Human-computer combination quality testing system for digital product testing and testing method thereof

Abstract

A testing method of a human-computer combination quality testing system includes steps of: after manufacture, importing relevant CAD models, submitting the CAD models to a digital testing part for being examined; if a product is determined to be unqualified, returning the product for retreatment; if the product is determined to be qualified, submitting the product to a manual testing part for being examined by relevant inspectors; if the product is determined to be qualified by the inspectors, leaving the product as a qualified product; if the product is determined to be unqualified by the inspectors, returning the product for retreatment; then changing the relevant rule with a rule corrector of a system improving part according to a misjudging condition of the digital testing part; describing a corrected rule, which is corrected by the developer, by a rule descriptor; then applying the corrected rule to a system by a rule parser.

Claims

1-6. (canceled)

7. A human-computer combination quality testing system for digital product testing, comprising: a digital testing part, a manual testing part, and a system improving part; wherein said digital testing part comprises: a component model testing, a fit model testing and an engineering drawing testing; said manual testing part is appraising of products from parts and assembly to end products by an inspector, for separating unqualified products from qualified products; said system improving part comprises: a rule descriptor, a rule parser, and a rule corrector; wherein said rule descriptor comprises: rule bindings, trigger conditions, degree types and reply types; said rule bindings comprise at least one of a component model testing binding, a fit model testing binding and an engineering drawing testing binding; said trigger conditions comprise standard conditions set according to standards of a point-line model, surfaces, boundaries and textures of a component model; restriction conditions set according to restrictions comprising an assembly relationship and an assembly sequence of a fit model; and correlation conditions set according to a size correlation and a view correlation between an engineering drawing and a model; said degree types are represented in a quantized percentage form according to requirements; said reply types comprise: an adjust-type, a modify-type and a redo-type, and said reply types are correlated with said degree types; said rule parser parses semantemes described in a rule, said parsed semantemes comprise relationships between symbols and basic elements comprising the point-line model, the surfaces and the textures; restrictions comprising proportions, associations, contents and sequences; and movements comprising hitting, squeezing and measuring; said rule corrector provides an interface for editing the rule, so as to expand, modify, delete and query the rule.

8. The human-computer combination quality testing system, as recited in claim 7, wherein said rule descriptor sets said standard conditions according to said standards of points, lines, said surfaces, said boundaries and said textures of said component model; sets said restriction conditions according to said restrictions comprising said assembly relationship and said assembly sequence of said fit model; and sets correlation conditions according to said size and view correlations between said engineering drawing and said model; if said conditions are abnormal, a rule is triggered for warming about an irregularity detected; wherein said standards of said component model are described by a chain table structure; said points, said lines and said boundaries are described by a 1-dimensional chain table structure, each element thereof is directed to a next element by a pointer and is described as Element=(x,y,z) for describing a 3-dimensional point position; said surfaces and said textures are described by a 2-dimensional chain table structure, each element thereof is directed to an up element, a down element, a left element and a right element by four pointers and is described as Element=(x,y,z,d), wherein x, y and z describe a 3-dimensional point position, d describes said texture at (x, y, z); ownerships of said fit model are described by sets, wherein S.sub.1⊂S.sub.2 illustrates that parts represented by S.sub.1 are subordinate to parts represented by S.sub.2; S.sub.1∩S.sub.2 illustrates that said parts represented by S.sub.1 and said parts represented by S.sub.2 should be assembled together for forming a part; said assembly sequence of said fit model is described by an order set, wherein <S.sub.1, S.sub.2, . . . , S.sub.n> illustrates that S.sub.1 is assembled first, then S.sub.2, and finally S.sub.n; said size correlation between said engineering drawing and said model is described by a scale; said view correlation between said engineering drawing and said model is described as G=(V,E), wherein V is an apex set of a view, E is a vector side set of said view; v.sub.1 and v.sub.2 respectively represent two views, e.sub.12 describes a correlation between v.sub.1 and v.sub.2; standard settings, assembly restrictions and correlation rules defined above form said trigger conditions, said trigger conditions are marked as C.

