Work order management system and associated methods and systems for managing structural non-conformities and abnormalities.

Abstract

The present invention provides a system and method for structured inspection management. [Solution] A structured inspection management system, method, and non-temporary computer-readable medium for managing anomalies are disclosed. The system organizes a plurality of inspection orders, each associated with an anomaly and defining inspection criteria for performing inspections. The system presents inspection criteria for selected inspection orders and enforces restrictions on acceptable inputs to a predetermined set of structured inspection responses related to performing inspections. Based on at least one structured inspection response, the system automatically determines and stores the inspection status of the selected inspection order. If the inspection status indicates that the anomaly remains unresolved, the inspection order is kept in an incomplete state for subsequent inspections or corrective actions.

Description

[[Technical Field]]

[0001] Cross-Reference to Related Applications This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 63 / 765,186, filed on February 28, 2025, the entire content of which is incorporated herein by reference.

[0002] The present disclosure generally relates to inspection management systems, and more particularly to systems and methods for managing anomaly-related inspection activities using structured inspection responses. [[Background Art]]

[0003] Management of anomaly-related inspection activities in large or complex structures such as aircraft, rockets, microchips, and other assemblies can be a significant challenge due to the volume, complexity, and distribution of anomalies. Conventional inspection management approaches often rely on unstructured or free-form inspection input, fragmented data processing, and lack of tight integration with existing quality management systems, which can lead to inefficiencies, inconsistent inspection results, and difficulties in maintaining traceability across inspection activities.

[0004] Furthermore, many existing inspection workflows limit coordination between inspection criteria, inspection responses, and inspection statuses, and are not well suited for hybrid digital-manual inspection environments. Inspection activities may be performed using a combination of uncoordinated paper-based records and electronic systems, which increases the risk of errors, complicates record synchronization, and reduces the reliability of inspection results. [[Summary of the Invention]] [[Problem to be Solved by the Invention]]

[0005] The subject matter of this application was developed in response to the current technology, and in particular in response to shortcomings associated with conventional inspection and control methods that have not yet been fully resolved by currently available technology. Accordingly, the subject matter of this application was developed to provide a system and method for structured inspection and control that overcomes at least some of the aforementioned shortcomings of the prior art. [Means for solving the problem]

[0006] The following is a non-exhaustive list of examples of subject matter disclosed herein that may or may not be claimed.

[0007] This specification discloses a structured inspection management system. The system includes an inspection organizing module for organizing a plurality of inspection orders. Each inspection order is associated with an anomaly and defines inspection criteria for performing inspections associated with the anomaly. The system also includes a display module that presents inspection criteria for selected inspection orders. The system further includes a response enforcement module that restricts user input for selected inspection orders to a predetermined set of structured inspection responses related to the execution of inspections. Furthermore, the system includes a status tracking module that automatically determines and stores the inspection status of selected inspection orders based on at least one structured inspection response. The aforementioned subject matter of this paragraph characterizes Example 1 of the present disclosure.

[0008] The structured inspection management system further includes a traceability module that records traceability data for each structured inspection response selected via a response enforcement module. The traceability data enables the identification of at least one of the source or timing of the structured inspection response. The subject matter described herein characterizes Example 2 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in Example 1 above.

[0009] In manual workflow mode, a predetermined set of inspection criteria and structured inspection responses is provided to a physical inspection record, at least one structured inspection response recorded in the physical inspection record is then input to a response enforcement module via an electronic interface, and the inspection status is determined based on the structured inspection responses received via the electronic interface. The subject matter described herein characterizes Example 3 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in either Example 1 or 2 above.

[0010] In digital workflow mode, a predetermined set of inspection criteria and structured inspection responses is presented via an electronic interface, and the inspection status is determined based on the structured inspection responses received via the electronic interface. The subject matter described above characterizes Example 4 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in any of Examples 1-3 above.

[0011] Each test order comprises multiple test phases, and the response enforcement module restricts a predetermined set of structured test responses based on the current test phase. The subject matter described herein characterizes Example 5 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in any of Examples 1-4 above.

[0012] In one example, the initial testing phase includes a predetermined set of structured test responses indicating whether an anomaly-related condition exists. The subject matter described herein characterizes Example 6 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in Example 5 above.

[0013] In another example, the resolution inspection phase following corrective action includes a predetermined set of structured inspection responses indicating acceptance or rejection of an abnormal condition. The subject matter described herein characterizes Example 7 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in Example 5 above.

[0014] In some examples, the status tracking module determines the inspection status based on both the selected structured inspection response and the current inspection phase of the selected inspection order. The subject matter described herein characterizes Example 8 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in Example 5 above.

[0015] The status tracking module maintains the selected inspection order in an incomplete state if the structured inspection response indicates that the anomaly remains unresolved. The subject matter described herein characterizes Example 9 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in any of Examples 1-8 above.

[0016] Each inspection order is associated with an anomaly via anomaly identification data that includes a unique anomaly identifier. The subject matter described above in this paragraph characterizes Example 10 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in any of Examples 1-9 above.

[0017] Each inspection order is associated with anomaly-related information, including anomaly identification information, anomaly description information, and anomaly location information. The subject matter described above in this paragraph characterizes Example 11 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter from any of Examples 1 to 10 above.

[0018] The inspection organization module generates multiple inspection orders from one or more data sources, including locally stored data, manually uploaded data, or data obtained from external sources. The subject matter described herein characterizes Example 12 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in any of Examples 1 through 11 above.

[0019] The display module presents inspection visual data related to an anomaly, and the inspection visual data includes one or more of images, figures, or maps. The subject matter described herein characterizes Example 13 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in any of Examples 1 to 12 above.

[0020] This specification further discloses a method for structured anomaly inspection management. The method includes the steps of accessing selected inspection orders associated with anomalies and presenting inspection criteria for the selected inspection orders. The method also includes the steps of enforcing a restriction of acceptable inputs to a predetermined set of structured inspection responses related to the execution of inspections and receiving at least one structured inspection response selected from the predetermined set. The method further includes the step of automatically determining and storing the inspection status of the selected inspection orders based on the structured inspection responses. If the inspection status indicates that the anomaly remains unresolved, the inspection order is kept in an incomplete state. The aforementioned subject matter of this paragraph characterizes Example 14 of this disclosure.

[0021] The method further includes the step of recording traceability data related to the step of receiving a structured test response. The subject matter described herein is also used to characterize Example 15 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in Example 14 above.

[0022] Traceability data includes at least one of the source or timing of the structured test response. The subject matter described herein characterizes Example 16 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in Example 15 above.

[0023] A selected test order comprises multiple test phases, and the step of enforcing limits on acceptable inputs includes the step of enforcing a selection from a predetermined set of structured test responses corresponding to the current test phase. The subject matter described herein characterizes Example 17 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in any of Examples 14–16 above.

[0024] The method further includes the step of tracking the number of test trials associated with a selected test order, each test trial corresponding to the reception of at least one structured test response. The subject matter described herein characterizes Example 18 of the present disclosure, which also includes the subject matter described in any of Examples 14–17 above.

