Automated system testability assessment method

• US 4,970,725 A
• Filed: 03/14/1989
• Issued: 11/13/1990
• Est. Priority Date: 03/14/1989
• Status: Expired due to Term

• Current Assignee: Micron Technology, Inc.
• Original Assignee: Westinghouse Electric Company LLC (Brookfield Asset Management Incorporated)
• Inventors: McEnroe, Martin P., Hilderbrand, Laura L.
• Primary Examiner(s): ATKINSON, CHARLES
• Application Number:
  US07/323,023
• Time in Patent Office: 609 Days
• Field of Search: 371/7, 371/8.1, 371/9.1, 371/15.1, 364/551.01, 364/552, 364/579, 364/580, 364/285, 364/285.3, 364/285.4, 364/513, 364/900
• US Class Current: 714/25
• CPC Class Codes: G01R 31/31835 Analysis of test coverage or failure detectability
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/00 Error detection; Error correction; Monitoring error detection, correction or monitoring in information storage based on relative movement between record carrier and transducer G11B20/18; monitoring, i.e. supervising the progress of recording or reproducing G11B27/36; in static stores G11C29/00

Abstract

A procedure for calculating maintainability and testability parameters of a complex system uses computer software to enable the calculations to be made repeatedly during the development of the system. Failure modes and failure rates, elemental task times and test path data from a branching test flow diagram are input. Screens which identify the data to be input are displayed for ease of data entry. A hierarchical relationship between the modules in the system can be entered so that failure modes and failure rates need only be entered for lowest level modules. The procedure iteratively calculates maintainability and testability parameters starting at the lowest level and using previously calculated data in the next highest level. Fault isolation ambiguity is automatically taken into account by ordering the modules in descending order of total test path/module failure rate isolated by each test path. The ordered data are used in many of the calculations of the maintainability and testability parameters.

Claims

1. A process for automatically determining at least one of testability and maintainability parameters of a system composed of modules, comprising the steps of:

(a) inputting failure rate data specifying a failure rate for at least one failure mode of at least one module, detected by each test path performable during testing of the system;

(b) automatically ordering the modules for each of the failure modes detected by each test path in descending order of the failure rate corresponding thereto; and

(c) identifying, for each test path, an order for iterative repair of the modules for each of the failure modes detected by the test path, in dependence upon said ordering in step (b).

2. A process as recited in claim 1, further comprising the step of (d) calculating testability parameters including percentage of successful failure isolations requiring only positive integer numbers of iterative replacements, in dependence upon said ordering in step (b).

3. A process as recited in claim 1,

further comprising the step of (d) inputting module relationship data defining a hierarchical relationship between the modules, the hierarchical relationship corresponding to organization of maintenance for the system, and

wherein step (a) consists of inputting the failure rate data for lowest level modules only.

4. A process as recited in claim 3, further comprising the step of (e) calculating the failure rate data for higher level modules from the failure rate data for lower level modules associated therewith.

5. A process as recited in claim 3,

wherein step (a) comprises the steps of:

(ai) displaying input screens for each of the lowest level modules, the input screens including fields for failure mode, failure rate, percent failure contribution, method of fault detection/isolation and test path identifier; and

(a2) inputting data for each of the fields corresponding to each failure mode of the lowest level modules, and

wherein said process further comprises the step of (e) calculating a percentage of fault isolation of the system accomplishable using each method of testing applied to the system and requiring replacement of n modules, where n is an integer, said calculating being performed for n equals one and meaningful incremental increases up to the number of modules in the system.

6. A process as recited in claim 1,

further comprising the step of (d) producing a test flow diagram having branching nodes representing diagnostic tests not requiring reassembly, and

wherein the test paths correspond to all termination nodes in the test flow diagram.

7. A process as recited in claim 1, wherein a plurality of methods can be used to perform fault isolation, and

wherein said process further comprises the step of (d) identifying at least one of the methods as being applied in each of the test paths.

8. A process as recited in claim 7, wherein the methods include on-line automatic, off-line automatic and manual tests, and

wherein step (d) includes identifying the test paths applying more than one of the methods.

9. A process as recited in claim 7, further comprising the step of (e) totaling the failure rates for the failure modes of each of the modules detected using each of the methods.

10. A process as recited in claim 7, further comprising the step of (e) calculating a percentage of fault isolation of the system accomplishable using each of the methods and requiring replacement of n modules according to said ordering in step (b), said calculating being performed for n equal to each integer from one up to a predetermined number.

