A production order process issuing method and system based on a visual process card

Abstract

This invention relates to the field of data processing technology, specifically to a method and system for issuing production work orders based on a visual process card. The method includes: acquiring the editing event of the current visual process card and the corresponding snapshot of the process route before editing; determining candidate process route snapshots; determining the directly affected neighborhood; determining the set of actual change nodes; determining the set of overflow nodes; determining the set of broken nodes; determining the length of the broken interval; calculating the mirror breakage degree of the candidate process route snapshot; when the mirror breakage degree is less than a preset judgment threshold, retaining the candidate process route snapshot and performing a partial update; when the mirror breakage degree is greater than or equal to the preset judgment threshold, discarding the candidate process route snapshot and regenerating a complete process route with all the content of the current visual process card and issuing it. This invention can improve the accuracy, timeliness, and controllability of visual process cards in the production execution management process.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of data processing technology, specifically to a method and system for issuing production work orders based on visual process cards. Background Technology

[0002] In multi-variety, small-batch, and mixed-line production scenarios, the same production line typically needs to execute production work orders for multiple product models and different batches. The materials, process sequences, process parameters, and inspection requirements for each work order differ, and on-site personnel need to complete assembly, processing, and testing based on process cards.

[0003] In existing technologies, production orders are typically obtained by ERP or MES systems, which then generate production work orders based on product models, bills of materials, and preset process routes. After the work order is issued, the system associates the corresponding process information, operational requirements, process parameters, and work instructions with the production work order or workstation, and then distributes them to the terminals at each workstation. Operators retrieve the corresponding electronic process card by scanning the work order number, product barcode, or equipment number, and complete the task according to the steps displayed on the terminal. After the task is completed, the work report, quality data, and material usage information are uploaded to the MES system, thereby realizing the issuance of production tasks, process guidance, and production process recording.

[0004] However, the above solutions still have the following shortcomings: Existing technologies mainly associate and distribute processes based on the process version determined when the work order is issued, and process cards are usually generated or bound once when the work order is issued. Once the work order has entered the production state, if the process content is modified due to design changes, material substitutions, quality corrections, or equipment adjustments, the already opened workstation pages or cached process cards will not be updated synchronously, usually requiring personnel to notify, exit the page, and reload. The system also has difficulty automatically determining the work orders, batches, and workstations affected by changes, and lacks a mechanism for verifying the expiration of old versions and the execution of the previous version. Therefore, different workstations of the same work order may execute both old and new versions of the process simultaneously, leading to errors in material selection, operation sequence, process parameters, or inspection requirements, ultimately causing rework, line stoppages, delivery delays, and making it difficult to trace the actual process version executed by the product. Summary of the Invention

[0005] This invention provides a method and system for issuing production work orders based on visual process cards to solve existing problems.

[0006] The present invention provides a method for issuing production work orders based on visual process cards, which adopts the following technical solution: One embodiment of the present invention provides a method for issuing production work orders based on a visual process card, the method comprising the following steps: Obtain the edit event of the current visualization process card and the corresponding snapshot of the process route before editing, and perform change mapping on the corresponding route nodes in the snapshot of the process route before editing based on the edit event to obtain the candidate process route snapshot; The direct impact neighborhood is determined from the process route snapshot before editing based on the operation type of the editing event. The direct impact neighborhood includes the route nodes that are allowed to change in this editing event. By comparing the snapshot of the process route before editing with the snapshot of the candidate process route, the route nodes that have changed are identified as the actual set of changed nodes, and the nodes in the actual set of changed nodes that do not belong to the direct impact neighborhood are identified as the overflow node set. Check whether the predecessor-successor connections of each node in the overflow node set have changed before and after editing, and identify the nodes that have changed as the broken node set; The length of the fracture interval is determined based on the sequential position of each node in the fracture node set in the snapshot of the candidate process route. The mirror fracture degree of the candidate process route snapshot is calculated based on the number of nodes in the fracture node set and the length of the fracture interval. When the degree of image fragmentation is less than the preset judgment threshold, the snapshot of the candidate process route is retained and locally updated. When the degree of image fragmentation is greater than or equal to the preset judgment threshold, the snapshot of the candidate process route is discarded and the complete process route is regenerated and issued with all the contents of the current visualized process card.

[0007] Furthermore, based on the edit event, the corresponding route nodes in the pre-edit process route snapshot are modified and mapped to obtain candidate process route snapshots, specifically including: Locate the route node corresponding to the edit event in the process route snapshot before editing. The edit event includes the process card component identifier, operation type, edited process content and component sequence position. The process route snapshot before editing includes route nodes and the predecessor and successor connections of each route node. Based on the operation type, consecutive similar operations generated by the same process card component within a preset time window are merged, and the edited process content and component sequence position are mapped to the located route node to generate a candidate process route snapshot.

[0008] Furthermore, the directly affected neighborhood is determined from the pre-edit process route snapshot based on the operation type of the edit event, specifically including: When the operation type is process content modification, the route node corresponding to the edit event is determined as the direct action neighborhood; When the operation type is adding or deleting a process, the added or deleted route node, its direct predecessor route node, and its direct successor route node are determined as the direct action neighborhood. When the operation type is sequential adjustment, the route node to be moved, the route nodes adjacent to the route node to be moved before the move, and the route nodes adjacent to the route node to be moved after the move are determined as the direct action neighborhood.

[0009] Furthermore, by comparing the snapshot of the process route before editing with the snapshot of the candidate process route, the route nodes that have changed are identified as the set of actual change nodes, specifically including: For any route node in the pre-edit process route snapshot, if the operation name, equipment, time, material or process parameters of the route node change before and after editing, or if the correspondence between the route node and the process card component changes before and after editing, or if the direct predecessor route node and the direct successor route node of the route node change before and after editing, or if the route node only exists in one of the pre-edit process route snapshots and the candidate process route snapshots, then the route node is identified as a changed route node, and all changed route nodes are combined into an actual change node set.

[0010] Furthermore, examine whether the predecessor-successor connections of each node in the overflow node set have changed before and after the edit. Nodes that have changed are identified as the broken node set, specifically including: For each overflow node in the overflow node set, compare the direct predecessor and direct successor route nodes of the overflow node in the pre-edit process route snapshot with the direct predecessor and direct successor route nodes of the overflow node in the candidate process route snapshot to see if they are consistent. If the overflow node has the same direct predecessor and direct successor nodes in both the pre-edit process route snapshot and the candidate process route snapshot, then the overflow node is identified as a non-fracture node. If the overflow node is different from the direct predecessor or direct successor node in the pre-edit process route snapshot and the candidate process route snapshot, then the overflow node is identified as a broken node. All fracture nodes are grouped into a fracture node set.

[0011] Furthermore, the length of the fracture interval is determined based on the sequential position of each node in the fracture node set within the snapshot of the candidate process route, specifically including: Extract the sequential position of each node in the set of fracture nodes in the snapshot of the candidate process route; The minimum value among all extracted sequential positions is determined as the starting position, and the maximum value is determined as the ending position. The range of continuous nodes covered from the starting position to the ending position is defined as the break interval, and the number of nodes contained in the break interval is taken as the length of the break interval.

[0012] Furthermore, the mirror fracture degree of the candidate process route snapshot is calculated based on the number of nodes in the fracture node set and the length of the fracture interval, specifically including: The ratio of the number of nodes in the set of fracture nodes to the total number of nodes in the snapshot of the candidate process route, excluding the direct impact neighborhood, is determined as the structural spillover ratio. The ratio of the length of the fracture interval to the total number of nodes in the snapshot of the candidate process route is determined as the fracture coverage ratio; Based on the overflow ratio of the structure and the fracture coverage ratio, the mirror fracture degree of the candidate process route snapshot is calculated.

[0013] Furthermore, based on the spillover ratio of the structure and the fracture coverage ratio, the mirror fracture degree of the candidate process route snapshot is calculated, specifically including: The exponential function value is calculated with the natural constant as the base and the negative value of the product of the structure spillover ratio and the fracture coverage ratio as the exponent. Subtracting the value of the exponential function from 1 yields the degree of mirror breakage of the snapshot of the candidate process route.

