JPH04130462A - Self-diagnostic and self-repairing system for image forming device - Google Patents

Abstract

PURPOSE:To contrive the acceleration in self-restoration by correcting the application condition of a 1st work in a working script when the 1st work is failed, retrieving the working script of a failure cause and executing 1 2nd work capable of turning the current state of a device to a state capable of applying the 1st work after correcting the 1st application condition. CONSTITUTION:A case detecting means retrieves the cases stored in a case storing means 17 and detects the case of a failure state and a failure cause diagnosed by a failure diagnosing mean 12. At the time of deciding the discrepancy of a consequent when the 1st work corresponding to the working index of the case to be applied is executed, necessary correction is applied to the contents and working script of the case and additional processing is executed. The necessary correction means to additionally insert the 2nd work or correct the precedent of the work so that the condition of precedent coincidence can be satisfied when a prescribed state can be obtained at the time of executing the work initially included in the case. Thus, the self-restoration can be executed.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION <Industrial Application Field> The present invention relates to a self-diagnosis and self-repair system for an image forming apparatus. More specifically, the present invention relates to a device or system that can self-diagnose the operational status of an image forming device and self-repair by utilizing artificial intelligence and knowledge engineering, which have been actively researched in recent years.

<Conventional technology> In the development field of precision machinery and industrial machinery, recent efforts have been made to save labor in maintenance work and extend automatic operation.
Artificial Intelligence
Research on expert systems using CE+ so-called AI) technology is actively being conducted. Some expert systems can self-diagnose whether a device has malfunctioned or not.
There are also some devices that self-repair any malfunctions that occur.

<Problems to be Solved by the Invention> However, in the conventional fault diagnosis system using an expert system, (a) the knowledge is not general-purpose and can only diagnose faults for various targets, and (b) unknown faults occur. (c) As the target becomes more complex, the amount of knowledge required for fault diagnosis increases explosively.
Limitations were pointed out, including (d) difficulty in realizing it, and (d) difficulty in acquiring knowledge.

More specifically, conventional automatic adjustment systems and fault diagnosis systems basically operate corresponding actuators based on the outputs of the sensors. In other words, a type of automatic adjustment and failure diagnosis has been performed using a predetermined combination of sensors and actuators. Therefore, basically, each sensor corresponds to a specific actuator, and the relationship between the two is fixed.

Therefore, (1) The relationship between sensor parameters and actuator parameters must be clearly expressed numerically.

(2) For the reason mentioned in (1) above, the relationship between sensor parameters and actuator parameters is strongly dependent on the object and lacks versatility. In other words, it cannot be used for various objects. - (3) The relationship between parameters between each sensor or between parameters between each actuator is irrelevant to control. Therefore, only simple control can be performed based only on the relationship between the corresponding sensor parameters and actuator parameters, and the types of failures that can be handled are limited in advance.

In other words, it is necessary to predict possible failures at the design stage and include a mechanism for dealing with such failures; unknown failures cannot be handled.

(4) For the reason (3) above, it is not possible to predict the side effects on the parameters of other actuators that may be caused by manipulating the parameters of any actuator.

There were problems such as.

In this way, in conventional automatic adjustment systems and fault diagnosis systems, predicted failure A is caused by sensor A and actuator A.
The predicted failure B is performed based on the set A of the sensor B and the actuator B, and the predicted failure C is performed based on the set B of the sensor B and the actuator B.
Fault diagnosis was performed based on the set C of the sensor C and actuator C, respectively, and the fault repair was performed based on the diagnosis.

The present invention was made against the background of such prior art, and an object of the present invention is to provide a new self-diagnosis and self-repair system for an image forming apparatus that eliminates the drawbacks of the prior art.

<Means for Solving the Problems> The present invention is a self-diagnosis and self-repair system for an image forming apparatus that embodies image data and generates a visible image. If a failure occurs, failure diagnosis means for inferring the failure symptoms, cause of failure, and status of the equipment, failure symptoms that may occur in the target equipment, causes of failure, and the time at which the failure occurs. A case storage means that stores cases including an index of the state of the device and work required for repair, or at least by cause of failure; a work script storage means that stores work scripts including a plurality of operations at least by cause of failure; case detection means for detecting applicable cases from among the cases stored in the case storage means, based on the failure symptoms and failure causes diagnosed by the diagnosis means;
a repair work execution means for reading out a first work corresponding to the work index of the case detected by the case detection means from a work script having the same failure cause, and executing the read out first work; work success/failure determination means for determining whether the desired result has been obtained;
A work script modification means for modifying the application conditions of the first work of the work script in response to the work success/failure determination means determining that the work is unsuccessful, and the work script modification means modifying the application conditions of the first work. Accordingly, search for the work script for the cause of the failure, and if there is a second work that can change the current state of the device to a state where the first work can be applied after the application conditions are corrected, execute the second work. The present invention is characterized in that it includes an additional processing means for performing the processing, and a first work re-execution means for re-executing the first work after the processing of the additional processing means is completed.

Function> The case storage means stores cases organized at least by cause of failure. For example, cases of failure causes such as ``incorrect halogen lamp settings,'' cases of failure causes of ``defective main charging voltage,'' cases of failure causes of ``incorrect developing bias,'' and so on are stored in an organized manner. ing.

The case detection means searches the cases stored in the case storage means and detects cases of failure symptoms and causes of failure diagnosed by the failure diagnosis means.

Next, the application determination means reads the first work corresponding to the work index of the case to be applied from the work script of the same failure cause, and as a result of executing the read first work, the state specified as the result of the work is determined. It is determined whether or not it has been obtained.

In this way, the determination of whether or not work can be applied by the application determination means includes determination of whether the consequent matches.

In determining whether the consequent matches, it is determined whether or not the parameter state of the device becomes the parameter state defined as the work result after the work is executed.

If the application determining means determines that the consequent does not match, necessary modifications are made to the content of the case and the work script, and additional processing is performed.

Necessary corrections include adding a second task or adding a second task so that the consequent matching condition is satisfied when the predetermined state is not obtained as a result of executing the first included task. is to correct the antecedent of.

Then, the added second task is executed.

Further, after the second work is completed, the first work is executed.

<Embodiment> Overview of System Configuration FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing the system configuration of an embodiment of the present invention. This system includes multiple sensors la, lb installed on the target machine.

A plurality of actuators 6a, 6b, and 6c are included for changing the functional states of the IC and the target machine.

The plurality of sensors la, lb, and lc are each for detecting a change in an element of the target machine or a state related to the machine elements caused by the operation of the target machine.

Multiple sensors la, lb.

Information taken in from each IC is amplified by an amplifier circuit 2, converted from an analog signal to a digital signal by an A/D conversion circuit 3, and provided to a system control circuit 10.