[0025] The step of enforcing restriction on permissible input includes the step of preventing input of free-form inspection responses. The foregoing subject matter of this paragraph characterizes Example 19 of the present disclosure, and Example 19 also includes the subject matter according to any one of Examples 14 to 18 above.

[0026] Further disclosed herein is a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the processors to: access a selected inspection order associated with an anomaly; present inspection criteria for the selected inspection order; enforce restriction of permissible input to a predetermined set of structured inspection responses related to execution of the inspection; receive at least one structured inspection response selected from the predetermined set; and automatically determine and store an inspection status of the selected inspection order. If the anomaly remains unresolved, the inspection order is maintained in an incomplete state. The foregoing subject matter of this paragraph characterizes Example 20 of the present disclosure.

[0027] The described features, structures, advantages, and / or characteristics of the subject matter of the present disclosure may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more examples and / or implementations. In the following description, numerous specific details are provided to give a thorough understanding of examples of the subject matter of the present disclosure. One skilled in the art will recognize that the subject matter of the present disclosure may be practiced without one or more of the specific features, details, components, materials, and / or methods of a particular example or implementation. In other instances, additional features and advantages may be recognized in certain examples and / or implementations that may not be present in all examples or implementations. Further, in some instances, well-known structures, materials, or operations are not shown or described in detail to avoid obscuring aspects of the subject matter of the present disclosure. The features and advantages of the subject matter of the present disclosure will become more fully apparent from the following description and the appended claims, or may be learned by practice of the subject matter set forth below.

[0028] In order that the advantages of the subject matter can be more readily understood, a more particular description of the subject matter briefly described above will be rendered by reference to specific examples illustrated in the appended drawings. It should be understood that these drawings, which are not necessarily drawn to scale, depict only specific examples of the subject matter and therefore should not be considered as limiting the scope thereof. The subject matter will be described and explained with additional specificity and detail through the use of the drawings. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0029] [Figure 1] FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram of an example structured inspection management system in accordance with one or more examples of the present disclosure. [Figure 2] FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of an example inspection order interface showing a plurality of inspection orders and associated inspection order information in accordance with one or more examples of the present disclosure. [Figure 3A] FIG. 3A is a schematic diagram of an example inspection interface for a selected inspection order showing inspection order related information, inspection criteria, and response fields associated with a predetermined set of structured inspection responses in accordance with one or more examples of the present disclosure. [Figure 3B] FIG. 3B is a schematic diagram of one exemplary presentation of a predetermined set of structured inspection responses associated with the response fields of FIG. 3A in accordance with one or more examples of the present disclosure. [Figure 3C] FIG. 3C is a schematic diagram of one exemplary presentation of a selected structured inspection response for the response fields of FIG. 3A, and a corresponding automatic update of inspection status information in accordance with one or more examples of the present disclosure. [Figure 4] FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram of an example physical inspection record used in a manual workflow mode, showing inspection criteria and structured inspection response options recorded on the physical inspection record in accordance with one or more examples of the present disclosure. [Figure 5] FIG. 5 is a flow diagram of a method for structured inspection management in accordance with one or more examples of the present disclosure. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS

[0030] Wherever “one example,” “one example,” or similar phrases appear in this specification, it means that the specific features, structures, or characteristics described in relation to that example are included in at least one example of this disclosure. Throughout this specification, the phrases “one example,” “one example,” and similar wording may all, though not necessarily, refer to the same example. Similarly, wherever the term “implementation” is used, it means an implementation having the specific features, structures, or characteristics described in relation to one or more examples of this disclosure, but an implementation may relate to one or more examples unless there is a clearer relevance to state otherwise.

[0031] This specification discloses a structured inspection and control system for managing structural anomalies. As used herein, an anomaly means a condition that deviates from a given design, manufacture, operation, or maintenance standard and may include, but is not limited to, defects or other non-conformities that affect the performance, integrity, reliability, or appearance of a structure. Such anomalies may result from manufacturing inconsistencies, material degradation, assembly errors, environmental damage, operating stresses, fatigue, or other factors that cause a component or system to fall outside acceptable tolerances. Anomalies may vary in size and severity, from minor surface defects to large structural conditions that, if not adequately addressed, could affect operational conformity, safety margins, or long-term reliability.

[0032] Generally speaking, the disclosed structured inspection management system organizes inspection orders related to anomalies, presents inspection criteria for selected inspection orders, restricts inspection inputs to a predetermined set of structured inspection responses, and automatically determines and tracks inspection status based on those responses. The system consistently applies this structured inspection logic regardless of whether inspection activities are performed using electronic interfaces, physical records, or a combination thereof. The structured inspection management system supports operation across digital, manual, and hybrid inspection workflows, including use in both connected and offline environments. By enforcing structured inspection responses and system-driven inspection status determination across these workflows, the system improves the consistency, traceability, and reproducibility of inspection activities while reducing ambiguity in inspection results. In other words, unlike conventional inspection management systems that rely on manual interpretation of free-form inspection inputs and inspection results, the disclosed structured inspection management system enforces the restriction of acceptable inspection inputs to predetermined structured inspection responses and automatically determines inspection status based on those responses. In other words, the disclosed system enforces the selection of inspection results and derives inspection status without subjective interpretation.

[0033] The disclosed system may be beneficial for large and / or complex structures and assemblies, such as aircraft, ships, industrial equipment, or large infrastructure components, where anomaly information is often geographically dispersed and / or operationally complex. In such environments, the structured inspection management techniques provided by the disclosed system support improved coordination across dispersed personnel and systems, facilitate consistent inspection execution, and make inspection activities across multiple operating conditions more efficient. In one non-limiting example, a structured inspection management system could be used in an aircraft manufacturing or maintenance environment to manage inspection activities related to anomalies identified across different aircraft sections, production stages, or inspection phases.

[0034] Referring to Figure 1, one example shows a structured inspection management system 100 for managing structural anomalies. The structured inspection management system 100 provides a unified and systematic framework for managing anomaly-related inspection activities throughout one or more inspection lifecycles. Generally, the system 100 is configured to organize anomaly-related inspection orders, present inspection criteria related to selected inspection orders, enforce the use of structured inspection responses during inspection activities, and automatically determine and track inspection status based on those responses.

[0035] The structured inspection management system 100 is configured to support inspection activities performed across multiple environments, including digital, manual, and hybrid workflows, and can operate both connected and offline. By applying consistent response logic regardless of how inspection interactions occur, the system 100 can reduce ambiguity in inspection execution, improve the traceability of inspection results, and facilitate a reproducible and auditable inspection process. In this way, the structured inspection management system 100 provides foundational inspection management capabilities that support coordinated inspection activities across distributed personnel, locations, and inspection phases, without relying on free-form input or ad-hoc state determination.

[0036] The Structured Inspection Management System 100 is applicable to a wide range of structures, including but not limited to aircraft, ships, industrial machinery, microchips, and large-scale infrastructure components. As used herein, a structure can include any physical assembly, system, or component whose anomalies are being inspected, and can consist of multiple interconnected components, materials, or subsystems. Anomalies associated with such structures can vary in size and severity, from small surface defects to larger conditions affecting performance, safety, reliability, or operational conformity. In these environments, inspection activities related to anomalies may be performed at different stages of manufacturing, assembly, inspection, maintenance, or repair, and may involve multiple inspectors, processes, and operational conditions. As a result, inspection activities frequently occur across different systems, locations, and workflows, creating challenges such as ensuring consistent inspection execution, response processing, and inspection status determination.