[0014] Furthermore, when the degree of fracture in the mirror image is less than a preset judgment threshold, the snapshot of the candidate process route is retained and locally updated, specifically including: When the current edit contains an edit event, the degree of mirror breakage of that edit event is used as the work order-level refactoring judgment metric; When the current edit contains at least two edit events, the fracture intervals corresponding to each edit event are merged according to their sequential positions to obtain at least one fracture interval group. When the number of fracture interval groups is one, the mirror fracture degree corresponding to the fracture interval group is used as the work order-level reconstruction judgment quantity. When the number of fracture interval groups is at least two, for each fracture interval group, the mirror fracture degree corresponding to the fracture interval group is subtracted from 1 to obtain the normal preservation degree of each fracture interval group. Then, all normal preservation degrees are multiplied together, and the product is subtracted from 1 to obtain the work order-level reconstruction judgment quantity. When the refactoring judgment quantity at the work order level is less than the preset judgment threshold, the snapshot of the candidate process route is retained. Based on the changes in each node in the actual set of changed nodes, update the process content of the corresponding node in the snapshot of the candidate process route; Based on the changes in the predecessor-successor connections of each node in the overflow node set, the predecessor-successor connections of the corresponding nodes in the snapshot of the candidate process route are updated. The updated snapshot of the candidate process route is issued as an executable process route for the production work order.

[0015] This invention proposes a production work order process issuance system based on a visual process card, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor. When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements the steps of the production work order process issuance method based on a visual process card.

[0016] The beneficial effects of the technical solution of the present invention are: In this embodiment of the invention, by monitoring process change information in real time, the scope of work orders, batches, and workstations affected by the change is automatically determined when a change in process content is detected. Based on a version verification mechanism, it is ensured that each workstation obtains and loads the latest version of the process card before execution, while old version process cards are invalidated. This effectively solves the problem of inconsistent process versions caused by design changes, material substitutions, quality corrections, or equipment adjustments in multi-variety, small-batch, and mixed-line production scenarios. It avoids errors in material selection, operation sequence, process parameters, and inspection requirements caused by different workstations executing new and old versions of the process at the same work order. This significantly reduces rework rates and downtime risks, ensures the traceability of the actual process version executed by the product, and improves the accuracy, timeliness, and controllability of production execution management. Attached Figure Description

[0017] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention or the prior art, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments or the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0018] Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating a production work order process issuance method based on a visual process card, provided as an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 2 This is a structural diagram of a production work order process issuance system based on a visual process card, provided as an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0019] To further illustrate the technical means and effects adopted by the present invention to achieve its intended purpose, the following, in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and preferred embodiments, details the specific implementation, structure, features, and effects of a production work order process issuance method based on a visual process card proposed according to the present invention. In the following description, different "one embodiment" or "another embodiment" do not necessarily refer to the same embodiment. Furthermore, specific features, structures, or characteristics in one or more embodiments can be combined in any suitable form.

[0020] Unless otherwise defined, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention pertains.

[0021] The following description, in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, details a specific scheme for a production work order process issuance method based on a visual process card provided by the present invention.

[0022] This invention provides a method and system for issuing production work orders based on visual process cards. Please refer to [link / reference]. Figure 1 The diagram illustrates a flowchart of a production work order process issuance method based on a visual process card, according to an embodiment of the present invention. The method includes the following steps: S101. Obtain the edit event of the current visualization process card and the corresponding snapshot of the process route before editing, and perform change mapping on the corresponding route nodes in the snapshot of the process route before editing based on the edit event to obtain the candidate process route snapshot.

[0023] In this embodiment, based on the edit event, the corresponding route nodes in the pre-edit process route snapshot are modified and mapped to obtain a candidate process route snapshot, specifically including: Locate the route node corresponding to the edit event in the process route snapshot before editing. The edit event includes the process card component identifier, operation type, edited process content and component sequence position. The process route snapshot before editing includes route nodes and the predecessor and successor connections of each route node. Based on the operation type, consecutive similar operations generated by the same process card component within a preset time window are merged, and the edited process content and component sequence position are mapped to the located route node to generate a candidate process route snapshot.

[0024] For example, in the prior art, the Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system or Manufacturing Execution System (MES) system obtains production orders from the upper level of the enterprise, generates production work orders based on product models, bills of materials and preset process routes, and then sends the corresponding process content to the workstation terminal for on-site operators to execute.

[0025] To address the issue of "the inability to update synchronously after the process card is issued" in the aforementioned background technology, this embodiment introduces candidate process route snapshot pre-mapping and an overflow identification mechanism based on direct action neighborhood during the editing stage. This allows for the automatic detection and evaluation of structural anomalies before the process card is issued to the production end, thereby preventing erroneous processes from entering the production execution stage.

[0026] In this scenario, the ERP or MES system acts as the main body for issuing process cards, associating and distributing work instructions to workstations when a work order is released. However, due to its "one-time binding" mechanism, when a process change occurs after a work order has entered the production stage, the system cannot automatically identify the affected work orders and update them synchronously. This results in different workstations executing different versions of the process for the same work order. The relationship between these two systems is as follows: ERP sets the plan, and MES controls the execution; the two collaborate to complete the entire process from planning to workstation execution of a production order.

[0027] Specifically, some concepts in this embodiment are explained as follows: Visualized process cards: Process guidance documents displayed in a graphical interface, including the sequence of processes, the process content of each process, and process parameters. Process personnel can adjust the content of the process cards by dragging, editing, and other methods.

[0028] Editing event: A complete operation performed by a process engineer on a visual process card, including adding or deleting processes, modifying fields, or dragging and sorting. Each editing event records four elements: process card component identifier, operation type, edited process content, and component order position. In this embodiment, it is a single process engineer editing a visual process card.

[0029] Process card component identifier: A unique number for each graphic element of a process in the visual process card, used to locate the corresponding route node (also known as a process route node) in the background data.

[0030] Operation type: The types of editing events include four categories: modification of process content, addition of process, deletion of process, and adjustment of sequence.

[0031] Edited process content: After the editing event is completed, all process parameter information included in the process is displayed, including process name, equipment model, time quota, material grade and various process parameters.

[0032] Component sequence position: The sequential position of this process in the entire process route after the edit event is completed.

[0033] Pre-edit process route snapshot: A complete copy of the process route data saved by the system before the current edit event is executed, containing all route nodes and their predecessor and successor connections, serving as a benchmark for determining the scope of impact of the current edit event.

[0034] Candidate process route snapshot: A copy of the new process route data generated in memory after the system modifies the mapping of corresponding route nodes in the previous process route snapshot based on the edit event. This snapshot is not sent to the production end initially, but is only used as an evaluation basis for subsequent overflow identification, breakage determination, and refactoring decisions.

[0035] This embodiment uses the process card editing process of a production work order as an example to explain the implementation steps in detail. The process route currently in effect for this work order includes 6 processes, in the following order: material cutting (C1), drilling (C2), welding (C3), painting (C4), assembly (C5), and inspection (C6).

[0036] After the process engineer opens the visual process card for the work order, the system initiates an edit event listener. The system captures every editing operation performed by the process engineer in real time by listening to the addition, deletion, field modification, and drag-and-drop sorting operations on the process card interface.

[0037] For example, in this embodiment, the process engineer performed the following operation: dragging the inspection process from position 6 to position 2, placing it after the blanking process and before the drilling process. The system captured this edit event and recorded the four key elements of the edit event: the process card component identifier is C6, the operation type is sequence adjustment, the edited process content is all the process parameters of the inspection process (remaining unchanged), and the component sequence position is position 2.

