3D Sanding Toolpath Control for Selective Workpiece Regions

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current automated finishing systems face inefficiencies in scanning and processing workpieces due to the need for comprehensive scanning and high computational complexity, which increases latency and requires significant human input for precise region identification and processing.

Innovation Solution

An autonomous system that uses optical sensors and actuators to navigate and process a workpiece by detecting markers, generating a toolpath based on virtual models, and maintaining target forces, allowing for selective scanning and processing of defined regions, thereby reducing overall scanning and processing time and human intervention.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If comprehensive scanning of the entire workpiece is performed, then complete geometric data is obtained, but scan time and computational complexity increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvegeometric data completenessVSAvoidscan time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The workpiece surface is divided into multiple regions of interest (ROIs) based on marker detection. Instead of scanning the entire workpiece, the system segments the scanning task to focus only on relevant regions containing defects or features of interest, thereby reducing scan time while maintaining data completeness for critical areas.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies different scanning strategies to different regions: high-resolution scanning is applied only to regions containing markers or defects, while other regions receive reduced or no scanning. This local differentiation optimizes the balance between data quality and scanning efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Manufacturing precision

If comprehensive scanning and processing of the entire workpiece is performed, then complete surface finish is achieved, but computational complexity and processing time increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesurface finish qualityVSAvoidcomputational complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system extracts only the necessary geometric data from regions containing markers or defects for toolpath generation. By taking out only the relevant portions of the workpiece geometry needed for processing, the computational complexity is reduced while maintaining the quality of surface finish in critical areas.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs partial scanning and processing actions focused only on regions requiring attention. Instead of applying uniform comprehensive processing to the entire workpiece, selective processing is applied to specific regions, reducing computational burden while achieving the required surface finish quality where it matters most.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Measurement precision

If manual region identification is used, then precise processing areas are identified, but human input and processing time increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveregion identification accuracyVSAvoidhuman intervention requirement
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system automatically identifies regions of interest by detecting markers on the workpiece surface without requiring manual input. The autonomous detection and identification of processing areas eliminates the need for human operators to manually specify regions, reducing both human intervention and processing time while maintaining identification accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

4Manufacturing precision

If force control is applied during sanding, then surface finish quality is improved, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesurface finish qualityVSAvoidforce control mechanism complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system employs force sensors to monitor the contact force between the sanding head and workpiece in real-time. This feedback mechanism allows the control system to adjust sanding parameters dynamically, maintaining optimal force levels for quality surface finish while using a relatively simple sensor-based approach rather than complex active control mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS20240286281A1Method for selective, autonomous processing of regions of a workpiece via three-dimensional sanding
Publication Date: 2024.08.29 GRAYMATTER ROBOTICS INC
  • US20240286281A1 patent drawing
  • US20240286281A1 patent drawing
  • US20240286281A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A method includes: accessing a virtual model defining a geometry of a workpiece; navigating an optical sensor about the workpiece; accessing an image of the workpiece; detecting a marker, on the workpiece, depicted in the image; defining a first workpiece region of the workpiece bounded by the marker; defining a toolpath within the first workpiece region based on a geometry of the first workpiece region represented in the virtual model; assigning a first target force to the first toolpath; and during a processing cycle accessing a first sequence of force values output by a force sensor coupled to the sanding head, navigating the sanding head across the first workpiece region according to the first toolpath, and based on the first sequence of force values, deviating the sanding head from the first toolpath to maintain forces of the sanding head on the workpiece proximal the first target force.