Process flow data consistency control method and system based on process flow object

Abstract

The application discloses a production process data consistency control method and system based on process flow objects, and relates to the technical fields of manufacturing execution and industrial data processing. After quality abnormality occurs, the process flow object of a target process is switched to a limited state, a verification task including multiple target verification units is established, and a unique verification identifier is configured for each target verification unit. The server checks the processing completion data and the inspection data using the verification identifier, the event type and the event serial number, rejects repeated or out-of-order updates, and verifies the processing data, the mandatory inspection items and the inspection results unit by unit. Only when all target verification units are associated with processing completion data and inspection data corresponding to each other according to the verification identifier and not reused, and all mandatory inspection items are qualified, the normal flow is restored; when the verification round or the associated version changes, the original verification task is invalidated to reduce data mismatch, missed inspection and cross-round reuse.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the fields of manufacturing execution systems, industrial internet and production process data processing, data acquisition and monitoring, distributed ERP systems and data consistency control technology. More specifically, this invention relates to a production process data consistency control method and system based on process flow objects. Background Technology

[0002] In discrete manufacturing, the processing completion data and quality inspection data for the same product batch are typically submitted asynchronously by the production terminal and the quality inspection terminal, and stored separately in different business modules. If the system only associates data based on product quantity, submission time, or task name, it is prone to issues such as mismatch between inspection data and the actual processed objects, duplicate uploads of inspection records, or missing inspection items.

[0003] When a quality anomaly occurs, companies typically confirm whether the anomaly has been eliminated through rework, trial processing, or stricter inspection. A validation task may involve multiple products, product sub-batches, or product containers to be validated; even if the total number of processing records equals the total number of inspection records, there may be instances where the same object is inspected repeatedly while another object is missed. If the system only compares the total number of records or removes the quality limit upon detecting any qualified record, products that have not completed validation may still continue to circulate.

[0004] Asynchronous submissions from multiple terminals may also lead to network retransmissions, duplicate clicks, and verification data arriving before processed data. Without event idempotency checks and state transition constraints, the same event may be counted repeatedly, or out-of-order data may directly change the verification state, resulting in a discrepancy between the valid state of the verification task and the actual production process.

[0005] Furthermore, multiple verification rounds may be initiated during quality anomaly handling, and process documents, inspection rules, or operational guidelines may also undergo version changes. If data from older rounds or data generated under older versions is continued to be used in the current verification task, data from different points in time and under different rules will be mixed in the determination of the lifting of restrictions.

[0006] Existing batch coding, barcode tracking, timestamp verification, or total task verification can provide some traceability, but it is difficult to simultaneously ensure that the completed data and inspection data correspond one-to-one at the target verification unit level, that the same data is not reused by multiple verification units, that the mandatory inspection items are complete, and that the production flow status can be closed-loop controlled based on the verification results of each unit.

[0007] Therefore, a production process data consistency control scheme is needed for quality anomaly verification tasks. This scheme should perform object-level association, idempotency verification, sequence control, integrity verification of inspection items, and isolation of rounds and versions for processing events and inspection events submitted by different terminals, and only resume the production process after all target verification units have completed effective verification. Summary of the Invention

[0008] The purpose of this invention is to provide a production process data consistency control method and system based on process flow objects, so as to reduce the problems caused by asynchronous submission from multiple terminals, such as mismatch between processing objects and inspection objects, duplicate data masking missed inspections, out-of-order status updates, cross-cycle data mixing, and failure to close the loop before resuming the production process due to quality anomalies.

[0009] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides a production process data consistency control method executed by a consistency control server, comprising: establishing a process flow object for a target process of a product batch, and associating production task data and quality inspection data with the process flow object.

[0010] The system receives quality anomaly data submitted by the quality inspection terminal for the target process, associates the quality anomaly data with the process flow object, and switches the process flow object from normal flow state to restricted state.

[0011] A verification task is created based on the quality anomaly data, multiple target verification units and a set of mandatory inspection items corresponding to the anomaly detection items are determined, and a verification identifier is configured for each target verification unit; each verification identifier uniquely corresponds to one target verification unit.

[0012] The system receives the completed processing data submitted by the production terminal and generates an event verification key based on the verification task identifier, verification identifier, event type, and event sequence number. If the event verification key is not processed and the current state of the target verification unit conforms to the preset state transition order, the completed processing data is associated with the corresponding target verification unit and its processing state is updated; otherwise, the update is rejected.

[0013] The system receives inspection data submitted by the quality inspection terminal, performs event verification in the same manner, and associates the verified inspection data with the corresponding target verification unit. The same completed data or the same inspection data is used to update only one target verification unit.

[0014] For each target verification unit, verify whether the completed processing data and inspection data correspond to each other through the same verification identifier, whether they are reused, whether the inspection data covers all mandatory inspection items, and whether each inspection result meets the corresponding allowable range or preset qualification judgment conditions; only when all target verification units are associated with completed processing data and inspection data that correspond to each other according to the verification identifier and are not reused, and all mandatory inspection items are qualified, the process flow object is restored to the normal flow state; otherwise, the restricted state is maintained.

[0015] Optionally, the process flow object is associated with product batch identifier, target process identifier, performing employee identifier, production task identifier, quality anomaly event identifier, verification task identifier, and flow status. The target verification unit can correspond to a single product, a product sub-batch, a product container, or a set of products corresponding to a single processing completion event; the verification identifier can be stored in an electronic record or converted into a QR code, barcode, or RFID tag.

[0016] Optionally, a mapping relationship between anomaly detection items, process operation steps, and operation guidance content can be established in advance. Abnormal operation steps and corresponding special guidance content can be determined based on the anomaly detection items. After the employee completes the special guidance or passes the special assessment, the verification task can be issued.

[0017] Optionally, the target verification unit has a processing state and a quality verification state. Upon receiving the processing completion data, the processing state is updated from the pending processing state to the processed state, and the quality verification state is set to the pending inspection state; only when the processing state is processed and the quality verification state is pending inspection is the quality verification state allowed to be updated by inspection data. For duplicate events or out-of-order events, the original state is maintained and a rejection result or a processed result is returned.

