Work order management system for managing non-conformance anomalies in a structure and associated method and system

Abstract

A structured inspection management system, method, and non-transient computer-readable medium for managing anomalies are disclosed. The system organizes a plurality of inspection commands, each of which is associated with an anomaly and defines inspection criteria for performing the inspection. The system provides inspection criteria for a selected inspection command and enforces limits on acceptable inputs with a set of predefined structured inspection responses associated with the performance of the inspection. Based on at least one structured inspection response, the system automatically determines and stores the inspection status for the selected inspection command. When the inspection status indicates that the anomaly remains unresolved, the inspection command is maintained in an incomplete state for subsequent inspection or corrective action.

Description

Technology Field

[0001] This application claims the benefit of U.S. provisional patent application No. 63 / 765,186 filed February 28, 2025, the entirety of which is incorporated herein by reference.

[0002] The present invention generally relates to an inspection management system, and in particular to a system and method for managing inspection activities associated with anomalies using structured inspection responses. Background Technology

[0003] Managing inspection activities associated with anomalies in large or complex structures, such as aircraft, rockets, microchips, and other assemblies, can present significant challenges due to the volume, complexity, and distribution of the anomalies. Conventional inspection management approaches often rely on unstructured or free-form inspection inputs, fragmentary data processing, and rigid 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 provide limited coordination between inspection criteria, inspection responses, and inspection statuses, and are not suitable for use across hybrid digital and manual inspection environments. Inspection activities may be performed using a combination of paper-based records and electronic systems that do not operate integrally, which increases the risk of error, complicates record synchronization, and reduces the reliability of inspection results. The problem to be solved

[0005] The subject matter of the present application was developed in response to the current state of the art, particularly in response to the disadvantages associated with conventional inspection management approaches that have not yet been fully resolved by currently available technology. Accordingly, the subject matter of the present application was developed to provide a system and method for structured inspection management that overcomes at least some of the aforementioned disadvantages of prior art techniques. means of solving the problem

[0006] The following is a non-exclusive list of examples of the subject matter disclosed herein, which may or may not be claimed.

[0007] A structured inspection management system is disclosed herein. The system includes an inspection organization module that organizes a plurality of inspection commands. Each inspection command is associated with an anomaly and defines inspection criteria for performing an inspection associated with the anomaly. The system also includes a display module that provides inspection criteria for a selected inspection command. The system further includes a response execution module that restricts user input for a selected inspection command to a set of predefined structured inspection responses associated with the performance of an inspection. Additionally, the system includes a state tracking module that automatically determines and stores an inspection status for a selected inspection command based on at least one structured inspection response. The subject matter of this paragraph characterizes Example 1 of the present invention.

[0008] The structured test management system further includes a traceability module configured to record traceability data for each structured test response selected via a response execution module. The traceability data enables the identification of at least one of the source or timing of the structured test response. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 2 of the present invention, wherein Example 2 also includes the subject matter according to Example 1 above.

[0009] In manual workflow mode, a set of inspection criteria and predefined structured inspection responses is provided in a physical inspection record, at least one structured inspection response recorded in the physical inspection record is subsequently input into a response execution module via an electronic interface, and the inspection status is determined based on the structured inspection response received via the electronic interface. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 3 of the present invention, wherein Example 3 also includes the subject matter according to either Example 1 or 2 above.

[0010] In digital workflow mode, a set of inspection criteria and predefined structured inspection responses is provided via an electronic interface, and the inspection status is determined based on the structured inspection responses received via the electronic interface. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 4 of the present invention, wherein Example 4 also includes the subject matter according to any of Examples 1-3 above.

[0011] Each test command includes multiple test phases, and the response execution module limits a set of predefined structured test responses based on the current test phase. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 5 of the present invention, wherein Example 5 also includes the subject matter according to any of Examples 1-4 above.

[0012] In one example, the initial inspection phase includes a set of predefined structured inspection responses indicating whether conditions associated with an anomaly exist. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 6 of the present invention, wherein Example 6 also includes the subject matter according to Example 5 above.

[0013] In another example, following the corrective action, the resolution inspection phase includes a set of predefined structured inspection responses indicating acceptance or rejection of the above conditions. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 7 of the present invention, wherein Example 7 also includes the subject matter according to Example 5 above.

[0014] In some examples, the state tracking module determines the inspection state based on both the selected structured inspection response and the current inspection phase of the selected inspection command. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 8 of the present invention, wherein Example 8 also includes the subject matter according to Example 5 above.

[0015] The state tracking module maintains a test command selected as incomplete when the structured test response indicates that the anomaly remains in an unresolved state. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 9 of the present invention, wherein Example 9 also includes the subject matter according to any of Examples 1-8 above.

[0016] Each inspection command is associated with an anomaly via anomaly identification data containing a unique anomaly identifier. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph describes Example 10 of the present invention, wherein Example 10 also includes the subject matter according to any of Examples 1-9 above.

[0017] Each inspection command is associated with anomaly-related information including anomaly identification information, anomaly description information, and anomaly location information. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph describes Example 11 of the present invention, wherein Example 11 also includes the subject matter according to any of Examples 1-10 above.

[0018] The inspection organization module populates multiple inspection commands from one or more data sources, including locally stored data, manually uploaded data, or externally retrieved data. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 12 of the present invention, wherein Example 12 also includes the subject matter according to any of Examples 1-11 above.

[0019] The display module provides inspection time data associated with an anomaly, and the inspection time data includes one or more of an image, a diagram, or a map. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 13 of the present invention, wherein Example 13 also includes the subject matter according to any of Examples 1-12 above.

[0020] Furthermore, a method for managing structured anomaly checks is disclosed herein. The method includes the steps of accessing a selected check command associated with an anomaly and providing a check criterion for the selected check command. The method also includes the steps of enforcing a restriction on acceptable inputs with a set of predefined structured check responses associated with the performance of the check and receiving at least one structured check response selected from the predefined set. The method further includes the step of automatically determining and storing the check status for the selected check command based on the structured check response. The check command is maintained in an incomplete state when the check status indicates that the anomaly remains unresolved. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 14 of the present invention.

[0021] The method further includes the step of recording traceability data associated with receiving a structured test response. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 15 of the present invention, wherein Example 15 also includes the subject matter according to Example 14 above.

[0022] Traceability data includes at least one of the source or timing of the structured test response. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 16 of the present invention, wherein Example 16 also includes the subject matter according to Example 15 above.

[0023] The selected inspection command includes a plurality of inspection phases, and the step of enforcing the restriction of acceptable inputs includes the step of enforcing a selection from a set of predefined structured inspection responses corresponding to the current inspection phase. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 17 of the present invention, wherein Example 17 also includes the subject matter according to any of Examples 14-16 above.