The system control circuit 10 includes a digital signal/symbol conversion section 11, a fault diagnosis section 12, a fault simulation section 13, a target model storage section 14, a repair planning section 15, and a symbol/digital signal conversion section 16. Furthermore, the repair planning section 15 is connected to a case base storage section 17 and a work script storage section 18 .

The digital signal/symbol conversion section 11 is for converting the digital signal provided from the A/D conversion circuit 3 into qualitative information. That is, a digital signal, for example, normal.

A conversion function is provided to convert to any of the three symbols, high and low. Sensor la:
By converting the signals provided from I-b and lc into such qualitative symbolized information, the approach to fault diagnosis becomes easier. Note that the symbols are not limited to three such as normal, high, and low as in this example, but may be other expressions such as on and off or A, B, C, and D. When the digital signal is converted into a symbol in the conversion unit 11, characteristic data specific to the target machine stored in the target model storage unit 14 is referred to. Details of this feature data and signal conversion will be described later.

The failure diagnosis section 12 and the failure simulation section 13 are
By comparing the symbols converted by the digital signal/symbol conversion unit 1 with the fault diagnosis knowledge stored in the target model storage unit 4, it is determined whether or not there is a fault, and the fault diagnosis is performed. , is a component that expresses and outputs the failure state of the target machine using qualitative information, that is, symbols.

The repair planning unit 15, the case base storage unit 17, and the work script storage unit 18 are components for inferring a repair plan and deriving repair work based on the inference result of failure diagnosis when a failure occurs. . In inferring a repair plan and deriving a repair operation, cases related to past repair successes stored in the case base storage unit 17 are searched, and a work script (for performing a repair operation) for executing the searched successful case is searched. (a series of work units for the process) is selected from the work script storage section 18. In addition, the target model storage unit 1
Qualitative data (described in detail later) stored in 4 is utilized.

Note that the failure diagnosis section 12, the failure simulation section 13,
How the repair planning section 15, case base storage section 17, and work script storage section 18 perform fault diagnosis, fault simulation, inference of a repair plan, and derivation of a repair work will be described in detail later.

The repair work output from [Repair Planning Department] 5 is the symbol /
In the digital signal conversion section 16, the stored information in the target model storage section 4 is referred to and converted into a digital signal.

The digital signal is then converted from a digital signal to an analog signal by a D/A conversion circuit 4 and is provided to an actuator control circuit 5. The actuator control circuit 5 controls a plurality of actuators 6a, 6b, based on an applied analog signal, that is, an actuator control command.
6c is selectively activated to perform repair work.

FIG. 2 is a flowchart showing the processing of the system control circuit 10 in FIG. Next, with reference to FIG. 2, an overview of the processing of the system control circuit 10 shown in FIG. 1 will be explained.

The detection signal of sensor la, lb or 1c is amplified,
and is converted into a digital signal and read into the system control circuit 10, for example, every predetermined read cycle (
Step Sl).

The read digital signal is converted into symbols in the digital signal/symbol converter]1 (step S2
). This symbolization is performed based on characteristic data preset in the target model storage unit 14, that is, reference value data specific to the target machine. For example, the output ranges of the sensors la, lb, and lc are set in the target model storage unit 14 as reference value data specific to the target machine as follows.

That is, Sensor 1a; less than − low ~ka2-normal exceeds - high less than − low ~kb2-normal exceeds - high less than − low ~kc2 dew normal exceeds - high output kal Output kaH Output ka2 Sensor lb: output kb.

Output kb Output kb2 Sensor 1c: Output kc Output kc Output kc2 It is set as follows. The digital/symbol conversion unit 11 converts the sensors 1a to 1c based on reference value data specific to the target machine set in the target model storage unit 14.
Converts the digital signal from the device into a symbol of ``low,''``normal,'' or ``high.''

Next, the converted symbol is evaluated in the fault diagnosis section 12, and the presence or absence of a fault is determined and the fault symptoms are specified (step S3). The target model storage unit 1 is used to determine the presence or absence of a failure by evaluating symbols and to identify failure symptoms.
The fault diagnosis knowledge stored in 4 is utilized. Fault diagnosis knowledge is, for example, a setting condition that a specific parameter must be normal, for example. If the specific parameter is not normal, there is a failure,
The failure symptom is determined based on the specific parameter. If there is no failure, step S1
．． , S2 and S3 are repeated.

If it is determined in step S3 that there is a failure,
The state of the target machine is inferred, that is, fault diagnosis and fault state simulation are performed (step S4).

Specifically, stored in the target model storage unit 14,
Based on qualitative data that qualitatively represents the behavior or attributes of each element that makes up the device and the connection relationships between each element,
In the fault diagnosis section 12, a parameter causing the fault is searched, and in the fault simulation section 13, assuming that the searched parameter is the cause of the fault,
Fault conditions are simulated. Furthermore, the failure diagnosis section 12 compares the simulation results with the current parameter values to determine the validity of the assumption that the retrieved parameter is the cause of the failure. The above processing is performed on a plurality of parameters to be searched.

As a result of determining the presence or absence of a failure, diagnosing the failure, and simulating the failure state, the failure symptom and cause of the failure of the target machine are determined. Here, the failure symptom is a change in the output status of the target machine (for example, in the case of a copying machine, "copied images are pale", etc.), and the failure cause is the object that causes the symbol to change. This is a change in the mechanism or structure of a machine (for example, in the case of a copying machine, a decrease in the light intensity of a halogen lamp, etc.).

Next, the repair planning unit 15 searches a large number of cases stored in the case base storage unit 17 based on the failure diagnosis and failure state simulation results (step S5). Then, a case similar to the current state of the target machine is detected (step S6). Detection of this case is performed based on whether the failure symptom and the failure cause match.

Then, repair work based on the detected case is executed (step S7). In the repair work, the case and the repair work are corrected as necessary, and the corrected case is registered as a new case.

If the repair work based on the case is successful, the process ends (YES in step S8), but if the repair work based on the case is not successful (NO in step S8), a repair method is inferred. (Step S9), and a simulation of side effects is further performed (Step S9).
IO), a repair plan is determined, and repair work based on the decision is executed (step 511).

Although the inference and work execution in steps 89 to Sll are not based on cases, if the repair work based on this inference is successful, the repair results are registered in the case base storage unit 17 as a new case. .

Next, methods of fault diagnosis and fault repair will be explained in detail, starting with reference 17, using specific examples. In the following explanation,
- As an example, a method will be explained in which the peripheral area of the photoreceptor drum in a small-sized ordinary copying machine is targeted.

FIG. 3 is an illustrative diagram showing a specific target machine. In FIG. 3, 21 is a photosensitive drum, 22 is a main charger, 23 is an I\logen lamp for illuminating the original, 24 is a developing device, and 25 is a transfer charger.

