Control Parameter Tuning With Adaptive Stop Conditions

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing systems struggle to determine the optimal number of iterations for evaluating control parameters, making it difficult to efficiently adjust them.

Innovation Solution

An adjustment assistance method and system that drives a drive target under multiple operation conditions, calculates evaluation values, determines a representative value, and adjusts parameters based on this value, ending the process when the target is reached or predetermined time/number of changes is met.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If the evaluation operation is repeatedly performed to obtain the best solution, then the manufacturing precision of control parameter adjustment is improved, but the loss of time increases because it is difficult to determine how many times the evaluation should be repeated

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol parameter adjustment precisionVSAvoidadjustment time
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by pre-defining end conditions and interruption conditions before the evaluation operation begins. The control device is configured with predetermined criteria including target performance values, maximum repetition counts, and time limits. This allows the system to automatically terminate the evaluation process when these pre-set conditions are met, eliminating the need to manually determine how many repetitions are needed while ensuring sufficient precision is achieved.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If the evaluation operation is repeated many times to ensure optimal parameters, then the reliability of parameter optimization is improved, but the productivity decreases due to extended adjustment time

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveparameter optimization reliabilityVSAvoidadjustment efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies dynamics by making the evaluation process adaptive and dynamic rather than static. The system continuously monitors multiple parameters including the number of repetitions performed, time elapsed, and performance improvement trends. Based on this dynamic information, the control device automatically adjusts the continuation or termination of the evaluation process, allowing sufficient repetitions for reliability while preventing excessive repetitions that would reduce productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Manufacturing precision

If the control parameters are adjusted through repeated evaluation, then the manufacturing precision is improved, but the device complexity increases due to multiple evaluation steps

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol parameter precisionVSAvoidevaluation process complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies feedback by implementing a closed-loop evaluation system where the control device continuously monitors performance results and compares them against target values and predetermined conditions. The feedback mechanism automatically determines whether to continue or terminate the evaluation process based on real-time performance data, reducing the need for complex manual evaluation protocols while maintaining high precision through systematic feedback-driven adjustments.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentEP4685583A1Adjustment assistance method and adjustment assistance system
Publication Date: 2026.01.28 PANASONIC INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT CO LTD
  • EP4685583A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4685583A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4685583A1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A control parameter is efficiently adjusted. An adjustment assistance method includes the following steps. (a)A step of driving a drive target under a plurality of operation conditions using a control parameter (S203). (b)A step of calculating a plurality of evaluation values (S204). (c)A step of determining a representative evaluation value from among the plurality of evaluation values (S206). (d)A step of changing the control parameter based on the representative evaluation value (S207). (e)A step of repeating (a) to (d) using the control parameter changed in (d). (f)A step of ending the adjustment of the control parameter on condition that the representative evaluation value has reached a target performance value. (S212) (g)When the representative evaluation value has not reached the target performance value, a step of the adjustment of the control parameter is interrupted on condition that adjustment time of the control parameter has reached predetermined set time or the number of times of change of the control parameter has reached a predetermined set number of times (S214).