DE102016209779A1 - Method and device for planning diagnoses - Google Patents

Abstract

Method for planning at least two diagnoses of at least one component of a motor vehicle during a driving operation. In this case, the motor vehicle at least temporarily an automated driving operation in which the motor vehicle is at least partially controlled automatically without the action of an occupant of the motor vehicle to a predetermined destination by means of a route. The diagnostics take place during automated driving. The essence of the invention is that the planning of the at least two diagnoses is dependent on predetermined criteria.

Description

State of the art

The present invention relates to a method and a device for planning at least two diagnoses of at least one component of a motor vehicle during a driving operation according to the preamble of the independently formulated claims.

From the WO 2014/001054 A1 is the planning of a vehicle diagnosis known. It is the performance of a vehicle, which runs on a given route, estimated. The probability is determined that the estimated performance is suitable for vehicle diagnosis. Based on this probability, the vehicle diagnosis is planned.

Disclosure of the invention

The present invention is based on a method and a device for planning at least two diagnoses of at least one component of a motor vehicle during a driving operation.

According to the invention, the motor vehicle at least temporarily an automated driving operation by the motor vehicle is at least partially automatically controlled without the action of an occupant of the motor vehicle to a predetermined destination by means of a route. The diagnostics take place during automated driving. The essence of the invention is that the planning of the at least two diagnoses is dependent on predetermined criteria.

The advantage of the invention is that due to the independence of the driver influence during automated driving operation, the diagnoses can be largely scheduled at appropriate times and at suitable sections along the route. As a result, it is possible according to the invention to allow optimum performance of several diagnoses during the automated driving operation. As a result, for example, diagnoses can be performed more frequently, which can lead to an improvement in the operational safety of the motor vehicle. Diagnoses can be carried out in a timely and reliable manner. The probability that a motor vehicle must be shut down due to a lack of diagnosis can be significantly reduced.

The background to these advantages is that the performance of diagnostics in non-automated driving depends significantly on the driver's influence. Since the driver influence is difficult to predict, this leads to a frequent cancellation of diagnoses. With the help of the method according to the invention such a termination can be avoided.

A driving route in the sense of the invention is here understood as the driving route along which a motor vehicle moves or will move. This route is set for motor vehicles, which at least temporarily have an automated driving operation, before the start of the journey. The route has a defined starting point, from which the motor vehicle moves to a likewise predefined destination. The route can still be divided into individual sections. Each of these sections has in turn a start and an end point. The spatial positioning of a motor vehicle can be detected by means of common technical facilities. For example, a GPS transmitter (eg a navigation system) may be located in the vehicle. This makes it possible to determine the exact position of a motor vehicle.

In an advantageous embodiment of the invention, it is provided that the planning takes place in such a way that a planning sequence of the at least two diagnoses is determined as a function of predetermined criteria. The advantage is that it is taken into account that the at least two diagnoses have different priorities. This ensures that the highest priority diagnosis is always scheduled first. All further diagnoses are then planned on the basis of the planning sequence determined as a function of the priorities.

In a preferred embodiment of the invention, the predetermined criteria for determining the planning order are composed of a fixed and a variable portion. For each of the at least two diagnoses there may be such a fixed and a variable portion. The advantage of this embodiment is that the planning order can be optimized. The priorities that the diagnoses have based on their specified proportions are taken into account. However, it is also considered that the priorities of the at least two diagnoses may change due to their variable proportions.

In a further preferred embodiment of the invention, the fixed proportion for each of the at least two diagnoses is dependent on the respective diagnosis itself. Furthermore, the variable portion for each of the at least two diagnoses is dependent on the last execution of the respective diagnosis and / or conditions for execution the respective diagnosis. The advantage of this embodiment is that the Planning sequence and thus the planning of at least two diagnoses can be optimized even better.