[0024] The method further comprises the step of tracking a plurality of inspection attempts associated with a selected inspection command, each inspection attempt corresponding to the reception of at least one structured inspection response. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 18 of the present invention, wherein Example 18 also includes the subject matter according to any of Examples 14-17 above.

[0025] The step of enforcing a restriction on acceptable input includes the step of preventing the input of a free-form check response. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 19 of the present invention, wherein Example 19 also includes the subject matter according to any of Examples 14-18 above.

[0026] Furthermore, a non-transient computer-readable medium storing instructions is disclosed herein, wherein, when executed by one or more processors, the processor accesses a selected inspection instruction associated with an anomaly, provides inspection criteria for the selected inspection instruction, enforces a restriction of acceptable inputs with a set of predefined structured inspection responses associated with the execution of the inspection, receives at least one structured inspection response selected from the predefined set, and automatically determines and stores an inspection state for the selected inspection instruction. The inspection instruction is maintained in an incomplete state when the anomaly remains unresolved. The subject matter of the preceding paragraph characterizes Example 20 of the present invention.

[0027] The described features, structures, benefits, and / or characteristics of the subject matter of the present invention may be combined in a certain appropriate manner in one or more examples and / or embodiments. In the following description, a number of specific details are provided to provide a complete understanding of the examples of the subject matter of the present invention. Those skilled in the art will recognize that the subject matter of the present invention may be practiced without one or more of the specific features, details, components, materials, and / or methods of a particular example or embodiment. In other cases, additional features and benefits may be recognized in certain examples and / or embodiments where they may not be present in all examples or embodiments. Furthermore, in some cases, well-known structures, materials, or operations are not illustrated or described in detail to avoid obscuring aspects of the subject matter of the present invention. The features and benefits of the subject matter of the present invention will become more fully apparent from the following description and the appended claims, or may be learned through the practice of the subject matter as described below. Brief explanation of the drawing

[0028] To make the benefits of the subject more easily understood, a more specific description of the subject briefly described above will be provided with reference to specific examples illustrated in the attached drawings. With the understanding that these drawings, which are not necessarily drawn to scale, depict only certain examples of the subject and should not be considered to limit its scope, the subject will be described and explained with additional specificities and details through the use of the drawings. FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram of an example of a structured inspection management system according to one or more examples of the present invention. FIG. 2 is a schematic representation of an example of an inspection command interface showing a plurality of inspection commands and associated inspection command information according to one or more examples of the present invention. FIG. 3a is a schematic representation of an example of an inspection interface for a selected inspection command, showing inspection command related information, inspection criteria, and a response field associated with a set of predefined structured inspection responses according to one or more examples of the present invention. FIG. 3b is a schematic representation of providing an example of a set of predefined structured test responses associated with the response field of FIG. 3a according to one or more examples of the present invention. FIG. 3c is a schematic representation of an example of a selected structured inspection response for the response field of FIG. 3a and a corresponding automatic update of inspection status information according to one or more examples of the present invention. FIG. 4 is a schematic representation of an example of a physical inspection record used in a manual workflow mode, illustrating inspection criteria and structured inspection response options recorded in a physical inspection record according to one or more examples of the present invention. FIG. 5 is a flowchart of a method for structured inspection management according to one or more examples of the present invention. Specific details for implementing the invention

[0029] References throughout this specification to “an example,” “one example,” or similar language mean that the specific features, structures, or characteristics described in relation to the example are included in at least one example of the invention. Phrases throughout this specification such as “in an example,” “in one example,” and expressions of similar language may all refer to the same example, but are not necessarily so. Likewise, the use of the term “implementation” means an implementation having the specific features, structures, or characteristics described in relation to one or more examples of the invention, but unless otherwise indicated by an explicit correlation, an implementation may be associated with one or more examples.

[0030] A structured inspection management system for managing anomalies associated with structures is disclosed herein. As used herein, anomalies refer to conditions that deviate from predefined design, manufacturing, operation, or maintenance standards, and may include, but are not limited to, defects or other discrepancies affecting the performance, integrity, reliability, or appearance of a structure. Such anomalies may result from manufacturing discrepancies, material degradation, assembly errors, environmental damage, operational stress, fatigue, or other factors that cause a component or system to deviate from acceptable tolerances. Anomalies may vary in size and severity and range from minor surface imperfections to large-scale structural conditions that, if not properly addressed, may affect operational suitability, safety margins, or long-term reliability.

[0031] In general terms, the disclosed structured inspection management system organizes inspection commands associated with anomalies, provides inspection criteria for selected inspection commands, restricts inspection inputs to a set of predefined structured inspection responses, and automatically determines and tracks inspection statuses based on these structured inspection 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 determinations across these workflows, the system reduces ambiguity in inspection results while improving consistency, traceability, and repeatability of inspection activities. That is, unlike conventional inspection management systems that rely on free-form inspection inputs and manual interpretation of inspection results, the disclosed structured inspection management system enforces restrictions on acceptable inspection inputs using predefined structured inspection responses and automatically determines inspection statuses based on those responses. In other words, the disclosed system enforces inspection result selections and derives inspection statuses without subjective interpretation.

[0032] The disclosed system may be advantageous 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 approach provided by the disclosed system supports improved coordination across dispersed personnel and systems, promotes consistent inspection execution, and facilitates more efficient inspection activities across multiple operational contexts. In one non-limiting example, the structured inspection management system may be used in an aircraft manufacturing or maintenance environment to manage inspection activities associated with anomalies identified across different aircraft sections, production stages, or inspection phases.

[0033] Referring to FIG. 1, a structured inspection management system (100) for managing anomalies associated with a structure is illustrated, according to one example. The structured inspection management system (100) provides an integrated and systematic framework for managing inspection activities associated with anomalies throughout one or more inspection lifecycles. Generally, the system (100) is configured to organize inspection commands associated with anomalies, provide inspection criteria associated with selected inspection commands, implement the use of structured inspection responses during inspection activities, and automatically determine and track inspection status based on said responses.

[0034] A structured inspection management system (100) is configured to support inspection activities performed across multiple environments, including digital, manual, and hybrid workflows, and can operate in both connected and offline conditions. By applying consistent response logic regardless of how inspection interactions are performed, the system (100) can reduce ambiguity in inspection execution, improve traceability of inspection results, and facilitate repeatable and auditable inspection processes. In this manner, the structured inspection management system (100) provides basic 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 determinations.