[0037] In some cases, structured inspection management systems can be deployed in environments where inspection activities are performed by multiple parties across different locations or organizational boundaries. For example, in an aerospace manufacturing or assembly environment, inspections may be performed at supplier facilities, during intermediate production stages, or before the final delivery of the structure. A structured inspection management system enables consistent recording and tracking of inspection orders, structured inspection responses, and inspection status across such environments in an auditable manner. For example, the system can be used to support inspection activities performed upstream in the supply chain, enabling the verification and resolution of anomalies before they are integrated into downstream assemblies. By enforcing structured inspection responses and system-driven inspection status determination, the system reduces unresolved anomalies and supports collaboration between different organizations or inspection teams.

[0038] In some examples, the structured inspection management system 100 includes several modules that collectively support structured inspection management. For example, but not limited to these, the system 100 may include an inspection organization module 102, a display module 104, a response enforcement module 106, a status tracking module 108, and, in some embodiments, a traceability module 110. The arrangement, inclusion, and functionality of the modules shown in Figure 1 are illustrative, and in other embodiments, the system 100 may include additional modules, fewer modules, or different combinations of modules. In some examples, the functionality associated with one or more modules may be combined, distributed across multiple systems, or at least partially performed via manual or hybrid digital and manual workflows.

[0039] The inspection organization module 102 is configured to organize, manage, and retrieve multiple inspection orders, each inspection order being associated with an anomaly within the structure. Furthermore, each inspection order defines inspection criteria for performing one or more inspection activities related to the anomaly. The inspection organization module 102 provides a structured framework for managing inspection orders throughout one or more inspection lifecycles, including creating, selecting, retrieving, and requeuing inspection orders based on inspection results.

[0040] In some examples, the inspection organization module 102 generates and manages inspection orders using data obtained from one or more data sources. The data sources may include at least one of locally stored data, manually uploaded data, or externally obtained data. This multi-source capability enables the structured inspection management system 100 to support automated, manual, and hybrid inspection workflows and operate in environments where inspection information may originate from different systems, tools, or record formats. Depending on the implementation of the structured inspection management system 100, inspection orders can be stored or represented in various forms, including electronic data structures, structured files, or physical records.

[0041] The display module 104 is configured to present inspection-related information about inspection orders in a structured manner. In some examples, the display module 104 presents information related to a selected inspection order, including inspection criteria defined for the inspection order, inspection status information, and anomaly-related information associated with the inspection order. In other examples, the display module 104 presents information about multiple inspection orders to enable the user to view, compare, or manage inspection activities across multiple inspection orders. The display module 104 enables the user to review inspection orders, understand inspection requirements, and monitor inspection status as inspection activities progress, either at an individual level or across multiple inspection orders.

[0042] In some examples, the display module 104 provides an electronic interface to which inspection-related information is presented to the user, such as a graphical user interface that displays inspection orders and associated inspection data. In other implementations, the display module 104 supports the presentation of inspection information in non-electronic formats, including printed or physical inspection records, to support manual or offline inspection workflows. Depending on the implementation and operating status of the structured inspection management system 100, the display module 104 can present inspection-related information in various visual arrangements, including tabular views, lists, or other layouts.

[0043] The display module 104 may be further configured to present inspection visual data related to anomalies. Inspection visual data may include, but are not limited to, one or more visual representations that provide spatial or contextual information about an anomaly, including images, diagrams, or maps. Such inspection visual data may be presented in connection with an inspection order to help the user understand the location, context, or characteristics of an anomaly during the inspection activity.

[0044] The response enforcement module 106 is configured to control and restrict user input to acceptable inspection inputs for an inspection order. Specifically, the response enforcement module 106 restricts user input for a selected inspection order to a predetermined set of structured inspection responses related to the execution of the inspection. The predetermined structured inspection responses represent acceptable inspection results and are configured to be selected by the user rather than entered as free-form or unstructured text. By restricting acceptable input to predetermined structured inspection responses, the response enforcement module 106 reduces ambiguity in inspection results and promotes consistent inspection execution across different workflows and environments. This structured response enforcement enables consistent execution of inspection activities across different inspectors, locations, and operating conditions, including digital, manual, and hybrid inspection workflows, while providing a reliable foundation for subsequent inspection status determination and inspection tracking. In some examples, the predetermined set of structured inspection responses may be configurable before inspection execution, but are fixed during the execution of a given inspection order.

[0045] In some examples, each inspection order includes multiple inspection phases, and the response enforcement module 106 is configured to restrict a predetermined set of structured inspection responses based on the current inspection phase of the inspection order. As the inspection order progresses through different inspection phases, the response enforcement module 106 enforces selection from a corresponding predetermined set of structured inspection responses related to the current inspection phase, thereby ensuring that only situation-appropriate inspection inputs are allowed in each phase. In other examples, the inspection order includes only a single inspection phase.

[0046] In some examples, one of the inspection phases includes an initial inspection phase in which a predetermined set of structured inspection responses indicates whether a condition associated with an anomaly exists. In some examples, another inspection phase includes a resolution inspection phase following corrective action, in which a predetermined set of structured inspection responses indicates acceptance or rejection of the anomaly condition. By phase-controlling the acceptable inspection responses, the response enforcement module 106 ensures consistent handling of inspection inputs as the inspection order progresses through different stages of inspection activity. In other examples, the inspection order may include additional or alternative inspection phases beyond the initial and resolution inspection phases. Such inspection phases may include, but are not limited to, a verification inspection phase, a reinspection phase, a supplementary inspection phase, a pending inspection phase, a conditional acceptance phase, or a final completion phase. The response enforcement module 106 may restrict the acceptable inspection responses based on the current inspection phase in each case, according to a predetermined set of structured inspection responses associated with each phase.

[0047] The status tracking module 108 is configured to determine, update, and store the inspection status of inspection orders as inspection activities progress. Based on structured inspection inputs received via the response enforcement module 106, the status tracking module 108 ensures that each inspection order is consistently classified according to a predetermined inspection status category. In some examples, the status tracking module 108 automatically determines the inspection status of a selected inspection order based on at least one structured inspection response selected from a predetermined set of structured inspection responses. For example, if a structured inspection response indicates that no abnormal conditions exist or have been well addressed, the inspection status may be updated to a completed status. Conversely, if a structured inspection response indicates that an abnormal condition exists or remains unresolved, the inspection status may be maintained in an active or incomplete status to support further inspection or corrective action. The inspection status includes one of a predetermined set of inspection status states maintained by the structured inspection management system, each inspection status state representing an inspection result recognized by the system.

[0048] In some examples, the status tracking module 108 supports inspection orders with multiple inspection phases and determines the inspection status to reflect the progress of the inspection phases. In other words, the status tracking module 108 determines the inspection status of a selected inspection order based on both at least one structured inspection response and the current inspection phase of the inspection order. For example, an inspection order may remain in an incomplete status across multiple inspection phases until the structured inspection response corresponding to a later inspection phase indicates an acceptable inspection result.