[0018] Optionally, the inspection data includes the item identifier, test value or judgment result, inspection object identifier, and inspection rule version corresponding to each mandatory inspection item. The consistency control server obtains the allowable range or preset pass / fail judgment conditions corresponding to each mandatory inspection item based on the inspection rule version or version snapshot corresponding to the verification task. If an inspection item is missing, the data is empty, the inspection object identifier does not match, or the inspection rule version is inconsistent, the inspection data is rejected and the system remains in a pending inspection state. If the inspection data is valid but the result of any mandatory inspection item does not meet the corresponding allowable range or preset pass / fail judgment conditions, the quality verification status of the corresponding target verification unit is updated to an inspection failure state.

[0019] Optionally, a verification round identifier can be configured for the verification task, and a version snapshot of the process document version and inspection rule version can be recorded when the verification task is created. Only one currently valid verification task is retained for the same process flow object; data from other rounds or failed tasks cannot be used for the current verification task, and a new verification task is created based on the changed version when the version changes.

[0020] Optionally, the reliability parameters of the employee's process can be determined based on the historical quality anomaly data, rework data, scrap data, and verification task completion data of the employee in the target process, and the number of target verification units, the proportion of target verification units selected from candidate products, or the tightening of the inspection cycle after the normal flow is restored can be adjusted accordingly. It is also possible to restrict the continued use of abnormal processing equipment, material batches, process documents, or operation guidance resources for the target process based on the distribution of similar quality anomalies associated with the same production support object.

[0021] Another aspect of the present invention provides a production process data consistency control system, including a production terminal, a quality inspection terminal, and a consistency control server; the consistency control server includes an object creation module, an exception handling module, a verification task module, a processing data processing module, an inspection data processing module, a consistency determination module, and a status control module, each module being used to perform the processing corresponding to the above methods.

[0022] The present invention also provides an electronic device, a computer-readable storage medium, and a computer program product. The electronic device, the computer-readable storage medium, or the computer program product stores a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to perform the described method.

[0023] Compared to the closed-loop judgment method based solely on processing quantity and inspection quantity, this invention associates production tasks, quality anomalies, verification tasks, processing completion data, and inspection data with the same target process through process flow objects, so that data from different terminals have a common data association carrier.

[0024] By configuring verification identifiers for each target verification unit, it is possible to verify one by one whether the processed data and the inspection data correspond to the same verification object, thereby reducing the situation where duplicate inspection records cover up missed inspection objects or the inspection object is inconsistent with the processed object.

[0025] By restricting states and recovery conditions, the verification results control the normal production tasks, the flow of the next process, or the settlement process after a quality anomaly occurs, reducing the situation where the production process resumes before the anomaly has been verified.

[0026] By implementing state transitions, mandatory verification items, verification rounds, and version expiration control, we can reduce out-of-order commits, duplicate commits, incomplete verification items, cross-round data mixing, and the use of old version data for the current task.

[0027] By distinguishing between employee-related anomalies and enterprise production support anomalies, quality control actions can be applied to the executing employees or processing equipment, material batches, process documents, and operating instructions, respectively, reducing the possibility of production support anomalies being wrongly attributed to individual employees.

[0028] By making each verification identifier uniquely correspond to a target verification unit, and restricting the same completed data or inspection data to be used only to update one corresponding verification unit, a one-to-one verification constraint can be formed at the data association layer. This helps to avoid the same inspection record being repeatedly referenced by multiple verification units, or data being written to the wrong object due to identifier ambiguity.

[0029] By examining the dual existence of processed data and test data for each target verification unit, the recovery conditions for the verification task can be transformed from total closure to object-level closure. Even if repeated test data brings the total number of test records to the required level, it cannot replace verification units lacking test data, thereby reducing the possibility of missed detections being masked by quantitative statistics.

[0030] By linking the restriction status with at least one of the following: the issuance of normal production tasks, the entry of products into the next process, or the settlement of production quantities, the consistency judgment result of quality data can be transformed into a control signal for the production terminal or production process, which helps to prevent abnormal products from continuing to circulate before the verification loop is completed.

[0031] By presetting the state transition order and event verification key, out-of-order submissions and duplicate submissions can be identified when the processed data and the verification data arrive asynchronously. The system can return a rejection result or a processed result without changing the valid state, which helps to maintain the determinism and idempotency of the target verification unit state update.

[0032] By mapping the set of mandatory inspection items to the abnormal detection items, and requiring all mandatory inspection items to have valid and qualified inspection results, irrelevant inspection results or partial inspection results can be avoided from being used to lift the restriction status, thus ensuring that the recovery conditions correspond to the original quality abnormality.

[0033] By verifying the round identifier and version snapshot, data generated under different verification rounds and different process documents or inspection rules can be divided into mutually isolated data sets, which helps to ensure that the data involved in the consistency judgment are formed under the same process and inspection conditions.

[0034] By mapping anomaly detection items to specific operational steps and specialized guidance content, we can provide employees with guidance resources corresponding to abnormal process parameters or operational steps. This helps reduce irrelevant guidance content and improve the relevance of subsequent verification tasks.

[0035] By distinguishing between employee-side anomalies and production support object anomalies, and triggering employee verification controls or limiting controls on equipment, materials, process documents, and operating instructions resources respectively, control actions can be applied to the technical objects corresponding to the causes of anomalies, reducing the possibility of similar anomalies recurring due to incorrect control objects. Attached Figure Description

[0036] The accompanying drawings are provided to further illustrate the invention and form part of the specification. They are used in conjunction with embodiments of the invention to explain the invention and do not constitute a limitation thereof. In the drawings: Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the architecture of a production process data consistency control system based on process flow objects, provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0037] Figure 2 A flowchart illustrating a production process data consistency control method based on process flow objects, provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0038] Figure 3 This is a flowchart for quality anomaly handling and verification task generation provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0039] Figure 4 This is a state transition diagram of the target verification unit provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0040] Figure 5 This is a timing diagram showing the interaction between processing completion data and inspection data provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0041] Figure 6 A flowchart for verification rounds and version change control provided for embodiments of the present invention.

[0042] Figure 7 The flowchart for separating employee-side anomalies and enterprise production support anomalies is provided for embodiments of the present invention.