In this embodiment, for example, there are three sensors la.

lb and lc are provided. That is, sensor 1a is an AE sensor for measuring the amount of light incident on the photoreceptor drum, sensor 1b is a surface potential sensor for measuring the surface potential of the photoreceptor drum, and sensor IC measures the density of the image copied on paper. This is a concentration meter for

Although not shown in FIG. 3, three types of actuators are provided. That is, the main charging volume VRI is used to change the main charging voltage of the photoreceptor drum, and the lamp volume A is used to control the light amount of the halogen lamp.
Three volumes are provided as actuators: VR and a transfer volume VR2 for controlling the transfer voltage between the photosensitive drum and copy paper.

By the way, the target machine shown in Fig. 3 can be viewed from a physical perspective, and the target machine can be expressed at the physical level as a combination of multiple elements, and the behavior and attributes of each element and the connection relationship between each element can be expressed using parameters. When expressed qualitatively using this method, it is as shown in Table 1. The expression format shown in Table 1 will be referred to as a "substantive model."

Furthermore, the representation shown in FIG. 4 in which the entity model is abstracted and expressed as a connection tree of each parameter will be referred to as a "mathematical model."

Then, by combining the "substantive model" and the "mathematical model",
Let's call it the target model j. The "target model" is qualitative data common to image forming apparatuses that is also utilized for failure repair, which will be described later.

(The following is a blank space) Table 1 "Substantive Model" The contents of the substantive model and the mathematical model as qualitative data are stored in the target model storage unit 14.

The target model storage unit 14 also stores information regarding predetermined parameters among the parameters included in the real model.
For example, reference value data measured at the time of factory shipment is stored. This reference value data is characteristic data specific to this image forming apparatus.

For example, in this machine, as shown in FIG. 5, the parameters X1v1.0. , ■, , are stored with reference value data specifying the low, normal, and high ranges, respectively.

In this embodiment, the above-mentioned reference value data can be updated in response to sensing data during subsequent failure diagnosis and failure repair processes, changes in the operating state of the machine, and the like.

Furthermore, the target model storage unit 14 stores evaluation function knowledge as an example of fault diagnosis knowledge, which is a standard for determining whether or not the target machine is operating normally, based on the converted symbol. ing.

Note that the evaluation function knowledge, in other words, the failure diagnosis knowledge, may be specific to the target device, or may not be specific and may be common to a wide range of image forming apparatuses.

Evaluation function knowledge includes the following knowledge.

Image density O3 - normal, fogging degree O1 - normal, separation performance S, <normal Here, if o, , o, , s are not the above conditions, the target machine is not operating normally. .

Now, consider a case where the digitized sensor information of the target machine during normal operation has the following values.

AE sensor value X-30 Surface potential sensor value V, -300 Densitometer value 0. -7 Also, when using a blank original with optical density D-0, the densitometer value O8- or the degree of rotation O1, and the surface potential sensor value V with the halogen lamp turned off.
, -dark potential Vn5, and their values are respectively fogging degree O, -50 dark potential ■. =700.

The fogging degree O1 and the dark potential Vfi may be measured manually or automatically by a sensor under certain conditions, for example, each time the target machine is turned on or before copying starts. It may be programmed so that it is measured automatically. In this embodiment, the latter is adopted.

AE sensor 1a, surface potential sensor 1b and concentration meter IC
Each person X, V, ,O,,O5・,■, obtained by
, are respectively digital signal/symbol converters 11
is converted to a symbol at .

The conversion is performed for each sensor la, lb or I as described above.
The digital value given from C is stored in the target model storage unit 1.
Each time the symbol is compared with the reference value data as feature data stored in 4, it is converted into one of three types of symbols: normal, high, or low.

In this example, each parameter is symbolized as follows.

X-High vImg Low 0.1-Low Vll-Normal In the fault diagnosis unit 12, each of these symbolized parameters is combined with functional evaluation knowledge as an example of fault diagnosis knowledge stored in the target model storage unit 14. be compared. As a result, since the image density O3 is not normal, it is determined that there is a failure, and the failure symptom is ``Image density is too low (0
．． − low)”. And next,
0. - Low" as a failure symptom, a failure diagnosis, that is, the cause of the failure is inferred.

Fault diagnosis is first performed in the fault simulation section 13 using the mathematical model shown in FIG. 4 to search for parameters that may cause Ol-low.

In the mathematical model in Figure 4, 0. Fig. 6 shows the parameters that have the potential to reduce the . In FIG. 6, the parameters marked with upward or downward arrows are those that may cause parameter O1-low, and those with upward arrows indicate that the parameter increases, while those with downward arrows indicate parameters that may cause parameter O1-low. If that parameter decreases, 0. -Causes low.

Next, each parameter ζ, D, that can cause O6-rho was explored in the mathematical model.

Vl　γ. ,V,,V,,V. ,X,β,H,.

Regarding D, the failure diagnosis unit 12 detects the cause of the parameter change.

This detection is performed based on the entity model shown in Table 1, and in this embodiment, the following failure cause candidates are inferred.

That is, V, -Port-: → Defective transfer transformer ζ - Deterioration of low knee paper ■, - Defective high knee developing bias γ. - Deterioration of low knee toner ■, - Defective low knee main charging voltage H1, - Defective high knee halogen lamp setting D = Low: → The original is thin vl - When low, it is a defect in the transfer transformer, and ζ - low is paper The knowledge that Vb-high means a defect in the developing bias is failure cause knowledge, and this knowledge is included in qualitative data common to image forming apparatuses.

Note that among the parameters, β is the sensitivity of the photoreceptor, and since it does not increase, it is excluded.

D, , V, and X are also excluded since they are represented by other parameters.

Then, in response to the above inference made in the fault diagnosis section 12, a fault state simulation is performed in the fault simulation section]3.

Simulating a fault state means inferring the state of the target machine when the inferred fault occurs. More specifically, it is assumed that the cause of 0-low, that is, the cause of the failure is, for example, a defective transfer transformer, and 1-low is set for the model in the normal state. Then, the influence on each parameter in that state is examined using a mathematical model. - If set to low, 0. =low and S,-low, and all other parameters are normal, so this contradicts the X-high and ■,=low obtained from the sensor. Therefore, the result is that the inference regarding the cause of the failure is incorrect.

Similarly, we set ζ=rho on the normal state mathematical model and compare the result with the symbols obtained from the sensor. In this case as well, on the mathematical model, for X-normal,
Since the symbol from the sensor is X-high, there is a contradiction and the inference of the cause of the failure is determined to be incorrect.

In this way, the failure state is simulated for all failure cause candidates, and it is confirmed whether the inference of the failure cause is correct.

As a result, in this example, when the cause of the failure is set to ``incorrect halogen lamp settings (HL-high)'', a result that matches the actual condition of the target machine can be obtained, and other causes of the failure can be determined. It is concluded that all candidates are inconsistent with the actual state of the device.

Therefore, it can be concluded that the cause of the failure in this case is improper setting of the halogen lamp. Table 2 shows the status of each parameter of the target machine at that time.