9. The human-computer combination quality testing system, as recited in claim 7, wherein a rule of said rule bindings of said rule descriptor is described as <Logic(C.sub.1, C.sub.2, . . . , C.sub.m), Component/Fit/Drawing>, wherein Logic(C.sub.1, C.sub.2, . . . , C.sub.m) is a logic system comprising a series of trigger rules, which is corresponding to Component/Fit/Drawing; said logic system comprises , and − basic operations, wherein C.sub.1C.sub.2 requires that both C.sub.1 and C.sub.2 are true, C.sub.1C.sub.2 requires that either C.sub.1 or C.sub.2 is true, and C.sub.1 requires that C.sub.1 is not true; said rule is marked as R; wherein said degree types are represented in said quantized percentage form, for describing irregular degrees; each rule is corresponding to one degree type, which is marked as <R,Degree,Reply>; said irregular degrees are adjustable according to requirements; for example, Degree of 1%˜10% represents a slight irregularity with slight inconformity and mistakes, Degree of 11%˜30% represents a medium type with a medium irregularity; Degree of above 30% represents a serious irregularity; wherein said reply types comprise: said adjust-type, said modify-type and said redo-type, which depend on said irregular degrees and are corresponding to one rule and one degree type; said adjust-type is corresponding to said slight irregularity, said modify-type is corresponding to said medium irregularity, and said redo-type is corresponding to said serious irregularity.

10. The human-computer combination quality testing system, as recited in claim 8, wherein a rule of said rule bindings of said rule descriptor is described as <Logic(C.sub.1, C.sub.2, . . . , C.sub.m), Component/Fit/Drawing>, wherein Logic(C.sub.1, C.sub.2, . . . , C.sub.m) is a logic system comprising a series of trigger rules, which is corresponding to Component/Fit/Drawing; said logic system comprises , and − basic operations, wherein C.sub.1C.sub.2 requires that both C.sub.1 and C.sub.2 are true, C.sub.1C.sub.2 requires that either C.sub.1 or C.sub.2 is true, and C.sub.1 requires that C.sub.1 is not true; said rule is marked as R; wherein said degree types are represented in said quantized percentage form, for describing irregular degrees; each rule is corresponding to one degree type, which is marked as <R,Degree,Reply>; said irregular degrees are adjustable according to requirements; for example, Degree of 1%˜10% represents a slight irregularity with slight inconformity and mistakes, Degree of 11%˜30% represents a medium type with a medium irregularity; Degree of above 30% represents a serious irregularity; wherein said reply types comprise: said adjust-type, said modify-type and said redo-type, which depend on said irregular degrees and are corresponding to one rule and one degree type; said adjust-type is corresponding to said slight irregularity, said modify-type is corresponding to said medium irregularity, and said redo-type is corresponding to said serious irregularity.

11. The human-computer combination quality testing system, as recited in claim 7, wherein said component model testing of said digital testing part determines whether elements comprising said points, said lines, said surfaces, said boundaries and said textures are qualified, wherein said points, said lines and said boundaries are described by a 1-dimensional chain table, said surfaces and said textures are described by a 2-dimensional chain table; wherein said fit model testing of said digital testing part determines whether said components are assembled fitly, and examines said restrictions comprising said assembly relationship and said assembly sequence; said ownership is represented by set operations; said assembly sequence is described by an order set; wherein said engineering drawing testing of said digital testing part detects said size and view correlations between said engineering drawing and said model, said size correlation between said engineering drawing and said model is described by a scale; and said view correlation between said engineering drawing and said model is described as G=(V,E), wherein V represents a view set, and E represents a relationship set of said view correlation.

12. The human-computer combination quality testing system, as recited in claim 8, wherein said component model testing of said digital testing part determines whether elements comprising said points, said lines, said surfaces, said boundaries and said textures are qualified, wherein said points, said lines and said boundaries are described by said 1-dimensional chain table, said surfaces and said textures are described by said 2-dimensional chain table; wherein said fit model testing of said digital testing part determines whether said components are assembled fitly, and examines said restrictions comprising said assembly relationship and said assembly sequence; said ownership is represented by set operations; said assembly sequence is described by said order set; wherein said engineering drawing testing of said digital testing part detects said size and view correlations between said engineering drawing and said model, said size correlation between said engineering drawing and said model is described by said scale; and said view correlation between said engineering drawing and said model is described as G=(V,E), wherein V represents a view set, and E represents a relationship set of said view correlation.

13. The human-computer combination quality testing system, as recited in claim 9, wherein said component model testing of said digital testing part determines whether elements comprising said points, said lines, said surfaces, said boundaries and said textures are qualified, wherein said points, said lines and said boundaries are described by said 1-dimensional chain table, said surfaces and said textures are described by said 2-dimensional chain table; wherein said fit model testing of said digital testing part determines whether said components are assembled fitly, and examines said restrictions comprising said assembly relationship and said assembly sequence; said ownership is represented by set operations; said assembly sequence is described by said order set; wherein said engineering drawing testing of said digital testing part detects said size and view correlations between said engineering drawing and said model, said size correlation between said engineering drawing and said model is described by said scale; and said view correlation between said engineering drawing and said model is described as G=(V,E), wherein V represents a view set, and E represents a relationship set of said view correlation.