[0043] Explanation of reference numerals in the attached figures 100. Production process data consistency control system based on process flow objects; 110. Enterprise management terminal; 120. Production terminal; 130. Warehouse terminal; 140. Quality inspection terminal; 150. Settlement terminal; 160. Consistency control server; 161. Object creation module; 162. Anomaly handling module; 163. Verification task module; 164. Processing data processing module; 165. Inspection data processing module; 166. Consistency determination module; 167. Status control module; 170. Reliability evaluation module; 180. Data storage module.

[0044] 200. Process flow object; 201. Object identifier; 202. Product batch identifier; 203. Target process identifier; 204. Performing employee identifier; 205. Production task data; 206. Quality anomaly data; 207. Verification task data; 208. Processing completion data; 209. Inspection data; 210. Flow status; 211. Process document version; 212. Inspection rule version; 213. Operation guidance resource version.

[0045] 300. Verification Task; 301. Verification Task Identifier; 302. Verification Round Identifier; 303. Target Verification Unit; 304. Verification Identifier; 305. Target Inspection Item; 306. Set of Mandatory Inspection Items; 307. Processing Status; 308. Quality Verification Status; 309. Verification Task Status; 310. Version Snapshot; 320. Pending Processing Status; 321. Processed and Awaiting Inspection Status; 322. Inspection Passed Status; 323. Inspection Failed Status; 324. Invalid Status; 325. Rejected Status Update.

[0046] 401. Employee process reliability parameters; 402. Enterprise production support reliability parameters; 403. Production support objects; 404. Processing equipment; 405. Material batches; 406. Process documents; 407. Operation guidance resources; 408. Enterprise rectification tasks. Detailed Implementation

[0047] The technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. The described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. The following embodiments and their technical features can be combined with each other without conflict.

[0048] The specific products, processes, data fields, verification quantities, and judgment conditions in the embodiments of this invention are used to illustrate the technical solutions and do not constitute a limitation on the scope of protection.

[0049] The production process referred to in this invention may include at least one of the following processes performed on the product according to the technological route: material receiving, processing, assembly, quality inspection, rework, scrapping, warehousing, outbound delivery, and settlement.

[0050] The target process, as referred to in this invention, is a process in the product manufacturing process where a quality anomaly occurs or where quality verification is required. The process flow object is a data object established for the target process within a product batch. The target verification unit is a control object that needs to undergo processing and quality inspection separately after a quality anomaly occurs; the verification task includes multiple target verification units to determine the data closure status of each verification object one by one.

[0051] The target verification unit can correspond to a single product, a product sub-batch, a tote, a pallet, or a set of products corresponding to a single processing completion event. A normal production task is a batch production task issued when the process flow object is in a normal flow state; a verification task is a controlled production task created after a quality anomaly occurs to verify the anomaly handling results.

[0052] like Figure 1 As shown, this embodiment provides a production process data consistency control system 100 based on process flow objects. The system 100 may include an enterprise management terminal 110, a production terminal 120, a warehouse terminal 130, a quality inspection terminal 140, a settlement terminal 150, a consistency control server 160, a reliability evaluation module 170, and a data storage module 180.

[0053] The enterprise management terminal 110 is used to configure product information, process routes, operation information, production task rules, quality inspection rules, and operation guidance resources. The operation guidance resources may include safety operation videos, production operation videos, inspection videos, operation guidance documents, process images, equipment parameter setting examples, and examples of qualified or unqualified products.

[0054] The production terminal 120 can be an employee mobile terminal, workstation computer, barcode scanning terminal, or equipment operation terminal, used to receive ordinary production tasks or verification tasks, and submit task retrieval data, processing completion data, rework data, scrap data, and abnormal reporting data.

[0055] Warehouse terminal 130 is used to submit data on material outbound, material return, semi-finished product warehousing, semi-finished product outbound, and finished product warehousing. Settlement terminal 150 is used to obtain the production quantity confirmed by quality and generate piece-rate or production settlement data.

[0056] The quality inspection terminal 140 is used to receive inspection tasks, read the identifiers of the product to be inspected, the product sub-batch, or the product container, and submit the inspection item identifier, test value or judgment result, inspection object identifier, inspection time, and inspection rule version. The quality inspection terminal 140 can also submit preliminary inspection conclusions formed on the terminal side, but the allowable range for updating the quality verification status or the preset pass / fail judgment conditions are determined by the consistency control server 160 based on the inspection rule version or version snapshot corresponding to the verification task.

[0057] The consistency control server 160 includes an object creation module 161, an exception handling module 162, a verification task module 163, a processing data processing module 164, an inspection data processing module 165, a consistency determination module 166, and a status control module 167.

[0058] The object creation module 161 is used to create and maintain the process flow object 200; the exception handling module 162 is used to receive quality exception data 206 and change the flow status 210 of the process flow object 200; the verification task module 163 is used to create a verification task 300, determine the target verification unit 303 and the target inspection item 305, and configure the verification identifier 304.

[0059] The processing data processing module 164 and the inspection data processing module 165 process the processing completion data 208 submitted by the production terminal 120 and the inspection data 209 submitted by the quality inspection terminal 140, respectively. The consistency determination module 166 determines the consistency result of the quality data based on the processing status 307, the quality verification status 308, and the correspondence between the two types of data. The status control module 167 restores the normal flow status or maintains the restricted status based on the result.

[0060] The reliability evaluation module 170 is used to determine the employee process reliability parameter 401 and the enterprise production support reliability parameter 402. The data storage module 180 is used to store the process flow objects 200, the verification tasks 300, and the data submitted by each terminal.

[0061] In some embodiments, the warehouse terminal 130, settlement terminal 150, and reliability evaluation module 170 are optional components. The object creation module 161 to the status control module 167 can be deployed on the same server or distributed across multiple interconnected computing nodes.

[0062] like Figure 2 As shown, this embodiment also provides a production process data consistency control method based on process flow objects. This method can be executed by a consistency control server 160 and includes steps S101 to S110.

[0063] In step S101, a process flow object 200 is created for the target process in the product batch, and the production task data 205 and quality inspection data of the target process are associated with the process flow object 200. The object creation module 161 can generate an object identifier 201 based on the product batch identifier 202 and the target process identifier 203.

[0064] The object identifier 201 can be generated by combining the product batch identifier 202, the target process identifier 203, and the object serial number, or it can be a randomly generated unique identifier. The key is to uniquely identify the process flow object 200 within the corresponding business scope.