11. A process as recited in claim 10,

wherein at least one of the tests paths isolates more than one of the modules included in at least one ambiguity group, and

wherein the predetermined number used in step (e) equals a largest number of the modules in the at least one ambiguity group.

12. A process as recited in claim 1, further comprising the steps of:

(d) inputting maintenance task data specifying elemental task times of steps in procedures performed when each of the test paths is completed; and

(e) calculating maintainability parameters in dependence upon said ordering in step (b) and the elemental task times specified in step (d).

13. A process for automatically determining at least one of testability and maintainability parameters of a system composed of modules testable using a plurality of methods of fault detection and isolation, comprising the steps of:

(a) displaying an input screen for at least one module to provide fields for input of failure mode, failure rate, percent failure contribution, method of fault detection/isolation and test path identifier;

(b) inputting failure data for all of the failure modes of the at least one module using the input screen displayed in step (a);

(c) calculating a percentage of fault isolation of the system accomplishable using each of the methods and requiring replacement of n modules, said calculating being performed for n equal to each integer from one up to a predetermined number.

14. A process as recited in claim 13, further comprising the steps of:

(d) automatically ordering the failure modes detected by each test path in descending order of the failure rate corresponding thereto; and

(e) outputting, for each test path, an order for repair of the modules having a failure mode detected by the test path, in dependence upon said ordering in step (d).

15. A process as recited in claim 14, wherein the methods include on-line automatic, off-line automatic and manual tests, and

wherein step (b) includes identifying more than one of the methods as being used in at least one of the test paths identified by a corresponding test path identifier.

16. A process as recited in claim 15, further comprising the step of (f) totaling the failure rates for the failure modes of each of the modules detected using each of the methods associated with each corresponding test path identifier.

17. A process as recited in claim 16,

further comprising the step of (g) inputting module relationship data defining a hierarchical relationship between the modules, the hierarchical relationship corresponding to organization of maintenance for the system, and

wherein steps (a) and (b) are performed only for lowest level modules.

18. A process as recited in claim 17, further comprising the step of (h) calculating testability parameters including percentage of successful failure isolations requiring only n module replacements in dependence upon said ordering in step (d), said calculating being performed for n equal to each integer from one up to a predetermined number.

19. A process for automatically determining testability and maintainability parameters of a system composed of modules testable using a plurality of methods of fault detection and isolation, comprising the steps of:

(a) producing a test flow diagram having branching nodes representing diagnostic tests not requiring reassembly and termination nodes represented by a test path identifier, each corresponding to a unique test path through the test flow diagram;

(b) inputting test path data identifying all of the methods of fault detection and isolation used in the unique test path corresponding to each test path identifier;

(c) inputting module relationship data defining a hierarchical relationship between the modules, including highest and lowest levels of the hierarchical relationship, the hierarchical relationship corresponding to organization of maintenance for the system;

(d) displaying input screens for each of the modules in the lowest level of the hierarchical relationship, each input screen providing fields for input of a failure mode, a failure rate, percent failure contribution, at least one method of fault detection/isolation and a test path identifier;

(e) inputting failure data corresponding to all of the failure modes of each of the modules in the lowest level of the hierarchical relationship, using the input screens displayed in step (a);

(f) inputting maintenance task data specifying elemental task times of steps and procedures performed when each of the test paths is completed;

(g) calculating a total test path/module failure rate corresponding to all of the failure modes, isolated by each of the test paths;

(h) automatically ordering the modules corresponding to the failure modes detected by each of the test paths in descending order of the total test path/module failure rate calculated in step (f);

(i) outputting, for each test path, an order for repair of the modules having the failure mode detected by the test path, in dependence upon said ordering in step (g);

(j) calculating testability parameters including percentage of successful fault isolations requiring only n module replacements in dependence upon said ordering in step (g), said calculating being performed for n equal to each integer from one up to a predetermined number;

(k) automatically producing time lines of maintenance procedures to be performed in response to traversing each of the test paths, using the maintenance task data input in step (f), with multiple time lines produced for each of the test paths isolating a plurality of modules, the plurality of time lines incrementally adding modules according to said ordering in step (g);

(l) calculating maintainability parameters in dependence upon said time lines produced in step (k); and

(m) repeating steps (h)-(l) for at least one level of modules higher than the lowest level of modules in the hierarchical relationship.