阅读说明：本技术 用于飞行器的动态故障隔离 (Dynamic fault isolation for aircraft ) 是由 B·沙弗里克 R·J·雷特 M·安德雷格 R·B·默里 J·S·埃利奥特 于 2021-03-09 设计创作，主要内容包括：本申请涉及用于飞行器的动态故障隔离。一种方法包括接收标识飞行器上检测的一个或多个故障状况的故障代码数据以及接收指示在与该(一个或多个)状况相关联的时间框架中飞行器的一个或多个状况的故障情景数据。该方法还包括(基于故障代码数据、故障情景数据、指示飞行器的当前状态的状态数据和历史维护数据)生成包括第一组未完成检查列表项的第一检查列表显示。该方法进一步包括接收指示第一组未完成检查列表项的一个或多个检查列表项的完成的输入以及基于输入更新状态数据。该方法还包括(基于故障代码数据、故障情景数据、更新后的状态数据和历史维护数据)生成包括第二组未完成检查列表项的第二检查列表显示。(The present application relates to dynamic fault isolation for aircraft. A method includes receiving fault code data identifying one or more fault conditions detected on an aircraft and receiving fault scenario data indicating one or more conditions of the aircraft in a time frame associated with the condition(s). The method also includes generating a first checklist display (based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the status data indicative of the current status of the aircraft, and the historical maintenance data) that includes a first set of outstanding checklist items. The method further includes receiving input indicating completion of one or more check list items of the first set of incomplete check list items and updating the status data based on the input. The method also includes generating (based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the updated status data, and the historical maintenance data) a second checklist display including a second set of incomplete checklist items.)

1. An aircraft maintenance system (120), comprising:

one or more data bus interfaces (126) for receiving fault code data (148) and fault scenario data (150) via one or more aircraft data buses (160), wherein the fault code data identifies one or more fault conditions detected on an aircraft (102) and the fault scenario data indicates one or more conditions of the aircraft in a timeframe associated with the one or more fault conditions;

one or more processors (122) coupled to the one or more data bus interfaces; and

one or more memory devices (124) accessible to the one or more processors, the one or more memory devices storing instructions (142) executable by the one or more processors to cause the one or more processors to:

generating a first checklist display (118) comprising a first set of incomplete checklist entries, wherein the first checklist display is generated based on two or more of the fault code data, the fault scenario data, status data (152) indicative of a current status of the aircraft, and historical maintenance data (156);

receiving input indicating completion of one or more check list items of the first set of incomplete check list items;

updating the status data based on the input; and

generating a second checklist display including a second set of incomplete checklist items, wherein the second checklist display is generated based on two or more of the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the updated status data, and the historical maintenance data, and wherein the second set of incomplete checklist items is different from the first set of incomplete checklist items.

2. The aircraft maintenance system of claim 1, further comprising a display device (116) on the aircraft, wherein the display device is configured to display the first checklist display and the second checklist display.

3. An aircraft maintenance system according to claim 1 or claim 2, wherein the one or more memory devices store at least a portion of the historical maintenance data.

4. The aircraft maintenance system of claim 1 or claim 2, further comprising a communication interface (128) configured to access at least a portion of the historical maintenance data from a data store (138) external to the aircraft.

5. An aircraft maintenance system according to claim 1 or claim 2, wherein the fault code data is associated with a plurality of fault isolation paths, wherein each fault isolation path of the plurality of fault isolation paths specifies a sequence of tasks to isolate a cause of a particular fault condition of the one or more fault conditions.

6. The aircraft maintenance system of claim 1 or claim 2, wherein the fault scenario data comprises sensor data indicative of an operating environment associated with the aircraft during the timeframe, configuration data indicative of a status of the aircraft during the timeframe, or both.

7. An aircraft maintenance system according to claim 1 or claim 2, wherein the historical maintenance data identifies previous maintenance activities associated with the aircraft, previous maintenance activities associated with one or more other aircraft, or previous maintenance activities associated with both, and wherein the previous maintenance activities indicate a plurality of historical fault conditions, historical fault scenario data associated with each of the historical fault conditions, a respective ordered sequence of tasks performed to address each of the historical fault conditions.

8. An aircraft maintenance system according to claim 1 or claim 2, wherein the status data is indicative of one or more configuration states of the aircraft.

9. The aircraft maintenance system of claim 1 or claim 2, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the one or more processors to: after updating the historical maintenance data, obtain second fault code data and second fault scenario data via the one or more data bus interfaces, and in response to the second fault code data matching the fault code data and the second fault scenario data matching the fault scenario data, generate a third check list display including a third set of incomplete check list entries, wherein the third set of incomplete check list entries is different from the first set of incomplete check list entries and different from the second set of incomplete check list entries.

10. An aircraft maintenance system according to claim 1 or claim 2, wherein the input comprises one or more data bus signals detected by the one or more data bus interfaces, wherein the one or more data bus signals are indicative of a configuration state of the aircraft or a change in the configuration state of the aircraft.

Technical Field

The subject disclosure relates to aircraft maintenance using a dynamic fault isolation process.

Background

As aircraft become more complex, maintaining them becomes increasingly difficult and time consuming. Many modern aircraft include aircraft health monitoring systems to detect fault conditions and assist maintenance personnel in identifying and troubleshooting the fault conditions. For example, in response to detecting a particular fault condition, the aircraft health monitoring system may generate a fault code. The fault code may be indexed to a fault isolation procedure in a fault isolation manual associated with the aircraft. The fault isolation process lists a series of tasks that maintenance personnel should perform to isolate and correct the fault condition. Different detected fault conditions are indexed to respective fault isolation routines. Each fault isolation routine specifies a sequence of tasks that should be performed. The sequence of tasks is ordered based on some predetermined criteria, such as based on how likely each task will resolve the fault condition.

Disclosure of Invention

In some examples, an aircraft maintenance system includes one or more data bus interfaces, one or more processors coupled to the one or more data bus interfaces, and one or more memory devices accessible by the one or more processors. The one or more data bus interfaces are configured to receive fault code data and fault scenario data via the one or more aircraft data buses. The fault code data identifies one or more fault conditions detected on-board the aircraft, and the fault scenario data indicates one or more conditions of the aircraft in a time frame (timeframe) associated with the one or more fault conditions. The one or more memory devices store instructions that are executable by the one or more processors to cause the one or more processors to generate a first checklist display comprising a first set of outstanding (incomplete) checklist items. A first checklist display is generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the status data indicating the current status of the aircraft, and the historical maintenance data. The instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the one or more processors to receive input indicating completion of one or more check list items of the first set of incomplete check list items, and update the status data based on the input. The instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the one or more processors to generate a second checklist display including a second set of outstanding checklist items. A second checklist display is generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the updated status data, and the historical maintenance data, and the second set of incomplete checklist items is different from the first set of incomplete checklist items.

According to some examples, a method includes receiving fault code data via one or more aircraft data buses, wherein the fault code data identifies one or more fault conditions detected on-board an aircraft. The method also includes receiving fault scenario data via the one or more aircraft data buses, wherein the fault scenario data indicates one or more conditions of the aircraft in a time frame associated with the one or more fault conditions. The method further includes generating, by the one or more processors, a first checklist display including a first set of outstanding checklist items. A first checklist display is generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the status data indicating the current status of the aircraft, and the historical maintenance data. The method also includes receiving, by the one or more processors, an input indicating completion of one or more check list items of the first set of incomplete check list items, and updating, by the one or more processors, the status data based on the input. The method further includes generating, by the one or more processors, a second checklist display including a second set of outstanding checklist items. A second checklist display is generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the updated status data, and the historical maintenance data, and the second set of incomplete checklist items is different from the first set of incomplete checklist items.

According to some examples, a computer-readable storage device stores instructions executable by one or more processors to cause the one or more processors to perform operations. The operations include receiving fault code data identifying one or more fault conditions detected on the aircraft and receiving fault scenario data indicating one or more conditions of the aircraft in a time frame associated with the one or more fault conditions. The operations also include generating a first checklist display including a first set of outstanding checklist items, where the first checklist display is generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the status data indicating a current status of the aircraft, and the historical maintenance data. The operations further include receiving input indicating completion of one or more check list items of the first set of incomplete check list items and updating the status data based on the input. The operations further include generating a second review list display including a second set of outstanding review list items. A second checklist display is generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the updated status data, and the historical maintenance data, and the second set of incomplete checklist items is different from the first set of incomplete checklist items.