[0038] Subsequently, the system retrieves a snapshot of the process route that was in effect before the edit event occurred, based on the current production work order number. In this snapshot, the order and preceding / following relationships of each route node are as follows: Blanking (C1) is followed by Drilling (C2); Drilling (C2) is preceded by Blanking (C1) and followed by Welding (C3); Welding (C3) is preceded by Drilling (C2) and followed by Painting (C4); Painting (C4) is preceded by Welding (C3) and followed by Assembly (C5); Assembly (C5) is preceded by Painting (C4) and followed by Inspection (C6); Inspection (C6) is preceded by Assembly (C5) and followed by nothing. This snapshot is the process route snapshot before editing in this embodiment.

[0039] The system pre-maps the edit results in memory based on the captured edit event information. Specifically, the system uses the process card component identifier C6 as the matching basis to locate the route node corresponding to the inspection process in the pre-edit process route snapshot. Then, the system determines the component sequence position of the changed content according to the operation type (sequence adjustment), changes the component sequence position from the 6th position to the 2nd position, and recalculates the predecessor-successor connection relationship of the route node according to the changed component sequence position: the predecessor of inspection (C6) becomes blanking (C1), and the successor becomes drilling (C2); the successor of blanking (C1) becomes inspection (C6); the predecessor of drilling (C2) becomes inspection (C6). The system maps the above changes to the located route node and generates a new process route snapshot in memory, with the process sequence as follows: blanking (C1), inspection (C6), drilling (C2), welding (C3), painting (C4), assembly (C5). This snapshot is the candidate process route snapshot in this embodiment. This snapshot of the candidate process route will not be released to the production side for the time being, but will only be used as a basis for subsequent evaluation.

[0040] In the above process, if the process personnel perform the same type of operation on the same process card component multiple times within the preset time window, such as dragging the same inspection component three times in a row within 3 seconds, the system uses the existing data deduplication and time sorting methods to merge the above multiple operations into one valid edit event, and use a single edit event for subsequent processing to avoid duplicate counting.

[0041] It should be noted that the system does not immediately send the candidate process route snapshot to the production end, but instead retains it in memory as a basis for subsequent evaluation. The purpose of this design is to prevent edit events from directly impacting the production environment. Before confirming that the candidate route does not have structural anomalies, it is not sent to the workstation terminal, thereby preventing erroneous process routes from entering the production execution phase. The difference analysis between the candidate process route snapshot and the snapshot before editing forms the data foundation for all subsequent overflow identification and breakage determination.

[0042] S102. Determine the directly affected neighborhood from the process route snapshot before editing based on the operation type of the editing event. The directly affected neighborhood includes the route nodes that are allowed to change in this editing event.

[0043] In this embodiment, the directly affected neighborhood is determined from the pre-edit process route snapshot based on the operation type of the edit event, specifically including: When the operation type is process content modification, the route node corresponding to the edit event is determined as the direct action neighborhood; When the operation type is adding or deleting a process, the added or deleted route node, its direct predecessor route node, and its direct successor route node are determined as the direct action neighborhood. When the operation type is sequential adjustment, the route node to be moved, the route nodes adjacent to the route node to be moved before the move, and the route nodes adjacent to the route node to be moved after the move are determined as the direct action neighborhood.

[0044] Specifically, some concepts in this embodiment are explained as follows: Directly affected neighborhood: The range of route nodes that are allowed to change under normal circumstances during this edit event. This range is determined based on the operation type and serves as the benchmark for subsequently determining "which nodes constitute abnormal overflow." Any changes to nodes outside the directly affected neighborhood are considered abnormal overflows.

[0045] Overflow node set: Among the route nodes that actually changed, those nodes that do not belong to the directly affected neighborhood. The changes in these nodes were not caused by the normal scope of this edit, but were passively triggered by mechanisms such as data reconstruction or template refresh in the system background.

[0046] Actual change node set: The set of all route nodes that have undergone valid changes between the pre-edit process route snapshot and the candidate process route snapshot.

[0047] Structural spillover ratio: The ratio of the number of spillover nodes to the total number of all nodes outside the directly affected neighborhood, used to measure the extent to which a local edit spreads to unrelated processes.

[0048] This embodiment continues the editing scenario from the previous embodiment, and further explains the specific implementation method of this step based on the editing event where the process engineer moves the inspection process from the 6th position to the 2nd position: In production work order process issuance scenarios, process engineers typically need to adjust the process content in the visual process card based on product model, processing requirements, or on-site equipment conditions. This might involve moving a process before another, modifying the equipment model for a process, or adding a new process between adjacent processes. Under normal circumstances, the process route only needs to update the edited process and a small number of directly connected adjacent processes; it should not affect other unrelated processes in the route.

[0049] However, in practical systems, visual process cards, operation forms, process templates, and production work order process routes are typically maintained as independent data objects. After a process engineer makes a partial modification to the process card, the system may need to re-call the process template, rebuild the operation form, or regenerate the entire process route. During this process, even if the process engineer only modifies one operation, it may cause changes to the content, component correspondences, or predecessor-successor connections of multiple unrelated route nodes. For example, adjusting only the position of the inspection operation may simultaneously regenerate route nodes such as blanking and drilling that were not involved in the adjustment. The essence of this phenomenon is that the impact of a partial process edit exceeds its normal operating range, indicating that the process card editing results cannot be directly and accurately transmitted to the corresponding route nodes, but rather undergo additional data reconstruction and transformation processes. The larger the impact range, the higher the degree of redundant construction, and the more likely it is to cause data inconsistencies between the visual process card and the production work order process route. Therefore, this method quantifies and evaluates the spillover degree of each edit by determining the direct impact neighborhood and identifying abnormal changes exceeding this range in subsequent steps.

[0050] For example, a process engineer executes an edit event that moves inspection step C6 from position 6 to position 2. The four key elements of this edit event are: component identifier is C6, operation type is sequence adjustment, the edited process content is all process parameters of the inspection step, and the component sequence position is position 2.

[0051] Based on the operation type (order adjustment) of the edit event, the system determines the directly affected neighborhood according to the following rules: The node being moved is C6; before the move, the node adjacent to C6 was C5 (C5's successor is C6); after the move, the nodes adjacent to C6 are C1 (C1's successor becomes C6) and C2 (C2's predecessor becomes C6). After merging and deduplicating these nodes, the system obtains the direct neighborhood affected by this edit event. for: .

[0052] The direct impact neighborhood indicates that the operation of moving the inspection process from position 6 to position 2 should, under normal circumstances, only affect four route nodes: material cutting (C1), drilling (C2), assembly (C5), and inspection (C6). Here, C6 is the moved node, C5 is the previous neighbor, and C1 and C2 are the new neighbors after the move. Welding (C3) and painting (C4) do not belong to this direct impact neighborhood. If these two nodes change in the candidate process route snapshot, it is considered an abnormal spillover, requiring marking in subsequent steps and further assessment to determine if their preceding / following connections have been broken.

[0053] S103. Compare the snapshot of the process route before editing with the snapshot of the candidate process route, determine the route nodes that have changed as the actual changed node set, and determine the nodes in the actual changed node set that do not belong to the direct affected neighborhood as the overflow node set.

[0054] In this embodiment, by comparing the snapshot of the process route before editing with the snapshot of the candidate process route, the route nodes that have changed are determined as the actual set of changed nodes, specifically including: For any route node in the pre-edit process route snapshot, if the operation name, equipment, time, material or process parameters of the route node change before and after editing, or if the correspondence between the route node and the process card component changes before and after editing, or if the direct predecessor route node and the direct successor route node of the route node change before and after editing, or if the route node only exists in one of the pre-edit process route snapshots and the candidate process route snapshots, then the route node is identified as a changed route node, and all changed route nodes are combined into an actual change node set.

[0055] Specifically, some concepts in this embodiment are explained as follows: Actual Change Node Set: This set comprises all route nodes that have undergone substantial changes between the pre-edit process route snapshot and the candidate process route snapshot. This set is determined based on four objective conditions; a node is included if any one of these conditions is met.

[0056] Relationship change record set: For each node in the actual change node set, record the change status of its direct predecessor and direct successor nodes before and after editing, forming a relationship change record that can be queried in subsequent steps.