[0049] In some examples, the status tracking module 108 performs one or more system actions in response to changes in the inspection status. For example, an inspection order maintained in an incomplete status may be re-queued for subsequent inspection activities, while an inspection order updated to a completed status may be restricted from further changes unless reactivated by an authorized user. In some examples, the status tracking module 108 may also generate notifications or alerts when inspection status conditions are met, such as when an inspection order remains incomplete over a threshold period.

[0050] The structured inspection management system 100 may further include a traceability module 110 that records traceability data related to inspection activities performed for inspection orders. In some examples, the traceability module 110 records traceability data that enables the identification of at least one of the source or timing related to structured inspection responses and inspection status updates for inspection orders.

[0051] In some examples, the traceability data recorded by the traceability module 110 may include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following: a user identifier, a response timestamp, a system identifier, or other metadata related to inspection-related actions. Such actions may include creating or selecting an inspection order, entering a structured inspection response via the response enforcement module 106, determining the inspection status by the status tracking module 108, or requeuing or completing an inspection order. By recording traceability data in relation to structured inspection responses and inspection status changes, the traceability module 110 can provide an auditable inspection history of inspection orders. This traceability supports accountability, review, and compliance requirements across different inspection workflows and operating environments, including digital, manual, and hybrid inspection workflows.

[0052] In some examples, the traceability data recorded by the traceability module 110 may include one or more identifiers corresponding to records maintained in external systems, such as quality control systems or anomaly tracking systems used by other organizations. For example, inspection order identifiers or anomaly identifiers maintained by the structured inspection management system 100 may be associated with corresponding records or reference identifiers in external systems. Such identifier-based associations enable cross-system traceability of inspection activities without requiring direct system integration or changes to external records. This makes it possible to use the structured inspection management system 100 across multiple organizations or systems while maintaining consistent structured inspection response acquisition and inspection status determination.

[0053] The structured inspection management system 100 can be configured to operate in manual workflow mode. In manual workflow mode, a predetermined set of structured inspection responses related to inspection criteria and inspection orders is provided in a physical inspection record, such as a printed document or other non-electronic medium. Inspection activities related to anomalies may be performed on the structure according to the inspection criteria using the physical inspection record, and at least one structured inspection response reflecting the inspection activity may then be input to the response enforcement module 106 via an electronic interface. That is, the input of the structured inspection response is performed after the inspection is performed, as part of a separate data entry or synchronization step, and not simultaneously with the inspection. In manual workflow mode, the status tracking module 108 determines the inspection status of the inspection order based on at least one structured inspection response received via the electronic interface. In this way, the structured inspection management system 100 uses the physical record to maintain consistent enforcement of structured inspection responses and system-driven inspection status determination, even when the inspection activity is performed first. Inspection activities can be performed using the physical inspection record in manual workflow mode, but the structured inspection response is ultimately input to the structured inspection management system 100 to enable response enforcement and system-driven inspection status determination. In other words, inspection orders initially processed using physical inspection records are then digitized or synchronized with the structured inspection management system 100 to maintain unified inspection records.

[0054] The structured inspection management system 100 may also be configured to operate in digital workflow mode. In digital workflow mode, a predetermined set of structured inspection responses related to inspection criteria and inspection orders is presented via an electronic interface, such as a graphical user interface generated by the display module 104. Inspection activities related to anomalies may be performed on the structure according to the inspection criteria, and at least one structured inspection response reflecting the inspection activity may be input via the electronic interface and received by the response enforcement module 106. In digital workflow mode, the status tracking module 108 determines the inspection status of the inspection order based on at least one structured inspection response received via the electronic interface. Digital workflow mode enables real-time or near real-time determination and tracking of inspection status.

[0055] In some cases, the structured inspection management system 100 supports a seamless transition between manual and electronic workflows. Inspection orders may be partially completed using physical inspection records and then uploaded, entered, or synchronized to the structured inspection management system 100 without losing inspection data or traceability. This hybrid capability allows inspection activities to continue uninterrupted during the transition between paper-based and electronic processes, while maintaining consistent enforcement of structured inspection responses and system-driven inspection status determinations.

[0056] In some examples, each inspection order managed by the structured inspection management system 100 is associated with a corresponding anomaly via anomaly identification data. The anomaly identification data may include a unique anomaly identifier that enables inspection orders to be consistently linked to the relevant anomaly across different system components, workflows, and inspection activities. Furthermore, each inspection order may be further associated with anomaly-related information that describes the relevant anomaly. Such anomaly-related information may include, but is not limited to, anomaly identification information, anomaly description information, and anomaly location information. By associating inspection orders with anomaly-related information, the structured inspection management system 100 enables inspection activities to be performed in the appropriate context while maintaining a consistent link between inspection orders and the anomalies they correspond to.

[0057] Referring to Figure 2, one non-limiting example of an inspection interface generated by the Structured Inspection Management System 100 is shown. In this example, the inspection interface presents information related to multiple inspection orders, each associated with an anomaly, managed by the system, and including anomaly description information, anomaly location information, and structured inspection responses related to each inspection order. The inspection interface in Figure 2 is illustrative and represents one example of how inspection-related information may be visually organized for review and interaction. In other examples, inspection-related information may be presented using different visual layouts, groupings, or interfaces, and the specific information displayed may vary depending on factors such as the user's role, inspection phase, or operating status. Therefore, Figure 2 is not intended to limit the structure, function, or presentation of the Structured Inspection Management System 100.

[0058] In some examples, the inspection interface in Figure 2 is provided by the display module 104, allowing the user to view inspection orders individually or collectively. For example, the inspection interface may present an inspection order identifier, an inspection status indicator, and selectable structured inspection responses corresponding to the inspection criteria defined for the inspection order. The inspection interface may further present anomaly-related inspection visual data, such as images, diagrams, or maps, to provide anomaly-related information and, in some examples, contextual information for inspection activities.

[0059] Specifically, as shown in Figure 2, the inspection interface displays multiple inspection orders 112. Each inspection order 112 contains inspection order-specific data to facilitate anomaly tracking, inspection order management, and traceability. Such data may include, but are not limited to, an inspection order identifier 114 configured to uniquely identify the inspection order, inspection status information 116 indicating the current status of the inspection order (e.g., active, completed, incomplete, queued), and, in some examples, inspection order revision information 118 (see, for example, Figure 3) to track updates or changes to the inspection order over time.

[0060] Each inspection order 112 is associated with a corresponding anomaly via anomaly identification data, which may include a unique anomaly identifier (not shown). In some examples, the inspection order identifier and the anomaly identifier associated with the inspection order may be the same or different, depending on how anomalies and inspection orders are tracked within a particular implementation. Each inspection order 112 may further include anomaly-related information, such as anomaly description information 124 and anomaly location information 126. The anomaly location information 126 may identify a location at the component level, a location at the zone level, a placement classification, or other location criteria related to the structure. For example, if the structure is an aircraft, the anomaly location information 126 may identify a specific fuselage section, indicate whether the anomaly is located on the exterior or interior, or in the upper or lower region, and pinpoint the location using standardized aerospace reference coordinates.