[0065] In step S102, the quality inspection terminal 140 receives quality anomaly data 206 submitted for the target process, and associates the quality anomaly data 206 with the corresponding process flow object 200 according to the product batch identifier, production task identifier, product identifier or target process identifier.

[0066] The quality anomaly data 206 may include the quality anomaly event identifier, anomaly detection item, detection value, allowable range, number of defects, defect location, product identifier, inspection record identifier, and inspection time.

[0067] In step S103, the process flow object 200 is switched from normal flow state to restricted state. The restricted state can be used to stop issuing ordinary production tasks corresponding to the target process, prohibit the corresponding products from continuing to enter the next process, or prohibit the corresponding production quantity from entering the normal settlement process; the original unqualified products corresponding to the quality anomaly data remain in an isolated state until they pass re-inspection, are scrapped, or other preset disposals are completed.

[0068] In step S104, a verification task 300 is created based on the quality anomaly data 206, multiple target verification units 303 are determined, as well as target inspection items 305 and mandatory inspection item set 306 corresponding to the anomaly detection items, and a verification identifier 304 is configured for each target verification unit 303.

[0069] The target inspection item 305 may be the same as the anomaly detection item, or it may include related inspection items used to determine the cause of the anomaly or the result of the anomaly handling. The mandatory inspection item set 306 consists of the inspection items that must be completed to lift the restriction state. The verification identifier 304 may be generated by combining the verification task identifier 301, the target process identifier 203, and the verification unit number, or it may be a randomly generated unique identifier.

[0070] The verification identifier 304 can be stored in an electronic record or converted into a QR code, barcode, or RFID tag and associated with the target verification unit 303. In cases where the target verification unit 303 is a product container or a single processing completion event, the verification identifier 304 can be associated with the corresponding container identifier or event identifier.

[0071] In some embodiments, each verification identifier 304 uniquely corresponds to one target verification unit 303. Before writing data, the processing data processing module 164 and the inspection data processing module 165 query the current binding relationship of the verification identifier 304; if the same data record has already been used to update other target verification units, or if the product identifier in the data is inconsistent with the product identifier associated with the verification identifier 304, the association is refused to be established.

[0072] With the unique binding constraint mentioned above, a processing event or inspection event only changes the state of one target verification unit 303, which helps to avoid data being reused repeatedly, written to other verification units by mistake, or missing data being supplemented by duplicate data.

[0073] In step S105, the processing completion data 208 submitted by the production terminal 120 is received. The processing completion data 208 carries a verification task identifier 301, a verification identifier 304, an event type, and an event sequence number. Based on this, the server generates an event verification key. If the event verification key is not processed and the current state of the target verification unit 303 conforms to the preset state transition order, the processing completion data 208 is associated with the corresponding target verification unit 303 and its processing state 307 is updated; otherwise, the state update is rejected.

[0074] The completed processing data 208 may also include the executing employee identifier 204, equipment identifier, processing time, product identifier, product container identifier, process document version 211, completed quantity, and processing result. The event sequence number is determined by the terminal when the event is first generated; the original event sequence number is used when the same event is retransmitted. For repeatedly submitted completed processing data, the event verification key remains the same, and the server returns the processed result without updating the target verification unit again. In some embodiments, the event verification key may also include the event source terminal identifier, the data source system identifier, or a globally unique event identifier. When different terminals generate event sequence numbers, the consistency control server 160 distinguishes events from different sources based on the combination of the event source terminal identifier and the event sequence number, to avoid incorrectly identifying duplicate events when different terminals generate the same event sequence number.

[0075] In step S106, inspection data 209 submitted by the quality inspection terminal 140 is received. Inspection data 209 carries a verification task identifier 301, a verification identifier 304, an event type, an event sequence number, and the inspection results corresponding to the mandatory inspection items. After the event verification and state transition verification pass, the server associates inspection data 209 with the corresponding target verification unit 303 and updates its quality verification status 308. The consistency control server 160 obtains the allowable range or preset pass / fail conditions for each mandatory inspection item based on the inspection rule version or version snapshot corresponding to the current verification task, and verifies the inspection data 209 accordingly.

[0076] In step S107, the server checks one by one whether each target verification unit 303 has processing completion data 208 and inspection data 209 corresponding to each other through the same verification identifier 304, whether the inspection data 209 covers all mandatory inspection items, and whether each inspection result meets the corresponding allowable range or preset qualification judgment conditions, and determines the consistency result of quality data of the process flow object 200 accordingly.

[0077] In step S108, it is determined whether the recovery conditions are met. The recovery conditions include: each target verification unit 303 has completed processing data 208; each has inspection data 209 corresponding to the completed processing data through the same verification identifier 304; and the inspection results of all mandatory inspection items meet the corresponding allowable range or preset qualification judgment conditions.

[0078] When any target verification unit lacks processing completion data, lacks corresponding inspection data, has mismatched verification identifiers, has incomplete mandatory inspection items, or has unqualified inspection results, the restricted state of the process flow object 200 is maintained in step S109, and a supplementary inspection task, rework task, or the next verification round can be generated.

[0079] When all target verification units meet the recovery conditions, in step S110, the process flow object 200 is restored to the normal flow state, and the issuance of ordinary production tasks for the target process is allowed again, or the verified products are allowed to continue to flow along the process route. This restoration does not change the isolation, rework, scrap, or re-inspection status of the original non-conforming products. The original non-conforming products only enter the normal flow after completing the corresponding disposal and meeting the release conditions.

[0080] Through the above steps, even if the number of completed records is equal to the number of inspection records, as long as there is a mismatch in the verification identifier, or a certain target verification unit lacks completed processing data or inspection data, the process flow object 200 will not be restored.

[0081] Compared to simply determining whether the total task volume is closed, the closure determination of each target verification unit requires that each target verification unit simultaneously have both processed data and qualified inspection data. This ensures that missing, duplicate, or mismatched data is retained in the state of the corresponding verification unit, which is beneficial for subsequent auditing, tracing, and anomaly location.

[0082] The process flow object 200 may include object identifier 201, product batch identifier 202, target process identifier 203, performing employee identifier 204, production task data 205, quality anomaly data 206, verification task data 207, processing completion data 208, inspection data 209, and flow status 210.

[0083] The process flow object 200 may also include process document version 211, inspection rule version 212, and operation guidance resource version 213. The above data may be stored in the same data record, or in multiple data tables, message topics, or microservices associated through object identifier 201.