The features, functions, and advantages described herein can be achieved independently in various embodiments or may be combined in yet other embodiments further details of which can be seen with reference to the following description and drawings.

Drawings

FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating a system including an aircraft and an associated aircraft maintenance system that facilitates dynamic fault isolation.

FIG. 2A is a diagram illustrating a first example of a checklist display, according to a particular embodiment of the system of FIG. 1.

FIG. 2B is a diagram illustrating a second example of a checklist display, according to a particular embodiment of the system of FIG. 1.

FIG. 2C is a diagram illustrating a third example of a checklist display in accordance with a particular embodiment of the system of FIG. 1.

FIG. 3 is a flow diagram of an example of a method of dynamic fault isolation, according to certain embodiments.

FIG. 4 is a flow diagram of another example of a method of dynamic fault isolation, according to certain embodiments.

FIG. 5 illustrates a lifecycle of the aircraft of FIG. 1, in accordance with certain embodiments.

FIG. 6 is a block diagram illustrating the aircraft of FIG. 1, in accordance with certain embodiments.

FIG. 7 illustrates a computing environment including the aircraft maintenance system of FIG. 1, in accordance with certain embodiments.

Detailed Description

In particular embodiments, the context sensitive aircraft maintenance system uses data describing faults, context information, status data, and historical data to suggest which routines to execute and/or the order (e.g., sequence) of tasks that should be performed to identify and/or correct the fault condition. The situational information includes information about the aircraft from the time period during which the fault occurred or was detected. In some embodiments, the contextual information also includes current status or configuration information related to the aircraft, such as settings for various controls (e.g., selector switch positions, valve positions, breaker states, etc.), control surface positions, other system parameters, and the like.

The order of the tasks is determined based in part on which tasks address previous complaints (complags) associated with the same or related fault codes and the same or similar contextual information. The order is determined dynamically (e.g., at runtime). Thus, over time, as additional historical data accumulates, the order of the tasks for a particular fault isolation check list changes.

In some embodiments, the fault isolation check list is controlled by a component that has access to the current state of the aircraft and a memory that indicates previous operations performed during a particular maintenance activity. In such embodiments, the fault isolation check list may be automatically updated to indicate that particular steps or operations were previously performed or are not required during particular maintenance activities. For example, some fault isolation tasks of the fault isolation check list refer to maintenance processes that include multiple tasks. In this example, each maintenance procedure is fairly comprehensive in that it explicitly or implicitly lists all of the tasks required to perform the maintenance procedure. Many of these steps overlap from one maintenance process to another. To illustrate, maintenance tasks related to a particular subsystem may include tasks to remove an access panel for gaining access to components of the particular subsystem. If several components of the subsystem are placed below the access panel, the user may then perform another maintenance task process that also lists the maintenance task that removed the access panel. In this case, the fault isolation check list may automatically indicate the task of removing the access panel as complete based on the access panel having been removed during a previous maintenance task. Additionally or alternatively, two or more tasks may be listed next to each other in the fault isolation check list, due in part to the fact that: each of the two or more tasks requires removal of the access panel, thereby reducing the time required for auxiliary tasks (e.g., tasks that are not themselves intended to correct the fault condition).

In another example, the particular fault isolation process described by the fault isolation check list may include tasks to set control inputs to particular states, such as turning a knob, toggling a switch, opening a circuit breaker, and so forth. In this example, the task may be automatically indicated as complete based on detecting the status of the control input (e.g., based on data read from the aircraft data bus, based on sensor data, and/or based on data stored in memory indicating the status of the control input).

Each fault isolation check list describes a process that includes multiple tasks. Each fault isolation check list is associated with (e.g., indexed to) one or more fault codes, and each fault code is associated with (e.g., indexed to) one or more fault isolation check lists. In some embodiments, the order of the tasks of the fault isolation check list is determined based at least in part on the context information and the historical maintenance information. Accordingly, the task of solving the fault condition based on the fault code and the scenario information, which has been conventionally performed, can be performed early in the maintenance activity. One technical benefit of the dynamic fault isolation process described herein is that downtime of the aircraft is reduced (or conversely, availability is increased) because the dynamic ordering of the fault isolation tasks enables operations that may resolve the fault condition to be performed earlier in the maintenance process. This benefit is cumulative in that the order changes as more historical information becomes available.

Specific embodiments are described herein with reference to the drawings. Throughout the specification, common features are designated by common reference numerals throughout the drawings. In some of the drawings, multiple instances of a particular type of feature are used. Although the features may be physically and/or logically different, each feature is given the same reference number and different instances are distinguished by adding a letter to the reference number. When features are referred to herein as groups or types (e.g., when no particular one of the features is referred to), reference numerals are used without distinction of letters. However, when referring herein to a particular one of a plurality of features of the same type, the reference number is used with a distinguishing letter. For example, referring to FIG. 1, multiple instances of historical maintenance data are shown and associated with reference numbers 156A and 156B. The distinguishing letter "A" is used when referring to a particular one of these instances of historical maintenance data, such as historical maintenance data 156A. However, when referring to any arbitrary instance of the historical maintenance data or as a set of such instances of the historical maintenance data, the reference numeral 156 is used without distinguishing letters.

As used herein, various terms are used only for the purpose of describing particular embodiments and are not intended to be limiting. For example, the singular forms "a", "an" and "the" are intended to include the plural forms as well, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. Furthermore, some features described herein are in the singular in some embodiments, and in the plural in other embodiments. For ease of reference herein, such features are generally incorporated as "one or more" features and are subsequently referred to in the singular, unless aspects relating to a plurality of features are described.

The terms "comprising," including, "and" containing "are used interchangeably with" including, "" including, "or" comprising. Furthermore, as used herein, terms such as "comprising," "including," "having," "containing," and variations thereof, are intended to be inclusive in a manner similar to the term "comprising" as an open transition word without precluding any additional or other elements. In addition, the term "wherein" is used interchangeably with the term "wherein". As used herein, "exemplary" indicates examples, embodiments, and/or aspects, and should not be construed as limiting or indicating preferences or preferred embodiments. As used herein, ordinal terms (e.g., "first," "second," "third," etc.) used to modify an element such as a structure, component, operation, etc., do not by themselves indicate any priority or order of the element relative to another element, but merely distinguish the element from another element having a same name (without using ordinal terms). As used herein, the term "group/set" refers to a grouping of one or more elements, and the term "plurality" refers to a plurality of elements.

As used herein, "generate," "calculate," "use," "select," "access," and "determine" are interchangeable unless the context indicates otherwise. For example, "generating," "calculating," or "determining" a parameter (or signal) may refer to actively generating, calculating, or determining the parameter (or signal), or may refer to using, selecting, or accessing the parameter (or signal), such as has been generated by another component or device. As used herein, "coupled" may include "communicatively coupled," "electrically coupled," or "physically coupled," and may also (or alternatively) include any combination thereof. Two devices (or components) can be directly or indirectly coupled (e.g., communicatively coupled, electrically coupled, or physically coupled) via one or more other devices, components, wires, buses, networks (e.g., a wired network, a wireless network, or a combination thereof), or the like. As an illustrative, non-limiting example, two devices (or components) that are electrically coupled may be included in the same device or in different devices, and may be connected via electronics, one or more connectors, or inductive coupling. In some implementations, two devices (or components) that are communicatively coupled (such as electrically coupled) may send and receive electrical signals (digital or analog signals) directly or indirectly, such as via one or more wires, buses, networks, or the like. As used herein, "directly coupled" is used to describe two devices that are coupled (e.g., communicatively coupled, electrically coupled, or physically coupled) without intermediate components.

As used herein, a "fault condition" refers to any detected or detectable abnormality in an aircraft. Typically, the fault condition is associated with a fault code that describes the affected system or subsystem. The fault condition (or fault code) may also be associated with text summaries that provide more easily understood (relative to the fault code) information about the fault condition.

