Adaptive Maintenance Procedure Guidance With Step Confirmation
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Traditional paper checklists are inadequate for guiding complex, non-linear maintenance procedures, as they fail to adapt to changing conditions and do not provide sufficient feedback or accommodate variations in engine maintenance based on age or history.
Innovation Solution
A system comprising a display, input device, and processing device that executes a script for guiding and confirming the execution of maintenance procedures, allowing for interactive and adaptive guidance through graphical outputs and inputs, with cues specifying actions and feedback.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Adaptability or versatility
If a paper checklist is used for maintenance procedures, then the procedure guidance is simple and easy to operate, but it cannot adapt to non-linear procedures or changing conditions
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements a dynamic procedure guidance system that transitions from static paper checklists to an electronic system capable of adapting its workflow based on real-time conditions. The system dynamically generates and updates procedure steps, allows non-linear navigation through maintenance tasks, and modifies the guidance path based on operator inputs and detected engine conditions, thereby resolving the contradiction between adaptability and complexity.
Solution Approach 2:
The system incorporates feedback mechanisms where operator inputs, sensor data, and procedure progression are continuously monitored and used to dynamically adjust the guidance workflow. This feedback loop enables the system to adapt to changing conditions and non-linear procedure requirements while maintaining a manageable interface complexity through automated decision support.
2Loss of information
If a paper checklist is used, then the device complexity is low, but it lacks the ability to provide detailed feedback and confirmation of procedure execution
Solution Approach 1:
The electronic procedure guidance system implements comprehensive feedback mechanisms that track and confirm each procedure step execution. The system provides real-time feedback on completion status, validates operator inputs against required parameters, and maintains a detailed record of procedure execution. This eliminates information loss about procedure status while managing complexity through structured digital workflows and automated validation rules.
Solution Approach 2:
The system introduces an electronic intermediary layer between the operator and the maintenance tasks, mediating through a digital interface that captures, validates, and processes procedure execution data. This intermediary maintains detailed information about each step's completion and status without requiring complex physical documentation systems, resolving the contradiction between feedback completeness and system complexity.
3Adaptability or versatility
If static checklists are used, then the ease of operation is high, but they become obsolete when engine conditions or maintenance practices change
Solution Approach 1:
The system dynamically adapts procedure guidance based on changing engine conditions and maintenance practices while maintaining ease of operation through an intuitive electronic interface. The workflow automatically updates based on real-time data, allowing the system to remain current without requiring manual restructuring of the guidance documentation, thus balancing adaptability with operational simplicity.
Solution Approach 2:
The electronic system automatically updates and adapts procedure guidance based on input data and predefined rules, eliminating the need for manual checklist revisions. The system serves itself by dynamically generating appropriate procedure steps and updates based on changing conditions, maintaining ease of operation while achieving high adaptability to new scenarios.
4Manufacturing precision
If detailed adaptive guidance is provided, then the procedure execution accuracy is improved, but the device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system uses feedback mechanisms to provide detailed adaptive guidance that confirms each procedure step's execution accuracy. By continuously monitoring operator actions and comparing them against required parameters, the system ensures precise procedure execution while managing complexity through automated validation and structured digital workflows that prevent errors without requiring overly complex interfaces.
Data Source
AI summary
Apparatuses and methods of operating the same are described. An apparatus including a display, an input device, and a processing device coupled to the display and the input device. The processing device may send an output to the display. The output may include a graphical object associated with a first step of a user-implemented procedure. The processing device may receive an input from the input device. The input may indicate a progress on an execution of the first step by an operator. The processing device may determine whether the input indicates that the operator has completed the first step. The processing device may determine whether the first step is a final step in the user-implemented procedure. The processing device may identify a second step in the user-implemented procedure when the input indicates that the operator has completed the first step and the first step is not a final step.


