Distributed Robotic Controller for Low-Latency Skill Coordination

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing robotic systems rely on commodity hardware controllers that limit flexibility and introduce latency and errors due to centralized decision-making, leading to suboptimal performance and efficiency.

Innovation Solution

A robotic controller is integrated closer to the robotic elements, utilizing an AI-powered computing platform that makes real-time decisions and coordinates skills, such as gripper operations and motion planning, to enhance flexibility and responsiveness.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Device complexity

If a centralized control computer processes all sensor data and makes decisions, then system coordination is simplified, but latency and response time increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol architectureVSAvoiddecision latency
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The control system is segmented into distributed controller units, each responsible for specific robotic elements. Each controller independently processes sensor data and makes decisions locally, eliminating the single-point bottleneck of centralized control and reducing decision latency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The control architecture transitions from a vertical hierarchical structure (centralized top-down control) to a horizontal distributed structure where controllers operate at the same level and can communicate peer-to-peer, adding a dimensional shift that improves response time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

2Ease of manufacture

If commodity hardware controllers are used with robotic arms, then hardware compatibility is improved, but system flexibility and performance potential are limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvehardware compatibilityVSAvoidsystem flexibility
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The controller units are designed with universal interfaces and standardized communication protocols that enable them to work with multiple types of robotic elements from different manufacturers. This multi-functionality allows the system to maintain hardware compatibility while achieving greater flexibility through software-configurable control strategies.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The control system employs dynamic, reconfigurable controller units that can adapt their behavior and control parameters in real-time based on task requirements. This dynamic capability allows the same hardware to flexibly adjust performance characteristics without being locked into fixed manufacturer-specific limitations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Power

If sensor data is sent to a remote control computer for processing, then computational resources are centralized, but communication bandwidth and response speed are reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomputational capabilityVSAvoiddata processing speed
Core Design Contradiction:
PowerVSSpeed

Solution Approach 1:

Computational processing is segmented and distributed to local controller units positioned near the robotic elements they control. This segmentation allows sensor data to be processed immediately at the source without requiring continuous communication with a remote computer, thereby maintaining computational capability while dramatically improving processing speed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

4Device complexity

If a single control computer manages all robotic elements, then system integration is simplified, but points of failure increase and reliability decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem integrationVSAvoidsystem reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The control system is divided into independent controller units, each managing specific robotic elements. This segmentation creates redundancy where the failure of one controller does not necessarily bring down the entire system, as other controllers continue to operate independently, thereby improving reliability while maintaining manageable integration through standardized interfaces.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS20250326128A1Integrated robotic controller
Publication Date: 2025.10.23 DEXTERITY INC
  • US20250326128A1 patent drawing
  • US20250326128A1 patent drawing
  • US20250326128A1 patent drawing

AI summary

An integrated robotic controller is disclosed which includes a communication interface configured to provide connectivity to a set of elements comprising a robotic system and a processor coupled to the communication interface and configured to: receive state information via the communication interface from or more elements included in the set of elements; make based at least in part on the state information a decision as to how to control one or more elements included in the set of elements; and send to each of the one or more elements, via the communication interface, a command determined based on at least in part on the decision.