[0057] Following the example in the above steps, the process engineer executed an edit event that shifted inspection step C6 from position 6 to position 2, and the system has determined the directly affected neighborhood. for: And generated a snapshot of the candidate process route.

[0058] A candidate process route snapshot refers to a new copy of the process route data generated by the system in memory after changing the mapping of the corresponding route nodes in the previous process route snapshot based on the current edit event.

[0059] This snapshot has the following three characteristics: Based on edit event generation: The system uses the process card component identifier as the matching basis, locates the route node corresponding to the edit event in the process route snapshot before editing, and then maps the changes generated by the edit event (including the new component order position, the edited process content, etc.) to the located route node to form a new copy of the process route data.

[0060] Not to be distributed yet: This snapshot is only stored in the system memory and is not directly distributed to the production end.

[0061] As a comparison object: the system compares the snapshot of the process route before editing with the snapshot of the candidate process route, identifies all the route nodes that have changed, and thus determines whether the current editing has exceeded the normal scope of operation.

[0062] Relationship with the snapshot of the process route before editing: The pre-edit process route snapshot is the route state that was in effect before the edit occurred, representing the "state before modification"; the candidate process route snapshot is the route state pre-mapped in memory based on the edit event, representing the "expected state after modification". The two are compared and analyzed, and any node that has changed in the candidate snapshot but is not in the directly affected neighborhood is regarded as an abnormal overflow node.

[0063] After the process engineer moves the inspection step from position 6 to position 2, the system generates a snapshot of the candidate process route with the following process sequence: blanking (C1), inspection (C6), drilling (C2), welding (C3), painting (C4), and assembly (C5). This sequence represents the expected process route status after editing, but the candidate snapshot will not be sent to the production end until it has been evaluated and confirmed.

[0064] In this embodiment, the system uses the process card component identifier as the matching basis, compares each route node in the pre-edit process route snapshot with the route nodes in the candidate process route snapshot, checks whether each node meets any of the following four conditions, and includes nodes that meet any condition into the actual change node set. .

[0065] Condition 1: The process name, equipment, working hours, materials, or process parameters have changed. Assume that when the system reloads the process template, it incorrectly updates the equipment parameters of welding node C3, which is not within the scope of this adjustment, from type A welding machine to type B welding machine. The process name, equipment, working hours, materials, or process parameters of this node have changed before and after the edit, satisfying Condition 1. Therefore, node C3 is included in the actual changed node set.

[0066] Condition 2: The correspondence between process card components and route nodes changes. In the existing form-based process issuance method, visual process cards, operation forms, process templates, and production work order process routes are usually maintained as independent data objects. When the system re-invokes the process template, it may cause misalignment between process card components and route nodes that were originally bound together. For example, a component identifier originally bound to the painting C4 node may be incorrectly bound to the welding C3 node after editing, or the binding relationships between multiple nodes may be shifted as a whole. When this correspondence between components and nodes changes, the corresponding route node is included in the actual changed node set.

[0067] Condition 3: The direct predecessor or successor node of a node changes. This condition is used to capture changes in the preceding and following connections. Continuing with the current edit event as an example, in the candidate process route snapshot, because Inspection C6 is moved to position 2, the preceding and following connections of several nodes have changed: the direct predecessor of Drilling C2 node changes from Blanking C1 to Inspection C6; the direct successor of Assembly C5 node changes from Inspection C6 to empty; the direct predecessor of Inspection C6 node changes from Assembly C5 to Blanking C1, and its direct successor changes from empty to Drilling C2. Since the direct predecessors or successors of the above nodes have changed before and after the edit, these nodes are all included in the actual changed node set.

[0068] It should be noted that condition 3 does not require that changes in the adjacency relationships of nodes be directly caused by an edit event. When the predecessor node of a node changes, the connection relationships of that node will inevitably be affected. For example, when inspection C6 is moved to the second position, the predecessor of drill hole C2 changes from material unloading C1 to inspection C6. Although drill hole C2 is not the node that was moved, its predecessor has changed, so it is still counted in the actual changed node set.

[0069] Condition 4: The component exists in only one of the two route snapshots. This condition is used to capture scenarios where a process is added or deleted. If a route node exists in only one of the snapshots—either the pre-edit route snapshot or the candidate route snapshot—then the node is included in the actual set of changed nodes. In this edit event, no process was added or deleted, so this condition was not triggered in this example.

[0070] The four conditions described above are used to capture four different types of abnormal changes: Condition 1 captures unexpected refreshes at the parameter level; Condition 2 captures mapping misalignments between components and nodes; Condition 3 captures structural disruptions in process connection relationships; and Condition 4 captures inconsistencies between snapshots on both sides when adding or deleting processes. These four conditions complement each other and, when used in combination, can cover all possible spillover scenarios that may occur during process route editing. The triggering of any condition signifies a deviation between the actual set of changed nodes and the directly affected neighborhood; this deviation essentially represents an abnormal diffusion of a local edit to indirect affected nodes.

[0071] It should be noted that the filtering of system updates and database operations—specifically, changes to database primary keys, route node numbers, update times, and display formats—are considered automatic maintenance information at the system level and do not involve substantial changes to the process content. Therefore, they are not included in the actual set of changed nodes. For example, changes to the timestamp field automatically updated by the system in the background are not considered as criteria; similarly, route node numbers automatically adjusted due to system version upgrades are also not considered as criteria. Through this filtering mechanism, the system can focus on capturing substantial changes that truly affect process execution, avoiding false alarms caused by automatic system refreshes.

[0072] Based on the above comparison, the system merges nodes that meet the conditions to form the actual set of changed nodes. In this example, this set is represented as: .

[0073] For the actual set of change nodes For each node in the system, the system records the changes in the direct predecessor and direct successor nodes before and after editing, forming a set of relationship change records. The record format is as follows: For the material feeding node C1, its successor changes from C2 to C6, and is recorded as: C1: (successor: C2-C6). For the drilled node C2, its predecessor changes from C1 to C6, and is recorded as: C2: (Predecessor: C1-C6, Successor: C3-C3). For welding node C3, its predecessor C2 and successor C4 remain unchanged, but the equipment parameters change from type A to type B, recorded as: C3: (predecessor: C2-C2, successor: C4-C4, parameters: AB); For the C4 node in the painting section, although its sequential position changed from the 4th to the 5th (a complete translation occurred), its direct predecessor remains C3, and its direct successor remains C5; the connection relationship between the predecessor and successor remains unchanged. Furthermore, the C4 component is bound to the C4 node before editing, and it remains bound to the C4 node after editing; only its overall position shifted one position, but the correspondence between the component and the node remained intact. Therefore, it does not satisfy condition 2, condition 3, condition 1, or condition 4.

[0074] It's worth noting that the true meaning of condition 2 is that a change in the correspondence only occurs when the component identifier originally corresponded to node A, but after editing, it corresponds to node B (for example, component C3 originally corresponded to the welding node, but after editing, component C3 incorrectly corresponds to the painting node). Although the position of C4 has been moved, its component identifier still corresponds to the same node, so it does not constitute a change in correspondence and therefore does not meet condition 2.

[0075] For the assembly of node C5, its successor changes from C6 to empty, and is recorded as: C5: (Predecessor: C4-C4, Successor: C6-empty). For node C6, its predecessor changes from C5 to C1, and its successor changes from null to C2, recorded as: C6: (predecessor: C5-C1, successor: null-C2).

[0076] This set of relationship change records is used to determine whether a structural fracture has occurred at an overflow node. First, from... Middle removal belongs to the direct action neighborhood. The nodes are used to obtain the overflow node set. .

[0077] In another embodiment, to fully demonstrate the determination logic of the "fracture node", this embodiment, based on the above embodiment, assumes that a more serious template contamination occurred when the system generated a snapshot of the candidate process route. In addition to the C3 equipment parameters being mistakenly refreshed, the predecessor and successor connection relationships of C3 and C4 were also swapped.