The specified proportion of the predefined criteria for determining the planning order here means the conditions that each individual diagnosis requires in order to be able to run. These conditions include, for. As the starting conditions, the operating conditions, the duration of diagnosis, the termination conditions and / or the importance of a diagnosis. The starting conditions of a respective diagnosis are the conditions under which this diagnosis starts. The operating conditions of a particular diagnosis are the conditions under which the diagnosis can take place. So most diagnoses need special conditions to be able to walk. This can z. B. higher load points over a period of time or deceleration phases or even dynamics in a limited area. If possible, optimum operating conditions should be chosen for which the particular diagnosis can be most efficient. So it may be z. For example, it may be that the operating conditions of a diagnosis would allow some performance variation. However, the diagnosis is most efficient if the power is constant. It is always trying to schedule diagnoses so that they can run under their optimal operating conditions. The diagnostic time is the time it takes to complete the diagnosis. Termination conditions are reasons why a diagnosis should be terminated prematurely. The importance of a diagnosis is understood to mean its significance for the operability of the vehicle in comparison to the other diagnoses. Thus, for example, diagnoses of safety-relevant functions that need to be checked regularly have greater importance than diagnoses of comfort functions such as seat heaters.

The changeable portion of the predetermined criteria for determining the planning sequence takes into account that diagnoses that have not been run for a long time should be scheduled with a higher priority. Furthermore, an evaluation of the diagnostic conditions of the at least two diagnoses is included in the determination of the planning sequence. For example, diagnoses whose conditions are more difficult to fulfill can be considered with a higher priority in determining the planning order. Diagnoses whose diagnostic conditions are easier to fulfill are taken into account with a lower priority.

In a further embodiment of the invention, the planning takes place in such a way that suitable route sections along the route for carrying out the at least two diagnoses are determined as a function of predetermined criteria. The advantage of this embodiment is that along the route as many as possible, preferably all of the at least two diagnoses can be planned and performed.

In a preferred embodiment of the invention, the predetermined criteria for determining suitable route sections for each of the at least two diagnoses are dependent on the conditions for carrying out the respective diagnosis. The advantage of this refinement is that the diagnoses are scheduled at sections along the route at which their diagnostic conditions are best met. Ideally, each diagnosis is scheduled on such a stretch of track where its optimal diagnostic conditions can be realized.

In a further preferred embodiment of the invention, the predetermined criteria for the determination of suitable road sections are dependent on a to be changed on the route driving. During the planning of the at least two diagnoses, it is checked whether and, if so, at which road sections the automated driving operation can be adapted such that the diagnostic conditions of the at least two diagnoses can be met. For example, it is possible to check whether it is possible to drive faster or slower in a targeted manner, to set constant powers or constant speeds, or to bring about ramp-shaped state transitions. Furthermore, it can be checked whether z. B. shear phases can be maintained, certain gears can be selected or specific temperatures for certain systems can be approached. It may be that the planning and execution of a diagnosis along a route is made possible only by the fact that the driving operation can be changed. Or it results in this way for a diagnosis of further sections, where this diagnosis can be performed. Under certain circumstances, it may be useful to carry out the diagnosis on this section of the route. This refinement of the invention offers, inter alia, the advantage that diagnoses that take place under conditions which are seldom or not fulfilled in non-automated driving operation are carried out in a timely and reliable manner.

As an example of a rarely or not feasible in non-automated driving diagnosis here is the adjustment of sensors in the thrust called. For example, sensors such as mass air flow sensors, lambda and NOx sensors are typically calibrated in overrun mode either with other sensors or as a zero point value. In non-automated driving, available overrun phases are very sensitive to the driver. in the By contrast, automated driving operation can be achieved by deliberately generating overrun phases of the required length. For this purpose, it is possible to approach a speed which is faster than the normal target speed in order to initiate the coasting phase. For the final speed at which the overrun phase ends, a lower speed than the normal target speed can then be selected. In this case, the duration of the thrust and the necessary start and end speeds can be planned in advance according to the diagnostic time required for the respective diagnosis.

In a further embodiment of the invention, the predetermined criteria for planning are dependent on a previously planned or performed diagnosis. This refinement has the advantage that the planned diagnoses can be carried out later with the highest possible probability. So it may be z. For example, two diagnostics can not run in parallel. Along a route section, it is only possible in this case to ensure the diagnostic conditions of one of the at least two diagnoses. The embodiment prevents the double or multiple occupancy with two or more diagnoses that do not run in parallel along a route section.

In a further embodiment of the invention, the possibilities for the driving operation to be changed on the route in the course of driving the route are changed. This refinement has the advantage that, for example, a diagnosis which is rarely or not at all practicable in non-automated driving operation can be spontaneously planned and carried out. For example, it may be that, prior to driving on the route, the possibilities of the driving operation to be changed have been determined on the basis of assumptions with regard to conditions which may influence the driving operation. Such circumstances may be, for example, the road condition, the road profile along the route, traffic situations, speed limits or the like. Now imagine these assumptions in the course of driving the route as different than assumed, resulting in changed possibilities of driving to be changed on the route. This may result in additional possibilities for scheduling and carrying out diagnoses.