14. The human-computer combination quality testing system, as recited in claim 10, wherein said component model testing of said digital testing part determines whether elements comprising said points, said lines, said surfaces, said boundaries and said textures are qualified, wherein said points, said lines and said boundaries are described by said 1-dimensional chain table, said surfaces and said textures are described by said 2-dimensional chain table; wherein said fit model testing of said digital testing part determines whether said components are assembled fitly, and examines said restrictions comprising said assembly relationship and said assembly sequence; said ownership is represented by set operations; said assembly sequence is described by said order set; wherein said engineering drawing testing of said digital testing part detects said size and view correlations between said engineering drawing and said model, said size correlation between said engineering drawing and said model is described by said scale; and said view correlation between said engineering drawing and said model is described as G=(V,E), wherein V represents a view set, and E represents a relationship set of said view correlation.

15. A testing method of a human-computer combination quality testing system for a digital product testing, comprising steps of: after manufacture, importing relevant CAD models, submitting the CAD models to a digital testing part for being examined; examining in sequence with component model testing, fit model testing and engineering drawing testing for determining whether a relevant rule is disobeyed; if a product is determined to be unqualified by the three testing, returning the product for being adjusted, modified or redone; if the product is determined to be qualified by the three testing, submitting the product to a manual testing part for being examined by relevant inspectors; if the product is determined to be qualified by the inspectors, leaving the product as a qualified product; if the product is determined to be unqualified by the inspectors, returning the product for being adjusted, modified or redone, and submitting an explanation to a developer; then adding, changing or deleting the relevant rule with a rule corrector of a system improving part according to a misjudging condition of the digital testing part; describing a corrected rule, which is corrected by the developer, by a rule descriptor; then applying the corrected rule to a system by a rule parser for avoiding the misjudging condition.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0027] Referring to the drawings, the present invention is further illustrated.

[0028] FIG. 1 is a sketch view of a conventional digital product quality testing system.

[0029] FIG. 2 is a sketch view of a human-computer combination quality testing system according to the present invention.

[0030] FIG. 3 is a sketch view of a point-line model according to the present invention.

[0031] FIG. 4 is a sketch view of a surface model according to the present invention.

[0032] FIG. 5 is a sketch view of a view correlation according to the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

[0033] Referring to FIG. 2, a human-computer combination quality testing system according to the present invention comprises: a digital testing part, a manual testing part, and a system improving part.

[0034] The digital testing part may be an original system without human-computer combination, which does not need to be changed. The digital testing part comprises: a component model testing, a fit model testing and an engineering drawing testing. The component model testing determines whether elements comprising the point-line models, surfaces, boundaries and textures are qualified. The fit model testing determines whether components are assembled fitly, and examines restrictions comprising an assembly relationship and an assembly sequence. The engineering drawing testing detects size and view correlations between an engineering drawing and a model.

[0035] The manual testing part is appraising of products from parts and assembly to end products by an inspector with manufacturing and assembling experience, for separating unqualified products from qualified products.

[0036] The system improving part comprises: a rule descriptor, a rule parser, and a rule corrector.

[0037] The rule descriptor is a four-element group (Condition, Binding, Type, Reply), comprising: rule bindings Binding, trigger conditions Condition, degree types Degree and reply types Reply.