[0084] Object identifier 201 is used to uniquely identify the process flow object 200; product batch identifier 202 and target process identifier 203 are used to identify the product batch and its process route location; employee identifier 204 is used to identify the employee performing ordinary production tasks or verification tasks.

[0085] The verification task data 207 may include a verification task identifier 301, a verification round identifier 302, a target verification unit 303, a verification identifier 304, a target inspection item 305, and a verification task status 309. The processed data 208 and the inspection data 209 are associated with the same target verification unit 303 through the verification identifier 304.

[0086] The workflow status 210 includes at least a normal workflow status and a restricted status, and may also include a pending verification status, a verification in progress status, a verification failed status, and a completed status. The workflow object 200 can be created when a product batch enters the target workflow, and is set to the completed status after the target workflow is completed and the next workflow is entered.

[0087] like Figure 3 As shown, the process of generating quality anomaly handling and verification tasks may include steps S201 to S207.

[0088] In step S201, the anomaly handling module 162 receives quality anomaly data 206 submitted by the quality inspection terminal 140.

[0089] In step S202, based on the product batch identifier, production task identifier, product identifier, or target process identifier in the quality anomaly data 206, the corresponding process flow object 200 is queried, and the quality anomaly data 206 is written into that object.

[0090] In step S203, anomaly detection items are determined based on the quality anomaly data 206. Anomaly detection items can be dimensional items, positional items, appearance items, hardness items, assembly integrity items, or functional performance items.

[0091] In step S204, target inspection item 305 is determined based on the anomaly detection items. Target inspection item 305 is used to verify whether the quality anomaly that caused the limiting state has been eliminated.

[0092] In step S205, a verification task 300 is created. The verification task 300 may include a verification task identifier 301, associated quality anomaly events, target process, performing employee, target number of verification units, target inspection items 305, and verification task status 309.

[0093] In step S206, the target verification unit 303 is determined. The number of target verification units 303 can be determined based on the anomaly level, historical quality data, inspection rules, or employee process reliability parameters 401.

[0094] In step S207, a verification identifier 304 is configured for each target verification unit 303, and the verification identifier 304 is associated with the verification task identifier 301, the target process identifier 203, and the target inspection item 305.

[0095] In some embodiments, after determining the anomaly detection items in step S203, steps S211 to S213 may also be executed. In step S211, abnormal operation steps are determined based on the anomaly detection items; in step S212, specific guidance content is determined from the operation guidance resources; in step S213, data on the execution of specific guidance or passing specific assessments by the employees are received.

[0096] Specific guidance content can be the target time period in the training video, the target chapter in the operation document, process images, equipment parameter setting examples, or inspection examples. After completing step S213, return to step S204, determine the target inspection item 305 based on the anomaly detection items and the current verification conditions, and continue to execute steps S205 to S207.

[0097] By returning the optional special guidance branch to the target inspection item determination step, the determination of the target inspection item can be avoided after the special guidance is completed, so that subsequent verification tasks still target the anomaly detection items that cause the limiting state.

[0098] Specialized guidance is an optional approach. For anomalies caused by processing equipment (404), material batches (405), process documents (406), or operational guidance resources (407), corresponding enterprise rectification tasks (408) can be created directly, without making specialized guidance a necessary prerequisite for verification tasks.

[0099] like Figure 4 As shown, each target verification unit 303 has a processing state 307 and a quality verification state 308. The processing state 307 includes a state to be processed and a processed state; the quality verification state 308 includes a state to be inspected, a qualified state 322, a failed state 323, and a failed state 324. Figure 4 The pending processing status 320 indicates that the processing status is pending processing; the processed and pending inspection status 321 indicates that the processing status is processed and the quality verification status is pending inspection. It is a combination display of the two status fields.

[0100] When the processing status of the target verification unit 303 is "pending processing", and the processing completion data 208 submitted by the production terminal 120 passes the verification identifier 304 and the event verification key, its processing status is updated to "processed", and the quality verification status is set to "pending inspection", thus forming... Figure 4 The processed and awaiting inspection status shown is 321.

[0101] The quality verification status is updated to either inspection qualified status 322 or inspection unqualified status 323 only when the processing status of the target verification unit 303 is processed and the quality verification status is pending inspection, and the inspection data 209 submitted by the quality inspection terminal 140 is verified by the verification identifier 304 and the event verification key.

[0102] When the processing status of the target verification unit 303 is still pending processing, if inspection data 209 is received, the inspection data is identified as out-of-order inspection data and a rejection status update 325 is generated. The processing status and quality verification status remain unchanged, and the target verification unit 303 is not allowed to directly enter the inspection qualified status 322.

[0103] The server generates an event verification key based on the verification task identifier 301, verification identifier 304, event type, and event sequence number, and sets a unique constraint on the event verification key. When it is detected that the same event verification key has already been processed, or the current processing state and quality verification state do not conform to the preset state transition order, a rejection state update 325 is generated, and the valid state of the target verification unit 303 is not changed repeatedly. When the event verification key includes an event source terminal identifier, a data source system identifier, or a globally unique event identifier, the unique constraint is established for the field combination containing the corresponding identifier.

[0104] The event verification key serves as an idempotent processing identifier. When the production terminal 120 or the quality inspection terminal 140 submits the same event again due to network retransmission, repeated clicks, or timeout retries, the server returns the processed result without updating the status or repeatedly entering data; the same completed data or the same inspection data must not be used to update other target verification units.

[0105] When verification task 300 is canceled, verification round becomes invalid, or the process document version or inspection rule version corresponding to the version snapshot changes, the quality verification status of the corresponding target verification unit 303 will be updated to failure status 324. Data in failure status will no longer participate in the recovery judgment of the current or subsequent verification tasks.

[0106] In some embodiments, a set of mandatory inspection items 306 is determined based on the anomaly detection items. The target verification unit 303 is determined to be in an inspection qualified state 322 only when the inspection data 209 covers all mandatory inspection items and the results of each item meet the corresponding allowable range or preset qualification judgment conditions.