[0078] Based on the above assumptions, the snapshot of the candidate process routes generated by the system is: C1, C6, C2, C4, C3, C5. That is, the positions of C3 and C4 have been swapped, and C4, which was originally after C3, has been moved before C3, resulting in changes to the preceding and following connections of both.

[0079] Based on this candidate process route snapshot, the actual set of change nodes is as follows: The direct-acting neighborhood is Then the set of overflow nodes is: That is, both welding C3 and painting C4 were identified as overflow nodes.

[0080] S104. Check whether the predecessor-successor connection relationship of each node in the overflow node set has changed before and after editing, and determine the nodes that have changed as the broken node set.

[0081] In this embodiment, the predecessor-successor connection relationships of each node in the overflow node set are checked to see if they have changed before and after editing. Nodes that have changed are identified as the broken node set, specifically including: For each overflow node in the overflow node set, compare the direct predecessor and direct successor route nodes of the overflow node in the pre-edit process route snapshot with the direct predecessor and direct successor route nodes of the overflow node in the candidate process route snapshot to see if they are consistent. If the overflow node has the same direct predecessor and direct successor nodes in both the pre-edit process route snapshot and the candidate process route snapshot, then the overflow node is identified as a non-fracture node. If the overflow node is different from the direct predecessor or direct successor node in the pre-edit process route snapshot and the candidate process route snapshot, then the overflow node is identified as a broken node. All fracture nodes are grouped into a fracture node set.

[0082] The core judgment logic of this step differs from the broad identification of overflow nodes in steps S102 to S103. Instead, it focuses on a deep judgment of whether a "substantial break in the connection relationship" has occurred. In steps S102 to S103, overflow nodes may passively change due to parameter updates or content synchronization. Although these changes deviate from the scope of the directly affected neighborhood, they do not necessarily disrupt the sequential logic between processes. Step S104 clearly distinguishes between "parameter-level changes" and "connection-level changes" by checking whether the direct predecessors and successors of the overflow nodes are consistent before and after editing. Only nodes where the connection relationship changes constitute a structural break. This distinction is one of the core ideas of this invention, aiming to avoid misjudging non-structural changes such as template updates as process route breaks, thereby reducing unnecessary complete reconstruction.

[0083] Specifically, some concepts in this embodiment are explained as follows: Overflow node set: The set of nodes in the actual changed node set that do not belong to the directly affected neighborhood. The changes to these nodes are not caused by the normal scope of this edit, but are passively triggered by mechanisms such as data reconstruction or template refresh in the system background.

[0084] Broken node set: In the overflow node set, the set of nodes whose direct predecessor or successor path nodes have changed before and after editing. A broken node indicates that the connection between the preceding and following nodes of the node has been broken, which may lead to disorder in the process sequence.

[0085] Direct preceding route node: In a process route, a route node is the preceding route node that is immediately adjacent to another route node.

[0086] Direct successor route node: In a process route, the route node immediately following a given route node.

[0087] This embodiment follows the previous embodiment and further explains the specific determination process of the broken node set based on the determination result of the overflow node set.

[0088] Based on the preceding analysis, the system has been determined to be: Actual change node set Directly acting neighborhood overflow node set .

[0089] In other words, weld node C3 was identified as the only overflow node in this edit. The reason for the overflow is that weld C3 does not belong to the direct impact neighborhood that should have been changed by the sequence adjustment operation (its direct predecessor C2 and direct successor C4 have not changed), but its equipment parameters were mistakenly refreshed from type A to type B due to the system reloading the process template. Then, the record corresponding to overflow node C3 was extracted from the relationship change record set to check whether its predecessor-successor connection relationship had changed. Since neither C3's predecessor C2 nor successor C4 changed, and only the equipment parameters changed, the connection relationship of C3 was not broken and it will not be marked as a broken node.

[0090] According to the judgment rules, when the direct predecessor and direct successor nodes of an overflow node are the same in both the pre-edit process route snapshot and the candidate process route snapshot, the overflow node is determined as a non-fracture node, and a relationship fracture marker is generated. Since the overflow node set contains only one node, C3, and this node is determined to be a non-fracture node, no fracture nodes are generated in this edit, and the fracture node set is empty.

[0091] In another embodiment, suppose that a more severe stencil contamination occurs when the system generates a candidate process route snapshot, causing the positions of welding C3 and painting C4 to be interchanged. The candidate process route snapshot becomes: C1, C6, C2, C4, C3, C5. In this scenario, the actual set of changed nodes is: The direct action neighborhood is Then the set of overflow nodes is: .

[0092] For each overflow node in the overflow node set, the system compares its direct predecessor and direct successor route nodes in the pre-edit process route snapshot with its direct predecessor and direct successor route nodes in the candidate process route snapshot to see if they are consistent.

[0093] For overflow node C3 (welding): In the pre-edit process route snapshot, C3's predecessor is C2, and its successor is C4; in the candidate process route snapshot, C3's predecessor is C4, and its successor is C5. C3's direct predecessor changes from C2 to C4, and its direct successor changes from C4 to C5; both predecessors and successors have changed. According to the judgment rules, the predecessor-successor connection relationship of this overflow node has changed; therefore, C3 is identified as a break node.

[0094] For overflow node C4 (coating): In the pre-edit process route snapshot, C4's predecessor is C3, and its successor is C5; in the candidate process route snapshot, C4's predecessor is C2, and its successor is C3. C4's direct predecessor changes from C3 to C2, and its direct successor changes from C5 to C3; both predecessors and successors have changed. According to the judgment rules, the predecessor-successor connection relationship of this overflow node has changed; therefore, C4 is identified as a break node.

[0095] Set of fracture nodes That is .

[0096] S105. Determine the length of the fracture interval based on the sequential position of each node in the fracture node set in the snapshot of the candidate process route.

[0097] In this embodiment, the length of the fracture interval is determined based on the sequential position of each node in the fracture node set in the snapshot of the candidate process route, specifically including: Extract the sequential position of each node in the set of fracture nodes in the snapshot of the candidate process route; The minimum value among all extracted sequential positions is determined as the starting position, and the maximum value is determined as the ending position. The range of continuous nodes covered from the starting position to the ending position is defined as the break interval, and the number of nodes contained in the break interval is taken as the length of the break interval.

[0098] For example, based on the sequential positions of fracture nodes C3 and C4 in candidate process route snapshots C1, C6, C2, C4, C3, and C5: C4 is in the 4th position and C3 is in the 5th position, which is the minimum sequential position. Maximum order position .

[0099] Length of the fracture interval: The fracture interval covers the 4th to 5th nodes in the candidate process route, i.e., the continuous node range C4 and C3.

[0100] S106. Calculate the mirror fracture degree of the candidate process route snapshot based on the number of nodes in the fracture node set and the length of the fracture interval.

[0101] In this embodiment, the mirror fracture degree of the candidate process route snapshot is calculated based on the number of nodes in the fracture node set and the length of the fracture interval, specifically including: The ratio of the number of nodes in the set of fracture nodes to the total number of nodes in the snapshot of the candidate process route, excluding the direct impact neighborhood, is determined as the structural spillover ratio. The ratio of the length of the fracture interval to the total number of nodes in the snapshot of the candidate process route is determined as the fracture coverage ratio; Based on the overflow ratio of the structure and the fracture coverage ratio, the mirror fracture degree of the candidate process route snapshot is calculated.

[0102] Based on the spillover ratio and the fracture coverage ratio of the structure, the mirror fracture degree of the candidate process route snapshot is calculated, specifically including: The exponential function value is calculated with the natural constant as the base and the negative value of the product of the structure spillover ratio and the fracture coverage ratio as the exponent. Subtracting the value of the exponential function from 1 yields the degree of mirror breakage of the snapshot of the candidate process route.

