Body-Worn Safety Control for Barrier-Free Autonomous Machines

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing safety measures for autonomously operating machines in industrial environments are costly, inflexible, and reduce machine availability, as they require static barriers and frequent shutdowns when operators are present, limiting the machines' potential and operator safety.

Innovation Solution

A body-worn device with safety means that generates an input signal only when correctly locked and arranged on the person, interacting with a safety controller to dynamically manage the safety environment, allowing machines to operate safely alongside operators without static barriers, enhancing flexibility and availability.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If fixed installations such as fences or barriers are used to isolate autonomously operating machines, then safety performance is improved, but device complexity and cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety performanceVSAvoiddevice complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces mechanical safety barriers (fences, barriers) with an electronic/optical safety system consisting of body-worn devices, safety controllers, and signal processing units. This substitution eliminates the need for physical isolation structures while maintaining safety performance through electronic monitoring and control mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The safety controller serves multiple functions: it receives signals from body-worn devices, processes safety information, controls autonomously operating machines, and coordinates safety operations across multiple devices. This multi-functional approach consolidates what would otherwise require separate safety systems into a single integrated controller.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Reliability

If fixed installations are used to ensure safety, then safety performance is improved, but productivity decreases due to machine shutdowns when operators are present

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety performanceVSAvoidproductivity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The safety system transitions from a static barrier-based approach to a dynamic body-worn device system. The safety status changes dynamically based on the operator's position, movement, and interaction with the machine, allowing the machine to operate continuously while maintaining safety through real-time monitoring rather than requiring shutdowns.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The body-worn device continuously provides feedback signals to the safety controller about the operator's status and position. This feedback mechanism enables real-time safety assessment, allowing the machine to maintain operation when safe and shut down only when necessary, thereby preserving productivity while ensuring safety.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Reliability

If each autonomously operating machine is equipped with its own safety equipment, then safety performance is improved, but device complexity and cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety performanceVSAvoiddevice complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The safety controller serves multiple functions: it receives signals from body-worn devices, processes safety information, controls autonomously operating machines, and coordinates safety operations across multiple devices. This multi-functional approach consolidates what would otherwise require separate safety systems into a single integrated controller.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Ease of operation

If body-worn devices are used without failsafe locking mechanisms, then ease of operation is improved, but reliability decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveease of operationVSAvoidreliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The failsafe locking mechanism ensures that the body-worn device is properly secured to the operator's body before it can generate valid safety signals. This preliminary action of locking prevents signal generation until correct wear is confirmed, ensuring reliability without significantly impacting ease of operation since the locking process is automatic and quick.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS10909439B2System for safeguarding a person from an autonomously operating machine
Publication Date: 2021.02.02 PILZ GMBH & CO KG
  • US10909439B2 patent drawing
  • US10909439B2 patent drawing
  • US10909439B2 patent drawing

AI summary

System for safeguarding a person from an autonomously operating machine. The system comprises a safety controller for asserting control over the autonomously operating machine based on an input signal generated by a body-worn. The body-worn device comprises safety means for ensuring failsafe locking and arrangement of the body-worn device on the person in a predefined manner. Furthermore, the body-worn device is configured to generate the input signal only when the body-worn device is locked and arranged in said predefined manner.