Closed-Loop Transport Optimization for Carrier Count and Belt Speed

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for optimizing closed-loop transportation systems, such as ovalmovers, rely on manual trial and error, which is time-consuming and costly, and do not adequately predict throughput and performance before physical implementation.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented device uses algorithmic procedures to optimize the number of carriers and operation speed of the belt system based on status signals, providing optimized settings without physical implementation, thus reducing time and costs.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of manufacture

If manual trial and error method is used to optimize closed-loop transportation system, then implementation is simple, but time consumption and costs increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveease of optimizationVSAvoidtime consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent creates a virtual copy or digital model of the closed-loop transportation system that can be simulated and optimized computationally. This virtual model allows testing different configurations (number of carriers, belt speeds) without physical implementation, thereby reducing time and costs while maintaining optimization effectiveness

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces the manual mechanical trial-and-error optimization process with an automated computer-based simulation system. The computing device automatically tests various system configurations and determines optimal settings, substituting human manual adjustment with algorithmic optimization

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

2Productivity

If larger number of carriers is provided in ovalmover, then throughput and performance increase, but implementation costs and congestion effects increase

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovethroughputVSAvoidnumber of carriers
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent systematically varies key parameters including the number of carriers, belt speeds, and operational configurations to identify the optimal combination that maximizes throughput while minimizing costs and congestion. The simulation allows testing different parameter sets to find the sweet spot

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Productivity

If higher operation speed of belt is used, then carrier return speed increases and throughput improves, but energy costs and maintenance costs increase

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovethroughputVSAvoidenergy cost
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent evaluates different belt operation speeds as a variable parameter to determine the optimal speed that achieves required throughput while minimizing energy consumption and maintenance requirements. The simulation identifies the cost-effective speed range

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

4Ease of operation

If manual trial and error approach is used for characterization, then system is easy to understand, but cost-effectiveness and speed of optimization decrease

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveease of understandingVSAvoidoptimization speed
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses a virtual simulation model that replicates the physical system's behavior, allowing rapid testing and characterization without physical prototypes. This digital copy enables fast iteration while maintaining conceptual clarity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual characterization processes with automated computer simulations that rapidly evaluate system performance. The computational approach speeds up optimization while the results remain interpretable

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

Data Source

PatentEP4631896A1Computer-implemented device, computer-implemented method, and computer program product for optimizing a closed-loop transportation system
Publication Date: 2025.10.15 SIEMENS AG
  • EP4631896A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4631896A1 patent drawingFigure 2A
  • EP4631896A1 patent drawingFigure 2B

AI summary

The invention relates to a computer-implemented device for optimizing a closed-loop transportation system (100), the closed-loop transportation system (100) comprising a linear transport system (110), including a first end (A) and a second end (B) as well as a belt system (130) arranged to form a closed-loop between the first end (A) and the second end (B) of the linear transport system(110), wherein the computer-implemented device comprises a receiving unit for receiving a number N, with N ≥ 1, of status signals indicative of an operation state of the closed-loop transportation system (100), a calculating unit using at least one algorithmic procedure, said at least one algorithmic procedure being configured to provide at least one output signal for optimizing the closed-loop transportation system (100) using the number N of status signals as input and a controlling unit for controlling the closed-loop transportation system (100) using the provided at least one output signal.