[0107] When the inspection data 209 is missing any mandatory inspection item, the test value or the judgment result is empty, or the product identifier in the inspection data 209 is inconsistent with the product identifier associated with the verification identifier 304, the inspection data is not used to update the status, and the target verification unit 303 is kept in the pending inspection state; when the inspection data is valid but any mandatory inspection item does not meet the allowable range or the preset pass judgment condition, its quality verification status is updated to the inspection failure status 323.

[0108] The mandatory inspection item set 306 can record item identifiers, sampling rules, allowable ranges, preset pass / fail conditions, and inspection rule versions. The inspection data processing module 165 calls the mandatory inspection item set 306 according to the inspection rule version or version snapshot corresponding to the current verification task to verify the completeness of the inspection items, the validity of the inspection results, and the consistency of the inspection rules.

[0109] Therefore, inspection records that only contain a qualified conclusion but lack the original quality abnormality related measurement items cannot be used to lift the restriction status. This helps to avoid irrelevant inspection data or partial inspection data replacing the actual quality verification that needs to be completed.

[0110] like Figure 5 As shown, the completed data 208 and the inspection data 209 can be associated with the same target verification unit 303 through the interaction between the production terminal 120, the consistency control server 160 and the quality inspection terminal 140.

[0111] The consistency control server 160 first issues a verification task 300 and its verification identifier 304 to the production terminal 120. After the execution staff completes the corresponding verification process, the production terminal 120 submits the processing completion data 208 containing the verification identifier 304 to the consistency control server 160.

[0112] The consistency control server 160 associates the completed data 208 with the target verification unit 303 based on the verification identifier 304, updates its processing status 307 to the processed status, and sets the quality verification status 308 to the pending inspection status. Figure 4 The processed assembly awaiting inspection is shown as state 321. Subsequently, the consistency control server 160 can issue corresponding inspection tasks to the quality inspection terminal 140.

[0113] After completing the inspection, the quality inspection terminal 140 submits inspection data 209 containing verification identifier 304 to the consistency control server 160. The consistency control server 160 verifies the verification identifier 304 and associates the inspection data 209 with the same target verification unit 303.

[0114] The consistency control server 160 determines the quality data consistency result based on the data integrity and quality verification status 308 of each target verification unit 303, and returns the corresponding flow status 210 to the production terminal 120.

[0115] A verification task 300 may include multiple target verification units 303. The consistency determination module 166 checks the data of each target verification unit 303 one by one, rather than simply comparing the total amount of processing completed and the total amount of inspection records of the verification task 300.

[0116] For example, verification task 300 includes three target verification units, all of which have completed processing data, but one of the target verification units lacks inspection data. Even if the inspection data of the other target verification unit is submitted repeatedly, bringing the total number of inspection records to three, it is still uncertain whether the quality data is consistent.

[0117] In the example above, duplicate submissions of verification data do not increase the effective verification count of the corresponding target verification unit because the event verification keys are the same. Target verification units lacking verification data remain in the processed and pending verification state 321. This reduces the interference of duplicate records on task total statistics and recovery judgment.

[0118] like Figure 6 As shown, the verification round and version change control process may include steps S301 to S310.

[0119] In step S301, a current verification task 300 is created. In step S302, a verification round identifier 302 is configured for the current verification task 300. In step S303, a version snapshot 310 is recorded. The version snapshot 310 may include at least the process document version 211 and the inspection rule version 212.

[0120] In step S304, the processing completion data 208 or the inspection data 209 are received.

[0121] In step S305, it is verified whether the verification round identifier 302 in the received data is consistent with the current valid verification task 300.

[0122] When the received data does not belong to the current verification round, the data is rejected for use in the quality data consistency judgment of the current verification task 300 in step S306.

[0123] When the received data belongs to the current verification round, in step S307, it is determined whether the associated version has changed during the execution of verification task 300.

[0124] When the associated version has not changed, the current verification task 300 continues to be executed in step S308, including continuing to receive the processing completion data 208, the inspection data 209, and updating the status of the target verification unit 303.

[0125] When the associated version changes, in step S309, the current verification task 300 is set to a failed state, and the target verification unit 303 that has not yet been completed enters a failed state 324.

[0126] Subsequently, in step S310, a new verification task 300 is created based on the changed version, and a new verification round identifier 302 and verification identifier 304 are configured. After the new task is created, it is set as the currently valid verification task; the previous verification task remains in an invalid state, and its processed data 208 and inspection data 209 are not used in the new verification task 300, nor are they involved in the recovery status judgment.

[0127] In some embodiments, the current verification task 300 can also be invalidated when the version of the operation guidance resource 213 changes. By controlling the verification rounds and versions, the use of historical verification data, failed verification data, or data generated under old version conditions in the current production process can be reduced.

[0128] Version snapshot 310 can fix the corresponding process parameters, target inspection items, allowable ranges, and inspection rules when creating verification task 300. After a version change, the original verification task becomes invalid, which helps avoid directly combining and comparing data generated under different process conditions or inspection conditions.

[0129] like Figure 7 As shown, the reliability evaluation module 170 can distinguish between employee-side anomalies and enterprise production support anomalies based on the quality anomaly distribution under employees and production support objects 403. Figure 7 This is just one exemplary judgment order and does not constitute a limitation on the order of anomaly judgment or the conditions for the establishment of anomalies in enterprise production support; in other embodiments, it is possible to first judge or judge in parallel whether the quality anomaly is associated with the same production support object.

[0130] In step S401, obtain similar quality anomaly data for the target process; in step S402, determine whether the similar quality anomaly involves multiple employees.

[0131] When the same quality anomaly does not involve multiple employees or is mainly concentrated on the same employee, the employee-side anomaly is identified in step S403, and the employee process reliability parameter 401 is updated in step S404.

[0132] The employee process reliability parameter 401 can be determined based on at least two of the following: the number of historical quality anomalies, rework data, scrap data, number of repetitions of similar anomalies, and the pass rate of verification tasks for the employee in the target process. It is used to determine the number of subsequent target verification units, the proportion of target verification units selected from candidate products, or the tightened inspection cycle after the normal flow is restored.

[0133] exist Figure 7 In the exemplary judgment sequence shown, when the same quality anomaly involves multiple employees, step S405 determines whether the anomaly is associated with the same production support object 403. The production support object 403 may include processing equipment 404, material batches 405, process documents 406, and operation guidance resources 407.