[0038] The rule descriptor comprises the trigger conditions Condition. The rule descriptor sets the standard conditions according to the standards of points, lines, the surfaces, the boundaries and the textures of a component model; sets the restriction conditions according to the restrictions comprising the assembly relationship and the assembly sequence of the fit model; and sets correlation conditions according to the size and view correlations between the engineering drawing and the model. If the conditions are abnormal, a rule is triggered for warming about an irregularity detected. The standards of the component model are described by a chain table structure; the points, the lines and the boundaries are described by a 1-dimensional chain table structure, each element thereof is directed to a next element by a pointer as shown in FIG. 3, and is described as Element=(x,y,z) for describing a 3-dimensional point position. The surfaces and the textures are described by a 2-dimensional chain table structure, each element thereof is directed to an up element, a down element, a left element and a right element by four pointers as shown in FIG. 4, and is described as Element=(x,y,z,d), wherein x, y and z describe a 3-dimensional point position, d describes the texture at (x, y, z). Ownerships of the fit model are described by sets, wherein S.sub.1⊂ S.sub.2 illustrates that parts represented by S.sub.1 are subordinate to parts represented by S.sub.2; S.sub.1∩S.sub.2 illustrates that the parts represented by S.sub.1 and the parts represented by S.sub.2 should be assembled together for forming a part. The assembly sequence of the fit model is described by an order set, wherein <S.sub.1, S.sub.2, . . . , S.sub.n> illustrates that S.sub.1 is assembled first, then S.sub.2, and finally S.sub.n. The size correlation between the engineering drawing and the model is described by a scale. The view correlation between the engineering drawing and the model is described as G=(V,E), wherein V is an apex set of a view, E is a vector side set of the view. Referring to FIG. 5, v.sub.1 and v.sub.2 respectively represent two views, e.sub.12 describes a correlation between v.sub.1 and v.sub.2; standard settings, assembly restrictions and correlation rules defined above form the trigger conditions, the trigger conditions are marked as C.

[0039] The rule descriptor comprises the rule bindings Binding. For each unit of the digital testing part, such as the component model testing (Component for short), the fit model testing (Fit for short) and the engineering drawing testing (Drawing for short), requirements for quality testing are different, and corresponding rules are also different. Different units of the digital testing part are bounded with different rules. The rule is described as <Logic(C.sub.1, C.sub.2, . . . , C.sub.m), Component/Fit/Drawing>, wherein Logic(C.sub.1, C.sub.2, . . . , C.sub.m) is a logic system comprising a series of trigger rules, which is corresponding to Component/Fit/Drawing; the logic system comprises , and − basic operations, wherein C.sub.1C.sub.2 requires that both C.sub.1 and C.sub.2 are true, C.sub.1C.sub.2 requires that either C.sub.1 or C.sub.2 is true, and C.sub.1 requires that C.sub.1 is not true; the rule is marked as R.

[0040] The rule descriptor comprises the degree types Degree, wherein the degree types are represented in the quantized percentage form, for describing irregular degrees; each rule is corresponding to one degree type, which is marked as <R,Degree,Reply>; the irregular degrees are adjustable according to requirements; for example, Degree of 1%˜10% represents a slight irregularity with slight inconformity and mistakes, Degree of 11%˜30% represents a medium type with a medium irregularity; Degree of above 30% represents a serious irregularity.

[0041] The rule descriptor comprises the reply types Reply, wherein the reply types comprise: the adjust-type (Adjust for short), the modify-type (Modify for short) and the redo-type (Redo for short), which depend on the irregular degrees and are corresponding to one rule and one degree type, and are described as <R,Degree,Reply>. The adjust-type is corresponding to the slight irregularity, the modify-type is corresponding to the medium irregularity, and the redo-type is corresponding to the serious irregularity.

[0042] The rule parser parses semantemes described in the rule, the parsed semantemes comprise relationships between symbols and basic elements comprising the point-line model, the surfaces and the textures; restrictions comprising proportions, associations, contents and sequences; and movements comprising hitting, squeezing and measuring.

[0043] The rule corrector provides an interface for editing the rule. For the rules which are determined as wrong, a deleting operation may be provided, which means providing Delete(<R,Degree,Reply>). For incomplete rule libraries, an adding operation may be provided, which means providing Add(<R,Degree,Reply>). For the rules with problems, a modifying operation may be provided, which means providing Modify(<R,Degree,Reply>). For all the rules in the rule library, a querying operation may be provided, which means providing Query(<R,Degree,Reply>).

[0044] Referring to FIG. 2, a testing method of a human-computer combination quality testing system is provided, comprising steps of: after manufacture, importing relevant CAD models, submitting the CAD models to a digital testing part for being examined; examining with component model testing, fit model testing and engineering drawing testing for determining whether a relevant rule is disobeyed; if a product is determined to be unqualified by the three testing, returning the product for being adjusted, modified or redone; if the product is determined to be qualified by the three testing, submitting the product to a manual testing part for being examined by relevant inspectors; if the product is determined to be qualified by the inspectors, leaving the product as a qualified product; if the product is determined to be unqualified by the inspectors, which means that a result of the digital testing part is wrong, returning the product for being adjusted, modified or redone, and submitting an explanation to a developer; then adding, changing or deleting the relevant rule with a rule corrector of a system improving part according to a misjudging condition of the digital testing part; describing a corrected rule, which is corrected by the developer, by a rule descriptor; then applying the corrected rule to a system by a rule parser for avoiding the misjudging condition.