Cable Processing Tool Identification and Verification System

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing cable processing systems require multiple large and heavy tool units, leading to increased costs and the risk of improper tool usage due to similarity, resulting in rejects, tool damage, and longer downtime.

Innovation Solution

A system with two sets of tools and a processing device that uses a test unit with identification means and a check device to ensure only suitable tools are combined for specific processing steps, preventing improper usage through automatic recognition and verification.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If multiple different tool units are provided for exchange to process different cable shapes and processing steps, then the processing device can handle various cable types and operations, but the units become large and heavy, increasing cost and complexity

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecapability to process different cable shapes and processing stepsVSAvoidnumber of large and heavy tool units required
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The tool system is divided into two independent sets (first set and second set), each containing multiple tools that can be independently exchanged. This segmentation allows the processing device to handle different cable types and processing steps using combinations of tools from the two sets, rather than requiring multiple complete tool units, thereby reducing overall system complexity while maintaining versatility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Tools from the first set and second set can be combined in various ways to perform different processing steps on different cable types. The holding devices are designed to accommodate multiple tool types from their respective sets, enabling a single processing device to perform multiple functions through different tool combinations, thus reducing the need for multiple specialized tool units.

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

2Adaptability or versatility

If tools are individually exchangeable and many tools are provided, then flexibility in tool selection is improved, but the danger of confusing similar tools increases, leading to improper usage, rejects, and tool damage

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveflexibility in tool selectionVSAvoidrisk of improper tool usage and tool damage
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system incorporates identification means that automatically detect and identify tools when they are mounted in the holding devices. The check device then verifies whether the identified tools form a suitable combination for the intended processing step. This feedback mechanism provides immediate confirmation of correct tool selection, preventing improper usage and the associated risks of rejects and tool damage while maintaining flexible tool exchangeability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The manual verification process for tool suitability is replaced by an automated identification and check system. Instead of relying on operator judgment to select correct tool combinations, the system uses identification means (such as sensors or readers) to automatically detect tool characteristics and the check device to verify compatibility, eliminating human error in tool selection.

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

3Adaptability or versatility

If multiple large and heavy tool units are provided for exchange, then complete processing capabilities are available, but the exchange process becomes time-consuming and costly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomplete processing capabilitiesVSAvoidtool exchange time
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

By segmenting the tool system into two independent sets with independently exchangeable tools, the patent enables partial tool exchanges rather than requiring exchange of complete heavy tool units. Operators can exchange individual tools from the first set or second set as needed, significantly reducing exchange time and effort while maintaining complete processing capabilities through appropriate tool combinations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system prepares for efficient tool exchange by implementing identification means that automatically recognize tools during the exchange process. This preliminary identification capability allows the check device to verify tool suitability immediately upon exchange, streamlining the entire tool change process and minimizing downtime without requiring complete tool unit replacements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS7340812B2System for processing a cable using at least two tools
Publication Date: 2008.03.11 KOMAX HOLDING
  • US7340812B2 patent drawing
  • US7340812B2 patent drawing
  • US7340812B2 patent drawing

AI summary

The system (1) for processing a cable (5) comprises a first set of tools (30(i)), a second set of tools (35(j)) and a processing device (10) for executing different processing steps for processing a cable (5) using at least two tools (30(i), 35(j)). The processing device (10) comprises: a first holding device (15), which is intended for the purpose of removably holding a first tool (30(i)) which is selected from the first set of tools, and a second holding device (16), which is intended for the purpose of removably holding a second tool (35(j)) which is selected from the second set of tools, at least one tool of the first set being suitable for processing the cable exclusively in combination with one of the tools of a predetermined partial set of the second set. A test unit (40) comprises identification means (45) for identifying the first tool (30(i)) and the second tool (35(j) and a check device (55) for checking whether the identified tools (30(i) 35(j)) are each tools which are suitable for processing in combination with one another.