[0061] Generally, an inspection order 112 is associated with a single anomaly, such that each reported anomaly corresponds to an individual inspection order. However, in some examples, a single inspection order 112 may be associated with multiple anomalies, such as when similar anomaly conditions occur at multiple structural locations or across groups of related components. In such cases, the inspection order 112 can reference multiple anomalies to support coordinated inspection activities and consistent processing of associated anomaly conditions. In some examples, the structured inspection management system 100 organizes anomaly-related information associated with inspection orders in a standardized format to reduce ambiguity and enable consistent processing of inspection criteria, inspection responses, and inspection statuses.

[0062] As further shown in Figure 2, an inspection order is associated with a predetermined set of selectable structured inspection responses in relation to the inspection activity. In the illustrated example, the inspection interface presents one or more response fields 134 corresponding to different inspection situations or inspection phases. For example, a first response field 134A may be associated with a predetermined set of structured inspection responses indicating whether a condition related to an anomaly exists. Such structured inspection responses may include, but are not limited to, responses indicating that the condition does not exist, could not be verified, or exists. Before the inspection is performed, the response field 134A may not be entered. Following the execution of the inspection, the response field 134A is entered with a selected structured inspection response chosen from the predetermined set. A second response field 134B may be associated with a predetermined set of structured inspection responses indicating acceptance or rejection of the anomaly condition after corrective action. Similar to the first response field, the second response field 134B may remain empty until the corresponding inspection phase is reached and the inspection is performed, at which point the response field 134B is entered with a structured inspection response selected from the predetermined set. The response fields and structured inspection responses shown in Figure 2 are provided as one non-limiting example. In other examples, different response fields, response values, or response hierarchies may be defined based on inspection criteria, inspection phases, or operational conditions. By enforcing a selection from a predetermined structured inspection response for each response field, the structured inspection management system 100 ensures that inspection inputs are captured in a consistent, unambiguous, and system-interpretable manner. This structured response enforcement enables system-driven inspection status determination and tracking.

[0063] In some examples, the structured inspection management system 100 further includes one or more traceability fields 122 related to inspection orders and structured inspection responses. The traceability fields 122 are configured to store traceability data that enables the identification of at least one of the source or timing of a structured inspection response selected via a response enforcement module 106. In some examples, the traceability data includes timing information 144 indicating when the structured inspection response was selected or recorded, such as a date, time, or system-generated timestamp. In some examples, the traceability data additionally or alternatively includes source information 146 identifying the source related to the structured inspection response, such as a user identifier, role identifier, or other system-recognized identifier related to the input of the response.

[0064] The traceability field 122 may be presented within the inspection interface in Figure 2, stored as metadata associated with the inspection order, or both. The specific form, number, and arrangement of the traceability field may vary depending on the implementation and without departing from the scope of this disclosure. In this way, the structured inspection management system 100 enables a traceable association between structured inspection responses and inspection activities while maintaining flexibility across digital or manual workflows.

[0065] In some examples, the inspection interface may further include one or more supplemental input fields 140 related to the inspection order, such as a memo field. Such supplemental input fields 140 may allow the input of contextual or reference information related to the inspection or corrective action. However, these supplemental fields are separate from the response field 134 and do not define acceptable inspection results. The determination of the inspection status is based on the selected structured inspection response, rather than on the free-form supplemental input.

[0066] In some examples, the structured inspection management system 100 allows the retrieval of inspection orders from multiple inspection orders 112 using a search interface 128. The search interface 128 can filter or identify inspection orders based on predetermined inspection order attributes, such as an inspection order identifier, inspection status value, or anomaly-related information associated with the inspection order. This functionality supports efficient navigation and management of inspection orders, particularly in environments containing a large number of anomalies.

[0067] Referring to Figure 3A, an exemplary inspection interface for a selected inspection order 112A in digital workflow mode is shown. The inspection interface shows access to the selected inspection order via the structured inspection management system 100. As shown in the figure, the selected inspection order 112A includes inspection order-related information relating to the selected inspection order, including anomaly location information 126, inspection status information 116, and inspection order revision information 118. The inspection interface further includes inspection criteria 120 relating to the selected inspection order. The inspection criteria define one or more requirements for performing an inspection related to an anomaly and can be presented directly on the display or via links or referenced inspection documents related to the inspection order. The inspection criteria provide criteria for evaluating anomalies during the execution of the inspection.

[0068] The selected test order 112A also includes a response field 134. The response field 134 defines the acceptable input to the test order by associating it with a predetermined set of structured test responses applicable to the execution of the test. The response field 134 restricts the test input to selection from a predetermined set of structured test responses, preventing the input of free-form or unstructured test responses. The response field 134 does not need to be filled in before the test is executed. Following the execution of the test, the response field 134 is filled with the selected structured test response, which has been selected from the predetermined set. As shown in Figure 3A, the response field 134 is selectable to display the predetermined set of structured test responses in the form of a drop-down menu, as will be described in more detail in Figure 3B. In other examples, the predetermined set of structured test responses may be presented in other selectable formats, including, but not limited to, presenting all available response options simultaneously with selectable checkboxes, radio buttons, or similar selection mechanisms. Regardless of the presentation format, the response field 134 enforces the restriction of acceptable input to the predetermined set of structured test responses. In some examples, different response fields may be presented at different stages of a test order, and each response field may be associated with a different predetermined set of structured test responses corresponding to a particular test phase.

[0069] Referring here to Figure 3B, a predetermined set of structured inspection responses 136 associated with response field 134 is shown. The predetermined set of structured inspection responses 136 defines all acceptable inspection inputs for response field 134 and is determined based on at least one of the inspection criteria associated with the inspection order or the inspection phase corresponding to the inspection execution. Once at least one structured inspection response is selected from the predetermined set, the selected structured inspection response is received by the structured inspection management system 100 and stored in association with response field 134 of the selected inspection order 112A. The selected structured inspection response represents the inspection result corresponding to the inspection execution and is used by the structured inspection management system 100 for subsequent inspection status determination.

[0070] As shown in Figure 3C, the inspection interface displays the selected structured inspection response entered for the selected inspection order. When a structured inspection response is selected, the response enforcement module 106 receives the selected structured inspection response and stores it in association with the inspection order. Based on the selected structured inspection response, the status tracking module 108 automatically determines the inspection status of the inspection order and updates the inspection status information 116 without requiring free-form interpretation or manual status assignment. As shown in the figure, the inspection status information 116 is updated to reflect the completion of the inspection order based on the selected structured inspection response. In other examples, different inspection status results may be automatically determined depending on the selected structured inspection response and, optionally, the inspection phase associated with the inspection order. In this way, the structured inspection management system 100 ensures that the inspection status is systemically determined based on the structured inspection input, thereby reducing ambiguity and facilitating consistent inspection status tracking across inspection orders and workflows.

[0071] Referring to Figure 4, an example of a manual workflow mode is shown, in which inspection activities are supported using a physical inspection record rather than an electronic inspection interface. In manual workflow mode, the inspection criteria 120 associated with the inspection order are provided on a physical inspection record, such as a printed inspection sheet, form, or checklist, and are made available to the inspector for use during the performance of the inspection on the structure. The physical inspection record further includes one or more response fields 134 corresponding to a predetermined set of structured inspection responses 136 applicable to the performance of the inspection. The response fields 134 on the physical inspection record define acceptable inspection inputs in the same manner as the response fields 134 described with respect to Figures 3A-3C, by restricting the inspection input to selection from a predetermined set of structured inspection responses and preventing the input of free-form or unstructured inspection responses. The predetermined set of structured inspection responses 136 may be presented on the physical inspection record as checkboxes, selection columns, marked fields, or other structured selection mechanisms.

