Distributed Safety Controller Architecture for 3D Sensor Evaluation
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current safety systems struggle to implement complex safety functions in high-demand applications like human-robot collaboration and autonomous vehicles due to performance limitations in sensors and controllers, particularly with the processing of image data, and lack efficient error coping mechanisms.
Innovation Solution
A safety system architecture that distributes redundancy and diversity in series between a single-channel sensor system and programmable controller, allowing for complex safety functions like object localization and classification using 3D image data, with a comparator unit to ensure safe output signals and reduce hardware and heat dissipation challenges.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If complex safety functions are implemented solely on a sensor system, then measurement precision and safety function quality are improved, but device complexity and processing power requirements increase beyond current sensor capabilities
Solution Approach 1:
The safety system is segmented into two distinct components: a sensor system (first unit) and a programmable controller (second unit). The sensor system performs initial evaluation of sensor data to generate first result signals, while the programmable controller performs independent evaluation to generate second result signals. This segmentation allows complex safety functions to be distributed across components with appropriate processing capabilities, avoiding the need for excessive processing power in a single sensor unit.
Solution Approach 2:
The programmable controller acts as an intermediary between the sensor system and the final safety output. It receives sensor data from the sensor system, performs independent evaluation, and compares its results with the sensor system's results. This intermediary role enables complex safety functions to be implemented without overloading the sensor system's processing capabilities.
2Reliability
If redundant diverse design is implemented on the sensor to cope with errors, then reliability is improved, but device complexity and construction size increase
Solution Approach 1:
Redundancy is achieved by segmenting the evaluation function across two independent units: the sensor system's control and evaluation unit and the programmable controller's control and evaluation unit. Each unit independently evaluates sensor data using diverse methods, providing redundancy without requiring duplicate hardware within the sensor itself. This distributes the complexity and physical size requirements.
Solution Approach 2:
The programmable controller serves multiple functions: it acts as a backup evaluation unit for safety functions, a comparator for result verification, and a coordination center for the overall safety system. This multi-functionality provides redundancy and error coping capability without requiring dedicated redundant hardware in the sensor system.
3Productivity
If higher processing power is provided in the sensor system, then complex safety functions can be implemented, but waste heat and costs increase
Solution Approach 1:
The heavy processing burden for complex safety functions is extracted from the sensor system and placed in the programmable controller. The sensor system performs only initial evaluation to generate first result signals, while the computationally intensive independent evaluation and comparison operations are performed by the programmable controller. This extraction allows complex safety functions to be implemented without requiring high processing power (and associated heat generation) in the sensor system.
Solution Approach 2:
The programmable controller serves as an intermediary that handles the computationally demanding tasks of independent evaluation and result comparison. By positioning this intermediary between the sensor system and the final safety output, the system achieves high processing capability for safety functions while keeping the sensor system's power consumption and heat generation low.
4Power
If safety functions are implemented on a programmable controller, then processing power and heat dissipation are improved, but current safety controllers lack the capability to perform demanding safety functions
Solution Approach 1:
The system employs dynamic evaluation where the programmable controller performs independent safety evaluation only when needed for comparison with the sensor system's results. The controller adapts its processing based on the requirements of the specific safety function and the data being processed, enabling it to handle demanding safety functions while maintaining efficient operation for less complex tasks.
Solution Approach 2:
The programmable controller is configured to change its processing parameters and evaluation methods based on the type of safety function being performed. It can adjust its evaluation algorithms and processing intensity to match the specific requirements of different safety functions, thereby achieving both high processing power and adaptability to various safety requirements.
Data Source
AI summary
A method using a safety system having at least one sensor system having at least one sensor in a first housing and at least one programmable controller in a second housing, wherein the sensor system has a first control and evaluation unit, with the first control and evaluation unit being configured to evaluate sensor data from the sensor of the sensor system and to form first result signals, wherein the programmable controller has a second control and evaluation unit, with the sensor system being configured to transfer sensor data to the second control and evaluation unit, with the second control and evaluation unit being configured to evaluate sensor data from the sensor of the sensor system and to form second result signals, and wherein a comparator unit is provided, with the comparator unit