[0134] When the frequency of association between similar quality anomalies and the same production support object 403 reaches a preset condition, a production support anomaly can be identified in step S406. In other embodiments, the production support object association judgment can be performed before or in parallel with step S402. Therefore, the identification of a production support anomaly does not require that the quality anomaly involve multiple employees. When no production support anomaly is identified and the quality anomaly is mainly concentrated on the same employee, it can be handled as an employee-side anomaly.

[0135] In step S407, the enterprise production support reliability parameter 402 is updated, and in step S408, the corresponding production support object 403 is restricted from continuing to be used for the target process.

[0136] For example, processing equipment 404 can be set to a state of needing maintenance, material batch 405 can be set to an isolated state, or process documents 406 and operation guidance resources 407 can be set to a state of needing revision.

[0137] In step S409, an enterprise rectification task 408 is generated. The enterprise rectification task 408 can be an equipment verification task, a material re-inspection task, a process verification task, or an operation guidance resource verification task.

[0138] In step S410, when the rectification verification meets the preset conditions, the available state of the corresponding production support object 403 is restored. Thus, the employee process reliability parameter 401 is used to control the verification task corresponding to the employee, and the enterprise production support reliability parameter 402 is used to control equipment, materials, process documents, or operation guidance resources.

[0139] The employee process reliability parameter 401 and the enterprise production support reliability parameter 402 are not only used for information display, but also for adjusting the number of target verification units, the proportion of target verification units selected from candidate products, the tightened inspection cycle after the normal flow is restored, or the availability status of production support object 403, thereby forming actual control over task issuance, inspection intensity, processing equipment and material usage.

[0140] An example: Drilling process with wire strippers This embodiment takes the drilling process in the production process of wire strippers as an example. The production process of wire strippers can include, in sequence, laser cutting, deburring, drilling, tapping, forming, heat treatment, polishing, sharpening, assembly, handle assembly, and packaging.

[0141] After product batch B001 enters the drilling process, the consistency control server 160 creates a process flow object 200 for product batch B001 and the drilling process. This object is associated with employee A, the drilling production task, the process document version, and the inspection rule version.

[0142] After employee A completes the drilling process, the quality inspection terminal 140 discovers that some products have hole diameters exceeding the allowable range and submits quality anomaly data 206. The anomaly handling module 162 writes the quality anomaly data 206 into the process flow object 200 and switches it to a restricted state.

[0143] The verification task module 163 identifies the aperture as the target inspection item 305 based on the aperture anomaly and creates a verification task 300. In this embodiment, the verification task 300 includes five target verification units 303. Five is only an example; the actual number can be set according to the anomaly level, historical quality data, and enterprise quality rules.

[0144] The verification task module 163 configures different verification identifiers 304 for each of the five target verification units 303. Employee A completes the verification process one by one, and the production terminal 120 submits the processing completion data 208 containing the corresponding verification identifier 304.

[0145] Quality inspectors read the verification identifier 304 through the quality inspection terminal 140, perform aperture inspection on the corresponding target verification unit 303, and submit inspection data 209 including the measured aperture value, the inspection object identifier, the inspection rule version, and optional terminal-side judgment results. The consistency control server 160 obtains the allowable aperture range based on the version snapshot corresponding to the current verification task, and determines whether the measured aperture value is qualified accordingly.

[0146] When all five target verification units 303 have completed processing data 208 and the aperture inspection results are all within the allowable range, the consistency determination module 166 determines that the quality data is consistent, and the status control module 167 restores the process flow object 200 to the normal flow state. Previously discovered non-conforming aperture products remain isolated and are handled separately according to the rework, re-inspection, scrapping, or other preset disposal procedures.

[0147] If any target verification unit 303 lacks processing completion data 208, lacks inspection data 209, has a mismatched verification identifier 304, or has an unqualified aperture inspection result, the restricted state is maintained, and the next verification round can be created. When creating the next verification round, the previous round is set as failed or invalid, and only the data from the new currently valid verification task is used for consistency judgment.

[0148] For example, if one of the five target verification units lacks aperture inspection data, and the aperture inspection data of another target verification unit is uploaded repeatedly, the duplicate data will not fill the missing unit, and the process flow object 200 will remain in a restricted state.

[0149] One example: Deburring process with wire strippers This embodiment uses the deburring process with wire strippers as an example. Quality defects in the deburring process may include burr residue, excessive local polishing, surface scratches, or abnormal edge shape.

[0150] When the quality inspection terminal 140 detects burr residue, the anomaly handling module 162 switches the corresponding process flow object 200 to a restricted state and determines at least one abnormal operation step among clamping position, grinding angle, contact time and edge inspection according to the preset mapping relationship.

[0151] The server can determine the corresponding specific guidance content from deburring operation videos, operation instruction documents, or inspection examples. After the employee completes the specific guidance or specific assessment, a deburring verification task 300 is created, and at least one of the following—burr height, edge integrity, and surface condition—is identified as the target inspection item 305.

[0152] After each target verification unit 303 completes the deburring process, the production terminal 120 submits the processing completion data 208 containing the verification identifier 304; the quality inspection terminal 140 reads the corresponding verification identifier 304, executes the target inspection item 305 and submits the inspection data 209.

[0153] Only when each target verification unit 303 has completed processing and passed the corresponding quality inspection will the process flow object 200 corresponding to the deburring process be restored. When there are missing inspection items, discrepancies between processing data and inspection data, or failure of any target verification unit to pass inspection, the restricted state will be maintained.

[0154] Therefore, the conditions for resuming the deburring process simultaneously constrain the processing completion event, the inspection object, and the target inspection item, which can reduce the situation where the production process is resumed based solely on the appearance qualification conclusion or the number of inspections.

[0155] The above treatment can also be applied to the sharpening process of wire strippers. For example, if the blade edge is skewed or the sharpening angle is abnormal, the positioning reference, sharpening angle, or processing path can be identified as abnormal operation steps, and the blade edge size, sharpening angle, or blade edge appearance can be identified as target inspection item 305.

[0156] In other embodiments, the process flow object 200 can also be associated with material outbound data, rework data, scrap data, next process confirmation data, and inbound data. The quantity confirmed by quality can be used as input for piecework or settlement processing, but the above business processing does not change the core of this invention, which uses verification identifiers to realize object-level quality data correspondence and status control.