According to the invention, a device for planning at least two diagnoses of at least one component of a motor vehicle during a driving operation is also claimed. The motor vehicle has at least temporarily an automated driving operation, in which the motor vehicle is at least partially controlled automatically without the action of an occupant of the motor vehicle to a predetermined destination by means of a route. The diagnostics take place during automated driving. Means are provided by means of which a planning of the at least two diagnoses occurs depending on predefined criteria.

In one embodiment of the device, the planning is done such that a planning sequence of the at least two diagnoses is determined as a function of predetermined criteria. Preferably, the predetermined criteria are composed of a fixed and a variable portion. In this case, the predetermined proportion for each of the at least two diagnoses is particularly preferably dependent on the respective diagnosis itself. Furthermore, the variable component for each of the at least two diagnoses is particularly dependent on the last execution of the respective diagnosis and / or on conditions for carrying out the respective diagnosis Diagnosis. In this case, the planning takes place in such a way that suitable route sections along the route for carrying out the at least two diagnoses are determined as a function of predetermined criteria.

drawings

Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be explained in more detail with reference to the accompanying drawings. Showing:

1 Communication of the components and devices involved in planning and execution;

2 Procedure of the procedure for the planning and execution of the diagnoses;

3 Determining the planning order based on different priorities of the diagnoses;

4 Example of a dependency matrix of different diagnoses;

5 The process of planning;

6 Example of the scheduling of different diagnoses on specific sections.

1 shows by way of example how the components and devices involved in the planning and implementation communicate with each other. Has a component 101 a need for diagnosis, it reports this to another component 102 in the motor vehicle. This further component is hereafter referred to as coordinator 102 designated. This coordinator 102 is able to do all the diagnoses reported to him 301 (please refer 3 ) with their respective running priority and their specific conditions of discharge and their To coordinate planning. The coordinator 102 in turn communicates with the devices for adjusting the driving operation 103 , The latter give feedback to the coordinator 102 which diagnoses 301 at which sections are feasible. The coordinator 102 continues to communicate with the devices for performing the diagnosis 104 , He may, for example, give instructions to them to carry out the diagnosis or he receives from the devices 104 Feedback on started or completed diagnoses.

In 2 is the process of planning and performing the at least two diagnoses 301 shown in more detail. The procedure starts in step 201 , In step 202 one or more diagnoses are reported 301 with several conditions at the coordinator 102 at. The applications can be made before each start of driving a route x or in the course of driving the route. Furthermore, older, not yet performed diagnoses 301 who are still in the memory of the coordinator 102 considered. At the registration of diagnoses 301 their expiration conditions can be communicated with. Alternatively, the expiration conditions of the diagnoses 301 in the coordinator 102 deposited. This is the case, for example, if the diagnoses 301 ever before from the coordinator 102 were planned.

The transmitted sequence conditions AB include the start and termination conditions, the diagnostic duration of each diagnosis and their specific operating conditions or diagnostic conditions. Thus, for example, it may be necessary for the performance of a diagnosis that the motor vehicle moves over a period of more than 20 seconds at a speed between 60 and 80 km / h, that the motor vehicle has an idling of more than 20 seconds, or that, for example, over There is a thrust for 30 seconds with the engine temperature above 75 ° C and below 90 ° C. If the diagnostic conditions lie within a wide range of fluctuation for a diagnosis, the coordinator can continue to be informed as to which diagnostic conditions are most optimal. For example, it may be that a certain power range would be permissible to perform a diagnosis, but the most optimal diagnosis would be at a constant power. Conditions that would be rather unfavorable for the performance of a diagnosis, but in which the diagnosis would nevertheless be possible, can be sent to the coordinator 102 also be transmitted.

In step 202 of the 2 become the coordinator 102 continue to communicate the different priorities of each diagnosis. These priorities of each diagnosis are composed of three distinct parts (see 3 ): The first part is the static priority 302 , The static priority is the importance of the diagnosis, e.g. B. for a particular issue. It is therefore static. These can be, for example, diagnoses of safety-relevant functions that have to be checked regularly. Such diagnoses accordingly have a higher static priority 302 as diagnoses of comfort functions such as seat heaters.