When the states of the parameters shown in Table 2 are traced onto a mathematical model, FIG. 7 is obtained. In FIG. 7, the downward arrow attached to the right side of each parameter indicates low, the upward arrow indicates high, and N indicates normal.

Execution of repair work Next, the failure diagnosis section 12 and the failure simulation section 1
Based on the results of the failure diagnosis performed in step 3, repair work is performed according to the flowcharts shown in FIGS. 8A, 8B, and 8C.

Hereinafter, the repair work will be explained step by step according to the flowcharts shown in FIGS. 8A, 8B, and 8c.

Note that the flowcharts in FIGS. 8A, 8B, and 8c refer to step S5 in the flowchart in FIG.
．． S6. This corresponds to S7 and S8, and specifically represents the contents of the repair process in detail.

Case Search: According to the fault diagnosis method described above, the cause of the fault that causes the occurring fault symptom is inferred (step 521).
. Based on the results, a large number of cases stored in the case base storage unit 17 (see FIG. 1) are searched, and cases that can be used for repair are detected from among them (step 5).
22).

More specifically, as shown in Table 3, all the cases stored in the case base storage unit 17 include the case number, the parameter status before restoration, the parameter status after restoration,
Failure symptoms, causes of failure, repair work, number of successful applications, and number of failed applications are recorded.

Table 3 Also, each case is hierarchically classified according to failure symptoms and failure causes.

Therefore, the repair planning unit 15 uses the failure symptoms diagnosed by the failure diagnosis unit 12 and the failure simulation unit 13 to
"Image density is too low (05-low)" and cause of failure "
Using "Poor setting of Haloken lamp (Ht, -high)" as an index, a case satisfying both the failure symptom and the failure cause is detected. Therefore, even if the failure symptom is "low image density," cases where the cause of the failure is, for example, "defective main charging voltage" will not be detected.

As mentioned above, "failure symptoms" here refer to phenomena that are recognized as malfunctions of the target machine, such as "low image density" or "image fog," and "failure causes." indicates a change in the function or structure of the target machine, such as "incorrect setting of the nozzle lamp" or "incorrect main charging voltage."

Now, the failure symptom "Image density is too low" and the failure cause "
As a result of searching for cases based on "Haroken lamp setting failure", cases (1) to (3) shown in Tables 4 to 6 below were found.
Suppose that is detected.

(Left below) Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 By the way, there are multiple detected cases, three in this case, so it is necessary to decide which case to apply to the repair work first.

Therefore, the three detected cases (1) to (3) are prioritized (steps 523 to 525). The priority regarding the application order is determined by comparing the parameter status before repair in each case with the current parameter status of the target machine simulated in the failure diagnosis (see Table 2) (step 523), and Priority is given to cases with the largest number of matching parameters.

Specifically, when comparing the status of the parameters before each restoration in cases (1) to (3) with the current status of the parameters (Table 2), only the status (■) is different in case (1). In case (2), the states of Vl and ■ are different. In case (3), V. , ■, and ■1 have different states.

Therefore, priority regarding application order is given in the order of case (1), case (2), and case (3).

Note that if the number of matches between the parameter status before restoration and the current parameter status is equal, the number of successful applications is taken into account (step 524), and the higher the number of successful applications, the higher the priority is given.

Furthermore, if the number of matches between the parameter status before repair and the current parameter status is equal, and the number of successful applications is also the same, the number of failed applications is taken into account (step 524), and the smaller the number of failed applications, the higher the priority. A ranking will be given.

Note that, of course, if only one case is detected in step S22, the prioritization regarding the application order is omitted.

Application of Cases Next, a repair plan based on the first priority case (or the detected case if only one case is detected) is executed.

In executing the repair plan, first, case (1) given the first priority is set in the work register, and based on case (1), the work stored in the work script storage unit 18 is executed. The work script with the failure cause "No. 10 Gen lamp setting failure" is selected from the scripts and set in the work register (step 526).
).

An example of a work script for incorrect halogen lamp settings is shown in Part 7.
Shown in the table.

Table 7 As shown in Table 7, in the work script, the cause of the failure that serves as an index, ``Improper Norogen Lamp Setting,'' is written, and multiple tasks 1. 2. 3. ...or has been restored. Each task is described in rule format,
It consists of antecedent part situation, antecedent part operation, and consequent part situation. Each task means that when an antecedent part is operated in an antecedent part situation, a consequent part situation is obtained.

To be more specific, for example, in the case of work 1, the antecedent situation is the parameter HL=lXi, and in this state, by performing the antecedent operation of decreasing the lamp volume AVR, The content is that a parameter change called parameter HL-normal, that is, a consequent situation is obtained.

Note that the work script is set for each cause of failure and lists the minimum unit of work.

Work scripts are set for each cause of failure, so
There are as many work scripts as there are causes of failure.

When case (1) and the work script in Table 7 are set in the work register (step 526), next, the restoration planning unit 15 determines the status of the parameters before restoration of case (1) set in the register. It is checked whether it completely matches the current parameter situation (step 52).
7).

If the parameter situation before repair in case (1) completely matches the current parameter situation, the work with the number written in the repair work column of case (1) will be changed to “Halogen "Improper Lamp Setting" work script is selected and executed (step 528) (actually, the case (
Since the parameter status in 1) does not completely match the current parameter status shown in Table 2, the actual processing is as follows.
(Proceed to steps 527-634, as described below).

If the consequent status is obtained as a result of executing the task, the task is determined to be successful (YES in step S29);
Furthermore, it is determined whether there is a next task (step 530). If there is a next work number in the repair work column, that work is selected from the work script and executed (step 328), and it is determined whether the work is successful or not (step 529), and the process is repeated.

Then, if there is no more work to do next (step S3
0 (NO), the numerical value in the column of the number of successful applications in the case is incremented by 1, and the number of successful applications is registered (step 531).

Even if the task is executed, if the consequent status of the task is not obtained, it is determined that the task has failed (No in step S29), the value in the application failure number column is incremented by 1, and the number of failures is registered. is performed (step 532).

Then, it is determined whether there is a case with the next priority (
step 533), if any (Y in step 333);
ES), step S26 for the next priority case.
Processing is performed from

If there is no case with the next priority (NO in step 333), a repair plan is inferred taking into account the side effects that will be detailed later, that is, OMS processing is performed (step 534).
).

Then, it is determined whether or not the 0MS processing was successful (step 535), and if it is determined that the 0MS processing was successful (
(YES in step S35), a new case is created based on the data obtained by the QMS processing, and the case is registered in the case base storage unit 17 (step S836).
). Then, the process ends.

If the 0MS process ends in failure (step S35
(No), no new case is registered and the process ends.