[0035] A 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 may include a specific physical assembly, system, or component that is subject to inspection for anomalies, and may be composed of multiple interconnected components, materials, or subsystems. Anomalies associated with such structures may vary in size and severity, ranging from minor surface imperfections to larger conditions affecting performance, safety, reliability, or operational suitability. In these environments, inspection activities associated with anomalies may be performed at different stages of manufacturing, assembly, inspection, maintenance, or repair, and may involve multiple inspectors, processes, and operational contexts. Consequently, inspection activities are frequently performed across different systems, locations, and workflows, causing difficulties in ensuring consistent inspection execution, response processing, and inspection status determination.

[0036] In some instances, a structured inspection management system can be deployed in environments where inspection activities are performed by multiple parties across different locations or organizational boundaries. For example, in aerospace manufacturing or assembly environments, inspections may be performed at supplier facilities during intermediate production stages or prior to the final delivery of structures. A structured inspection management system enables inspection orders, structured inspection responses, and inspection statuses to be consistently recorded and tracked across these environments in an auditable manner. For instance, the system can be used to support inspection activities performed upstream of the supply chain, allowing anomalies to be identified and resolved before integration into downstream assemblies. By implementing structured inspection responses and system-driven inspection status determinations, the system helps reduce unresolved anomalies and supports coordination between different organizations or inspection teams.

[0037] In some examples, the structured inspection management system (100) includes a plurality of modules that collectively support structured inspection management. For example, without limitation, the system (100) may include an inspection organization module (102), a display module (104), a response execution module (106), a status tracking module (108), and, in some embodiments, a traceability module (110). The arrangement, inclusion, and function of the modules illustrated in FIG. 1 are exemplary, and the system (100) in other embodiments may include additional modules, fewer modules, or other combinations of modules. In some examples, functions associated with one or more of the modules may be combined, distributed across multiple systems, or performed at least partially through manual or hybrid digital and manual workflows.

[0038] The inspection organization module (102) is configured to organize, manage, and retrieve multiple inspection commands, each inspection command being associated with an anomaly in a structure. Additionally, each inspection command defines inspection criteria for performing one or more inspection activities associated with the anomaly. The inspection organization module (102) provides a structured framework for managing inspection commands throughout one or more inspection lifecycles, including the creation, selection, retrieval, and re-queuing of inspection commands based on inspection results.

[0039] In some examples, the inspection organization module (102) populates and manages inspection commands 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 retrieved data. This multi-source capability enables the structured inspection management system (100) to support automated, manual, and hybrid inspection workflows and to operate in an environment where inspection information may originate from other systems, tools, or record formats. Depending on the implementation of the structured inspection management system (100), inspection commands may be stored or represented in various forms, including electronic data structures, structured files, or physical records.

[0040] The display module (104) is configured to provide inspection-related information for an inspection command in a structured manner. In some examples, the display module (104) provides information associated with a selected inspection command, including inspection criteria defined for the inspection command, inspection status information, and anomaly-related information associated with the inspection command. In other examples, the display module (104) provides information for multiple inspection commands so that a user can observe, compare, or manage inspection activities across multiple inspection commands. The display module (104) can enable a user to review inspection commands, understand inspection requirements, and monitor inspection status at an individual level or across multiple inspection commands as inspection activities progress.

[0041] In some examples, the display module (104) provides an electronic interface that provides inspection-related information to the user, such as a graphical user interface that displays inspection commands and associated inspection data. In other implementations, the display module (104) supports the provision of inspection information in a non-electronic format, including printed or physical inspection records, to support manual or offline inspection workflows. Depending on the implementation and operational context of the structured inspection management system (100), the display module (104) may provide inspection-related information in various visual arrangements, including table views, lists, or other layouts.

[0042] The display module (104) may be further configured to provide inspection visual data associated with an anomaly. The inspection visual data may include one or more visual representations that provide spatial or contextual information regarding the anomaly, including, without limitation, images, diagrams, or maps. Such inspection visual data may be provided in association with inspection commands to help the user understand the location, context, or characteristics of the anomaly during the inspection activity.

[0043] The response enforcement module (106) is configured to control and restrict user input to acceptable inspection inputs for an inspection command. Specifically, the response enforcement module (106) restricts user input for a selected inspection command to a set of predefined structured inspection responses associated with the execution of the inspection. The predefined 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 predefined structured inspection responses, the response enforcement module (106) reduces ambiguity in inspection results and facilitates consistent inspection execution across different workflows and environments. Such structured response enforcement provides a reliable basis for subsequent inspection status determination and inspection tracking, while enabling inspection activities to be performed consistently across different inspectors, locations, and operational contexts, including digital, manual, and hybrid inspection workflows. In some examples, the set of predefined structured inspection responses is configurable prior to inspection execution but is fixed during the execution of a given inspection command.

[0044] In some examples, each inspection command includes multiple inspection phases, and the response execution module (106) is configured to limit a set of predefined structured inspection responses based on the current inspection phase of the inspection command. As the inspection command proceeds through other inspection phases, the response execution module (106) executes a selection from the set of corresponding predefined structured inspection responses associated with the current inspection phase, thereby ensuring that only context-appropriate inspection inputs are allowed in each phase. In other examples, the inspection command includes only a single inspection phase.

[0045] In some examples, one of the inspection phases includes an initial inspection phase containing a response indicating whether a condition associated with an anomaly exists, provided that a set of predefined structured inspection responses is present. In some examples, another inspection phase includes a resolution inspection phase leading to a corrective action, and the set of predefined structured inspection responses includes a response indicating acceptance or rejection of the condition associated with the anomaly. By phase-controlling the acceptable inspection responses, the response enforcement module (106) ensures consistent processing of inspection inputs as the inspection command progresses through different stages of inspection activity. In other examples, the inspection command may include additional or alternative inspection phases beyond the initial inspection phase and the resolution inspection phase. These inspection phases may include, without limitation, a verification inspection phase, a re-inspection phase, a supplementary inspection phase, a deferred inspection phase, a conditional acceptance phase, or a final termination phase. The response enforcement module (106) may limit the acceptable inspection responses based on the current inspection phase in each case, according to the predefined structured inspection responses associated with each phase.

[0046] The status tracking module (108) is configured to determine, update, and store the inspection status for an inspection command as the inspection activity proceeds. The status tracking module (108) ensures that each inspection command is consistently classified according to a predefined inspection status category based on the structured inspection input received via the response execution module (106). In some examples, the status tracking module (108) automatically determines the inspection status for a selected inspection command based on at least one structured inspection response selected from a set of predefined structured inspection responses. For example, when the structured inspection response indicates that no abnormal condition exists or has been satisfactorily handled, the inspection status may be updated to a completed state. Conversely, when the structured inspection response indicates that an abnormal condition exists or remains unresolved, the inspection status may be maintained in an active or incomplete state to support further inspection or corrective action. The inspection status includes one of the predefined sets of inspection statuses maintained by the structured inspection management system, and each inspection status represents the system-recognized result of the inspection.