The second part of a priority of a diagnosis 301 is the part that results from the situation. This part becomes the first dynamic priority 303 called. This part of the priority depends on how often a diagnosis is or has to be performed and / or how long ago the time of the last diagnosis was performed.

The third part of the priority of a diagnosis 301 takes into account how high the probability that the diagnostic conditions when driving the route x in the vehicle can be realized or can be brought about by adjusting a driving operation. Diagnoses whose conditions are more exotic tend to have a high value for this second dynamic priority 304 ,

In step 202 of the 2 can the coordinator 102 also dependency matrices 401 be transmitted. Alternatively, these are dependency matrices 401 stored in the coordinator. In the dependency matrices are the dependencies 402 of diagnoses 301 deposited from each other. An example of such a dependency matrix 401 shows 4 , It's the diagnoses 301 1 to j deposited. In the example of 4 these are diagnoses 1, 2, 5 and j. It is stored in the matrix whether the diagnoses can run parallel to each other, ie the dependencies 402 the diagnoses of each other. In this case, the value 1 means that the diagnostics can run in parallel. The value 0 means that the diagnostics can not run parallel to each other. The diagnosis 1 in 4 For example, it can not run in parallel with any of the other diagnostics. On the other hand, diagnosis 2 runs in parallel with diagnosis 5, but not with diagnosis 1 and diagnosis j.

step 203 of the 2 puts the planning of the coordinator 102 notified diagnoses 301 This step will be explained later on the basis of 5 explained in more detail.

In the query step 204 It is checked whether feasible diagnoses exist. If this is not the case, the procedure for planning and execution ends in the step 205 , However, if there are feasible diagnoses, the coordinator communicates 102 with the devices for carrying out the diagnoses 104 ,

The diagnoses are made in step 206 from the devices for making the diagnoses 104 carried out. In step 207 report the devices to carry out the diagnoses 104 the status of the execution of the diagnoses to the coordinator 102 , The query step follows 208 , If the diagnosis was unsuccessful, the coordinator must 102 this diagnosis in step 203 schedule again. If the diagnosis was successful, the coordinator reports 102 this in step 209 to the component 101 back. All were with the coordinator 102 successfully completed, the procedure for the planning and execution of the diagnoses in the step ends 205 ,

The step 203 of the 2 , the flow of the method for planning the at least two diagnoses, is in 5 shown in more detail. The method may be at every beginning of the driving of a driving distance x and / or in the event that for the to be changed on the route x driving operation 103 in the course of driving the route x changed opportunities arise, are carried out in the course of driving the route. The procedure starts with step t 501 ,

In a first step 502 becomes the overall priority 305 certainly. The overall priority 305 every diagnosis 301 can be like in 3 shown determine from the respective three parts of the priority of a diagnosis 302 . 303 and 304 , The overall priority 305 is the sum of the static priority 302 plus the first dynamic priority 303 plus the second dynamic priority 304 , From comparing the overall priorities of everyone at the coordinator 102 logged diagnoses results in the planning sequence 306 , For example, in 3 Diagnosis 1 the highest overall priority 305 and will be scheduled first ( 306 = 1). Diagnosis j has the second highest overall priority 305 and will be scheduled second ( 306 = 2). In the example of 3 the points should represent further diagnoses. Accordingly, Diagnosis 5 has the seventh highest overall priority 305 and is scheduled in seventh place ( 306 = 7). Diagnosis 2, on the other hand, has a very low overall priority 305 , so that this diagnosis comes very far back in the planning order ( 306 = z).

In step 503 in 5 the planning of that diagnosis takes place 301 in the planning order 306 comes first. The coordinator 102 gives the conditions for this diagnosis 301 to the devices for adjusting the driving operation 103 further. These check whether there are a number n of possibilities M for carrying out this diagnosis along the planned route. It is also checked whether there are other possibilities by adapting the driving operation.