Now, as mentioned above, the parameter situation before repair in case (1) does not completely match the current parameter situation, and the state of parameter V is inconsistent, so the actual processing is performed in step s27. It was judged as No, and the 8th B
The process advances to step S37 shown in the figure.

In step S37, the work numbered in the repair work column of case (1) is designated from the "incorrect halogen lamp setting" work script. That is, work 1 is designated. Then, the antecedent status of work 1 and the current parameter status are compared, and it is determined whether they match or do not match (step 538).

When performing a task, the current parameter situation or the antecedent situation of the task must match. In this specific example, both the antecedent status of work 1 and the current parameter status are parameter H5-high, so the antecedent status matches the current parameter status. If they match (YES in step S38),
The work 1 is executed (step 539). and,
The success or failure of the task is determined (step 540), and if the consequent status is obtained as a result of the task execution, it is determined that the task was successful (YES in step S40).

Further, the presence or absence of the next work is determined depending on whether or not the next work number is entered in the repair work column of case (1) (step 541), and if there is a next work (
Step 541: YES), the next work is specified, the antecedent status of the work and the current parameter status are compared (step 537), and as described above, step S38
The subsequent processing is repeated.

If there is no more work to do (NO in step S41)
), the state of flag A or B (the purpose of these flags A and B will be described later) is determined (step 542), and if neither flag A nor B is set ( No in step S42)
, the numerical value in the column of the number of successful applications of case (1) is incremented by 1, the number of successful applications is registered (step 34B), and the process ends.

However, in step S39, even if the lamp volume AVR, which is the antecedent part operation, is decreased, the parameter HL does not change to normal as a result, and even if the lamp volume AVR is decreased to its lower limit, the consequent part status still remains. If the parameter HL-normal cannot be obtained, it is determined that the task has failed (NO in step S40).

In other words, the parameter state (
If the current parameter state after the work does not become the parameter state (consequent state) set in the repair work, the work is determined to have failed.

At this time, a second additional process is executed to avoid the cause of work failure, which will be explained below along the flow of FIG. 8C.

That is, first, the failure symptom "Image density is too low (0.
-口-)" and the failure cause is "Incorrect halogen lamp settings (Ht, -high)". Among these cases, the repair work column shows the work number that was determined to be a failure, such as the work All cases with a number of 1 are detected (step 549). Then, the parameter status before repair and the current parameter status of all detected cases are compared (step 550), and the difference between the parameter status before repair and the current parameter status is determined.
Parameters that are common in all cases are detected. In other words, a common feature of the parameter situations before restoration of all cases and a difference between the current parameter situations are detected (step 551).

In the specific example, the cases in which work 1 is listed in the repair work column are cases (1) and (2), so the parameter status before repair and the current parameters of these cases (1) and (2) are The situations are compared respectively and the common difference is the parameter V. or be featured. That is, in the parameter situation before restoration, the parameter v
, , - is low or in the current parameter situation, the parameter ■. -It is normal.

If it is determined that there is a different parameter (YES in step S51), that parameter, that is, parameter v4-normal in the specific example, is hypothesized to be the cause of the failure of the current operation, and this parameter Vn is changed from normal to normal. A job that can be performed is searched from the work script (step 552), and the presence or absence of the job is determined (step 552).
step 553).

Looking at the work script in Table 7, work 5 results in parameter ■. can be changed from normal to low, so it is determined that there is work to be done (Y in step 35B).
ES).

In this case, the work column of case (1) is tentatively corrected and work 5 is inserted. Additionally, flag B is set to indicate that this temporary correction has been made (step 55).
4). Operation 5 is then performed (step 555).

If the result of execution of work 5 is vo-low, it is determined that the work is successful (YES in step S56).
).

In this case, Vn-low is an essential condition as the antecedent condition of work 1. Therefore, the antecedent status of work 1 in the work script shown in Table 7 is corrected so that ■ E-low is added, and the work script in Table 7 is rewritten to the one shown in Table 8 (step 557).

In the work script shown in Table 8, the antecedent status of work 1 is "rHL-high and v7-low".

(The following is a blank space) Table 8 Then, the processing from step S37 shown in FIG. 8B is performed again. In this specific example, if work 1 is performed and is successful (YES in step S40), there is no further work to be performed (NO in step S41).
), it is determined that flag B is set (YES in step s42). Therefore, based on the parameter situation and processing at this time, a new case (1-1) is created.
is created and registered. Additionally, flags A and B are reset (step 544). This new case (1) is shown in Table 9.

(Leaving space below) Case (1-1) shown in Table 9 2 differs from case (1) shown in Table 4 in that the parameter V0 - normal in the parameter situation before repair. And in the repair work column, r5. The point is that two operations called IJ are described. Note that the number of successful applications of case (1, -1) is 1 in this case.
The number of application failures is 0.

Now, in step S56 of FIG. 8C, if it is determined that the work was not successful, the parameter V is also set.

It is determined whether there is a task in the work script that can change the value from normal to low (step 858).
, if there is work, the processing from step S54 is performed.

Furthermore, if it is determined in step S51 that there is no different parameter, or if it is determined in step 353 that there is no work, flags A and B are reset (step 559), and then other cases, e.g. It is determined whether there is a case with the next application priority (step 560).

If the next case exists (Y in step S60)
ES), the case and the corresponding work script are set in the work register (step 561), and the processing from step S37 shown in FIG. 8B is performed.

On the other hand, if it is determined in step S60 that there is no case with the next application priority (NO in step S60), the process proceeds to step S34 shown in FIG. 8A, and QMS processing is performed.

Next, in the above specific example, the repair plan based on case (1) fails, and case (2) is the case with the next application priority.
Consider the case where a repair plan is based on the following.

In this case, in step 561, case (2) and case (
The failure cause selected corresponding to 2) [Halogen lamp setting failure 3 explosion script is set in the work register.

Next, the "1" displayed in the case (2) repair work column specifies work 1 of the work script, and its antecedent status and current parameter status are compared (step 5).
37), a match or mismatch between the two is determined (step 538). As is clear from the comparison between Table 7 and Table 2, the antecedent status of Work 1 and the current parameter status match at HL-High, so Work 1 is executed (Step 539).

Then, when the state becomes HL-normal, it is determined that the task has been successful (YES in step S40), and it is determined whether or not there is a next task (step 541).

In case (2), since work 2 exists as the next work, the process advances to step S37, where the next work 2 is specified, and its antecedent status and current parameter status are compared. As a result, it is determined that the antecedent state vI-low of work 2 does not match the current parameter state V, -normal (NO in step S38).

As described above, when executing a task, the current parameter situation must match the antecedent situation of the task. Therefore, a first additional process is performed. That is,
A search is made to see if there is another task in the task script shown in Table 7 that allows the current parameter situation to match the antecedent situation (step 545).