[0047] In some examples, the state tracking module (108) supports a test command having multiple test phases and determines the test state in a manner that reflects progress through the test phases. That is, the state tracking module (108) determines the test state for a selected test command based on both at least one structured test response and the current test phase of the test command. For example, a test command may remain in an incomplete state over multiple test phases until a structured test response corresponding to a later test phase indicates an acceptable test result.

[0048] In some examples, the status tracking module (108) performs one or more system actions in response to a change in the inspection status. For example, an inspection command that remains in an incomplete state may be re-waited for subsequent inspection activity, whereas an inspection command updated to a completed state may be restricted from further modification unless reactivated by an authorized user. In some examples, the status tracking module (108) may also generate a notification or warning when an inspection status condition is met, such as when an inspection command remains incomplete for a critical period.

[0049] The structured inspection management system (100) may further include a traceability module (110) configured to record traceability data associated with inspection activities performed for an inspection command. In some examples, the traceability module (110) records traceability data that enables the identification of at least one of a source or timing associated with a structured inspection response and an inspection status update for an inspection command.

[0050] In some examples, the traceability data recorded by the traceability module (110) may, without limitation, include one or more of a user identifier, response timestamp, system identifier, or other metadata associated with an inspection-related action. Such actions may include the creation or selection of an inspection command, the input of a structured inspection response via the response execution module (106), the determination of an inspection status by the status tracking module (108), or the re-queuing or completion of an inspection command. By recording traceability data in association with the structured inspection response and the inspection status change, the traceability module (110) may provide an auditable inspection history for the inspection command. This traceability supports accountability, review, and compliance requirements across different inspection workflows and operational environments, including digital, manual, and hybrid inspection workflows.

[0051] 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, an inspection command identifier or anomaly identifier maintained by the structured inspection management system (100) may be associated with a corresponding record or reference identifier in an external system. This identifier-based association enables cross-system traceability of inspection activities without direct system integration or modification of external records. This allows the structured inspection management system (100) to be used across multiple organizations or systems while maintaining consistent structured inspection response capture and inspection status determination.

[0052] The structured inspection management system (100) may be configured to operate in manual workflow mode. In manual workflow mode, a set of inspection criteria associated with an inspection command and a predefined structured inspection response is provided in a physical inspection record, such as a printed document or other non-electronic medium. Inspection activities associated with an anomaly 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 subsequently be input into the response execution module (106) via an electronic interface. That is, the input of the structured inspection response occurs after the inspection is performed, as part of an individual data input or synchronization step, and is not caused simultaneously with the inspection performance. In manual workflow mode, the status tracking module (108) determines the inspection status for the inspection command based on at least one structured inspection response received via the electronic interface. In this manner, the structured inspection management system (100) maintains consistent execution of the structured inspection response and system-driven inspection status determination, even if the inspection activity is initially performed using the physical record. Although inspection activities may be performed using physical inspection records in manual workflow mode, structured inspection responses are ultimately entered into a structured inspection management system (100) to enable response execution and system-driven inspection status determination. That is, inspection commands initially processed using physical inspection records are subsequently digitized or synchronized with the structured inspection management system (100) to maintain an integrated inspection record.

[0053] The structured inspection management system (100) may also be configured to operate in a digital workflow mode. In the digital workflow mode, a set of inspection criteria associated with an inspection command and a predefined structured inspection response are provided via an electronic interface, such as a graphical user interface generated by a display module (104). An inspection activity associated with an abnormality may be performed on a 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 a response execution module (106). In the digital workflow mode, a status tracking module (108) determines the inspection status for an inspection command based on at least one structured inspection response received via the electronic interface. The digital workflow mode enables real-time or near-real-time inspection status determination and tracking.

[0054] In some examples, the structured inspection management system (100) supports a seamless transition between manual and electronic workflows. Inspection commands can be partially completed using physical inspection records and subsequently uploaded, entered, or synchronized to the structured inspection management system (100) without loss of 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 determination.

[0055] In some examples, each inspection command 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 the inspection command to be consistently linked to the associated anomaly across other system components, workflows, and inspection activities. Additionally, each inspection command may be further associated with anomaly-related information describing the associated anomaly. This anomaly-related information may, without limitation, include anomaly identification information, anomaly description information, and anomaly location information. By associating inspection commands 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 the inspection commands and the anomalies they correspond to.

[0056] Referring to FIG. 2, a non-limiting example of an inspection interface generated by a structured inspection management system (100) is illustrated. In this example, the inspection interface is each associated with an anomaly, is managed by the system, and provides information associated with a plurality of inspection commands, including anomaly description information, anomaly location information, and a structured inspection response associated with each inspection command. The inspection interface of FIG. 2 is exemplary and represents an example of a method in which inspection-related information can be visually organized for review and interaction. In other examples, inspection-related information may be provided using different visual layouts, groupings, or interfaces, and the specific information displayed may vary depending on factors such as user role, inspection phase, or operational context. Thus, FIG. 2 is not intended to limit the structure, functionality, or representation of the structured inspection management system (100).

[0057] In some examples, the inspection interface of FIG. 2 is provided by a display module (104) and allows the user to view inspection commands individually or collectively. For example, the inspection interface may provide an inspection command identifier, an inspection status indicator, and selectable structured inspection responses corresponding to inspection criteria defined for the inspection command. To provide contextual information about the inspection activity, the inspection interface may further provide anomaly-related information associated with the anomaly, such as images, diagrams, or maps, and in some examples, inspection time data.

[0058] Specifically, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the inspection interface exemplifies a plurality of inspection commands (112). Each inspection command (112) includes inspection command-specific data to facilitate anomaly tracking, inspection command management, and traceability. This data may include, without limitation, an inspection command identifier (114) configured to uniquely identify the inspection command, inspection status information (116) indicating the current status of the inspection command (e.g., active, completed, incomplete, pending), and, in some examples, inspection command modification information (118) for tracking updates or modifications to the inspection command over time (e.g., see FIG. 3).

[0059] Each inspection command (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 command identifier and the anomaly identifier associated with the inspection command may be the same or different depending on how the anomaly and the inspection command are tracked within a particular implementation. Each inspection command (112) may further include anomaly-related information associated with the anomaly, such as anomaly description information (124) and anomaly location information (126). The anomaly location information (126) may specify a component-level location, a zone-level location, a placement classification, or other location reference associated with a structure. For example, when the structure is an aircraft, the anomaly location information (126) may identify a specific fuselage section, indicate whether the anomaly is located on an external or internal surface or in an upper or lower area, and specify the location using standardized aerospace reference coordinates.