[0072] Following the execution of the inspection, at least one selected structured inspection response recorded in the physical inspection record is then input to the structured inspection management system 100 via an electronic interface. The response enforcement module 106 receives and stores the selected structured inspection response associated with the corresponding inspection order, and the status tracking module 108 automatically determines and updates the inspection status information 116 of the inspection order in the same manner as described for the digital workflow mode.

[0073] In this way, the structured inspection management system 100 maintains consistent enforcement of acceptable inspection inputs and system-driven inspection status determination across both digital and manual workflow modes. Inspection activities can be performed using physical inspection records in manual workflow mode, but inspection results are standardized by the use of a predetermined set of structured inspection responses and ultimately captured electronically to support consistent inspection status tracking, traceability, and downstream processing.

[0074] Referring here to Figure 5, Method 200 for structured anomaly inspection management is shown. Method 200 can be performed using the structured inspection management system described herein and is applicable to both digital and manual workflow modes. In block 202, Method 200 includes accessing selected inspection orders related to anomalies from among multiple inspection orders via the structured inspection management system. The selected inspection orders define inspection criteria for performing inspections related to anomalies. In block 204, the inspection criteria for the selected inspection orders are presented. The inspection criteria define one or more requirements that serve as a basis for evaluating the performance of the inspections and may be presented via an electronic interface, a physical inspection record, or a combination thereof.

[0075] In block 206, method 200 includes enforcing a restriction on the acceptable input for a selected test order to a predetermined set of structured test responses related to the execution of the test. Enforcing the restriction on acceptable input prevents the input of free-form or unstructured test responses and ensures that the test input is captured in a standardized, system-interpretable format. In block 208, method 200 includes receiving at least one structured test response selected from a predetermined set of structured test responses for a selected test order. The at least one structured test response represents a test result corresponding to the execution of the test. In block 210, method 200 includes automatically determining and storing the test status of a selected test order based on at least one structured test response without requiring manual interpretation of the test result. The test status is determined by the system without requiring manual interpretation or assignment by the user.

[0076] If the inspection status indicates that an anomaly remains unresolved, Method 200 includes keeping the selected inspection order in an incomplete state for subsequent inspection or corrective action. In this way, the unresolved anomaly remains trackable until the inspection result indicates resolution, and further action is possible. By doing so, Method 200 provides a structured and clear inspection workflow in which inspection inputs are limited to predetermined structured inspection responses and the inspection status is automatically determined based on those responses, thereby promoting consistency, traceability, and reproducibility across inspection activities and environments.

[0077] In some examples, the method further includes determining and storing the inspection status of selected inspection orders, and then making the inspection results available for review, summarization, or export. The inspection results may include inspection order identifiers, inspection status information, selected structured inspection responses, and associated traceability data. The method may further include exporting the inspection results in one or more structured data formats for use in external reporting tools, quality systems, or data analysis platforms. These additional operations can be performed without modifying the enforcement of acceptable inspection inputs or system-driven inspection status determination described herein.

[0078] In some examples, the operations of Method 200 can be implemented as computer-executable instructions stored in a non-temporary computer-readable medium and executed by one or more processors of a structured inspection management system. Upon execution of the instructions, one or more processors perform the operations described in Figure 5, which include accessing the inspection order, enforcing restrictions on the allowed input to a predetermined structured inspection response, receiving the selected inspection response, and automatically determining and storing the inspection status.

[0079] In the above explanation, specific terms such as “up,” “down,” “upper side,” “lower side,” “horizontal,” “vertical,” “left,” “right,” “upward,” and “downward” may be used. These terms are used to clarify explanations when dealing with relative relationships where applicable. However, these terms are not intended to imply absolute relationships, positions, and / or orientations. For example, the “upper” side of an object can become the “lower” side simply by inverting that object. Nevertheless, this is still the same object. Furthermore, the terms “include,” “equip,” and “possess,” and their variations, mean “include, but not limited to,” unless otherwise explicitly specified. An enumerated list of items does not mean that any or all of the items are mutually exclusive and / or mutually inclusive, unless otherwise explicitly specified. The terms “a,” “an,” and “the” also mean “one or more,” unless otherwise explicitly specified. Furthermore, the term “plural” can be defined as “at least two.” Furthermore, unless otherwise specified, as defined in this disclosure, certain features do not necessarily represent all of the features of the entire set or class of features.

[0080] The terms “approximately” or “substantially” are defined in some embodiments as meaning within + / - 5% of a given value, but in additional embodiments, any disclosure of “approximately” may be further narrowed and asserted to mean within + / - 4% of a given value, within + / - 3% of a given value, within + / - 2% of a given value, within + / - 1% of a given value, or the exact given value. Furthermore, if at least two values ​​of a variable are disclosed, such disclosure is specifically intended to include a range between the two values, whether they are disclosed in relation to separate embodiments or examples, and specifically intended to include a range less than or equal to at least the smaller of the two values ​​and / or the larger of the two values. Additionally, if at least three values ​​of a variable are disclosed, such disclosure is specifically intended to include a range between any two of the values, whether they are disclosed in relation to separate embodiments or examples, and specifically intended to include a range less than or equal to at least value A and / or value B, where A may be any value of the disclosed values ​​other than the disclosed maximum value, and B may be any value of the disclosed values ​​other than the disclosed minimum value.

[0081] Additionally, in this specification, when one element is “joined” to another element, this can include direct and indirect joins. A direct join can be defined as one element being joined to another element and having some kind of contact. An indirect join can be defined as a join between two elements that do not have direct contact with each other but have one or more additional elements between the joined elements. Furthermore, as used herein, fixing one element to another element can include both direct and indirect fixings. Additionally, as used herein, “adjacent” does not necessarily indicate contact. For example, one element may be adjacent to another element without contact.

[0082] As used herein, the phrase “at least one” means, when used with a list of items, that one or more different combinations of the listed items may be used, or only one of the items in the list may be required. An item may be a specific object, thing, or category. In other words, “at least one of” means that any combination of items or any number of items may be used from the list, but not all of the items in the list are required. For example, “at least one of item A, item B, and item C” may mean item A, item A and item B, item B, item A, item B, and item C, or item B and item C. In some cases, “at least one of item A, item B, and item C” may mean, for example, two item A, one item B, and ten item C, four item B and seven item C, or any other suitable combination, for example, but not limited to these.

[0083] Unless otherwise specified, terms such as “first,” “second,” etc., are used here merely as labels and are not intended to impose any order, position, or hierarchical requirements on the items they refer to. Furthermore, a reference to an item “second,” for example, does not require or exclude the presence of an item “first” or a lower-numbered item, and / or an item “third” or a higher-numbered item.

