. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that: In step five, the process is as follows: For the lowest level event function failure mode correlation matrix M FM1_u M FM1_u =T FM1_u =[t 1FM1_u … t xFM1_u … t zFM1_u ] For each level of functional failure mode except the lowest level event, confirm each level of functional failure mode FM step by step from the lowest level event upward v_u The functional failure mode FM (v+1)_u The correlation matrix M is constructed according to the logic gate types in the fault tree. FMv_u Recursive algorithms; When the logic gate is an AND gate: M FM(v+1)_u =(M FMv_a *M FMv_b *...*M FMv_w )[T FM(v+1)_u =[m 1FM(v+1)_u … m xFM(v+1)_u … m zFM(v+1)_u ] m xFM(v+1)_u =Min(t xFMv_a ×t xFMv_b ×...×t xFMv_w +t xFM(v+1)_u ,1) When the logic gate is an OR gate: M FM(v+1)_u =M FMv_a [M FMv_b […[M FMv_w [T FM(v+1)_u =[m 1FM(v+1)_u … m xFM(v+1)_u … m zFM(v+1)_u ] m xFM(v+1)_u =Min(t xFMv_s +t xFMv_b +…+t xFMv_w +t xFM(v+1)_u ,1) According to the recursive formula, the correlation matrix between the test items of the highest level event and the functional failure mode is finally obtained. M FMsys_1 =[t 1FMys_1 … t xFMsys-1 … t zFMsys_1 ] M FMsys 2 =[t 1FMsys_2 … t xFMsys_2 … t zFMsys_2 ] … M FMsys_n =[t 1FMsys_n … t xFMsys_n … t zFMsyu_n ] Through the logical operation of the matrix, the direct or indirect correlation between the test items and the functional failure modes is integrated, and the correlation matrix between the test items and the system functional failure modes is calculated.

8. The method according to claim 7, characterized in that: In step 6, the correlation matrix D between the system function failure mode and the fault list is used. FL And the correlation matrix M between system function failure mode and test items FMsys , and obtain the fault comprehensive matrix C FL as follows:

9. The method according to claim 8, characterized in that: In step 7, if c ij =1, then determine whether there is any bit_[T j ]() function return value is 1, reporting fault FL i .

Images