[0060] Generally, an inspection command (112) is associated with a single anomaly so that each reported anomaly corresponds to an individual inspection command. However, in some examples, a single inspection command (112) may be associated with multiple anomalies, for example, when similar anomaly conditions occur at multiple locations on a structure or across a group of related components. In such cases, the inspection command (112) may refer to multiple anomalies to support coordinated inspection activities and consistent processing of the associated anomaly conditions. In some examples, a structured inspection management system (100) organizes anomaly-related information associated with an inspection command in a standardized format to reduce ambiguity and enable consistent processing of inspection criteria, inspection responses, and inspection status.

[0061] As further illustrated in FIG. 2, an inspection command is associated with a set of predefined structured inspection responses selectable in relation to an inspection activity. In the illustrated example, the inspection interface provides one or more response fields (134) corresponding to different inspection contexts or inspection phases. For example, a first response field (134A) may be associated with a set of predefined structured inspection responses indicating whether a condition associated with an anomaly exists. These structured inspection responses may, without limitation, include responses indicating that the condition does not exist, cannot be verified, or exists. Prior to the performance of the inspection, the response field (134A) may not be filled. Following the performance of the inspection, the response field (134A) is filled with a structured inspection response selected from the predefined set. A second response field (134B) may be associated with a set of predefined structured inspection responses indicating acceptance or rejection of the condition of the anomaly following a corrective action. Similar to the first response field, the second response field (134B) may remain unfilled until the corresponding inspection phase is reached and the inspection is performed, at which point the response field (134B) is filled with a structured inspection response selected from a predefined set. The response field and structured inspection response illustrated in FIG. 2 are provided as one non-limiting example. In other examples, other response fields, response values, or response hierarchies may be defined based on inspection criteria, inspection phases, or operational contexts. By enforcing a selection from a predefined 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.

[0062] In some examples, the structured inspection management system (100) further includes one or more traceability fields (122) associated with inspection commands and structured inspection responses. The traceability fields (122) are configured to store traceability data that enables 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 occurrence timestamp. In some examples, the traceability data additionally or alternatively includes source information (146) identifying the source associated with the structured inspection response, such as a user identifier, role identifier, or other system recognition identifier associated with the input of the response.

[0063] The traceability field (122) may be provided within the inspection interface of FIG. 2, stored as metadata associated with an inspection command, or both. The specific form, number, and arrangement of the traceability field may be implementation-dependent and may be changed without departing from the scope of the invention. In this manner, the structured inspection management system (100) enables a traceable association of structured inspection responses with inspection activities while maintaining flexibility across digital or manual workflows.

[0064] In some examples, the inspection interface may further include one or more supplementary input fields (140) associated with the inspection command, such as a notes field. These supplementary input fields (140) may allow the input of contextual information or reference information related to the inspection or corrective action. However, these supplementary 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 the free-form supplementary input.

[0065] In some examples, the structured inspection management system (100) enables the search of inspection commands from a plurality of inspection commands (112) using a search interface (128). The search interface (128) enables the filtering or localization of inspection commands based on predefined inspection command attributes, such as an inspection command identifier, an inspection status value, or anomaly-related information associated with the inspection command. This capability supports the efficient search and management of inspection commands, particularly in environments containing a large number of anomalies.

[0066] Referring to FIG. 3a, an exemplary inspection interface for a selected inspection command (112A) is illustrated in digital workflow mode. The inspection interface illustrates access to the selected inspection command via a structured inspection management system (100). As illustrated, the selected inspection command (112A) includes inspection command-related information associated with the selected inspection command, including anomaly location information (126), inspection status information (116), and inspection command modification information (118). The inspection interface further includes inspection criteria (120) associated with the selected inspection command. The inspection criteria define one or more requirements for performing an inspection associated with an anomaly and may be provided directly within the display or via a linked or referenced inspection document associated with the inspection command. The inspection criteria provide a basis for evaluating an anomaly during the performance of the inspection.

[0067] The selected inspection command (112A) also includes a response field (134). The response field (134) defines acceptable inputs for the inspection command by being associated with a set of predefined structured inspection responses applicable to the performance of the inspection. The response field (134) restricts inspection input to selections from a set of predefined structured inspection responses and prevents the input of free-form or unstructured inspection responses. Prior to the performance of the inspection, the response field (134) may not be filled. Following the performance of the inspection, the response field (134) is filled with structured inspection responses selected from a predefined set. As illustrated in FIG. 3a, the response field (134) may be selectable to represent a set of predefined structured inspection responses in the form of a drop-down menu, as described in more detail in FIG. 3b. In other examples, the set of predefined structured inspection responses may be provided in other selectable formats, including providing all available response options simultaneously with selectable checkboxes, radio buttons, or similar selection mechanisms without restriction. Regardless of the expression format, the response field (134) enforces the restriction of acceptable inputs with a set of predefined structured inspection responses. In some examples, different response fields may be provided at different stages of the inspection command, and each response field is associated with a different set of predefined structured inspection responses corresponding to a specific inspection phase.

[0068] Now, referring to FIG. 3b, a set of predefined structured inspection responses (136) associated with a response field (134) is illustrated. The set of predefined structured inspection responses (136) defines all acceptable inspection inputs for the response field (134) and is determined based on at least one of an inspection criterion associated with an inspection command or an inspection phase corresponding to the performance of the inspection. Depending on the selection of at least one structured inspection response from the predefined set, the selected structured inspection response is received by the structured inspection management system (100) and stored in association with the response field (134) of the selected inspection command (112A). The selected structured inspection response represents an inspection result corresponding to the performance of the inspection and is used by the structured inspection management system (100) to determine a subsequent inspection state.

[0069] As illustrated in FIG. 3c, the inspection interface exemplifies a selected structured inspection response that is input for a selected inspection command. Depending on the selection of the structured inspection response, the response execution module (106) receives and stores the selected structured inspection response associated with the inspection command. Based on the selected structured inspection response, the status tracking module (108) automatically determines the inspection status for the inspection command and updates the inspection status information (116) without requiring free-form interpretation or manual status assignment. As illustrated, the inspection status information (116) is updated to reflect the completion of the inspection command based on the selected structured inspection response. In other examples, other inspection status results may be automatically determined based on the selected structured inspection response and, in some cases, the inspection phase associated with the inspection command. In this manner, the structured inspection management system (100) ensures that the inspection status is determined by the system based on the structured inspection input, thereby reducing ambiguity and facilitating consistent inspection status tracking across inspection commands and workflows.

