Wiring Harness Risk Analysis via Connector Count and Hazard Location

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In large-scale wiring systems, particularly in aircraft, it is challenging to confirm the safety of wiring connections due to the complexity and redundancy of electric wire harnesses, making it difficult to determine which harnesses pose a one-bundle risk or simultaneous failure risk that could impair safety.

Innovation Solution

A method and system that utilize a database to track connection information between connectors and harnesses, identifying the number of connectors and location information to determine the risk of a one-bundle risk and simultaneous failure risk by analyzing the connection relationships and hazard influences, allowing for the extraction of critical harnesses that may fail together.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If a large-scale wiring system with redundancy is employed to guarantee safety, then the safety of the system is improved, but the complexity of confirming wiring safety increases

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoidwiring complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the complex wiring system into individual harnesses and further into electric wires within each harness. By creating a database that breaks down the wiring system into these smaller units with their respective connection information, the system enables systematic safety confirmation without being overwhelmed by the overall complexity of the large-scale wiring network.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Adaptability or versatility

If the number of harnesses and terminal devices increases to handle large-scale systems, then the system functionality is improved, but the difficulty of confirming wiring safety increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem functionalityVSAvoidsafety confirmation difficulty
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDifficulty of detecting and measuring

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces a database as an intermediary between the complex wiring system and the safety confirmation process. This database stores structured connection information about harnesses, electric wires, and terminal devices, serving as a mediator that translates the physical wiring complexity into manageable data that can be systematically analyzed for safety without directly confronting the physical complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Measurement precision

If quantitative safety analysis using failure rate is performed, then the safety evaluation is improved, but the ability to confirm redundancy is insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety evaluation precisionVSAvoidredundancy confirmation
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs preliminary action by establishing a comprehensive database of connection information before conducting safety analysis. By pre-organizing data about which electric wires are bundled in which harnesses and how harnesses connect to terminal devices, the system enables subsequent safety evaluations to simultaneously assess both failure rates and redundancy configurations, rather than having to perform separate analyses.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS10248629B2Method for determining wiring risk and wiring risk determination system
Publication Date: 2019.04.02 MITSUBISHI AIRCRAFT
  • US10248629B2 patent drawing
  • US10248629B2 patent drawing
  • US10248629B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method for determining a wiring risk is a method for determining a first risk that electric wires connected to a plurality of terminal devices are bundled into a single harness, and a second risk that harnesses fail at the same time, wherein the first risk is determined by identifying the number of connectors to which a target harness identified from the plurality of harnesses is indirectly connected, and the second risk is determined by matching location information of the target harness to an influenced area by a hazard source, and identifying whether the target harness passes through the influenced area.