Agricultural Implement Speed-Based Actuator Control

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Complex agricultural implements with hydraulic functions pose challenges in user-friendliness and safety, as they require precise control of large and heavy components, necessitating advanced control systems that minimize operator training and risk of injury.

Innovation Solution

A method that utilizes speed signals and user interface inputs to restrict or permit actuator function activations based on predetermined speed criteria, ensuring safe operation by preventing activations at hazardous speeds and requiring secondary inputs from secure locations.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If intelligent processor-based control systems are used to manage complex hydraulic functions, then the agricultural implement becomes more controllable and user-friendly, but the risk of accidental activation and operator safety hazards increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveuser-friendlinessVSAvoidoperator safety risk
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces a speed signal intermediary that acts as a mediator between the control system and actuator functions. The control unit receives speed signals and uses them to mediate whether actuator activations are permitted, allowing intelligent control while preventing unsafe operations through this intermediate safety layer

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously monitors speed signals and provides feedback to the control unit, which then adjusts actuator activation permissions accordingly. This feedback mechanism ensures that the control system adapts to current operating conditions and prevents activations when speed criteria are not met, resolving the safety concern

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Object-affected harmful factors

If speed-based restrictions are implemented to prevent accidental actuator activation, then operator safety is improved, but the complexity of the control system increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoperator safety riskVSAvoidcontrol system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the operational parameter from simple on/off control to speed-dependent control. By monitoring speed signals and comparing them against predefined criteria, the system adds a parameter dimension (speed) that enables safety restrictions without requiring complex mechanical safety devices

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The control unit preliminarily evaluates speed signals before permitting actuator activations. This preliminary action checks whether speed criteria are satisfied before allowing control signals to activate actuators, preventing unsafe operations before they can occur rather than requiring complex post-activation safety mechanisms

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Object-affected harmful factors

If multiple control criteria are required for actuator activation, then safety is enhanced, but the ease of operation decreases due to increased training requirements

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoperator safety riskVSAvoidoperator training requirement
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The control system performs self-service by automatically monitoring speed signals and making decisions about actuator activation permissions. This eliminates the need for operators to manually assess safety conditions or receive extensive training on safety procedures, as the system autonomously enforces safety criteria

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements partial control restrictions based on speed criteria - not all actuator functions are restricted at all times, but only those that would be unsafe at current speeds. This partial action approach maintains operational flexibility while enhancing safety, avoiding excessive restrictions that would complicate operation

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP3340768B1Methods of controlling an agricultural implement, and an agricultural implement
Publication Date: 2020.11.04 VAEDERSTAD HOLDING AB
  • EP3340768B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3340768B1 patent drawingFigure 2

AI summary

This document relates to an agricultural implement (1 ) with hydraulic functions (F1, F2, F3; F4, F5, F6) and a method of controlling an agricultural implement (1 ) comprising receiving a speed signal which represents the advancing speed of the agricultural implement (1 ), receiving a control signal from a first user interface (6a), allowing, if the speed fulfils a predetermined criterion, the activation of a first actuator function (F1, F2, F3) and of a second actuator function (F4, F5, F6) based on a control signal, and, if the speed does not fulfil the criterion, restricting the possibility of activating the first actuator function (F1, F2, F3) based on a control signal.