Tester Self-Verification via Multi-Site Quality Assessment

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for testing electronic unit testers are inefficient and lack a systematic approach to ensure the reliability and accuracy of the testing process, often requiring manual intervention and multiple iterations, which can lead to errors and increased testing time.

Innovation Solution

A method and system for testing electronic unit testers that utilize multiple sites for connecting units, performing initial and subsequent tests, and conducting quality tests based on predetermined conditions to assess the performance of the tester, allowing for automated or semi-automated processes that reduce testing time and improve accuracy.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If manual testing methods are used for tester verification, then flexibility in handling complex test scenarios is improved, but testing time and human error increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveflexibility in handling complex test scenariosVSAvoidtesting time
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The testing system performs self-verification by automatically executing test sequences and evaluating results without external intervention. The tester tests itself through automated comparison of test results across multiple electronic units, reducing reliance on manual operations while maintaining comprehensive test coverage

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system pre-configures multiple test sites and establishes test sequences before actual testing begins. By preparing the testing environment and defining test protocols in advance, the system enables automated execution that reduces both manual intervention and overall testing time

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Productivity

If multiple test sites are used for simultaneous testing, then productivity is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetesting throughputVSAvoidtester configuration complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The testing system is divided into multiple independent test sites, each capable of testing electronic units separately. This segmentation allows parallel testing operations that increase productivity while each individual site remains relatively simple in design and operation

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Multiple test sites are configured with identical or similar testing capabilities, allowing any site to perform the same functions. This universality simplifies the overall system design by using standardized modules rather than complex specialized equipment, while still achieving high throughput through parallel operations

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

3Loss of time

If automated testing sequences are implemented, then testing time is reduced, but measurement precision may deteriorate due to systematic errors

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetesting timeVSAvoidtester accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system incorporates feedback mechanisms where test results from multiple electronic units are continuously monitored and compared. This feedback loop enables automatic detection of systematic errors or drift in the testing equipment, allowing for real-time adjustments that maintain measurement precision throughout automated testing operations

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs more tests than strictly necessary by testing multiple electronic units with identical configurations. This excessive action provides redundant data that helps identify and correct systematic errors, ensuring high measurement precision while maintaining efficient automated operation through statistical analysis of the additional test results

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS10794955B2Methods and systems for testing a tester
Publication Date: 2020.10.06 OPTIMAL PLUS
  • US10794955B2 patent drawing
  • US10794955B2 patent drawing
  • US10794955B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method of testing a tester, comprising testing electronic units using a plurality of sites in order to obtain first bin assignment, instructing the tester to perform a tester quality test if conditions CiQA,1 and CiQA,2 are met, the tester quality test comprising performing a second plurality of tests on an electronic unit using a first site, thereby obtaining second bin assignment for the electronic unit, the second bin assignment being representative of passing or failing of the electronic unit of the second plurality of tests with respect to at least one second test criteria, wherein CiQA,1 is met if passing first bin assignment has been obtained for said electronic unit connected to the tester using the first site, and wherein CiQA,2 is met if data representative of passing first bin assignment obtained for electronic units which have been tested on the first site, meets a quality criteria.