[0103] For example, this embodiment follows the aforementioned fracture scenario (candidate process route snapshots are C1, C6, C2, C4, C3, and C5), based on the determined set of fracture nodes. The calculation process for the degree of mirror fracture is explained in detail below: First, obtain the following basic data: Number of nodes in the fracture node set: (C3 and C4); Total number of nodes in the candidate process route snapshot: Directly affects the neighborhood: Its number of nodes is The total number of nodes in the candidate process route snapshot, excluding those in the directly affected neighborhood: .

[0104] The structural spillover ratio is calculated as follows: the number of nodes in the set of fractured nodes (i.e., nodes C3 and C4) is used as the numerator, and the total number of nodes in the candidate process route snapshot excluding the directly affected neighborhood (i.e., all nodes outside the directly affected neighborhood, a total of 2) is used as the denominator. The ratio of these two is then calculated. Specifically, the number of fractured nodes is 2, the total number of nodes outside the directly affected neighborhood is 2, and the ratio is 1. This structural spillover ratio is 100%, indicating that all nodes outside the directly affected neighborhood have experienced connection fractures, representing the highest level of structural spillover.

[0105] Secondly, the length of the fracture interval is obtained. In the candidate process route snapshot, fracture node C4 is located at position 4 and C3 is located at position 5. The number of consecutive nodes covered from position 4 to position 5 is 2, so the length of the fracture interval is 2.

[0106] Based on this, the fracture coverage ratio is calculated: dividing the fracture interval length 2 by the total number of nodes in the candidate process route snapshot 6, we get approximately 0.333, which means that the fracture interval covers approximately 33.33% of the entire process route, representing that one-third of the route segment has been covered by fracture nodes.

[0107] Finally, the mirror fracture degree is calculated: multiply the structural spillover ratio by the fracture coverage ratio, calculate the exponential function value with the negative value of the product as the base (e), and then subtract the exponential function value from 1. Substituting the above data, the mirror fracture degree is approximately 0.2835. This value represents the overall degree to which local editing in this editing event spreads to unrelated nodes and causes anomalies in the connection of continuous process routes.

[0108] The above calculations employ an exponential function rather than a linear superposition because the product of the structural spillover ratio and the fracture coverage ratio represents the overall degree of "editing influence spreading to irrelevant nodes and forming continuous fracture intervals." The "soft saturation" characteristic of the exponential function ensures that when this overall degree is low, the mirror fracture degree increases relatively slowly, preventing minor spillovers from being excessively amplified. As this overall degree continues to increase, the mirror fracture degree gradually approaches its upper limit, thus maintaining high sensitivity to severe anomalies while ensuring that the mirror fracture degree always remains within the range of 0 to 1. This design makes the mirror fracture degree comparable across different editing events and process routes of different lengths.

[0109] To demonstrate the sensitivity of mirror fracture severity, a comparison is made with a no-fracture scenario (candidate process route snapshots are C1, C6, C2, C3, C4, and C5): Number of nodes in the fracture node set: Empty Structural spillover ratio Length of the fracture interval Fault coverage ratio ; Degree of mirror fracture .

[0110] This comparison shows that when an overflow node experiences only parameter changes without connection breakage, the mirrored breakage degree is 0, and the system determines that no reconstruction is needed. When an overflow node experiences connection breakage, the mirrored breakage degree is greater than 0, and it increases with the number of broken nodes and the coverage area of ​​the breakage interval. This verifies the sensitivity of the mirrored breakage degree to "connection breakage" and its immunity to "pure parameter changes." This further illustrates that even if multiple nodes experience parameter changes due to template refresh, as long as the predecessor-follower connections of these nodes remain unchanged, the candidate process route can be deployed through partial updates without triggering a full reconstruction. This feature effectively avoids the problem of frequent full reconstructions caused by template refreshes in traditional solutions.

[0111] S107. When the degree of image breakage is less than the preset judgment threshold, retain the snapshot of the candidate process route and perform a local update. When the degree of image breakage is greater than or equal to the preset judgment threshold, discard the snapshot of the candidate process route and regenerate the complete process route with all the contents of the current visual process card and issue it.

[0112] In this embodiment, when the degree of image fracture is less than a preset judgment threshold, the snapshot of the candidate process route is retained and locally updated, specifically including: When the current edit contains an edit event, the degree of mirror breakage of that edit event is used as the work order-level refactoring judgment metric; When the current edit contains at least two edit events, the fracture intervals corresponding to each edit event are merged according to their sequential positions to obtain at least one fracture interval group. When the number of fracture interval groups is one, the mirror fracture degree corresponding to the fracture interval group is used as the work order-level reconstruction judgment quantity. When the number of fracture interval groups is at least two, for each fracture interval group, the mirror fracture degree corresponding to the fracture interval group is subtracted from 1 to obtain the normal preservation degree of each fracture interval group. Then, all normal preservation degrees are multiplied together, and the product is subtracted from 1 to obtain the work order-level reconstruction judgment quantity. When the refactoring judgment quantity at the work order level is less than the preset judgment threshold, the snapshot of the candidate process route is retained. Based on the changes in each node in the actual set of changed nodes, update the process content of the corresponding node in the snapshot of the candidate process route; Based on the changes in the predecessor-successor connections of each node in the overflow node set, the predecessor-successor connections of the corresponding nodes in the snapshot of the candidate process route are updated. The updated snapshot of the candidate process route is issued as an executable process route for the production work order.

[0113] Specifically, some concepts in this embodiment are explained as follows: Editing Session: The entire editing process from opening a visual process card to submitting it for distribution by a process engineer may include one or more editing events.

[0114] Break range: A range of consecutive nodes determined by each edit event based on its set of break nodes, denoted as When an edit event does not generate a break node, the event does not generate a corresponding break interval.

[0115] Fault interval group: An independent interval group obtained by merging multiple overlapping fault intervals. The merging rule is: if the starting position of the later fault interval is not greater than the ending position of the current fault interval, then the two are considered to overlap and are merged.

[0116] Work order-level refactoring judgment quantity: A single comprehensive quantitative index obtained by comprehensively considering the degree of fracture of all fracture interval groups in this editing session, denoted as .

[0117] Normal preservation degree: For a fracture interval group, subtract the mirror fracture degree corresponding to the interval group from 1 to represent the proportion of the interval group that has not fractured.

[0118] Work order level refactoring decision quantity Degree of fracture with single-event mirror image The core difference is: This reflects the extent of damage a single editing event causes to the route structure, while This reflects the overall degree of damage to the route structure caused by the superposition of multiple events throughout the editing session. When multiple break sections exist simultaneously, The calculation uses the product of the normality preservation levels of each interval. Its physical meaning is: the lower the probability that each interval simultaneously remains normal, the lower the overall reliability of the entire route, and the higher the necessity for complete reconstruction. Compared to directly accumulating the fragmentation levels of each mirror image, which might result in a value exceeding 1, the product logic ensures... It remains between 0 and 1, and steadily increases with the increase in the number of independent fracture intervals.

[0119] This embodiment uses an editing session containing multiple editing events as an example to explain in detail the calculation process of the work order-level reconstruction judgment quantity and the threshold-based issuance decision: Suppose that a process engineer executes the following three editing events sequentially during an editing session: Edit event 1 involves shifting test C6 from position 6 to position 2, creating a break in the candidate path from position 4 to position 5 (covering C4 and C3), mirroring the break degree. .

[0120] Editing event 2 involved modifying the process parameters (current value adjustment) for welding C3. No fracture node was generated (fracture interval length was 0), and the fracture degree was mirrored. No fracture intervals are generated.

[0121] Editing event 3 involves shifting assembly C5 from position 6 to position 4, resulting in a fracture zone at position 2 in the candidate route (covering only C6 itself), mirroring the fracture degree. .

[0122] First, based on the calculated fracture boundary: the fracture interval for event 1 is from the 4th to the 5th position, i.e. The break interval length for event 2 is 0, no route break is formed, and no break interval is generated; the break interval for event 3 is from the 2nd position to the 2nd position, i.e. .

[0123] Secondly, sort and merge overlapping intervals according to their starting positions: arrange all valid break intervals in ascending order of their starting positions to obtain... and .