6 explain this in more detail. Here, the distance x of a motor vehicle is plotted on the abscissa. It has a start point x _start and an end point, a destination x _end . In the upper part of the figure is the planning of the diagnosis with the planning order 306 = 1 shown. In the lower part is the planning of a diagnosis with a planning order 306 = z shown. As just explained, in step 503 of the 5 determines the possibilities M for carrying out a diagnosis. In 6 this possibility is plotted on the lower part of the ordinate for each diagnosis. M = 1 means that a diagnosis is feasible. M = 0 means that a diagnosis is not feasible. For example, the possibilities of carrying out the diagnosis with the planning order 306 = 1 through the black boxes 601 marked. Along these sections 601 it is possible to carry out the diagnosis. The devices for adjusting the driving operation 102 transmit the information on the number n of possibilities M for carrying out the diagnosis and information on the associated sections 601 to the coordinator 102 ,

This in 5 The method shown is continued with the interrogation step 504 , It is checked if the number of possibilities M for carrying out the diagnosis of the planning order 306 = 1 ≥ 1. If this is not the case, ie if this diagnosis can not be scheduled along the route x, the method in step 506 continued. On the other hand, there are at least one or more possibilities 601 to carry out this diagnosis, the procedure in step 505 continued.

In step 505 is the diagnosis with the planning order 306 = 1 scheduled. The coordinator determines this 102 first the assessment indices BI of the diagnosis along the possible route sections 601 , The evaluation indices describe how favorable the conditions for the diagnosis are within their running possibilities at a certain point in time or along a certain section of the route. This is for example in 6 for the diagnosis with the planning sequence 306 = 1 shown in the upper part of the diagram. The evaluation index BI is plotted on the upper part of the ordinate. In the example, a number range from 0 to 100 was chosen. This means 100 in that the conditions for carrying out the diagnosis are optimal. The value 1 means that the diagnosis is just running. The value 0 means that the diagnosis is not executable. In 6 is the history of valuation indices 602 along with for the diagnosis 306 = 1 possible route sections 601 in the upper part of the diagram located. The coordinator 102 plans in a variant in step 505 the diagnosis 301 with the planning order 306 = 1 at the possible route section 601 in which the evaluation index BI is maximum. The diagnosis can be scheduled to begin at the first location where the scoring index is the maximum. In 6 is this place for the diagnosis with the planning order 306 = 1 with the number 603 marked. The diagnosis with the planning sequence 306 = 1 is correspondingly along the route section 604 planned. In another variant, in step 505 the diagnosis 301 with the planning order 306 = 1 at the possible route section 601 be scheduled where there is a best contiguous score index BI. Best coherent evaluation index BI here means that the evaluation index BI over a contiguous section of the route x has as constant and / or as high a value as possible.

After planning the first diagnosis follows in the 5 shown procedures of the query step 506 , It is checked for further open diagnoses 301 are available for scheduling. If this is not the case, the method ends with step 511 , If there are more open diagnoses, the planning is in step 507 continued.

step 507 resembles step 503 , Now, however, the diagnosis becomes 301 , which in the planning order 306 is listed next, scheduled. The coordinator 102 in turn communicates the diagnostic conditions for this diagnosis to the devices for adjusting the driving operation 103 , These determine the number n of possibilities M and the respectively associated route sections for carrying out this diagnosis. Again, it is checked whether additional options result from the adaptation of the driving operation. The possibilities of carrying out the diagnosis with the planning order 306 = z are through the black boxes 605 marked. The information about the number of possibilities and the associated sections 605 will be to the coordinator 102 transmitted.

In the query step 508 it is checked if the number of possibilities n, the diagnosis 301 with the planning order 306 = z ≥ 1. If this is not the case, then step 510 continued. If so, the procedure in step 509 continued.

509 resembles the step 505 of the described method. Again, the coordinator determines the assessment indices BI of the diagnosis to be performed along the possible route segments 605 , In 6 is the course of the evaluation indices along the for the diagnosis with 306 = z possible route sections 605 each with 606 marked. Now be with for the planning of the diagnosis 306 = z but also the dependencies 402 all previously scheduled diagnoses 301 considered. For this, the coordinator pulls the dependency matrices 401 approach. Based on 6 this consideration can be explained even better.

In the upper part of the 6 is the route section 604 marked diamond-shaped, along which the diagnosis 301 with the planning order 306 = 1 was scheduled. The lower part of the 6 provides the planning of the diagnosis with the planning order 306 = z. The evaluation index BI of this diagnosis is considered over the entire route at the location 607 along the route section 608 the biggest. The section of the route 608 However, in the present example, this is just the blocked area of the diagnosis with the planning order 306 = z due to the dependency on the diagnosis with the planning order 306 = 1. The two diagnoses to be scheduled here have a dependency 402 from each other, which says that these two diagnoses are not parallel running. The diagnosis with the planning sequence 306 = z can accordingly along the route section 608 not be carried out. The diagnosis will therefore be in the section 609 planned. This is the route section along the entire route at which the evaluation index BI of the diagnosis with the planning order 306 = 1 is maximum, if one the Sperrbereich 608 excludes. It starts on the spot 610 in which the evaluation index BI is maximum in this section.