As used herein, "state data" refers to any data indicative of the current state of the aircraft, such as sensor data, stored values in memory, data bus signals, and the like. In such a scenario, the current state of the aircraft includes whether a particular component is present, whether a particular component is active, the location of a component (e.g., flight control surface, switch, etc.), the results of functional testing, and so forth. In this scenario, the configuration data is a subset of the state data. The configuration data indicates a particular setting or location of the aircraft component at a particular time. For example, configuration data associated with a fault condition may indicate whether a flap of a deployment (deployment) aircraft under the fault condition is detected.

As used herein, "historical maintenance data" refers to records associated with a particular aircraft or with multiple aircraft (e.g., all aircraft of a fleet). The historical maintenance data identifies aircraft complaints (e.g., fault codes or complaints reported by flight crew) and maintenance tasks that have been performed. In some embodiments, the historical maintenance data also identifies contextual information associated with some or all of the aircraft complaints, the order in which the maintenance tasks were performed, and some indication of which maintenance task(s) resolved the complaint.

FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating a system 100 including an aircraft 102 and an associated aircraft maintenance system 120. In FIG. 1, system 100 also includes a data repository 138 coupled to or accessible to aircraft maintenance system 120. In fig. 1, data store 138 is external to aircraft 102. In other implementations, the data store 138, or portions thereof, is on-board the aircraft 102. Further, in FIG. 1, aircraft maintenance system 120 is on-board aircraft 102; however, in other embodiments, the aircraft maintenance system 120 is external to the aircraft 102.

In fig. 1, an aircraft 102 includes a plurality of systems 104. The system 104 includes any component, Line Replaceable Unit (LRU), or bus of the aircraft 102. Each system 104 has a corresponding configuration 106, the corresponding configuration 106 referring to the state of each system 104. The aircraft 102 also includes controls 108, each having a corresponding configuration 110. Controls 108 include automatic controls and user-selectable controls. Examples of automatic controls include control circuitry and a processor that generate control signals based on sensed data or other information. Examples of user-selectable controls include switches, dials, knobs, touch screen interfaces, buttons, and the like.

The aircraft 102 further includes sensors 112. The sensors 112 are configured to generate sensor data, such as data indicative of the configuration 106 of one or more of the systems 104, the configuration 110 of one or more of the controls 108, or other information regarding the operation or status of the aircraft 102 or its surroundings.

The aircraft 102 also includes a health monitoring system 114. The health monitoring system 114 is configured to detect fault conditions within the aircraft 102. For example, health monitoring system 114 may receive sensor data, configuration data describing configuration 106 of one or more of systems 104, configuration data describing configuration 110 of one or more of controls 108, other data, or any combination thereof, via one or more aircraft data buses 160 and compare the data to various fault detection criteria (e.g., thresholds, modes, etc.) to determine when a fault condition has occurred. In response to detecting the fault condition, the health monitoring system 114 generates data describing the fault condition, such as a fault code or similar fault indication. Although FIG. 1 illustrates health monitoring system 114 as a distinct component, in some embodiments, health monitoring system 114, or portions thereof, are distributed among monitored systems 104. For example, the electrical system of system 104 may include an electrical system controller or an electrical system monitor that performs electrical system-specific health monitoring.

Aircraft maintenance system 120 includes one or more data bus interfaces 126 to receive data via aircraft data bus(s) 160. For example, in particular embodiments, data bus interface(s) 126 receives fault code data 148 from health monitoring system 114 via aircraft data bus(s) 160. Fault code data 148 identifies one or more fault conditions detected on the aircraft. In some embodiments, the data bus interface(s) 126 also receives fault scenario data 150 via the aircraft data bus(s) 160. The fault scenario data 150 indicates one or more conditions of the aircraft 102 in a time frame associated with the one or more fault conditions (e.g., a time period before or concurrent with the detection of the one or more fault conditions). In particular examples, the fault scenario data 150 includes sensor data from the sensors 112 that indicates an operating environment associated with the aircraft 102 during a time frame associated with the fault condition(s), configuration data that indicates a state of the aircraft 102 (e.g., describing one or more of the configurations 106 or 110) during the time frame, or both.

Aircraft maintenance system 120 includes one or more processors 122 coupled to data bus interface(s) 126 and one or more memory devices 124 accessible to processor(s) 122. In particular embodiments, aircraft maintenance system 120 enables computer systems to operate as dedicated computer systems that support dynamic fault isolation for aircraft maintenance. In FIG. 1, aircraft maintenance system 120 also includes one or more communication interfaces 128 configured to facilitate off-board communication. For example, when data store 138 is located outside of an aircraft, communication interface(s) 128 may access data from data store 138 via off-board communication connection 162, which may include a wired or wireless connection.

The memory device(s) 124 store data and instructions 142 that are executable by the processor(s) 122 to perform various operations. In fig. 1, the data includes fault code data 148 and fault scenario data 150. In some implementations, the memory device(s) 124 also store state data 152 indicative of the current state of the aircraft 102. For example, the status data 152 indicates one or more configuration states of the aircraft 102 (e.g., describing one or more of the configurations 106 or 110) in real-time or near real-time.

In the example shown in fig. 1, memory device(s) 124 also store historical maintenance data 156B. In some implementations, memory device(s) 124 store a portion of historical maintenance data 156B and data store 138 stores another portion of historical maintenance data 156A. Historical maintenance data 156 identifies previous maintenance activities associated with aircraft 102, previous maintenance activities associated with one or more other aircraft (e.g., other similar aircraft), or both. The prior maintenance activities indicate a plurality of historical fault conditions, historical fault scenario data associated with each historical fault condition, a respective ordered sequence of tasks performed to address each historical fault condition.

In FIG. 1, instructions 142 include dynamic fault isolation instructions 144 and update instructions 146. Dynamic fault isolation instructions 144 may be executed by processor(s) 122 to generate checklist display(s) 118 to guide maintenance personnel through a fault isolation process and associated maintenance processes. In fig. 1, checklist display(s) 118 are shown as being presented via one or more display devices 116 on aircraft 102; however, in other embodiments, checklist display(s) 118 are presented via a display device external to aircraft 102 or a portable display device, such as an electronic maintenance manual device.

The checklist display(s) 118 lists an ordered sequence of fault isolation tasks 132 based on a Fault Isolation Manual (FIM)130, an ordered sequence of maintenance tasks 136 based on a maintenance manual 134, or both. As described below, a set of tasks and an order of the tasks presented in the checklist display(s) 118 is determined (e.g., by the processor(s) 122) based on the fault code data 148, the fault scenario data 150, the status data 152, the historical maintenance data 156, the FIM130, the maintenance manual 134, the Minimum Equipment List (MEL)158, or a combination thereof. The FIM130 maps each fault code to a particular fault isolation procedure, and each fault isolation procedure indicates a set of fault isolation tasks 132, some of which may be maintenance tasks 136. To illustrate, the fault code data is associated with (e.g., indexed to or mapped to) multiple fault isolation paths of the FIM130, and each fault isolation path specifies a sequence of tasks to isolate a cause of a particular fault condition of the one or more fault conditions.

In some implementations, the particular checklist display 118 lists a set of fault isolation tasks 132 (and maintenance tasks 136) associated with a particular detected fault code, and the order of the tasks in the list is determined (e.g., by the processor(s) 122) based on historical maintenance data 156 (alone or in combination with other data). To illustrate, the fault scenario data 150 may be evaluated along with the historical maintenance data 156 to determine which tasks are more likely to resolve a fault condition based on which tasks resolved similar fault conditions in the past (e.g., fault conditions associated with the same or related fault code and the same or similar fault scenario).

Additionally or alternatively, a set of tasks and/or an order of tasks listed in a particular checklist display 118 may be determined based at least in part on the state data 152 (e.g., by the processor(s) 122). For example, some fault isolation tasks 132 of the FIM130 include checks to determine or verify the configuration 106, 110 of a particular system 104 or control 108. In this example, if the status data 152 indicates a configuration 106, 110 of a particular system 104 or control 108, the checklist items used to determine the configuration 106, 110 may be omitted from the checklist display 118. Alternatively, the check list items may be included in the check list display 118 with a check list item status 154 indicating that the check list item is complete.

