3D Sensor Hazard Zone Configuration for Shadow-Free Monitoring
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current methods for configuring hazard zones around machines in industrial environments lack support for ensuring secure detection by 3D sensors, leading to potential safety issues due to masking and shadowing, which can result in undetected objects or incomplete monitoring.
Innovation Solution
A method and device for configuring danger zones that ensure all outer surfaces are visible to the 3D sensor, using a data record to define the zone and check visibility, allowing for flexible and secure configuration, with the option to add additional sensors if necessary to prevent shadowing and occlusion.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If hazard zones are configured using conventional methods without automatic verification, then configuration flexibility is maintained, but safety reliability deteriorates due to undetected masking and shadowing
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs automatic verification by checking whether all outer surfaces of configured hazard zones are visible to the 3D sensor. This feedback mechanism detects masking and shadowing issues, providing safety verification without requiring complex manual inspection procedures.
Solution Approach 2:
The configuration system automatically verifies its own safety correctness by checking visibility of hazard zone surfaces. This self-service approach eliminates the need for external manual verification while maintaining configuration flexibility, resolving the contradiction between reliability and complexity.
2Adaptability or versatility
If hazard zones are configured to minimize safety distances for HRC applications, then collaboration flexibility improves, but detection reliability worsens due to increased risk of masking and shadowing
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary visibility checks during the configuration phase to identify and correct masking and shadowing issues before deployment. This allows hazard zones to be configured with minimal safety distances for HRC while ensuring detection reliability through advance verification.
Solution Approach 2:
Automatic visibility feedback during configuration enables the system to verify that minimized safety distances do not create undetectable regions. This feedback mechanism maintains both collaboration flexibility and detection reliability in HRC applications.
3Reliability
If additional 3D sensors are added to eliminate shadowing and masking, then monitoring reliability improves, but system complexity and cost increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary visibility analysis during configuration to identify shadowing and masking issues. This allows planners to make informed decisions about whether additional sensors are necessary, avoiding unnecessary system complexity while maintaining monitoring reliability where needed.
Solution Approach 2:
The automatic visibility verification provides feedback on monitoring coverage, enabling targeted addition of sensors only where necessary to eliminate critical blind spots. This feedback-driven approach improves monitoring reliability while minimizing system complexity.
4Ease of operation
If manual configuration verification is performed by installers, then configuration flexibility is maintained, but time consumption and human error increase
Solution Approach 1:
The configuration system automatically verifies its own safety correctness by checking visibility of hazard zone surfaces. This self-service verification eliminates time-consuming manual checks while maintaining configuration ease, as installers can confidently configure zones without performing tedious manual verification.
Solution Approach 2:
Automatic verification provides immediate feedback on configuration correctness, eliminating the time loss associated with manual verification processes. The system maintains configuration ease while removing human error risks through automated safety checks.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2~3
Figure 4~5
AI summary
A method is described for configuring at least one hazard location (26a-b) to be monitored by at least one 3D sensor (10, 10a-b), wherein the hazard location (26a-b) is a volume defined by external surfaces (36, 38) in which a machine (26) to be protected is located, and wherein the external surfaces (36, 38) are defined by the configuration. During or after the configuration, it is checked whether the external surfaces (36, 38) are visible to at least one of the 3D sensors (10, 10a-b).