[0070] Referring to FIG. 4, an example of a manual workflow mode is illustrated in which inspection activities are supported using a physical inspection record rather than an electronic inspection interface. In the manual workflow mode, inspection criteria (120) associated with an inspection command are provided for a physical inspection record, such as a printed inspection sheet, form, or checklist, which is made available to the inspector for use during the performance of an inspection of a structure. The physical inspection record further includes one or more response fields (134) corresponding to a set of predefined structured inspection responses (136) applicable to the performance of the inspection. The response fields (134) for the physical inspection record define acceptable inspection inputs in the same manner as the response fields (134) described in relation to FIG. 3a through 3c by restricting inspection inputs to selections from a set of predefined structured inspection responses and preventing the input of free-form or unstructured inspection responses. A predefined set of structured inspection responses (136) may be provided for the physical inspection record as a checkbox, selection column, indicated field, or other structured selection mechanism.

[0071] Following the execution of the inspection, at least one selected structured inspection response recorded for the physical inspection record is subsequently input into the structured inspection management system (100) via an electronic interface. The response execution module (106) receives and stores the selected structured inspection response in association with the corresponding inspection command, and the status tracking module (108) automatically determines and updates the inspection status information (116) for the inspection command in the same manner as described in relation to the digital workflow mode.

[0072] In this manner, the structured inspection management system (100) maintains consistent execution of acceptable inspection inputs and system-driven inspection status determination across both digital and manual workflow modes. Although inspection activities may be performed using physical inspection records in manual workflow mode, inspection results are ultimately captured electronically to support standardized and consistent inspection status tracking, traceability, and downstream processing through the use of a predefined set of structured inspection responses.

[0073] Now, referring to FIG. 5, a method (200) for structured anomaly inspection management is illustrated. The 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), the method (200) includes accessing a selected inspection command associated with an anomaly from a plurality of inspection commands via the structured inspection management system. The selected inspection command defines an inspection criterion for performing an inspection associated with an anomaly. In block (204), an inspection criterion for the selected inspection command is provided. The inspection criterion defines one or more requirements for which the performance of the inspection is evaluated and may be provided via an electronic interface, a physical inspection record, or a combination thereof.

[0074] In block (206), the method (200) includes enforcing a restriction on acceptable inputs for a selected inspection command with a set of predefined structured inspection responses associated with the execution of the inspection. Enforcing a restriction on acceptable inputs prevents the input of free-form or unstructured inspection responses and ensures that inspection inputs are captured in a standardized and system-interpretable form. In block (208), the method (200) includes receiving at least one structured inspection response selected from a set of predefined structured inspection responses for a selected inspection command. At least one structured inspection response represents an inspection result corresponding to the execution of the inspection. In block (210), the method (200) includes automatically determining and storing an inspection state for a selected inspection command based on at least one structured inspection response without requiring manual interpretation of the inspection result. The inspection state is determined by the system without requiring manual interpretation or assignment by the user.

[0075] When the inspection status indicates that an anomaly remains unresolved, the method (200) includes maintaining an inspection command selected in an incomplete state for subsequent inspection or corrective action. In this manner, the unresolved anomaly is tracked and maintained in a state available for further action until the inspection result indicates a resolution. By doing so, the method (200) provides a structured and unambiguous inspection workflow in which inspection inputs are limited to predefined structured inspection responses and the inspection status is automatically determined based on such responses, thereby promoting consistency, traceability, and repeatability across inspection activities and environments.

[0076] In some examples, the method further includes determining and saving the inspection status for a selected inspection command, and then creating inspection results available for review, summary, or export. The inspection results may include an inspection command identifier, inspection status information, a selected structured inspection response, and associated traceability data. The method may further include exporting the inspection results in one or more structured data formats to enable use with external reporting tools, quality systems, or data analysis platforms. These additional actions may be performed without altering the enforcement of the acceptable inspection inputs or system-driven inspection status determinations described herein.

[0077] In some examples, the operation of the method (200) may be implemented as a computer-executable instruction stored on a non-transient computer-readable medium and executed by one or more processors of a structured inspection management system. The execution of the instruction causes one or more processors to perform the operation described in connection with FIG. 5, which includes accessing an inspection instruction, enforcing a restriction of acceptable inputs with a predefined structured inspection response, receiving a selected inspection response, and automatically determining and storing an inspection state.

[0078] In the above description, certain terms such as "top," "bottom," "upper," "lower," "horizontal," "vertical," "left," "right," "above," and "below" may be used. These terms are used, where applicable, to provide some clarity in the description when dealing with relative relationships. However, these terms are not intended to imply absolute relationships, positions, and / or directions. For example, with respect to an object, the "upper" surface can become the "lower" surface simply by flipping the object over. Nevertheless, it remains the same object. Furthermore, the terms "including," "comprising," "equipped," and variations thereof mean "including but not limited thereto" unless otherwise explicitly specified. An enumerated list of items does not imply that some or all of the items are mutually exclusive and / or mutually inclusive, unless otherwise explicitly specified. The terms "indefinite and definite articles (“a,” “an,” and “the”)" also mean “one or more” unless otherwise explicitly specified. Furthermore, the term “plural” may be defined as “at least two.” Furthermore, unless otherwise noted, the specific features of the plural as defined herein do not necessarily mean the entire set of specific features or all specific features of the class.

[0079] In some embodiments, the terms “about” or “substantially” are defined to mean within + / -5% of a given value, but in additional embodiments, a certain disclosure of “about” may be claimed further reduced 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, when at least two values ​​of a variable are disclosed, such disclosure is specifically intended to include a range between the two values, regardless of whether they were disclosed in relation to a separate embodiment or example, and is specifically intended to include a range greater than or equal to the smaller of the two values ​​and / or less than or equal to the larger of the two values. Additionally, when at least three values ​​of a variable are disclosed, such disclosure is specifically intended to include a range between two of the values, regardless of whether they were disclosed in relation to a separate embodiment or example, and is specifically intended to include a range greater than or equal to value A and / or less than or equal to value B, wherein A may be a specific of the disclosed values ​​other than the largest disclosed value, and B may be a specific of the disclosed values ​​other than the smallest disclosed value.

[0080] Additionally, in this specification, cases where one element is "joined" to another element may include direct joining and indirect joining. Direct joining may be defined as one element being joined to another element and in contact to some extent. Indirect joining may be defined as a joining between two elements that do not come into 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 may include direct fixing and indirect fixing. Additionally, as used herein, "adjacent" does not necessarily mean contact. For example, one element may be adjacent to another element without contacting that element.

[0081] As used herein, when used with a list of items, the phrase “at least one” means that one or more different combinations of the listed items may be used and only one of the items in the list may be required. An item may be a specific object, thing, or category. That is, “at least one” means that a certain combination of items or a number of items may be used from the list, but not all 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, without limitation, 2 items A, 1 item B, and 10 items C; 4 items B and 7 items C; or other suitable combinations.