Looking at Table 7, it can be seen that by operation 4, parameter (1) can be made low when H,=normal. Therefore, YES is determined in step S46, and the process proceeds to step S47. Then, the repair work column of case (2) is provisionally corrected to rl, 4, 2J, and flag A is set to indicate that the provisional correction has been made (step 547).

Next, work 4 added as a result of the temporary correction is executed (step 348), and it is determined whether or not work 4 is successful (step 540).

If the execution of this work 4 is successful (step S40
YES), it is determined whether there is a next task (step 5).
41). In case (2), since work 2 exists as the next work, the process proceeds to step S37 again, the next work 2 is designated, and its antecedent status and current parameter status are compared. As a result, the current parameter situation is
By executing work 4 in step S48 above, ■
- Since it is low, it matches the antecedent situation of work 2.

Therefore, in step 538, the determination is YES, and work 2 is performed.
is executed (step 539).

Then, it is determined whether or not the execution of work 2 was successful (step 540), and if it was successful, in step S41,
It is determined whether there is a next task.

In case (2), there is no next task, so the process advances to step S42. Then, it is determined that flag A is set (YES in step S42), and step S
The case in which the repair work column was temporarily corrected in step 47 is registered as a new case (2-1) (step 544). Also, flags A and B are reset (step 544
).

This additionally registered case (2-1) is shown in Table 10.

The case (2-1) shown in Table 10 is the case (2) shown in Table 5.
The difference is that the parameter (7) is normal in the situation before restoration, and the restoration work is rl, 4, 2J. Further, the number of successful applications is 1 this time, and the number of failed applications is O.

(Margins below) Table 10 Note that if it is determined in step S46 that there is no other work that can match the current parameter status with the antecedent status (No in step 846), the process continues in step S46. The process advances to step S59 shown in FIG. 8C.

In carrying out the repair work, the method of searching for cases and applying the cases described above is particularly effective for apparatuses such as small ordinary copying machines as explained in the above specific example.

This is because devices such as small-sized ordinary copying machines have unstable elements (for example, active use of chemical changes, etc.) as control objects in their constituent systems. Therefore, due to changes in the conditions in which the component system is placed, such as environmental changes or structural deterioration, the relationship between the sensor parameters and the actuator parameters may change. Searching for cases in the explanation of the above specific example can be said to be because the device collects changes between such parameters while running, performs a type of learning using this, and tunes the knowledge. Even if a change occurs between parameters, repair work can be performed to effectively deal with the change.

In other words, when the relationship between the parameters of the target machine changes, the case is modified based on the change, a new case is created, and the contents of the work script are also modified.

In the above explanation, the example and the work script are stored separately, and are selected and set separately.

However, instead of this example, for example, if the repair work column for each case is stored with the work itself rather than the work number in the work script, the specific work to be performed can be stored. This can be an example of

In other words, the case and the work script can be integrated into a case.

Inference of repair plan Next, inference of repair plan, that is, step S5 in FIG.
The QMS processing shown in 1 will be explained.

As a result of fault determination, "Image 1g! Density is too low (0°-low)" was picked up as the fault symptom, so the goal of repair was 0. The goal is to increase the

Therefore, from the relationship on the mathematical model shown in Figure 4, it is possible to increase the repair target O by increasing D, increasing ■, or increasing ζ. It is inferred.

Next, when inference is made with the goal of increasing D, ■
Raise , or lower ■, or γ0
Either rise or get a conclusion. in this way,
Based on the mathematical model, the inference is repeated and
Candidates for repair operations can be obtained on the mathematical model. The results obtained are shown in Table 11.

(Left space below) Table 11 By the way, among the repair candidates obtained based on the mathematical model, there are some that can be realized and some that cannot be realized. For example, D: The optical density of the original cannot be changed, and β: The sensitivity of the photoreceptor is also difficult to change.

γo = toner sensitivity cannot be changed, ζ: paper sensitivity is also unchangeable.

Also, in this specific example, ■,: Bias voltage It is also impossible to change because there is no actuator.

Of course, by adding an actuator, ■,
can be made changeable.

Furthermore, X, the logarithm of the amount of light reflected from the original, ■: The surface potential of the drum after exposure and the toner density on the double drum cannot be changed per se, but can be changed indirectly by changing other parameters. It can only be changed, and is excluded from repair candidates here.

Although not directly related to this specific example, the amplitude of the separation AC voltage can also be changed by adding an actuator.

As described above, in this specific example, as repair candidates, (1): transfer voltage (2): surface potential Hl after main charging, and: logarithm of output light amount of the Haloken lamp are taken up.

On the other hand, the target model storage unit 14 stores in advance the following knowledge as repair plan knowledge. That is, (a) Increase V → Increase the control voltage of the transfer transformer (b) Decrease v 1 Decrease the control voltage of the transfer transformer (c) Increase V - 1 Control voltage of the charging transformer (d) Decrease V → Decrease the control voltage of the main charging transformer (e) Increase Ht - shift the halogen lamp control signal to the high voltage side (f) Decrease HL → Halogen lamp control signal Shift to low voltage side.

It is. The repair plan knowledge stored in the target model storage unit 14 is characteristic data specific to this device. By applying the repair plan knowledge to the repair candidates obtained based on the mathematical model, 0. As a repair operation to increase the voltage, (a) Increase V - Increase the control voltage of the transfer transformer (c) Increase V → Increase the control voltage of the charging transformer (f) Decrease HL → Halogen Three methods are available for shifting the lamp control signal to lower voltages.

If you simply want to increase the image density O8, these three
Repair is possible by performing any of the methods.

However, the target machine may be affected by various side effects by increasing the image density O1. Therefore, in this embodiment, as explained below, the inference of secondary effects is performed based on a mathematical model.

When the three repair plans derived in the inference of the side effect repair plan are developed on a mathematical model, FIGS. 9 to 14 are obtained. In other words, (a) Figures 9 and 10 show the case where V is increased (Figure 10 shows O5 when D-〇 is expressed on the mathematical model), (c) V , in the case of raising the
O8・ is expressed on the mathematical model when
, (f) When HL is lowered, Figures 13 and 14
(FIG. 14 shows O3· in the case of D-0 expressed on a mathematical model).

Then, the next state is inferred by performing a functional evaluation based on the mathematical model.

That is, (1) When V is increased (Figures 9 and 10) (a
) Output image density increases.

(b) When D-0, 0.・〉It may be normal.

In other words, fogging may occur.

(C) So > normal, and there is a possibility that a separation failure will occur.

(2) When V is increased (Figures 11 and 12) (a) The output image density increases.

(b) When D-0, OI>normal, and fogging may occur.

(3) When HL is lowered (FIGS. 13 and 14) (a) Only the output image density increases, and there are no other side effects.

Therefore, the repair planning unit 15 selects a repair plan that has the least side effects, that is, a repair plan that lowers the HL. This repair plan is consistent with the operation to eliminate the cause of the failure found in the failure diagnosis.