[0084] In this specification, a system, apparatus, structure, article, element, component, or hardware “configured to” perform a particular function is certainly capable of performing that function without any modification, rather than merely having the potential to perform that function after further modification. In other words, a system, apparatus, structure, article, element, component, or hardware “configured to” perform a specified function is specifically selected, created, implemented, used, programmed, and / or designed to perform the specified function. Where used herein, “configured to” refers to an existing characteristic of the system, apparatus, structure, article, element, component, or hardware that enables it to perform the specified function without further modification. For the purposes of this disclosure, a system, apparatus, structure, article, element, component, or hardware described as “configured to” perform a particular function may additionally or alternatively be described as “adapted to” and / or “operative to” perform that function.

[0085] The schematic flowcharts included herein are generally presented as logical flowcharts. Therefore, the illustrated order and labeled steps represent one example of the presented method. Other steps and methods may be considered equivalent in function, logic, or effect to one or more steps or parts thereof of the illustrated method. Additionally, the formatting and symbols used are provided to illustrate the logical steps of the method and are not intended to limit the scope of the method. Various arrow and line types may be used in the flowcharts, but these are not intended to limit the scope of the corresponding method. In fact, some arrows or other connectors may be used to indicate only the logical flow of the method. For example, arrows may indicate unspecified duration wait or monitoring periods between enumerated steps of the illustrated method. Additionally, the order in which a particular method is performed may or may not strictly adhere to the order of the corresponding steps shown.

[0086] To further emphasize the independence of implementation forms, many of the functional units described herein are labeled as modules. For example, modules may be implemented as hardware circuits including custom very large-scale integrated circuits ("VLSI") or off-the-shelf semiconductors such as gate arrays, logic chips, transistors, or other individual components. Modules may also be implemented in programmable hardware devices such as field-programmable gate arrays ("FPGA"), programmable array logic, or programmable logic devices.

[0087] Modules can also be implemented in software for execution on various types of processors. A module of specified program code may, for example, contain one or more physical or logical blocks of computer instructions, which may be organized as, for example, objects, procedures, or functions. Nevertheless, the executable code of a specified module does not need to be physically located together, and may contain separate instructions stored in different locations that, when logically combined, accomplish the purpose of the module that is expressed as containing the module.

[0088] In fact, a module of program code may be a single instruction or many instructions, and may be distributed across several different code segments, different programs, and several memory devices. Similarly, operational data may be identified and illustrated within a module herein, embodied in any suitable form, and organized within any suitable type of data structure. Operational data may be collected as a single dataset, or distributed across different locations, including different storage devices, and may exist at least partially simply as electrical signals on a system or network. If a module or part of a module is implemented in software, the program code may be stored and / or propagated on one or more computer-readable media.

[0089] A computer program product may include a computer-readable storage medium (also referred to as a medium) containing computer-readable program instructions that cause a processor to execute an aspect of the present invention.

[0090] A computer-readable storage medium can be a tangible device capable of holding and storing instructions used by an instruction execution device. A computer-readable storage medium may be, but is not limited to, an electronic storage device, a magnetic storage device, an optical storage device, an electromagnetic storage device, a semiconductor storage device, or any suitable combination thereof. More specific examples of computer-readable storage media, non-exclusively, include portable computer diskettes, hard disks, random access memory ("RAM"), read-only memory ("ROM"), erasable programmable read-only memory ("EPROM," i.e., flash memory), static random access memory ("SRAM"), portable compact disk read-only memory ("CD-ROM"), digital multipurpose disks ("DVD"), memory sticks, floppy disks, mechanical encoding devices such as punch cards or grooved-reinforced structures on which instructions are recorded, or any suitable combination thereof. The computer-readable storage medium used in this application is not to be interpreted as a radio wave or other freely propagating electromagnetic wave, an electromagnetic wave propagating through a waveguide or other transmission medium (for example, an optical pulse passing through an optical fiber cable), or a transient signal itself such as an electrical signal transmitted by a wire.

[0091] The computer-readable program instructions described in this application can be downloaded from a computer-readable storage medium to each computing / processing unit, or downloaded to an external computer or external storage device via a network, such as the Internet, a local area network, a wide area network, and / or a wireless network. The network may include copper transmission cables, optical transmission fibers, wireless transmission, routers, firewalls, switches, gateway computers, and / or edge servers. A network adapter card or network interface in each computing / processing unit receives computer-readable program instructions from the network and transfers the computer-readable program instructions for storage in a computer-readable storage medium within each computing / processing unit.

[0092] The computer-readable program instructions for performing the operations of the present invention may be assembler instructions, instruction set architecture ("ISA") instructions, machine instructions, machine-specific instructions, microcode, firmware instructions, state setting data, or they may be written in any combination of one or more programming languages, and may be either source code or object code including object-oriented programming languages ​​such as Smalltalk or C++, or they may be conventional procedural programming languages ​​such as C or similar programming languages. The entire computer-readable program instruction may be executed on the user's computer, or only a portion of the instruction may be executed on the user's computer, or the instruction may be executed as a standalone software package, or a portion of the instruction may be executed on the user's computer and a remote computer, or the entire instruction may be executed on a remote computer or server. In the latter scenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer via any type of network, including a local area network ("LAN") or a wide area network ("WAN"), or this connection may be to an external computer (for example, via the Internet using an Internet Service Provider). In some embodiments, to carry out aspects of the present invention, a computer-readable program instruction may be executed by using, for example, an electronic circuit including a programmable logic circuit, a field-programmable gate array ("FPGA") or a programmable logic array ("PLA"), and by customizing the electronic circuit using state information of the computer-readable program instruction.

[0093] Aspects of the present invention will be described herein with reference to flowcharts and / or block diagrams of methods, apparatus (systems), and computer program products according to embodiments of the present invention. It will be understood that each block in the flowcharts and / or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in the flowcharts and / or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer-readable program instructions.

[0094] A computer-readable program instruction may be given to the processor of a general-purpose computer, a dedicated computer, or other programmable data processing device to generate a machine, such that the instruction executed by the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing device generates means for performing functions / operations shown in one or more blocks of a flowchart and / or block diagram. The computer-readable program instruction may also be stored in a computer-readable storage medium, which can instruct a computer, a programmable data processing device, and / or other device to function in a particular way, such that the computer-readable storage medium containing the instruction comprises a product containing the instruction for performing the modes of functions / operations shown in one or more blocks of a flowchart and / or block diagram.

[0095] Computer-readable program instructions can also be loaded into a computer, other programmable data processing device, or other device so that a series of action steps are executed by the computer, other programmable device, or other device, thereby realizing a process performed by the computer.

[0096] The schematic flowcharts and / or schematic block diagrams in the figures illustrate the architecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementations of devices, systems, methods, and computer program products according to various embodiments. In this regard, each block in the schematic flowcharts and / or schematic block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portion of code containing one or more executable instructions of program code for performing a specified logical function.

[0097] While various arrow and line types may be used in flowcharts and / or block diagrams, it is understood that they do not limit the scope of the corresponding embodiment. In fact, some arrows or other connectors may be used to indicate only the logical flow of the given embodiment. For example, an arrow may indicate an unspecified duration of waiting or monitoring between enumerated steps of the given embodiment. It should also be noted that each block in a block diagram and / or flowchart, as well as combinations of blocks in a block diagram and / or flowchart, may be implemented by a dedicated hardware-based system or a combination of dedicated hardware and program code that performs a specified function or operation.