In some cases, FIM130 includes or refers to a deferrable maintenance task 136. The deferrable maintenance task 136 is a maintenance task associated with a non-operational device, where scheduling (dispatch) is allowed with the device remaining non-operational, according to the conditions specified in the minimum device list (MEL). Accordingly, maintenance tasks to repair or replace systems 104 not identified on MEL 158 are not delayable.

After the user performs the task, the user or the aircraft 102 may provide input indicating completion of the task or indicating the results of the task. For example, a user may perform a task by modifying the configuration 110 of the control 108. In this example, the user may then provide an input to aircraft maintenance system 120 to indicate that the task has been performed. Alternatively or additionally, modifying the configuration 110 of the control 108 may cause the status data 152 to be automatically updated based on signals or data that are certified to the aircraft maintenance system 120 via the aircraft data bus(s) 160, in which case the signals or data may be used as input indicating that a task has been performed.

In response to an input indicating that a task associated with a particular check list item has been performed, the check list item status 154 is updated and the check list display 118 is modified to display the check list item as complete, to show the results of the check list item, to indicate the next check list item to be performed, or a combination thereof. For example, some checklists include branch paths (each branch path including a set of tasks), and which path is executed or the order of execution of the tasks in the path depends on the outcome of the particular task. For illustration, a particular task may include a functional check, and different sequences of tasks may be performed depending on whether the functional check passes or fails.

In some cases, a particular maintenance task 136 appears multiple times in the task list. For example, several components of the system may be located within a particular access panel of the aircraft 102. In this example, the removal of a particular access panel may be listed as a maintenance task 136 during the replacement of each component. In this case, when the maintenance task 136 for removing the access panel is indicated as completed, the check list item status 154 associated with the maintenance task 136 is updated, and each check list item (not just the current or active check list item) indicating the maintenance task 136 is updated to show task completion.

The update instructions 146 may be executed by the processor(s) 122 to update the historical maintenance data 156 during or after maintenance. For example, after a particular task or group of tasks is indicated as completed, the update instructions 146 update the historical maintenance data 156 indicating that the task(s) have executed and/or the results of executing the task(s) (e.g., whether executing the task(s) cleared the fault condition or caused another detectable change, such as another fault condition or a change in functional checks). In some implementations, the update instructions 146 also generate statistical or other analysis data based on the historical maintenance data 156. For example, the update instructions 146 calculate a probability that a particular task or group of tasks will address a particular fault condition under a particular scenario (e.g., when particular fault scenario data is present). In this example, the probability data calculated by the update instructions 146 is stored with the historical maintenance data 156 and is used to determine the order of tasks to be performed when a similar fault condition is detected on the aircraft 102 or on another aircraft.

During operation, aircraft maintenance system 120 receives an indication of a fault condition, such as fault code data 148, fault scenario data 150, or both. In response to initiating maintenance activities associated with the fault condition, aircraft maintenance system 120 generates a first checklist display including a first set of outstanding checklist entries. A first checklist display is generated based on at least fault code data 148, fault scenario data 150, and status data 152. The first set of incomplete check list entries corresponds to or includes an ordered sequence of fault isolation tasks 132 originating from a FIM130 associated with the aircraft 102, an ordered sequence of maintenance tasks 136 originating from a maintenance manual 134 associated with the aircraft 102, or an ordered sequence including fault isolation tasks 132 and maintenance tasks 136. Each of the first set of incomplete check list items is associated with a respective task. In some embodiments, the first set of incomplete checklist items is sorted in a first checklist display based on an estimate of a likelihood that execution of each corresponding task will address the fault condition(s). In some embodiments, the first checklist displays a numerical value or other estimate that includes a likelihood that performance of a particular task will address one or more fault conditions.

After generating and presenting the first check list display to the user, aircraft maintenance system 120 receives an input indicating completion of one or more check list items in the first set of incomplete check list items. Input may be provided by a user, such as via one of controls 108 or via interaction with a first checklist display on display device(s) 116. Additionally or alternatively, the input may be received via signals or data transmitted over the aircraft data bus(s) 160, such as signals transmitted from the controls 108 to the system 104 to change the configuration 106 of the system 104. Aircraft maintenance system 120 updates data in memory device(s) 124 based on the inputs. In a particular example, the status data 152, the historical maintenance data 156, the check list item status 154, or a combination thereof is updated based on the input.

After receiving the input, aircraft maintenance system 120 may generate a second check list display including a second set of incomplete check list items, the second set of incomplete check list items being different from the first set of incomplete check list items. For example, checklist display 118 may be updated to identify a new task. A second checklist display is generated based on fault code data 148, fault scenario data 150, updated status data 152, and historical maintenance data 156.

In some cases, the task to be performed is dynamically selected (e.g., by processor(s) 122) to generate a checklist display, and after this initial selection, the task list is static. In this case, the set of incomplete check list items (e.g., the second set of incomplete check list items) present in the subsequent check list display (e.g., the second check list display) includes each of the previous set of incomplete check list items, except for one or more check list items indicated as complete. In other cases, the list of tasks to be performed is updated dynamically (e.g., by processor(s) 122) on an occasional basis as the list of checks is being performed, such as when additional information becomes available, or after the results of a particular task or check are known. In this case, the subsequent set of incomplete check list items includes one or more check list items not present in the previous set of incomplete check list items. When the subsequent checklist display is generated, one or more checklist items in the previous set of incomplete checklist items may be automatically indicated as complete based on input received from system 104, control 108, sensor 112, or health monitoring system 114.

In particular embodiments, after updating historical maintenance data 156 based on the maintenance that cleared the fault condition on aircraft 102 or on another aircraft, aircraft maintenance system 120 may obtain additional fault code data (e.g., second fault code data or subsequent fault code data) corresponding to the new fault condition and additional fault scenario data (e.g., second fault scenario data or subsequent fault code data) associated with the new fault condition. In response to determining that the additional fault code data matches (e.g., is the same as or similar to, based on the comparison criteria) the previous fault code data and that the additional fault scenario data matches (e.g., is the same as or similar to, based on the comparison criteria) the previous fault scenario data, aircraft maintenance system 120 generates a new checklist display that includes a set of incomplete checklist entries (e.g., a third set of incomplete checklist entries). The set of incomplete check list items presented in the new check list display is different from the set of incomplete check list items presented in the previous check list display (e.g., the first and second sets). For example, aircraft maintenance system 120 selects tasks to be performed, an order of tasks to be performed, or both based on updated historical maintenance data 156 such that one or more tasks that address the previous fault condition are performed earlier in the fault isolation process, wherein the task(s) that are desired to address the previous fault condition may also address the current fault condition.

Thus, the aircraft maintenance system 120 provides an improved technical solution to the technical problem of aircraft fault isolation. For example, by updating the historical maintenance data 156 with information indicating which tasks resolved each complaint and using the updated historical maintenance data 156 to order the tasks performed during subsequent maintenance activities, the aircraft maintenance system 120 generates a checklist display that is sorted in a manner that reduces the time required to isolate and resolve fault conditions on the aircraft 102.

Fig. 2A-2C illustrate examples of checklist displays 118, including a first checklist display 118A in fig. 2A, a second checklist display 118B in fig. 2B, and a third checklist display 118C in fig. 2C. The example checklist display 118 in fig. 2A-2C is intended only to illustrate specific examples of the present disclosure. In some embodiments, one or more features of checklist display 118 shown in fig. 2A-2C are omitted. In other embodiments, checklist display 118 includes additional features not shown in fig. 2A-2C.

In fig. 2A-2C, each checklist display 118 includes information 202, 220 describing fault conditions. In fig. 2A-2C, the information 202, 220 includes a maintenance message (e.g., maintenance message _1) that provides a textual description related to the fault condition. The information 202, 220 also includes fault code data 148 (e.g., fault code data _1 or fault code data _2), fault scenario data 150 (e.g., scenario data _1 or scenario data _2), and status data 152 (e.g., status data _1 and status data _ 2). In some implementations, the information 202, 220 also includes descriptors of the systems 104 associated with or affected by the fault condition. In fig. 2A-2C, each checklist display 118 also includes a plurality of checklist entries associated with the fault isolation paths 204, 222, 230 or the fault isolation process. Each fault isolation path 204, 222, 230 lists an ordered sequence of tasks to be performed as a check list item. As described above, the sequence of tasks in the checklist display 118 is based on at least the fault code data 148, the fault scenario data 150, and the historical maintenance data 156.