In other words, looking at it from a different perspective, inferring the cause of a failure in fault diagnosis involves tracing the actual state of the device when it fails on a mathematical model and understanding the state of each component when the device fails. In contrast to estimating the cause of a failure, estimating a repair plan is based on the premise that the device is not in a faulty state but is normal, traces the state of the device on a mathematical model, and performs repairs based on that. Reasoning plans.

In the above-mentioned specific example, the same failure cause and repair plan were obtained both in the inference in the failure diagnosis and in the inference in the repair plan.

However, in some cases, inferences for failure diagnosis assume a device in a failed state, while inferences for a repair plan assume a device in a normal state, so the results obtained may differ depending on the two. .

In such a case, if only those conclusions that do not contradict the conclusions obtained in the inference process of failure diagnosis are selected when inferring a repair plan, the inference process of the repair plan can be performed in a shorter time.

In the above case, if the repair plan of lowering HL cannot be selected, for example, if the AVH volume for shifting the halogen lamp control signal to the lower voltage side is already at the lower limit, then The restoration plan that increases (2) ■, which has the least impact, is selected.

However, if the repair plan of increasing . Which parameter should be manipulated in order to lower . . As a result, it is selected whether to raise HL, lower (1), or lower (2), and a repair plan including prevention of fogging is carried out.

That is, as shown in FIG. 15, the reasoning for the repair operation is developed assuming side effects. In the inference development of repair operations as shown in Figure 15, (a) branches that contradict the previous repair plan on the mathematical model are not selected (b) branches with the least side effects are selected (C ) Unrolling is performed based on the knowledge that the loop that formed it will stop unrolling at that point.

In FIG. 15, in the end, two repair plans remain: (1) the loop of V, ↑-HL↑-v, , ↑, and (2) the loop of V, ↑→V, ↓→V, ↑.

Now, suppose that when loop (1) is performed as a repair plan, the image density becomes a proper density, that is, O6 becomes normal. In such a case, ■. and HL have been increased, so in the pre-repair state where the image density O1 has returned to normal, the value of the surface potential measured by the sensor 1b changes to a much higher value than the value initially measured. It should be there. However, since the repair work was successful, the state of the parameter V after repair must be symbolized normally. Therefore, in such a case, when the repair is completed, the reference data for symbolizing the parameter (2) shown in FIG. 5 is changed based on the measured value measured by the sensor 1b.
For example, the data is rewritten to the data shown in FIG.

In this way, the reference data is updated as necessary after the repair work is completed.

In this embodiment, the above-mentioned (1) in FIG.
Specifically, when the main charging volume VRI is operated to increase the surface potential of the photoreceptor tram 21, and when a rash occurs on the resulting copy, the lamp volume AVR is operated to increase the halogen The light intensity of the lamp is increased and the image density of the copy is diluted.

Then, while increasing the main charging volume ■R1 and the lamp volume AVR alternately and appropriately, when the image density becomes normal, that is, when the parameter O1 becomes normal, it is obtained from the detection output of the densitometer that is the sensor 1c. When this occurs, the repair process is terminated.

Furthermore, if the above two repair plans are infeasible, a repair plan is selected that increases (3) (3) above, and the side effects of this are the occurrence of smearing and separation failure. A fault diagnosis based on two assumptions is performed, and a repair plan is selected.

The selected repair plan is then executed, and in the case of loop processing, failure is determined when the operation of the parameters on the loop reaches its limit.

In addition, in the case of this embodiment, as explained in the specific example, 0. It is determined that the repair is complete when it becomes normal.
In this state, the repair is stopped.

In the inference of the side effects described above, the three repair plans derived in the inference of the repair plan are sequentially developed on a mathematical model, and the side effects are collectively inferred for each of the three repair plans. ing.

Instead of this method of inferring side effects, the following processing may be performed.

That is, suppose that, for example, three repair plans are derived in the repair plan inference. In that case, take only one repair plan out of the three, simulate the side effects that may occur if the actuator means is actuated based on that repair plan, and It is determined whether the negative influence can be removed by actuating an actuator means other than the actuator means selected by the repair plan.

When it is determined that the side effects can be eliminated, the actuators selected by the repair plan are actually operated to carry out the repair, and the side effects are eliminated by activating other actuator means. It removes it.

As a result, there is no need to simulate the side effects based on the other two plans derived from the repair plan, and overall the repair operation time can be shortened.

In the above case, if for the first selected repair plan, a side effect is simulated and it is determined that the simulated side effect cannot be removed by actuating another actuator means. If it is done,
If the first repair plan is abandoned and a second repair plan is taken up, the selected actuator means may be activated based on the second repair plan. determine whether the simulated side effect can be removed by activating an actuator means other than the actuator means, and if the side effect can be removed, the Perform restoration work based on the second restoration plan.

In this way, if the first repair plan is extracted from among the multiple repair plans derived in the inference of the repair plan, the side effects in that case are inferred, and the side effects can be removed. Then, immediately execute the repair based on the first repair plan.

If that repair plan has too large a side effect, it is abandoned, the next repair plan is selected, and the side effects in that case are simulated.

In such a case, it is preferable to select which repair plan first among the plurality of repair plans derived in the inference of the repair plan, taking into account, for example, the cause of the failure obtained in the failure diagnosis.

In the above embodiments, the repair itself is considerably limited due to the small number of actuator parameters, but by increasing the number of actuator parameters, the flexibility and possibilities of repair can be further improved.

In the specific example explained above, if any of the repair operations is successful, the state of the equipment after the success is determined to be normal, so it is determined based on the digital data values provided from each sensor. It is preferable that the reference value data of each parameter (the reference values shown in FIG. 5) be updated and the parameters be symbolized based on the new reference value data.

Further, in the above-mentioned specific example, although the operating range of each actuator was not particularly mentioned, the target model storage unit 14
If the operating range data that sets the actuator's operating range is included in the characteristic data specific to the device stored in the device, the actuator can be operated when the output state of the actuator is within the stored operating range. When the output state of the actuator reaches the upper or lower limit of the stored operating range, it can be determined that the actuator cannot be operated, and this can be used to determine whether the repair work is correct or not.

Furthermore, in the above-mentioned specific example, a system that automatically performs self-diagnosis and self-repair based on a change in sensor output is introduced, or a system is provided in which the image forming apparatus is provided with a self-diagnosis mode setting key, etc. Self-diagnosis and/or self-repair may be performed only when a self-diagnosis mode setting key is operated.

In the above specific example, the system is completely autonomous, that is, the system automatically performs self-diagnosis to determine whether there is a failure or not, and self-repairs if a failure occurs, without any operation by service personnel or users. I picked it up and explained it. However, in the present invention, the sensor is removed from the configuration requirements, and a configuration is adopted in which a service person or the like can measure functional status data at predetermined locations of the image forming apparatus and input the measured data into the apparatus. By doing so, it is possible to configure an image forming apparatus that can perform non-autonomous self-diagnosis and perform autonomous repair based on the self-diagnosis.