[0124] Check if adjacent intervals overlap: interval The ending position is 2, the next interval The starting position is 4. Since 4 is greater than 2 (the starting position is greater than the ending position of the previous interval), the two intervals do not overlap and are independent of each other.

[0125] Ultimately, two fracture interval groups were obtained: Interval group 1 contains only event 3, and its mirror fracture degree is... Interval group 2 contains only event 1, and its mirror fracture degree is... .

[0126] Finally, for each set of fracture intervals, first use... ( Indicates the first The degree of mirror fracture of each fracture interval group indicates the extent to which the interval still maintains the normal mapping relationship: the degree of normal preservation of interval group 1 is... The normal preservation level of interval group 2 is: .

[0127] Then, multiply the normal preservation levels of all two fracture interval groups sequentially to obtain the overall degree of normal mapping relationship preservation of the entire candidate process route in the current editing session. .

[0128] Finally, subtract the degree of integration from 1 to obtain the work order-level refactoring judgment quantity. .

[0129] Should The physical meaning of the value is: In this editing session, the overall degree of structural anomaly at least in one of the two fracture interval groups is 39.35%. Compared to the maximum fracture degree of a single event (0.2835), the combined value... The value (0.3935) increased significantly, reflecting the cumulative effect of the simultaneous existence of two independent fracture zones.

[0130] Assume the system obtains a preset judgment threshold based on historical production work order data. for .

[0131] Compare work order-level refactoring decision quantities Compared with the preset judgment threshold ,because Greater than the preset judgment threshold This satisfies the conditions for triggering a full refactoring.

[0132] Therefore, the system determined that there was a large range of mapping anomalies in the candidate process route, discarded the snapshot of the candidate process route, and used all components, component order and process content in the current visualized process card as the only data source to regenerate the complete process route (correct order): C1 (material cutting), C6 (inspection), C2 (drilling), C3 (welding, parameters updated), C4 (painting), C5 (assembly).

[0133] Using all components, their order, and process content from the current visualized process card as the sole data source, a complete process route is regenerated. After generating the complete process route, the system performs the following verification and distribution operations: Process integrity verification involves checking whether the regenerated process route includes all process components in the visual process card, ensuring that nothing is omitted.

[0134] Equipment compatibility verification involves checking whether the equipment models corresponding to each process are available on the current production line to avoid issuing unexecutable process routes.

[0135] Process parameter range verification involves checking whether the process parameters (such as temperature, current, time, etc.) of each process are within the allowable range of the equipment to ensure that the parameters are executable.

[0136] After verification, the system will bind the regenerated complete process route to the production work order, generate an executable process file and send it to the corresponding production end, while recording the work order number, process version and sending result.

[0137] Optionally, when there is overlap between multiple fracture intervals, the following approach shall be adopted: When two or more fracture intervals are determined to overlap, the system merges the overlapping intervals into a single continuous interval covering the entire location. For example, interval... and interval merged into ; interval and interval merged into The merged intervals are treated as an independent group of fracture intervals for subsequent calculations.

[0138] For the merged fracture interval group, the system extracts the mirror fracture degree corresponding to all edit events in the group, and takes the maximum value as the mirror fracture degree of the fracture interval group.

[0139] When the work order-level refactoring judgment quantity is greater than or equal to the preset judgment threshold, the system determines that there is a large range of mapping anomalies in the candidate process route and triggers the complete refactoring process.

[0140] The generated candidate process route snapshots are discarded, and no data from them is used. Instead, a complete process route is regenerated using all components, their order, and process content in the current visualized process card as the sole data source. Specifically, process route nodes are created sequentially according to the current arrangement of components in the visualized process card. The process content corresponding to each component (including process name, equipment model, time quota, material grade, and various process parameters) is mapped to the corresponding route node, and the predecessor and successor connections of each node are recalculated to form a complete and independent copy of the process route data.

[0141] After regenerating the complete process route, the system performs the following three checks in sequence: Process integrity verification involves checking whether the regenerated process route includes all process components from the visual process card, ensuring no omissions. If an omission is found, the system stops issuing the process and prompts the process engineer to supplement the missing process.

[0142] Equipment compatibility verification checks whether the equipment models corresponding to each process are available on the current production line, ensuring the feasibility of the process route. If the equipment specified for a certain process is not in the list of available equipment on the production line, the system prompts the process personnel to adjust the equipment configuration.

[0143] Process parameter range verification involves checking whether the process parameters for each step are within the equipment's allowable range to ensure the process parameters are executable. For example, it checks whether the welding temperature is within the welding machine's rated temperature range and whether the processing time meets the equipment's processing capacity constraints. If a parameter exceeds the allowable range, the system prompts the process engineer to correct the parameter value.

[0144] After successful verification, the system will regenerate the complete process route and bind it to the current production work order, generating an executable process document. This document contains the complete sequence of processes, process parameters for each process, equipment requirements, and inspection standards. The system will then distribute the executable process document to the corresponding workstation terminal for on-site operators to execute. Simultaneously, the system records the work order number, process version number, distribution time, and distribution result, creating a traceable distribution log.

[0145] In summary, this invention achieves accurate quantitative assessment of the impact of local editing on visual process cards by establishing a complete processing mechanism from editing event collection, direct impact neighborhood definition, overflow node identification, fracture node determination to mirror fracture degree quantification and work order-level reconstruction judgment. Its core effects are reflected in three levels: Firstly, at the production safety level, by decoupling "parameter changes" from "connection changes" and using connection fracture as the basis for reconstruction judgment, erroneous reconstruction caused by non-structural changes such as template refresh is avoided, while ensuring that serious anomalies such as disordered process sequences are promptly intercepted. Secondly, at the system efficiency level, by constructing the mirror fracture degree by multiplying the overflow degree and fracture coverage ratio, and calculating the work order-level reconstruction judgment quantity by merging overlapping intervals and multiplying the normal maintenance degree, quantitative assessment and automatic decision-making for scenarios with multiple editing events and multiple fracture intervals are achieved without manual intervention, significantly reducing unnecessary complete reconstructions and lowering system computational resource consumption. Thirdly, at the data traceability level, by recording work order numbers, process versions, and distribution results, a data foundation is provided for process change impact analysis and execution version traceability, providing a reliable basis for production management decisions.

[0146] This invention also proposes a production work order process issuance system based on a visual process card; please refer to [link / reference]. Figure 2 The diagram illustrates a structural diagram of a production work order process issuance system based on a visual process card, provided by an embodiment of the present invention. The system includes: a data acquisition module 101, a data processing module 102, and a work order issuance module 103.

[0147] The data acquisition module 101 is used to acquire the editing event of the current visualization process card and the corresponding snapshot of the process route before editing, and to perform change mapping on the corresponding route nodes in the snapshot of the process route before editing based on the editing event to obtain the candidate process route snapshot. Data processing module 102 is used to determine the directly affected neighborhood from the process route snapshot before editing based on the operation type of the editing event, wherein the directly affected neighborhood includes the route nodes that are allowed to change in this editing event; By comparing the snapshot of the process route before editing with the snapshot of the candidate process route, the route nodes that have changed are identified as the actual set of changed nodes, and the nodes in the actual set of changed nodes that do not belong to the direct impact neighborhood are identified as the overflow node set. Check whether the predecessor-successor connections of each node in the overflow node set have changed before and after editing, and identify the nodes that have changed as the broken node set; The length of the fracture interval is determined based on the sequential position of each node in the fracture node set in the snapshot of the candidate process route. The mirror fracture degree of the candidate process route snapshot is calculated based on the number of nodes in the fracture node set and the length of the fracture interval. The work order issuance module 103 is used to retain the snapshot of the candidate process route and perform partial updates when the degree of image breakage is less than the preset judgment threshold, and discard the snapshot of the candidate process route and regenerate the complete process route with all the contents of the current visual process card and issue it when the degree of image breakage is greater than or equal to the preset judgment threshold.