In FIG. 2A, a first checklist display 118A includes one or more completed checklist items 206 associated with the checkmark in the first checklist display 118A. Each completed check list entry 206 is associated with a check list entry status 154 indicating completion of the check list entry. Additionally, some completed check list items 206 are associated with status data 152, which status data 152 indicates the status or configuration of the aircraft as a result of performing tasks associated with the completed check list items 206. For example, in FIG. 2A, the completed check list item 206 indicates that FIM task _1 was performed. In this example, FIM task _1 is a functional check that has passed, and status data 152 may therefore include a field or data element indicating that the functional check associated with FIM task _1 has passed. As another example, in FIG. 2A, a completed check list entry 206 indicates that a maintenance security check was performed. In some implementations, maintaining the safety check can include configuring a particular system 104 or control 108 to be in a safe state (e.g., shutting down the electrical system). In such an embodiment, performing the maintenance safety check may result in a particular configuration 106 of system 104 or a particular configuration 110 of controls 108, and configurations 106, 110 may be detected via signals or data communicated over aircraft data bus(s) 160. In such an embodiment, the signal or data is used to update the status data 152 so that in a subsequent checklist display (such as the second checklist display 118B), the maintenance security check may be automatically indicated as complete without user input.

In FIG. 2A, the first checklist display 118A also includes one or more incomplete checklist items 208 that are not associated with the checkmark in the first checklist display 118A. In FIGS. 2A-2C, a particular one of the incomplete check list items is highlighted at 210 or otherwise displayed in a visually different manner to indicate that the particular incomplete check list item describes the next task to be performed in the task sequence.

The difference between the checklist display 118A of FIG. 2A and the checklist display 118C of FIG. 2C illustrates the progression through a single FIM process over time. For example, in fig. 2A, the next task to be executed is FIM task _ 2. In fig. 2A, the checklist display 118A instructs FIM path _1 to branch according to the result of FIM task _ 2. For example, if FIM task _2 fails, then the checklist display 118A indicates that maintenance task _1 is to be performed. However, if FIM task _2 passes, the next task to be executed is FIM task _ 3. In fig. 2C, FIM task _2 is indicated as complete and failed, and the next task to be performed is maintenance task _ 1.

The difference between the checklist display 118A of FIG. 2A and the checklist display 118B of FIG. 2B illustrates a change in the order of tasks performed in response to a change in fault conditions over time (e.g., based on the accumulation of historical maintenance data 156 and the dynamically ordered tasks in the checklist display 118). In some embodiments, the fault code data _2 of fig. 2B is the same (i.e., identical) as the fault code data _1 of fig. 2A. In other embodiments, the fault code data _2 of fig. 2B is similar (based on comparison criteria) but not exactly the same as the fault code data _1 of fig. 2A. For example, fault code data _1 and fault code data _2 may both indicate a fault in the same system 104 of the aircraft 102. Likewise, in some embodiments, the context data _2 of fig. 2B is the same (i.e., exactly the same) as the context data _1 of fig. 2A, and in other embodiments, the context data _2 of fig. 2B is similar (based on comparison criteria) to, but not exactly the same as, the context data _1 of fig. 2A. For example, context data _1 and context data _2 may both include sensor readings that fall within a particular range indicated by the comparison criteria. Further, in some embodiments, state data _2 of fig. 2B is the same (i.e., exactly the same) as state data _1 of fig. 2A, and in other embodiments, state data _2 of fig. 2B is similar (based on comparative criteria) to state data _1 of fig. 2A, but not exactly the same. For example, in state data _1 and state data _2, a first subset of the systems 104 may have the same configuration 106, and the comparison criteria may indicate that sharing this configuration 106 indicates similarity for purposes of determining the checklist display 118. Thus, while there may be a difference between the generation of the first checklist display 118A and the second checklist display 118B in terms of fault code data 148, fault scenario data 150, status data 152, or any combination thereof, the two checklist displays 118A, 118B relate to fault conditions that the aircraft maintenance system 120 deems match each other.

Following the sequence of tasks indicated by fig. 2A and 2C, FIM task _4 is to be executed after FIM task _1, after FIM task _2, and only in the event FIM task _2 fails. However, in the task sequence indicated by fig. 2B, FIM task _4 is to be executed before FIM task _1, and FIM task _1 is executed only if FIM task _5 passes. This rearrangement of the sequence of tasks to be performed is based at least in part on historical maintenance data 156. For example, during a first maintenance operation (or a first set of maintenance operations), the following may be the case: the fault condition associated with the fault code data _1, the scenario data _1, and the status data _1 is frequently solved by performing the FIM task _4, and is rarely solved by performing the FIM task _ 1. In this case, dynamic fault isolation instructions 114 dynamically reorder the task sequence to schedule the execution of FIM task _4 before the execution of FIM task _ 1. One technical advantage of the dynamic fault isolation process of rearranging the sequence of tasks in this manner is that the availability of the aircraft 102 is increased because the dynamic reordering results in earlier execution of tasks that may resolve the fault condition.

FIG. 3 is a flow diagram of an example of a method 300 of dynamic fault isolation, according to certain embodiments. Method 300 may be performed by aircraft maintenance system 120 of FIG. 1 in response to receiving an indication that a fault condition has been detected. For example, processor(s) 122 may execute dynamic fault isolation instructions 144, update instructions 146, or both, to perform the various operations of method 300.

The method 300 includes, at 302, obtaining selection data. Examples of selection data include fault code data 148, fault scenario data 150, status data 152, and historical maintenance data 156. The selection data may be obtained from the memory device(s) 124, from the health monitoring system 114, from the sensors 112, from the data store 138, or a combination thereof.

The method 300 further includes, at 304, selecting a routine to execute based on the selection data. The routine includes a set of tasks to isolate or resolve a fault condition. Typically, the routine is selected based on fault code data as specified by the FIM130, and one routine may refer to or incorporate other routines. For example, a particular FIM routine may include a fault isolation task that requires the execution of a particular maintenance routine that includes multiple maintenance tasks. Thus, routines may be nested and may include branch paths.

In some implementations, selecting the routine includes selecting an order of execution of a set of tasks. In such an embodiment, the order or sequence of execution of the tasks is selected such that tasks that are more likely to result in a resolution of the fault condition are scheduled to execute before tasks that are less likely to resolve the fault condition. For example, historical maintenance data 156 may be evaluated to determine which task or tasks have resolved a similar fault condition. In such a scenario, if two fault conditions have the same or related fault codes, affect the same or related systems 104, and occur in similar scenarios (e.g., the fault scenario data 150 matches the fault scenario data associated with the previous instance within some specified similarity threshold or criteria), the fault condition occurring in the previous instance is deemed similar to the present fault condition.

The method 300 further includes, at 306, selecting a task from the routine and, at 308, determining whether the task needs to be performed. For example, a selected task (or each task) of the routine may be evaluated based on the state data 152 to determine whether the task is needed. In some cases, it may not be necessary to perform one or more tasks because the status data 152 indicates that the aircraft status to be achieved by performing the task already exists. To illustrate, if the task involves adjusting the configuration 110 of a particular control (e.g., turning a knob to a specified setting), the method 300 determines whether the task is required at 308 by determining whether the particular control 108 already has the target configuration 110 (e.g., has been turned to the specified setting).

If the task is not needed at 308, then at 306, the method 300 selects another task. If the task is needed, the method 300 determines if the task is complete. For example, a task may be listed in the checklist display 118, and the method 300 may determine that the task is complete when an input is received indicating that the task is complete. In some cases, the input is user input indicating completion of a task. In other cases, the input is a signal or data from the system 104 of the aircraft 102 indicating a change in the configuration 106 of the system 104 or the configuration 106 of the system 104. For example, if the task is to deploy flaps of the aircraft 102, the input may be a signal indicating that the flaps are deployed or a signal commanding deployment of the flaps. In other cases, the input is a signal or data from the controls 108 of the aircraft 102 indicating a configuration 110 of the controls 108 or a change in the configuration 110 of the controls 108. For example, if the task is a toggle switch, the input may be a signal generated in response to the toggle switch. In other cases, the input is a signal or data from the sensors 112 of the aircraft 102 indicative of a condition or change associated with performing a task. For example, if the task is to deploy flaps of the aircraft 102, the input may be a signal from a flap position sensor indicating that the flaps are deployed.

