Dynamic Energy Management Device for Time-Point Power Optimization
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional power management devices fail to adjust energy-saving techniques dynamically based on time points within an object period, leading to inefficient power consumption and user dissatisfaction, as they apply the same standards throughout the period without considering the proximity to the period's end or beginning.
Innovation Solution
A management device that includes a power acquisition portion, a date acquisition portion, a state determination table, and an action table, which extracts target achievement levels and corresponding operations based on division periods and power ranges to control energy-saving actions dynamically, ensuring power consumption remains within target values by adjusting operations according to the current time point within the object period.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If the same energy-saving standard is applied throughout the entire object period, then the device structure is simple and easy to operate, but the power consumption cannot be optimized effectively at different time points
Solution Approach 1:
The object period is divided into multiple division periods (first division period, second division period, etc.), and different energy-saving standards are applied to each division period. This segmentation allows the system to optimize power consumption at different time points while maintaining manageable complexity through structured control rules.
Solution Approach 2:
The energy-saving technique determination is made dynamic by adjusting the evaluation timing from a single end-of-period assessment to multiple assessments at different time points (first time point, second time point, etc.). This dynamic approach enables real-time optimization while the standardized division periods keep the control logic organized and manageable.
2Manufacturing precision
If energy-saving operations are determined at the end of the object period only, then the control logic is simple, but the target power consumption cannot be achieved in time
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary energy-saving determinations at multiple time points (first time point, second time point) before the object period ends. This allows the system to take preliminary actions to ensure target achievement while maintaining simple control logic through standardized division periods and predetermined evaluation criteria.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements feedback mechanisms by evaluating power consumption at multiple time points and adjusting energy-saving techniques accordingly. Each division period's evaluation provides feedback that informs subsequent control decisions, improving target achievement precision while the structured approach prevents control logic from becoming overly complex.
3Productivity
If aggressive energy-saving measures are applied throughout the period, then the target power consumption is more likely to be achieved, but user satisfaction decreases due to unnecessary power reduction
Solution Approach 1:
By segmenting the object period into division periods with different evaluation time points, the system applies energy-saving measures only when and where needed. This prevents unnecessary power reduction in periods where the target is already on track, thereby maintaining user satisfaction while achieving the overall power consumption target.
Solution Approach 2:
The dynamic evaluation at multiple time points allows the system to adjust energy-saving intensity based on actual power consumption patterns. This dynamic approach ensures aggressive measures are applied only when necessary to achieve the target, avoiding unnecessary restrictions that would reduce user satisfaction.
4Adaptability or versatility
If energy-saving techniques are determined based on a single target achievement level, then the control system is simple, but it cannot adapt to different time points within the object period
Solution Approach 1:
The system segments the target achievement levels into multiple states (first state, second state, third state, etc.) corresponding to different division periods and time points. This segmentation enables time-point adaptability while keeping the control system manageable through structured state definitions and transition rules.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements dynamic state determination by evaluating power consumption at multiple time points and transitioning between states based on performance. This dynamic approach enables adaptation to different time points while the standardized state definitions and transition criteria prevent the system from becoming overly complex.
Data Source
AI summary
In a management device, a state determination table in a first storage portion indicates correspondence relationships in which target achievement levels are respectively associated with combinations with division periods and ranges of amount of power. An action table in a second storage portion indicates correspondence relationships with operations for making an execution portion perform and the target achievement levels. A first extraction portion extracts, from the state determination table, a target achievement level corresponding to a combination with a division period including a date acquired by a date acquisition portion and a range of amount of power including the amount of consumed power acquired by a power acquisition portion. A second extraction portion extracts, from the action table, an operation corresponding to the target achievement level extracted by the first extraction portion. An execution control portion controls the execution portion to perform the operation extracted by the second extraction portion.