[0148] It should be noted that the system provided in the above embodiments is only an example of the division of the above functional modules. In actual applications, the above functions can be assigned to different functional modules as needed, that is, the internal structure of the computer equipment can be divided into different functional modules to complete all or part of the functions described above. In addition, the production work order process issuance system based on visual process cards and the production work order process issuance method based on visual process cards provided in the above embodiments belong to the same concept. The specific implementation process is detailed in the method embodiment and will not be repeated here.

[0149] It should be noted that the order of the above embodiments of the present invention is merely for descriptive purposes and does not represent the superiority or inferiority of the embodiments. The processes depicted in the accompanying drawings do not necessarily require a specific or sequential order to achieve the desired result. In some embodiments, multitasking and parallel processing are also possible or may be advantageous.

[0150] The various embodiments in this specification are described in a progressive manner. The same or similar parts between the various embodiments can be referred to each other. Each embodiment focuses on describing the differences from other embodiments.

[0151] The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the principles of the present invention should be included within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for issuing production work orders based on visual process cards, characterized in that, include: Obtain the edit event of the current visualization process card and the corresponding snapshot of the process route before editing, and perform change mapping on the corresponding route nodes in the snapshot of the process route before editing based on the edit event to obtain the candidate process route snapshot; The direct impact neighborhood is determined from the process route snapshot before editing based on the operation type of the editing event. The direct impact neighborhood includes the route nodes that are allowed to change in this editing event. By comparing the snapshot of the process route before editing with the snapshot of the candidate process route, the route nodes that have changed are identified as the actual set of changed nodes, and the nodes in the actual set of changed nodes that do not belong to the direct impact neighborhood are identified as the overflow node set. Check whether the predecessor-successor connections of each node in the overflow node set have changed before and after editing, and identify the nodes that have changed as the broken node set; The length of the fracture interval is determined based on the sequential position of each node in the fracture node set in the snapshot of the candidate process route. The mirror fracture degree of the candidate process route snapshot is calculated based on the number of nodes in the fracture node set and the length of the fracture interval. When the degree of image fragmentation is less than the preset judgment threshold, the snapshot of the candidate process route is retained and locally updated. When the degree of image fragmentation is greater than or equal to the preset judgment threshold, the snapshot of the candidate process route is discarded and the complete process route is regenerated and issued with all the contents of the current visualized process card.

2. The method for issuing production work orders based on visual process cards according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of modifying the corresponding route nodes in the pre-edit process route snapshot based on the edit event to obtain a candidate process route snapshot specifically includes: Locate the route node corresponding to the edit event in the process route snapshot before editing. The edit event includes the process card component identifier, operation type, edited process content and component sequence position. The process route snapshot before editing includes route nodes and the predecessor and successor connections of each route node. Based on the operation type, consecutive similar operations generated by the same process card component within a preset time window are merged, and the edited process content and component sequence position are mapped to the located route node to generate a candidate process route snapshot.

3. The method for issuing production work orders based on visual process cards according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of determining the directly affected neighborhood from the pre-edit process route snapshot based on the operation type of the edit event specifically includes: When the operation type is process content modification, the route node corresponding to the edit event is determined as the direct action neighborhood; When the operation type is adding or deleting a process, the added or deleted route node, its direct predecessor route node, and its direct successor route node are determined as the direct action neighborhood. When the operation type is sequential adjustment, the route node to be moved, the route nodes adjacent to the route node to be moved before the move, and the route nodes adjacent to the route node to be moved after the move are determined as the direct action neighborhood.

4. The method for issuing production work orders based on visual process cards according to claim 1, characterized in that, The comparison between the pre-edit process route snapshot and the candidate process route snapshot identifies the changed route nodes as the actual set of changed nodes, specifically including: For any route node in the pre-edit process route snapshot, if the operation name, equipment, time, material or process parameters of the route node change before and after editing, or if the correspondence between the route node and the process card component changes before and after editing, or if the direct predecessor route node and the direct successor route node of the route node change before and after editing, or if the route node only exists in one of the pre-edit process route snapshots and the candidate process route snapshots, then the route node is identified as a changed route node, and all changed route nodes are combined into an actual change node set.

5. The method for issuing production work orders based on visual process cards according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of checking whether the predecessor-successor connections of each node in the overflow node set have changed before and after editing, and identifying the nodes that have changed as the broken node set, specifically includes: For each overflow node in the overflow node set, compare the direct predecessor and direct successor route nodes of the overflow node in the pre-edit process route snapshot with the direct predecessor and direct successor route nodes of the overflow node in the candidate process route snapshot to see if they are consistent. If the overflow node has the same direct predecessor and direct successor nodes in both the pre-edit process route snapshot and the candidate process route snapshot, then the overflow node is identified as a non-fracture node. If the overflow node is different from the direct predecessor or direct successor node in the pre-edit process route snapshot and the candidate process route snapshot, then the overflow node is identified as a broken node. All fracture nodes are grouped into a fracture node set.

6. The method for issuing production work orders based on visual process cards according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of determining the length of the fracture interval based on the sequential position of each node in the fracture node set in the snapshot of the candidate process route specifically includes: Extract the sequential position of each node in the set of fracture nodes in the snapshot of the candidate process route; The minimum value among all extracted sequential positions is determined as the starting position, and the maximum value is determined as the ending position. The range of continuous nodes covered from the starting position to the ending position is defined as the break interval, and the number of nodes contained in the break interval is taken as the length of the break interval.

7. The method for issuing production work orders based on visual process cards according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of calculating the mirror fracture degree of the candidate process route snapshot based on the number of nodes in the fracture node set and the length of the fracture interval specifically includes: The ratio of the number of nodes in the set of fracture nodes to the total number of nodes in the snapshot of the candidate process route, excluding the direct impact neighborhood, is determined as the structural spillover ratio. The ratio of the length of the fracture interval to the total number of nodes in the snapshot of the candidate process route is determined as the fracture coverage ratio; Based on the overflow ratio of the structure and the fracture coverage ratio, the mirror fracture degree of the candidate process route snapshot is calculated.

8. A method for issuing production work orders based on visual process cards according to claim 7, characterized in that, The step of calculating the mirror fracture degree of the candidate process route snapshot based on the overflow ratio of the structure and the fracture coverage ratio specifically includes: The exponential function value is calculated with the natural constant as the base and the negative value of the product of the structure spillover ratio and the fracture coverage ratio as the exponent. Subtracting the value of the exponential function from 1 yields the degree of mirror breakage of the snapshot of the candidate process route.

9. A method for issuing production work orders based on visual process cards according to claim 1, characterized in that, When the degree of image fracture is less than a preset judgment threshold, the snapshot of the candidate process route is retained and locally updated, specifically including: When the current edit contains an edit event, the degree of mirror breakage of that edit event is used as the work order-level refactoring judgment metric; When the current edit contains at least two edit events, the fracture intervals corresponding to each edit event are merged according to their sequential positions to obtain at least one fracture interval group. When the number of fracture interval groups is one, the mirror fracture degree corresponding to the fracture interval group is used as the work order-level reconstruction judgment quantity. When the number of fracture interval groups is at least two, for each fracture interval group, the mirror fracture degree corresponding to the fracture interval group is subtracted from 1 to obtain the normal preservation degree of each fracture interval group. Then, all normal preservation degrees are multiplied together, and the product is subtracted from 1 to obtain the work order-level reconstruction judgment quantity. When the refactoring judgment quantity at the work order level is less than the preset judgment threshold, the snapshot of the candidate process route is retained. Based on the changes in each node in the actual set of changed nodes, update the process content of the corresponding node in the snapshot of the candidate process route; Based on the changes in the predecessor-successor connections of each node in the overflow node set, the predecessor-successor connections of the corresponding nodes in the snapshot of the candidate process route are updated. The updated snapshot of the candidate process route is issued as an executable process route for the production work order.

10. A production work order process issuance system based on a visual process card, comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, characterized in that, When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements the steps of the production work order process issuance method based on a visual process card as described in any one of claims 1-9.

Images