When the task is completed, method 300 includes updating the state at 312. For example, processor(s) 122 store new or updated state data 152 in response to determining that the task is complete. Additionally or alternatively, the processor(s) 122 update a check list item status 154 of a check list item associated with the task.

The method 300 also includes, at 314, determining whether the fault is cleared (e.g., determining whether the fault condition still exists). For example, processor(s) 122 may perform an automatic function check to determine whether the fault is clear. Alternatively, the user may initiate a functional check to determine if the fault is clear. Although fig. 3 illustrates determining whether the fault is cleared after each individual task is performed, in other embodiments, the method 300 may be arranged such that multiple tasks are performed between checks to determine whether the fault is cleared. For example, the functional check to determine whether the fault is clear may be performed automatically according to a schedule (e.g., periodically), in which case the determination of whether the fault is clear may be made at times after a single task is performed, and at other times after several tasks have been performed.

The method 300 includes saving the FIM update data at 316 if the fault clears. In some embodiments, the FIM update data updates or modifies the FIM 130. For example, the FIM update data may cause the order of tasks listed in FIM130 to change. In other embodiments, the FIM update data updates or modifies the historical maintenance data 156 to indicate which task or tasks were performed to clear the fault. In such an embodiment, the updated or modified historical maintenance data 156 is used to dynamically change the order of tasks in the FIM130 when the method 300 is performed at some future time, such as when another aircraft experiences a similar fault condition.

In some embodiments, the method 300 further includes performing a scheduling check at 318 if the fault is not cleared. The schedule check determines whether the fault prevents scheduling of the aircraft 102. For example, if a fault isolation task or fault code data 148 that has been performed narrows down the fault to a particular system 104 and the particular system 104 is listed in MEL 158, dispatch check 318 indicates that aircraft 102 may return to service and maintenance to clear the fault, which may be delayed until a more convenient time. If the particular system 104 is not listed in MEL 158 or the subscriber determines not to delay maintenance, method 300 continues by performing another iteration. In the example shown in fig. 3, the next iteration begins at 302 by obtaining selection data; however, in other embodiments, the next iteration begins at 304 by selecting a routine based on previously obtained selection data, or at 306 by selecting another task from a previously selected routine.

In other embodiments, the various operations shown in FIG. 3 may be performed in a different order. For example, in some embodiments, a scheduling check is performed before a routine is selected, before a task is selected, or before a task is determined to be completed.

FIG. 4 is a flow diagram of another example of a method 400 of dynamic fault isolation, according to a particular embodiment. Method 400 may be performed by the aircraft maintenance system of FIG. 1. For example, processor(s) 122 may execute dynamic fault isolation instructions 144, update instructions 146, or both, to perform various operations of method 400.

The method 400 includes, at 402, receiving fault code data via one or more aircraft data buses, wherein the fault code data identifies one or more fault conditions detected on-board the aircraft. For example, aircraft maintenance system 120 receives fault code data 148 from health monitoring system 114.

The method 400 further includes, at 404, receiving fault scenario data via the one or more aircraft data buses, wherein the fault scenario data indicates one or more conditions of the aircraft in a time frame associated with the one or more fault conditions. For example, aircraft maintenance system 120 receives fault scenario data 150 from system 104, controls 108, sensors 112, health monitoring system 114, or a combination thereof.

The method 400 further includes generating, by the one or more processors, a first checklist display including a first set of outstanding checklist items, where the first checklist display is generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the status data indicating a current status of the aircraft, and the historical maintenance data, at 406. For example, the aircraft maintenance system 120 selects a FIM routine to execute based on the fault code data 148 and determines the order in which the tasks of the FIM routine should be executed in order to most conveniently address the fault condition. In this example, the tasks are ordered in a sequence from most likely to resolve the fault condition (based on historical maintenance data and the degree to which the fault scenario data matches previous fault scenario data) to least likely to resolve the fault condition. In some embodiments, other factors may also be considered to determine the order of tasks, such as time or available components associated with each task. To illustrate, a task that can be performed very quickly but is unlikely to resolve a fault may be scheduled before a task that is more likely to resolve the fault but requires more time to perform. As another illustrative example, a task that is less likely to resolve the failure but does not require any components or supplies may be scheduled before a task that is more likely to resolve the failure but requires expensive components or supplies or components or supplies that are difficult to obtain (e.g., long lead times).

After determining the order of the tasks, a first checklist display is generated and the tasks are arranged in the order based on the determined order. The first checklist display is presented to the user via display device(s) 116 to guide for performing various tasks. Initially, a first checklist displays a list including incomplete checklist items, where each incomplete checklist item corresponds to a task that has not yet been performed. In some cases, the first checklist display may also initially list one or more completed checklist items. For example, if a particular check list entry instructs the user to change configuration 110 of control 108 to a target configuration, and aircraft maintenance system 120 is able to automatically (e.g., via a signal on aircraft data bus(s) 160) determine that control 108 is in the target configuration, then a first check list display may display the particular check list entry with an indication that the particular check list entry is complete.

The method 400 includes, at 408, receiving, by one or more processors, an input indicating a completion of one or more check list items in a first set of incomplete check list items. For example, aircraft maintenance system 120 may receive user input or receive a signal or data from the aircraft data bus(s) indicating that the check list entry is complete.

The method 400 includes, at 410, updating, by one or more processors, the state data based on the input. For example, aircraft maintenance system 120 updates status data 152 based on the inputs. Additionally or alternatively, the one or more processors update the check list entry status 154, the historical maintenance data 156, or both based on the input.

The method 400 includes, at 412, generating, by the one or more processors, a second checklist display including a second set of outstanding checklist items. For example, aircraft maintenance system 120 generates a subsequent checklist display, such as one of checklist displays 118B or 118C. In this example, a subsequent exam list display may be generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the updated status data, and the historical maintenance data, and the second set of incomplete exam list items may be different from the first set of incomplete exam list items.

FIG. 5 is a flow chart illustrating a life cycle of an aircraft including aircraft maintenance system 120 of FIG. 5. During pre-production, exemplary lifecycle 500 includes specifications and designs of an aircraft (such as aircraft 102 described with reference to FIG. 1) at block 502. During the specification and design of an aircraft, lifecycle 500 may include the specification and design of aircraft maintenance system 120. At block 504, lifecycle 500 includes material procurement, which may include procurement of material for aircraft maintenance system 120.

During production, lifecycle 500 includes component and subassembly manufacturing at block 506 and system integration of an aircraft at block 508. For example, lifecycle 500 may include the assembly and subassembly manufacturing of aircraft maintenance system 120 and system integration of aircraft maintenance system 120. At block 510, lifecycle 500 includes certification and delivery of the aircraft, and at block 512, lifecycle 500 includes placing the aircraft into service. Certification and delivery may include certification of the aircraft maintenance system 120 to put the aircraft maintenance system 120 into service. When in service by a customer, the aircraft may be scheduled for routine maintenance and service (which may also include modification, reconfiguration, refurbishment, and so on). At block 514, lifecycle 500 includes performing maintenance and service on the aircraft, which may include performing maintenance and service on aircraft maintenance system 120.

Each of the processes of lifecycle 500 may be performed or carried out by a system integrator, a third party, and/or an operator (e.g., a customer). For purposes of this description, a system integrator may include, but is not limited to, any number of aircraft manufacturers and major system subcontractors; the third party may include, but is not limited to, any number of sellers, subcontractors, and suppliers; and the operator may be an airline, leasing company, military entity, service organization, and so on.

Aspects of the present disclosure may be described in the context of an example of a vehicle. A particular example of a vehicle is an aircraft 102 as shown in fig. 1. In the example of fig. 6, aircraft 102 includes a fuselage 602 having an interior 604 and system 104. In the example shown in FIG. 6, system 104 includes a propulsion system 606, an electrical system 608, an environmental system 610, a hydraulic system 612, and an aircraft maintenance system 120. Any number of other systems may be included.