[0098] This subject matter may be embodied in other concrete forms without deviating from its spirit or essential characteristics. The examples described should be considered in all respects as illustrative only and not restrictive. All modifications that are equivalent in meaning and scope to the claims shall be included within the claims. [Explanation of symbols]

[0099] 100 Structured Inspection Management System, 102 Inspection Organization Module, 104 Display Module, 106 Response Enforcement Module, 108 Status Tracking Module, 110 Traceability Module, 112 Multiple Inspection Orders, 112A Inspection Order, 114 Inspection Order Identifier, 116 Inspection Status Information, 118 Inspection Order Revision Information, 120 Inspection Criteria, 122 Traceability Field, 126 Anomaly Location Information, 128 Search Interface, 134 Response Field, 134A First Response Field, 134B Second Response Field, 136 Structured Inspection Response, 140 Supplementary Input Field, 144 Timing Information, 146 Source Information, 200 Method, 202 Block

Claims

1. A structured inspection management system (100), An inspection organization module (102) that organizes multiple inspection orders (112), wherein each of the inspection orders (112) is associated with an anomaly, and an inspection criterion (120) for performing an inspection associated with the anomaly is defined in the inspection organization module (102), A display module (104) that presents the inspection criteria (120) related to the selected inspection order (112A) from among the multiple inspection orders (112), A response enforcement module (106) restricts user input for the selected inspection order (112A) to a predetermined set of structured inspection responses (136) related to the execution of the inspection, A status tracking module (108) automatically determines and stores the inspection status (116) for the selected inspection order (112A) based on at least one structured inspection response (136) selected via the response enforcement module (106), A structured inspection management system, including [specific feature / feature].

2. The structured inspection management system according to claim 1, further comprising a traceability module (110) that records traceability data (122) for each of the selected structured inspection responses via the response enforcement module (106), enabling the identification of at least one of the source or timing of the structured inspection response.

3. In manual workflow mode, The predetermined set of the inspection criteria (120) and the structured inspection response (136) is provided in the physical inspection record. At least one structured inspection response (136) recorded in the physical inspection record is subsequently input to the response forcing module (106) via an electronic interface. The structured inspection management system according to claim 1, wherein the inspection status (116) is determined based on at least one structured inspection response (136) received via the electronic interface.

4. In digital workflow mode, The predetermined set of the inspection criteria (120) and the structured inspection response (136) is presented via an electronic interface. The structured inspection management system according to claim 1, wherein the inspection status (116) is determined based on at least one structured inspection response (136) received via the electronic interface.

5. Each of the multiple inspection orders (112) has multiple inspection phases, The structured inspection management system according to claim 1, wherein the response enforcement module (106) limits the predetermined set of structured inspection responses (136) corresponding to the current inspection phase.

6. One of the multiple inspection phases includes an initial inspection phase, The structured inspection management system according to claim 5, wherein the predetermined set of structured inspection responses (136) corresponding to the initial inspection phase includes a response indicating whether or not a condition related to the abnormality exists.

7. One of the multiple inspection phases includes a resolution inspection phase following corrective action, The structured inspection management system according to claim 5, wherein the predetermined set of structured inspection responses (136) corresponding to the resolution inspection phase includes responses indicating acceptance or rejection of the abnormal condition.

8. The structured inspection management system according to claim 5, wherein the status tracking module (108) determines the inspection status (116) based on at least one structured inspection response (136) and the current inspection phase of the selected inspection order (112A).

9. The structured inspection management system according to claim 1, wherein the status tracking module (108) is configured to maintain the selected inspection order (112A) in an incomplete state if at least one of the structured inspection responses indicates that the anomaly remains unresolved.

10. The structured inspection management system according to claim 1, wherein each of the multiple inspection orders (112) is associated with the anomaly via anomaly identification data including a unique anomaly identifier.

11. The structured inspection management system according to claim 1, wherein each of the multiple inspection orders (112) is associated with abnormality-related information including abnormality identification information, abnormality description information (124), and abnormality location information (126).

12. The inspection organization module (102) is further configured to generate multiple inspection orders (112) from multiple data sources, The structured inspection management system according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of data sources include at least one of locally stored data, manually uploaded data, or data obtained from an external source.

13. The display module (104) is further configured to present inspection visual data related to the abnormality, The structured inspection management system according to claim 1, wherein the inspection visual data includes at least one of images, figures, and maps.

14. A method (200) for the management of structured anomaly inspections, wherein the method (200) is Step (202) accesses a selected inspection order (112A) related to an anomaly from among a plurality of inspection orders (112) via a structured inspection management system (100), wherein the selected inspection order (112A) defines inspection criteria (120) for performing the inspection related to the anomaly, Step (204) presents the inspection criteria (120) for the selected inspection order (112A), Step (206) of enforcing the restriction of the acceptable input for the selected test order (112A) to a predetermined set of structured test responses (136) related to the execution of the test, Step (208) of receiving at least one structured test response selected from the predetermined set of structured test responses (136) for the selected test order (112A), Step (210) of automatically determining and storing the inspection status (116) of the selected inspection order (112A) based on at least one of the structured inspection responses, Includes, A method for maintaining the selected inspection order (112A) in an incomplete state for subsequent inspection or corrective action if the inspection status (116) indicates that the anomaly remains unresolved.

15. The method according to claim 14, further comprising the step of recording traceability data (122) related to the step of receiving at least one structured test response.

16. The aforementioned traceability data (122) is The method according to claim 15, comprising at least one of the sources or timings of the structured test response received for the selected test order (112A).

17. The selected inspection order (112A) has multiple inspection phases, The method according to claim 14, wherein the step of enforcing the limitation of the allowable input includes the step of enforcing selection from a predetermined set of structured test responses (136) corresponding to the current test phase.

18. The method according to claim 14, further comprising the step of tracking the number of test trials associated with the selected test order (112A), wherein each test trial corresponds to the reception of at least one structured test response for the selected test order (112A).

19. The method according to claim 14, wherein the step of enforcing the limitation of the allowable input includes the step of preventing the input of a free-form test response.

20. A non-temporary computer-readable medium that, when executed by one or more processors, stores instructions causing one or more of the processors to execute a method for structured anomaly inspection management, wherein the method is A step of accessing a selected test order (112A) from among multiple test orders (112) that is related to an anomaly, wherein the selected test order (112A) defines a test criterion (120) for performing the test related to the anomaly, The steps include presenting the inspection criteria (120) for the selected inspection order (112A), The steps include: enforcing a restriction on the allowable input for the selected test order (112A) to a predetermined set of structured test responses (136) related to the execution of the test; The steps include receiving at least one of the structured test responses (136) selected from the predetermined set of structured test responses (136) for the selected test order (112A), The steps include: automatically determining and storing the inspection status (116) of the selected inspection order (112A) based on at least one of the structured inspection responses; Includes, A non-temporary computer-readable medium that, if the inspection status (116) indicates that the anomaly remains unresolved, keeps the selected inspection order (112A) in an incomplete state for subsequent inspection or corrective action.

Images