[0157] The system 100 described above can be implemented by an electronic device. The electronic device includes a processor, a memory, a communication interface, and a bus connecting the various components. When the computer program stored in the memory is executed by the processor, it causes the electronic device to perform the method described in any of the above embodiments.

[0158] The above methods can also be implemented by a computer program stored in a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, or provided as a computer program product including a computer program; when the computer program is executed by a processor, it implements the methods described in any of the above embodiments. The above modules can be implemented by software, hardware, or a combination of both, and can be located in the same electronic device or distributed across multiple communicating electronic devices.

[0159] The above description uses the wire stripper production process as an example. This invention can also be applied to other product production processes that have multiple processing steps, quality inspection, and anomaly verification requirements.

[0160] Although embodiments of the present invention have been disclosed above, they are not limited to the applications listed in the specification and embodiments. They can be applied to various fields suitable for the present invention. Other modifications can be easily made by those skilled in the art. Therefore, without departing from the general concept defined by the claims and their equivalents, the present invention is not limited to the specific details and illustrations shown and described herein.

Claims

1. A method for controlling the consistency of production process data based on process flow objects, characterized in that, Performed by the consistency control server, including: Establish process flow objects for the target processes of product batches; In response to the quality anomaly data submitted by the quality inspection terminal, the process flow object is switched from normal flow state to restricted state, and a verification task including multiple target verification units is created. Each target verification unit is configured with a unique corresponding verification identifier, and the target inspection item corresponding to the anomaly detection item in the quality anomaly data is determined. The system receives the processing completion data submitted by the production terminal and the inspection data submitted by the quality inspection terminal. It associates the processing completion data and the inspection data with the corresponding target verification unit according to the verification identifier. The same processing completion data or the same inspection data is associated with only one target verification unit. Based on the processing status and quality verification status of each target verification unit, as well as the correspondence between the processing completion data and the inspection data, the consistency result of the quality data is determined. The process flow object will be restored to normal flow state only when each target verification unit is associated with processing completion data and inspection data that correspond to each other according to the verification identifier and are not reused, and the target inspection items are all qualified; otherwise, the restricted state will be maintained.

2. The production process data consistency control method based on process flow objects according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process flow object is associated with the product batch identifier, target process identifier, production task identifier, quality anomaly event identifier, verification task identifier, and flow status; The target verification unit is the product to be verified, a product sub-batch, a product container, or a set of products corresponding to a single processing completion event; the verification identifier is an electronic record, a QR code, a barcode, or an RFID tag.

3. The production process data consistency control method based on process flow objects according to claim 1, characterized in that, The completed processing data and the inspection data respectively carry a verification task identifier, a verification identifier, an event type, and an event sequence number; The consistency control server generates an event verification key based on this, and updates the corresponding state only when the event verification key has not been processed and the current state of the target verification unit conforms to the preset state transition order; otherwise, it maintains the original state and returns a rejection result or a processed result.

4. The production process data consistency control method based on process flow objects according to claim 1, characterized in that, The target inspection items include at least one mandatory inspection item, and the at least one mandatory inspection item constitutes a set of mandatory inspection items; The corresponding target verification unit is deemed qualified only when the test data matches the verification label, covers all mandatory test items, and each item meets the corresponding allowable range or preset qualification judgment conditions; If the inspection item is missing, the data is empty, or the inspection object identifier does not match, the inspection data is rejected and the system remains in a pending inspection state. If the inspection data is valid but any mandatory inspection item fails, the quality verification status of the corresponding target verification unit will be updated to an inspection failure status.

5. The production process data consistency control method based on process flow objects according to claim 1, characterized in that, Establish a mapping relationship between anomaly detection items, process operation steps, and operation guidance content in advance, and determine abnormal operation steps and corresponding special guidance content based on the anomaly detection items; The verification task is issued after the employee completes the specific guidance content or passes the specific assessment, and the issuance of ordinary batch tasks of the target process to the employee is stopped during the restriction period.

6. The production process data consistency control method based on process flow objects according to claim 1, characterized in that, Configure a verification round identifier for the verification task, and record a version snapshot of the process document version and inspection rule version when creating the verification task; For each process flow object, only one currently valid verification task is retained, and data from other rounds or failed tasks are not included in the recovery status judgment; When the associated version changes, the current verification task is invalidated and a new verification task is created based on the changed version.

7. A method for production process data consistency control based on process flow objects according to any one of claims 1 to 6, characterized in that, The employee's process reliability parameters are determined based on at least two of the following: historical quality anomaly data, rework data, scrap data, and verification task completion data during the target process. Based on this, determine the number of target verification units for subsequent verification tasks, the proportion of target verification units selected from candidate products, or the stricter inspection cycle after resuming normal circulation.

8. The production process data consistency control method based on process flow objects according to claim 7, characterized in that, The frequency of occurrence of the same anomaly detection items associated with the same production support object is statistically analyzed. The production support object includes at least one of processing equipment, material batches, process documents, and operation guidance resources. When the occurrence frequency meets the preset association frequency, it is determined that there is a production support anomaly, and the corresponding production support object is restricted from being used for the target process.

9. A production process data consistency control system based on process flow objects, characterized in that, include: The system comprises a production terminal, a quality inspection terminal, and a consistency control server, wherein the consistency control server is used for: Establish process flow objects for the target processes of product batches; In response to the quality anomaly data submitted by the quality inspection terminal, the process flow object is switched to a restricted state, and a verification task including multiple target verification units is created. A unique corresponding verification identifier is configured for each target verification unit, and the target inspection item corresponding to the anomaly detection item in the quality anomaly data is determined. According to the verification identifier, the processing completion data submitted by the production terminal and the inspection data submitted by the quality inspection terminal are respectively associated with the corresponding target verification unit, and the same processing completion data or the same inspection data is associated with only one target verification unit. The consistency result of quality data is determined based on the processing status and quality verification status of each target verification unit and the correspondence between the processing completion data and the inspection data. The process flow object is restored to the normal flow state only when each target verification unit is associated with processing completion data and inspection data that correspond to each other according to the verification identifier and are not reused, and the target inspection items are all qualified. Otherwise, the restricted state is maintained.

10. An electronic device, characterized in that, The method includes a processor and a memory communicatively connected to the processor, the memory storing a computer program that, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to perform the method according to any one of claims 1 to 8.

Images