[0082] Unless otherwise indicated, terms such as "First," "Second," etc. are used herein merely as labels and are not intended to impose any sequential, positional, or hierarchical requirements on the items they refer to. Furthermore, references to items such as "Second" do not require or exclude the existence of items such as "First" or lower numbers, and / or items such as "Third" or higher numbers.

[0083] As used herein, a system, device, structure, article, element, component, or hardware "configured" to perform a specific function is capable of actually performing the specific function without any specific modification, rather than merely having the potential to perform the specific function after further modification. That is, a system, device, structure, article, element, component, or hardware "configured" to perform a specific function is specifically selected, created, implemented, utilized, programmed, and / or designed for the purpose of performing the specific function. As used herein, "configured" indicates an existing feature of the system, device, structure, article, element, component, or hardware that enables the system, device, structure, article, element, component, or hardware to perform the specific function without further modification. For the purposes of the present invention, a system, device, structure, article, element, component, or hardware described as "configured" to perform a specific function may additionally or alternatively be described as "adapted" and / or "operable" to perform the said function.

[0084] The schematic flowcharts included herein are generally described as logical flowcharts. Accordingly, the illustrated sequence and labeled steps represent an example of the provided method. It may be recognized that other steps and methods are equivalent in function, logic, or effect to one or more steps, or parts thereof, of the illustrated method. Additionally, the formats and symbols adopted are provided to describe the logical steps of the method and are not understood to limit the scope of the method. Although various arrow and line forms may be employed in the flowchart, they are not understood 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 periods of waiting or monitoring of an unspecified duration between the enumerated steps of the illustrated method. Additionally, the sequence in which a particular method is triggered may or may not strictly adhere to the sequence of the illustrated corresponding steps.

[0085] Many of the functional units described herein are labeled as modules to further emphasize their implementation independence. For example, a module may be implemented as a custom Very Large Scale Integration ("VLSI") circuit or as a hardware circuit comprising off-the-shelf semiconductors such as gate arrays, logic chips, transistors, or other discrete components. A module may also be implemented as a programmable hardware device such as a field programmable gate array ("FPGA"), programmable array logic, programmable logic device, etc.

[0086] The module may also be implemented in software for execution by various types of processors. An identified module of program code may include one or more physical or logical blocks of computer instructions, which may consist of, for example, objects, procedures, or functions. Nevertheless, the executable files of the identified module do not need to be physically located together and may include separate instructions stored in different locations that constitute the module and achieve the purpose specified for the module when logically combined.

[0087] In practice, a module of program code may be a single instruction or many instructions, and may be distributed across several different code segments, between different programs, and across multiple memory devices. Likewise, operational data may be identified and exemplified within a module, implemented in a predetermined appropriate form, and organized within a predetermined appropriate form of data structure. Operational data may be collected as a single data set or distributed across different locations including other storage devices, and may exist at least partially only as electronic signals to a system or network. Where a module or a part of a module is implemented in software, the program code may be stored and / or propagated to one or more computer-readable media.

[0088] A computer program product may include a computer-readable storage medium (or media) having computer-readable program instructions for a processor to perform aspects of the present invention.

[0089] A computer-readable storage medium may be a device of a form capable of holding and storing instructions for use by an instruction execution device. A computer-readable storage medium may be, for example but not limited to, an electronic storage device, a magnetic storage device, an optical storage device, an electromagnetic storage device, a semiconductor storage device, or a certain suitable combination of the above. A non-exclusive list of more specific examples of a computer-readable storage medium includes: a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, random access memory (“RAM”), read-only memory (“ROM”), erasable programmable read-only memory (“EPROM”) or flash memory, static random access memory (“SRAM”), portable compact disc read-only memory (“CD-ROM”), digital multi-purpose disc (“DVD”), memory sticks, floppy disks, mechanically encoded devices such as a groove structure or punch card on which instructions are recorded, and a certain suitable combination of the above. Computer-readable storage media as used herein must not be interpreted as the transient signal itself, such as radio waves or other freely propagating electromagnetic waves, electromagnetic waves propagating through waveguides or other transmission media (e.g., optical pulses passing through fiber optic cables), or electrical signals transmitted through wires.

[0090] The computer-readable program instructions described herein may be downloaded from a computer-readable storage medium to each computing / processing unit or 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 of each computing / processing unit receives computer-readable program instructions from the network and transmits the computer-readable program instructions to be stored on a computer-readable storage medium within each computing / processing unit.

[0091] Computer-readable program instructions for performing the operation of the present invention may be source code or object code written in a predetermined combination of one or more programming languages, including assembler instructions, instruction set architecture ("ISA") instructions, machine instructions, machine-dependent instructions, microcode, firmware instructions, state setting data, or object-oriented programming languages ​​such as Smalltalk, C++, etc., and conventional procedural programming languages ​​such as the "C" programming language or similar programming languages. Computer-readable program instructions may be executed entirely on a user's computer, partially on a user's computer, as a standalone software package, partially on a user's computer and partially on a remote computer, or entirely on a remote computer or server. In the latter scenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer through a predetermined type of network, including a local area network ("LAN") or a wide area network ("WAN"), or the connection may be made to an external computer (e.g., via the Internet using an Internet service provider). In some embodiments, an electronic circuit comprising, for example, a programmable logic circuit, a field programmable gate array (“FPGA”), or a programmable logic array (“PLA”) can execute computer-readable program instructions by utilizing state information of computer-readable program instructions to personalize the electronic circuit in order to carry out aspects of the present invention.

[0092] Aspects of the present invention are described with reference to flowchart examples and / or block diagrams of a method, apparatus (system), and computer program product according to an embodiment of the present invention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchart examples and / or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks of the flowchart examples and / or block diagrams, may be implemented by computer-readable program instructions.

[0093] These computer-readable program instructions may be provided to a processor of a general-purpose computer, a special-purpose computer, or another programmable data processing unit to produce a machine, and accordingly, instructions executed via the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing unit generate means for implementing specific functions / operations in flowcharts and / or block diagram blocks or blocks. These computer-readable program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable storage medium capable of instructing the computer, programmable data processing unit, and / or other device to function in a specific manner, and accordingly, the computer-readable storage medium having the stored instructions constitutes a manufactured article comprising instructions that implement aspects of specific functions / operations in flowcharts and / or block diagram blocks or blocks.

[0094] Computer-readable program instructions can also be loaded onto a computer, another programmable data processing device, or another device to create a computer-implemented process by causing a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer, another programmable device, or another device, and accordingly, instructions executed on the computer, another programmable device, or another device implement specific functions / operations in blocks or blocks of a flowchart and / or block diagram.