FIG. 7 is a block diagram of a computing environment 700 including a computing device 710, the computing device 710 configured to support aspects of a computer-implemented method and computer-executable program instructions (or code) in accordance with the subject disclosure. For example, the computing device 710, or portions thereof, is configured to execute instructions to initiate, perform, or control one or more operations described with reference to fig. 1-4. The example of FIG. 7 illustrates an embodiment in which the aircraft maintenance system 120 is not integrated on the aircraft 102. For example, the aircraft maintenance system 120 may be temporarily embodied in a computing device (e.g., a notebook computer or tablet computer) coupled with the aircraft 102, such as to perform maintenance or fault isolation tasks.

Computing device 710 includes one or more processors 122. Processor(s) 122 are configured to communicate with system memory 730, one or more storage devices 740, one or more input/output interfaces 750, one or more communication interfaces 128, or any combination thereof. The system memory 730 includes volatile memory devices (e.g., Random Access Memory (RAM) devices), non-volatile memory devices (e.g., Read Only Memory (ROM) devices, programmable read only memory (prom), and flash memory), or both. The system memory 730 stores an operating system 732, which may include a basic input/output system for booting (booting) the computing device 710 and a full operating system that enables the computing device 710 to interact with users, other programs, and other devices. The system memory 730 stores program data 736 such as fault code data 148, fault scenario data 150, status data 152, historical maintenance data 156, check list status 154, or a combination thereof.

The system memory 730 includes one or more application programs 734 (e.g., a set of instructions) that are executable by the processor(s) 122. By way of example, the one or more application programs 734 include instructions that are executable by the processor(s) 122 to initiate, control, or perform one or more operations described with reference to fig. 1-4. To illustrate, the one or more application processors 122 include dynamic fault isolation instructions 144 and update instructions 146.

One or more storage devices 740 include non-volatile devices such as magnetic disks, optical disks, or flash memory devices. In a particular example, storage device(s) 740 include a removable memory device and a non-removable memory device. Storage device(s) 740 are configured to store an operating system, images of an operating system, application programs (e.g., one or more of application programs 734), and program data (e.g., program data 736). In some examples, system memory 730, storage device(s) 740, or both, include tangible computer-readable media. In some examples, one or more of storage device(s) 740 are external to computing device 710.

The one or more input/output interfaces 750 enable the computing device 710 to communicate with one or more input/output devices 770 to facilitate user interaction. For example, input/output interface(s) 750 may include a checklist display, a display interface, an input interface, or both. For example, input/output interface(s) 750 are adapted to receive input from a user, input from another computing device, or a combination thereof. In some embodiments, input/output interface(s) 750 conform to one or more standard interface protocols, including a serial interface (e.g., a Universal Serial Bus (USB) interface or an electrical and electronic engineers (IEEE) interface standard), a parallel interface, a display adapter, an audio adapter, or a custom interface ("IEEE" is a registered trademark of the institute of electrical and electronics engineers, Piscataway, New Jersey). In some implementations, the input/output interface(s) 704 includes one or more user interface devices and a display including some combination of buttons, a keyboard, a pointing device, a display, a speaker, a microphone, a touch screen, and other devices.

The processor(s) 122 are configured to communicate with the device(s) or controller(s) 780 via one or more communication interfaces 128. For example, the one or more communication interfaces 128 may include a network interface. The device(s) or controller(s) 780 may include, for example, the data repository 138.

In some embodiments, a non-transitory computer-readable medium stores instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to initiate, perform, or control operations to perform some or all of the functions described above. For example, the instructions may be executable to implement one or more of the operations or methods of fig. 1-4. In some implementations, some or all of one or more of the operations or methods of fig. 1-4 may be implemented by one or more processors (e.g., one or more Central Processing Units (CPUs), one or more Graphics Processing Units (GPUs), one or more Digital Signal Processors (DSPs)) executing instructions, by special purpose hardware circuits, or by any combination thereof.

Various examples of the disclosure are described below in a set of related clauses:

according to clause 1, an aircraft maintenance system includes one or more data bus interfaces to receive fault code data and fault scenario data via one or more aircraft data buses. The fault code data identifies one or more fault conditions detected on the aircraft, and the fault scenario data indicates one or more conditions of the aircraft in a time frame associated with the one or more fault conditions. The aircraft maintenance system also includes one or more processors coupled to the one or more data bus interfaces and one or more memory devices accessible by the one or more processors. The one or more memory devices store instructions that are executable by the one or more processors to cause the one or more processors to generate a first checklist display comprising a first set of outstanding checklist items. A first checklist display is generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the status data indicating the current status of the aircraft, and the historical maintenance data. The one or more memory devices store instructions executable by the one or more processors to receive input indicating completion of one or more check list entries of the first set of outstanding check list entries, and update the status data based on the input. The one or more memory devices store instructions that are executable by the one or more processors to generate a second checklist display including a second set of outstanding checklist items. A second checklist display is generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the updated status data, and the historical maintenance data. The second set of outstanding check list items is different from the first set of outstanding check list items.

According to clause 2, the aircraft maintenance system of clause 1 further comprises a display device on the aircraft, wherein the display device is configured to display the first checklist display and the second checklist display.

According to clause 3, in the aircraft maintenance system according to clause 1 or clause 2, the one or more memory devices store at least a portion of the historical maintenance data.

According to clause 4, the aircraft maintenance system of any of clauses 1-3 further comprises a communication interface configured to access at least a portion of the historical maintenance data from a data store external to the aircraft.

According to clause 5, in the aircraft maintenance system according to any of clauses 1-4, the fault code data is associated with a plurality of fault isolation paths, wherein each fault isolation path of the plurality of fault isolation paths specifies a sequence of tasks to isolate a cause of a particular fault condition of the one or more fault conditions.

According to clause 6, in the aircraft maintenance system according to any one of clauses 1-5, the fault scenario data includes sensor data indicative of an operating environment associated with the aircraft during the timeframe, configuration data indicative of a state of the aircraft during the timeframe, or both.

According to clause 7, in the aircraft maintenance system according to any of clauses 1-6, the historical maintenance data identifies previous maintenance activities associated with the aircraft, previous maintenance activities associated with one or more other aircraft, or previous maintenance activities associated with both, and the previous maintenance activities indicate a plurality of historical fault conditions, historical fault scenario data associated with each of the historical fault conditions, a respective ordered sequence of tasks performed to address each of the historical fault conditions.

According to clause 8, in the aircraft maintenance system according to any one of clauses 1-7, the status data indicates one or more configuration statuses of the aircraft.

According to clause 9, in the aircraft maintenance system according to any of clauses 1-8, the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the one or more processors to update the historical maintenance data based on the input.

According to clause 10, in the aircraft maintenance system according to any one of clauses 1-9, the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the one or more processors to: after updating the historical maintenance data, second fault code data and second fault scenario data are obtained via the one or more data bus interfaces, and in response to the second fault code data matching the fault code data and the second fault scenario data matching the fault scenario data, a third check list display is generated that includes a third set of incomplete check list entries, wherein the third set of incomplete check list entries is different from the first set of incomplete check list entries and different from the second set of incomplete check list entries.

According to clause 11, in the aircraft maintenance system according to any one of clauses 1-10, the input comprises one or more data bus signals detected by the one or more data bus interfaces, wherein the one or more data bus signals indicate a configuration state of the aircraft or a change in the configuration state of the aircraft.

According to clause 12, in the aircraft maintenance system according to clause 11, the one or more data bus signals are generated in response to a user changing the configuration of the aircraft.

Configuration clause 13, in the aircraft maintenance system according to clause 11, the input comprises user input received in response to the first checklist display.

According to clause 14, in the aircraft maintenance system according to any of clauses 1-13, generating the second check list display includes automatically indicating one or more check list items in the first set of incomplete check list items as complete.

According to clause 15, in the aircraft maintenance system according to clause 14, the second set of incomplete check list items includes each check list item of the first set of incomplete check list items except for one or more check list items indicated as complete.

According to clause 16, in the aircraft maintenance system according to clause 14, the second set of incomplete check list items includes one or more check list items not present in the first set of incomplete check list items.

According to clause 17, in the aircraft maintenance system according to any one of clauses 1-16, the time frame associated with the one or more fault conditions corresponds to a time period prior to or concurrent with the detection of the one or more fault conditions.

