Method and system for the validating fault symptoms

• US 20060229829A1
• Filed: 07/16/2004
• Published: 10/12/2006
• Est. Priority Date: 07/31/2003
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Continental Automotive GmbH (Continental AG)
• Original Assignee: Siemens AG
• Inventors: Thiveos, Konstantin
• Granted Patent: US 7,248,976 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 702/59
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/2257 using expert systems

Abstract

For the purpose of validating fault symptoms appearing at driver outputs (10), a symptom validation unit (14) is provided, within a final stage (18), which undertakes a validation or a preliminary validation, as applicable, on the basis of a classification of symptoms. By assigning the item of validation data “invalid” to symptoms which cannot be unambiguously identified, it is possible to suppress the further consideration of the symptoms, or to initiate further diagnoses of the final stage output (10) concerned, as appropriate.

Claims

1-12. -12. (canceled)

13. A method of validating fault symptoms appearing at driver outputs, which comprises the following steps:

recording a symptom, present at a driver output, and classifying the symptom into one of several classes of different symptoms by way of a symptom recognition unit;

with a symptom validation unit, assigning to the symptom an item of symptom validation data in dependence on a classification resulting from the classifying step;

reporting the classification, or reporting an item of reporting data assigned to the classification; and

reporting the item of symptom validation data.

14. The method according to claim 13, which comprises:

providing at least four classes for classifying a symptom;

classifying an unambiguously identifiable electrical fault as a symptom in class 1;

classifying a not unambiguously identifiable electrical fault as a symptom in class 2;

classifying a symptom as belonging to class 3 if an unambiguous determination is possible that no electrical fault is present; and

classifying a symptom as belonging to class 4 if no electrical fault is present, but the absence of the electrical fault cannot be unambiguously identified.

15. The method according to claim 14, which comprises, if a fault symptom is classified as belonging to class 1, assigning the item of validation data “

valid”

to the fault symptom and reporting the classification together with the item of validation data.

16. The method according to claim 14, which comprises, if a fault symptom is classified as belonging to class 3, assigning the item of validation data “

valid”

to the fault symptom and reporting the classification together with the item of validation data.

17. The method according to claim 14, which comprises, if a fault symptom is classified as belonging to class 2 or class 4, assigning the item of validation data “

invalid”

to the fault symptom and reporting the classification as class 3 together with the item of validation data.

18. The method according to claim 13, which comprises, if the item of validation data is reported as “

invalid”

, causing the symptom validation unit to influence the respective driver output in order to acquire additional data about the fault symptom concerned.

19. A system for validating fault symptoms appearing at a driver output, comprising:

a final stage (18) including a symptom recognition unit with a symptom validation unit and a symptom output unit;

said symptom recognition unit recording symptoms present at the driver output and classifying each symptom into one of several classes of different symptoms;

said symptom validation unit being configured to assign to a symptom an item of symptom validation data in dependence on a classification by said symptom recognition unit;

a symptom reporting unit connected to said final stage and to receive from said system output unit the classification and the item of validation data, and configured to report the classification or the item of reporting data assigned to the classification, as applicable, and the item of symptom validation data.

20. The system according to claim 19, wherein at least four classes are available for classifying a symptom, including class 1, class 2, class 3, and class 4, and wherein:

an unambiguously identifiable electrical fault is classified as a symptom in class 1;

a not unambiguously identifiable electrical fault is classified as a symptom in class 2;

a symptom is classified as belonging to class 3 if an unambiguous determination is possible that no electrical fault is present; and

a symptom is classified as belonging to class 4 if no electrical fault is present, but an absence of an electrical fault cannot be unambiguously identified.

21. The system according to claim 20, wherein, if a fault symptom is classified as belonging to class 1, said symptom validation unit assigns the item of validation data “

valid”

to the fault symptom and said symptom reporting unit reports the classification together with the item of validation data.

22. The system according to claim 20, wherein, if a fault symptom is classified as belonging to class 3, said symptom validation unit assigns the item of validation data “

valid”

to the fault symptom and said symptom reporting unit reports the classification together with the item of validation data.

23. The system according to claim 20, wherein, if a fault symptom is classified as belonging to class 2 or class 4, said symptom validation unit assigns the item of validation data “

invalid”

to the fault symptom, and said symptom reporting unit reports a class 3 classification together with the item of validation data.

24. The method according to claim 19, which comprises, when the item of validation data is reported as “

invalid”

, said symptom validation unit is caused to influence the respective driver output in order to acquire additional data about the fault symptom concerned.