[0095] Schematic flowcharts and / or schematic block diagrams in the drawings illustrate the architecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementations of devices, systems, methods, and computer program products according to various embodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block of the schematic flowcharts and / or schematic block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or part of code comprising one or more executable instructions of program code for implementing a specified logical function(s).

[0096] Although various arrow and line forms may be adopted in flowcharts and / or block diagrams, it is understood that they do not limit the scope of the corresponding embodiments. In fact, some arrows or other connectors may be used to indicate only the logical flow of the illustrated embodiments. For example, arrows may indicate an indefinite waiting or monitoring period between the enumerated steps of the illustrated embodiments. It will also be noted that each block of the block diagram and / or flowchart, and combinations of blocks of the block diagram and / or flowchart, may be implemented by a special-purpose hardware-based system that performs a specific function or operation, or by a combination of special-purpose hardware and program code.

[0097] The subject matter may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from its spirit or essential features. The described examples are to be regarded as merely illustrative and non-limiting in all respects. Any modifications included within the meaning and scope of the claims and equivalents shall be included within their scope.

Claims

Claim 1 A structured inspection management system (100), comprising: an inspection organization module (102) configured to organize a plurality of inspection commands (112), wherein each inspection command (112) is associated with an anomaly and an inspection standard (120) is defined for performing an inspection associated with the anomaly; a display module (104) configured to provide an inspection standard (120) associated with a selected inspection command (112A) for a selected inspection command (112A) of the plurality of inspection commands (112); and a response execution module (106) configured to restrict user input for a selected inspection command (112A) with a set (136) of predefined structured inspection responses associated with the performance of an inspection. A structured inspection management system characterized by being configured to include a state tracking module (108) configured to automatically determine and store an inspection status (116) for a selected inspection command (112A) based on at least one structured inspection response (136) selected via a response execution module (106). Claim 2 A structured inspection management system according to claim 1, further comprising a traceability module (110) configured to record traceability data (122) that enables identification of at least one of the source or timing of the structured inspection response for each structured inspection response selected via the response execution module (106). Claim 3 A structured inspection management system according to claim 1, characterized in that, in a manual workflow mode: an inspection standard (120) and a set of predefined structured inspection responses (136) are provided to a physical inspection record; at least one structured inspection response (136) recorded in the physical inspection record is subsequently input to a response execution module (106) via an electronic interface; and an inspection status (116) is determined based on at least one structured inspection response (136) received via an electronic interface. Claim 4 A structured inspection management system according to claim 1, characterized in that, in a digital workflow mode: an inspection standard (120) and a set of predefined structured inspection responses (136) are provided via an electronic interface; and an inspection status (116) is determined based on at least one structured inspection response (136) received via the electronic interface. Claim 5 A structured inspection management system according to claim 1, wherein each of the multiple inspection commands (112) has multiple inspection phases; and the response execution module (106) limits a set (136) of predefined structured inspection responses corresponding to the current inspection phase. Claim 6 A structured inspection management system according to claim 5, wherein one of the plurality of inspection phases includes an initial inspection phase; and a set of predefined structured inspection responses (136) corresponding to the initial inspection phase includes a response indicating whether a condition associated with an abnormality exists. Claim 7 A structured inspection management system according to claim 5, wherein one of the multiple inspection phases includes a resolution inspection phase following a corrective action; and a set of predefined structured inspection responses (136) corresponding to the resolution inspection phase includes responses indicating acceptance or rejection of the above conditions. Claim 8 A structured inspection management system according to claim 5, characterized in that a state tracking module (108) determines an inspection state (116) based on at least one structured inspection response (136) and the current inspection phase of a selected inspection command (112A). Claim 9 A structured inspection management system according to claim 1, characterized in that a state tracking module (108) is configured to maintain an inspection command (112A) selected in an incomplete state when at least one structured inspection response indicates that an abnormality remains in an unresolved state. Claim 10 A structured inspection management system according to claim 1, characterized in that each inspection command of a plurality of inspection commands (112) is associated with an abnormality through abnormality identification data including a unique abnormality identifier. Claim 11 A structured inspection management system according to claim 1, characterized in that each inspection command of a plurality of inspection commands (112) is associated with abnormality-related information including abnormality identification information, abnormality description information (124), and abnormality location information (126). Claim 12 A structured inspection management system according to claim 1, wherein the inspection organization module (102) is further configured to fill in a plurality of inspection commands (112) from a plurality of data sources; and wherein the plurality of data sources include at least one of locally stored data, manually uploaded data, or externally retrieved data. Claim 13 A structured inspection management system according to claim 1, wherein the display module (104) is further configured to provide inspection time data associated with an abnormality; and wherein the inspection time data includes at least one of an image, a diagram, or a map. Claim 14 A method (200) for managing a structured anomaly inspection, wherein the method (200) comprises: a step (202) of accessing a selected inspection command (112A) associated with an anomaly from a plurality of inspection commands (112) via a structured inspection management system (100), wherein the selected inspection command (112A) defines an inspection criterion (120) for performing an inspection associated with an anomaly; a step (204) of providing an inspection criterion (120) for the selected inspection command (112A); a step (206) of implementing a restriction on acceptable inputs for the selected inspection command (112A) with a predefined set of structured inspection responses (136) associated with the performance of the inspection; and a step (208) of receiving at least one structured inspection response selected from the predefined set of structured inspection responses (136) for the selected inspection command (112A). A method for managing structured abnormality checks, comprising the step (210) of automatically determining and storing an inspection status (116) for a selected inspection command (112A) based on at least one structured inspection response, and maintaining the selected inspection command (112A) in an incomplete state for subsequent inspection or corrective action when the inspection status (116) indicates that the abnormality remains unresolved. Claim 15 A non-transient computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause one or more processors to perform a method for managing structured anomaly checks, the method comprises: a step of accessing a selected check command (112A) associated with an anomaly from a plurality of check commands (112), wherein the selected check command (112A) defines a check criterion (120) for performing a check associated with an anomaly; a step of providing a check criterion (120) for the selected check command (112A); a step of enforcing a restriction on acceptable inputs for the selected check command (112A) with a predefined set of structured check responses (136) associated with the performance of the check; and a step of receiving at least one structured check response selected from the predefined set of structured check responses (136) for the selected check command (112A). A non-transient computer-readable medium comprising the step of automatically determining and storing an inspection status (116) for a selected inspection command (112A) based on at least one structured inspection response, and characterized by maintaining the selected inspection command (112A) in an incomplete state for subsequent inspection or corrective action when the inspection status (116) indicates that an abnormality remains in an unresolved state.

Images