When in 5 The method now follows the query step 510 , This checks if there are more open diagnostics to schedule 301 available. If this is the case, further planning takes place. step 507 will be executed again. If there are no more open diagnostics, the procedure ends in step 511 ,

QUOTES INCLUDE IN THE DESCRIPTION

This list of the documents listed by the applicant has been generated automatically and is included solely for the better information of the reader. The list is not part of the German patent or utility model application. The DPMA assumes no liability for any errors or omissions.

Cited patent literature

• WO 2014/001054 A1 [0002]

Claims (10)

Method for planning at least two diagnoses ( 301 ) at least one component ( 101 ) of a motor vehicle during a driving operation, characterized in that the motor vehicle at least temporarily has an automated driving operation in which the motor vehicle is at least partially automatically controlled without the action of an occupant of the motor vehicle to a predetermined destination by means of a route (x) and the diagnoses ( 301 ) take place during the automated driving operation, with the following step: • planning the at least two diagnoses ( 301 ) depending on given criteria ( 302 . 303 . 304 . 305 , BI, 401 . 402 ). A method according to claim 1, characterized in that the planning is done such that a planning order ( 306 ) of at least two diagnoses ( 301 ) depending on given criteria ( 302 . 303 . 304 . 305 ) is determined. Method according to claim 2, characterized in that the predetermined criteria ( 305 ) for determining the planning sequence are composed of a defined ( 302 ) and a variable portion ( 303 . 304 ). Method according to claim 3, characterized in that the specified proportion ( 302 ) for each of the at least two diagnoses ( 301 ) - depending on the diagnosis ( 301 ) itself and • that the variable portion ( 303 . 304 ) for each of the at least two diagnoses ( 301 ) - from the last execution of the respective diagnosis ( 303 ) and / or - conditions for implementation ( 304 ) of the respective diagnosis. A method according to claim 1, characterized in that the planning is done such that suitable route sections ( 601 . 605 ) along the route (x) for carrying out the at least two diagnoses ( 301 ) are determined depending on predetermined criteria. A method according to claim 5, characterized in that the predetermined criteria for the determination of suitable sections ( 601 . 605 ) for each of the at least two diagnoses ( 301 ) are dependent on the conditions for carrying out the respective diagnosis (BI). A method according to claim 5, characterized in that the predetermined criteria for the determination of suitable sections ( 601 . 605 ) are dependent on a to be changed on the route (x) driving operation. Method according to claim 1, characterized in that the predetermined criteria for planning dependencies ( 401 . 402 ) from a previously planned or performed diagnosis ( 301 ) exhibit. Device for planning at least two diagnoses ( 301 ) at least one component of a motor vehicle during a driving operation, characterized in that the motor vehicle at least temporarily has an automated driving operation in which the motor vehicle is controlled at least partially automatically without the action of an occupant of the motor vehicle to a predetermined destination by means of a route (x) and the Diagnoses ( 301 ) take place during the automated driving operation, in which means are provided, by means of which a planning of the at least two diagnoses ( 301 ) depending on given criteria ( 302 . 303 . 304 . 305 , BI, 401 . 402 ) happens. Apparatus according to claim 9, characterized in that the planning is done such that a planning order ( 306 ) of at least two diagnoses ( 301 ) depending on given criteria ( 302 . 303 . 304 . 305 ), whereby preferably the predetermined criteria ( 305 ) are composed of a defined ( 302 ) and a variable portion ( 303 . 304 ), with particularly preferred • the specified proportion ( 302 ) for each of the at least two diagnoses ( 301 ) - depending on the diagnosis ( 301 ) itself and • the variable portion ( 303 . 304 ) for each of the at least two diagnoses ( 301 ) - from the last execution of the respective diagnosis ( 303 ) and / or - conditions for carrying out the respective diagnosis ( 304 ); and wherein the planning is done in such a way that suitable route sections ( 601 . 605 ) along the route (x) for carrying out the at least two diagnoses ( 301 ) depending on predetermined criteria (BI, 401 . 402 ) be determined.

Images