In addition, if you configure a system that only selects the actuator to repair a failure based on the results of the self-diagnosis performed by the device, but displays the actuator that should be operated without actually operating the actuator, service The image forming apparatus may include a non-autonomous repair system, in which a person only needs to operate the displayed actuator.

Of course, it is also possible to exclude the configuration requirements of the self-repair system and configure an image forming apparatus having only the self-diagnosis system.

That is, according to the present invention, (1) an image forming apparatus having a fully autonomous self-diagnosis and self-healing system; (2) an image forming apparatus having an autonomous self-diagnosis system and a non-autonomous self-healing system; (3) (4) an image forming device having a non-autonomous self-diagnosis system and a non-autonomous self-healing system; (4) an image forming device having a non-autonomous self-diagnosis system and an autonomous self-healing system; or (5) an image forming device having only an autonomous self-diagnosis system. The forming device can be configured as desired.

In addition, in this invention, when inferring a repair plan,
In consideration of the adjustment range of the actuator, only actuators that are actually adjustable may be selected.

To explain more specifically, the actuator is, for example, A
In the case of VR, the lower limit of AVR is "0" and the upper limit is rlo
oJ, and the configuration is such that the AVH setting state can be detected as an integer value between O and 100. In addition, the lower limit value “0” and the upper limit value r1 of the AVR are stored in the target model storage unit 14.
Set 00J. Therefore, when the AVR is in an adjusted state, the adjusted state of the AVR is understood as integer value data of any one of 0 to 100 corresponding to the adjusted state.

The repair planning unit 15 uses integer value data from 0 to 100 obtained depending on the adjustment state of the AVH
It is determined whether the AVR can be selected as the actuator for troubleshooting. That is, the lower limit value and upper limit value of the AVR stored in the target model storage unit 14 are compared with the current adjustment state value, and it is determined whether the AVR can be further operated toward the lower limit or toward the upper limit. It will be done.

Therefore, by adopting such a configuration for each of a plurality of actuators or any actuator among them, it is possible to obtain the result of the inference of the repair plan or the combination of actuator means that can be actually operated. This has the advantage of being output and allowing for the inference of a practical repair plan.

Note that the above explanation is just an example of how to set the operating range, and the operating range may be set using another method and compared with the actual state of the actuator.

In addition, the repair planning section 15 not only compares the set adjustable range of the actuator with the actual adjustment value, but also the failure diagnosis section 12 when performing failure diagnosis.
The set adjustable range of the actuator and the actual adjustment value may be compared and referred to.

Furthermore, in the image forming apparatus according to the embodiment of the present invention, for example, a manually operated self-diagnosis mode setting key or switch is provided as the self-diagnosis mode setting means, and the self-diagnosis mode setting key or switch is operated. The above-mentioned self-diagnosis or self-diagnosis and self-repair can be performed only when the

The location of the self-diagnosis mode setting key or switch is as follows.
Although it may be placed in any desired location, it is preferable to provide it in a location different from that of normal image forming operation keys, such as inside the image forming device so that it can be operated with the front panel open. It would be nice.

<Effects of the Invention> According to the present invention, it is possible to determine whether or not a failure has occurred in the image forming apparatus, and when a failure has occurred, the symptoms of the failure,
The cause of the failure and the condition of the equipment are inferred. Then, based on the inference result, a plurality of pre-stored cases are searched, and the most suitable case for fault repair is detected. Also,
Detected cases are corrected as necessary. Then, failure repair processing is performed based on the case. In case-based fault repair processing, the repair plan is registered in the case in advance, so there is no need to reason about the repair plan, which shortens the time it takes to start repair processing, and overall the fault diagnosis and fault repair can be done in a short time. The image forming apparatus can perform the following steps.

Further, according to the present invention, since the cause of failure is determined based on qualitative data common to image forming apparatuses, a self-diagnosis and self-repair system that can handle unknown failures that are not explicitly described is provided. The image forming apparatus can have the following.

Furthermore, the self-diagnosis and self-repair system according to the present invention can be commonly applied to many types of image forming apparatuses, rather than to a specific image forming apparatus, and as a result, is inexpensive. An imaging device having a self-diagnosis and self-repair system can be provided.

[Brief explanation of drawings]

FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing the system configuration of an embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 2 is a flowchart showing the operation of the control circuit in FIG. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing a schematic configuration of the present invention when used in a plain paper copying machine. FIG. 4 is a diagram representing a mathematical model of this embodiment. FIG. 5 is a diagram showing reference value data of each parameter necessary when each parameter is symbolized. FIGS. 6 and 7 are diagrams showing development for fault diagnosis on a mathematical model. FIGS. 8A, 8B, and 8C are flowcharts showing repair work processing to which an example of an embodiment of the present invention is applied. FIGS. 9 to 14 are diagrams showing development for inferring side effects on a mathematical model. FIG. 15 is a diagram showing operations when selecting a repair plan. FIG. 16 is a diagram showing updated reference value data. In the figure, it is shown, la, lb, 1cm sensor, 6a. 6b, 6c...Actuator, 10...System control circuit, 11...Digital signal/symbol conversion section, 12...Fault diagnosis section, 13...Failure simulation section, 14...Target model storage Part, 15...Repair planning part, 16... Symbol/digital signal conversion part,
17 shows a case base storage unit, 18 shows a work script storage unit. Figure A

Claims (1)

[Scope of Claims] 1. A self-diagnosis and self-repair system for an image forming device that embodies image data to generate a visible image, which system is capable of determining whether or not the target device is malfunctioning. Fault diagnosis means for determining and inferring the failure symptoms, cause of failure, and equipment status when a failure occurs, failure symptoms that may occur in the target equipment, cause of failure, status of the equipment at that time, and repair. A case storage means in which a case including an index of work required for the operation is stored at least by cause of failure, a work script including a plurality of tasks is stored at least by cause of failure, and a failure diagnosis means is used to diagnose the case. Case detection means for detecting applicable cases from cases stored in the case storage means based on failure symptoms and causes of failure; a first work corresponding to a work index of the case detected by the case detection means; a repair work execution means that reads out the first work from a work script that has the same failure cause and executes the read first work; and after the execution of the first work, a work success/failure unit that determines whether or not the result to be achieved by the first work has been obtained. determination means; work script modification means for modifying the application conditions of the first work of the work script in response to the work success/failure determination means determining that the work is unsuccessful; the work script modification means adjusting the application conditions of the first work; If there is a second work that can make the current state of the device applicable to the first work after the application conditions have been corrected, search for the work script that caused the failure. A self-diagnosis and self-repair system for an image forming apparatus, comprising: additional processing means for executing a work; and first work re-execution means for re-executing the first work after completion of processing by the additional processing means. .