According to clause 18, in the aircraft maintenance system according to any of clauses 1-17, the first set of incomplete check list items corresponds to an ordered sequence comprising fault isolation tasks originating from a fault isolation manual associated with the aircraft, an ordered sequence of maintenance tasks originating from a maintenance manual associated with the aircraft, or an ordered sequence comprising both fault isolation tasks and maintenance tasks.

According to clause 19, in the aircraft maintenance system according to clause 18, the sequence of the first set of incomplete check list entries is determined based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the status data, and the historical maintenance data.

According to clause 20, in the aircraft maintenance system according to clause 18, a check list item of the first set of incomplete check list items is associated with the task, and wherein the first check list display further includes an estimate of a likelihood that performance of the task will address the one or more fault conditions.

According to clause 21, in the aircraft maintenance system according to clause 18, each of the plurality of check list items in the first set of incomplete check list items is associated with a corresponding task, and wherein the first set of incomplete check list items is ordered in a first check list display based on an estimate of a likelihood that execution of each task in the corresponding task will address the one or more fault conditions.

According to clause 22, a method includes receiving fault code data via one or more aircraft data buses, wherein the fault code data identifies one or more fault conditions detected on-board the aircraft. The method also includes receiving fault scenario data via the one or more aircraft data buses, wherein the fault scenario data indicates one or more conditions of the aircraft in a time frame associated with the one or more fault conditions. The method further includes generating, by the one or more processors, a first checklist display including a first set of outstanding checklist items, where the first checklist display is generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the status data indicating a current status of the aircraft, and the historical maintenance data. The method also includes receiving, by the one or more processors, an input indicating completion of one or more check list items in the first set of incomplete check list items and updating, by the one or more processors, the status data based on the input. The method further includes generating, by the one or more processors, a second checklist display including a second set of incomplete checklist items, wherein the second checklist display is generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the updated status data, and the historical maintenance data, and wherein the second set of incomplete checklist items is different from the first set of incomplete checklist items.

According to clause 23, the method according to clause 24 further comprises displaying the first checklist display and the second checklist display at a display device on the aircraft.

According to clause 24, the one or more memory devices according to clause 23 or clause 24 store at least a portion of the historical maintenance data.

According to clause 25, the method of any of clauses 22-24 further comprises accessing at least a portion of the historical maintenance data from a data store outside the aircraft.

According to clause 26, in the method according to any of clauses 22-25, the fault code data is associated with a plurality of fault isolation paths, wherein each fault isolation path of the plurality of fault isolation paths specifies a sequence of tasks to isolate a cause of a particular fault condition of the one or more fault conditions.

According to clause 27, in the method according to any one of clauses 22-26, the fault scenario data includes sensor data indicative of an operating environment associated with the aircraft during the timeframe, configuration data indicative of a state of the aircraft during the timeframe, or both.

According to clause 28, in the method according to any of clauses 22-27, the historical maintenance data identifies previous maintenance activities associated with the aircraft, previous maintenance activities associated with the one or more other aircraft, or previous maintenance activities associated with both, and the previous maintenance activities indicate a plurality of historical fault conditions, historical fault scenario data associated with each of the historical fault conditions, a respective ordered sequence of tasks performed to address each of the historical fault conditions.

According to clause 29, in the method according to any one of clauses 22-28, the status data indicates one or more configuration states of the aircraft.

According to clause 30, in the method of any one of clauses 22-29, the method further comprises updating the historical maintenance data based on the input.

According to clause 31, in the method according to clause 30, the method further comprises: after updating the historical maintenance data, obtain second fault code data and second fault scenario data via the one or more data bus interfaces, and in response to the second fault code data matching the fault code data and the second fault scenario data matching the fault scenario data, generate a third check list display including a third set of incomplete check list entries, wherein the third set of incomplete check list entries is different from the first set of incomplete check list entries and different from the second set of incomplete check list entries.

According to clause 32, in the method according to any one of clauses 22-31, the input includes one or more data bus signals detected by the one or more data bus interfaces, wherein the one or more data bus signals indicate a configuration state of the aircraft or a change in the configuration state of the aircraft.

According to clause 33, in the method according to clause 32, one or more data bus signals are generated in response to a user changing the configuration of the aircraft.

According to clause 34, in the method according to clause 32, the input comprises user input received in response to the first checklist display.

According to clause 35, in the method according to any of clauses 22-34, generating the second check list display includes automatically indicating one or more check list items in the first set of incomplete check list items as complete.

According to clause 36, in the method according to clause 35, the second set of incomplete check list items includes each of the first set of incomplete check list items except for one or more check list items indicated as complete.

According to clause 37, in the method according to clause 35, the second set of incomplete check list items includes one or more check list items not present in the first set of incomplete check list items.

According to clause 38, in the method according to any one of clauses 22-27, the time frame associated with the one or more fault conditions corresponds to a time period prior to or concurrent with the detection of the one or more fault conditions.

According to clause 38, in the method according to any of clauses 22-38, the first set of incomplete inspection list items corresponds to an ordered sequence comprising fault isolation tasks originating from a fault isolation manual associated with the aircraft, an ordered sequence of maintenance tasks originating from a maintenance manual associated with the aircraft, or an ordered sequence comprising both fault isolation tasks and maintenance tasks.

According to clause 39, in the method according to clause 38, the sequence of the first set of incomplete check list entries is determined based on fault code data, fault scenario data, status data, and historical maintenance data.

According to clause 40, in the method according to clause 38, a check list item of the first set of incomplete check list items is associated with the task, and wherein the first check list display further includes an estimate of a likelihood that execution of the task will address the one or more fault conditions.

According to clause 41, in the method according to clause 38, each of a plurality of check list items in the first set of incomplete check list items is associated with a corresponding task, and wherein the first set of incomplete check list items is ordered in a first check list display based on an estimate of a likelihood that execution of each task in the corresponding task will address one or more fault conditions.

According to clause 42, a computer-readable storage device storing instructions executable by one or more processors to cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising receiving fault code data identifying one or more fault conditions detected on an aircraft. The operations further include receiving fault scenario data indicative of one or more conditions of the aircraft in a timeframe associated with the one or more fault conditions. The operations further include generating a first checklist display including a first set of outstanding checklist items, where the first checklist display is generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the status data indicating a current status of the aircraft, and the historical maintenance data. The operations also include receiving input indicating completion of one or more of the first set of incomplete check list items and updating the status data based on the input. The operations further include generating a second checklist display including a second set of incomplete checklist items, where the second checklist display is generated based on the fault code data, the fault scenario data, the updated status data, and the historical maintenance data, and where the second set of incomplete checklist items is different from the first set of incomplete checklist items.

The illustrations of the examples described herein are intended to provide a general understanding of the structure of various embodiments. The illustrations are not intended to serve as a complete description of the elements and features of apparatus and systems that utilize the structures or methods described herein. Many other embodiments may be apparent to those of skill in the art upon reviewing the present disclosure. Other embodiments may be utilized and derived from the disclosure, such that structural and logical substitutions and changes may be made without departing from the scope of the disclosure. For example, the method operations may be performed in an order different than that shown in the figures, or one or more of the method operations may be omitted. The present disclosure and figures are, therefore, to be regarded as illustrative rather than restrictive.

Moreover, although specific examples have been illustrated and described herein, it should be appreciated that any subsequent arrangement designed to achieve the same or similar results may be substituted for the specific embodiments shown. This disclosure is intended to cover any and all subsequent adaptations or variations of various embodiments. Combinations of the above embodiments, and other embodiments not specifically described herein, will be apparent to those of skill in the art upon reviewing the description.

The Abstract of the disclosure is submitted with the understanding that it will not be used to interpret or limit the scope or meaning of the claims. In addition, in the foregoing detailed description, various features may be grouped together or described in a single embodiment for the purpose of streamlining the disclosure. The above described examples illustrate but do not limit the disclosure. It should also be understood that numerous modifications and variations are possible in light of the principles of this disclosure. As the following claims reflect, the claimed subject matter may be directed to less than all of the features of any of the disclosed examples. Accordingly, the scope of the disclosure is defined by the appended claims and equivalents thereof.