Automated Fire Suppression Design Optimizer

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional fire suppression system design processes are manual and resource-intensive, leading to inefficiencies and increased costs due to the lack of automated tools for optimizing nozzle and piping placement within building maps and constraints.

Innovation Solution

A computer-based system that utilizes an optimizer to determine optimal nozzle and piping placements within a fire suppression system, incorporating building maps and constraints, and provides real-time feedback through interactive tools to ensure compliance with regulations and physical constraints.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If manual design processes are used for fire suppression systems, then design flexibility and customization are maintained, but time consumption and resource waste increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedesign efficiencyVSAvoiddesign time

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual mechanical design processes with an automated computer-based optimization system. The system uses algorithms to automatically determine optimal nozzle placements and piping configurations, substituting human manual work with computational automation, thereby dramatically improving design efficiency and reducing time consumption.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The design system performs self-optimization by automatically evaluating multiple design scenarios and selecting the optimal configuration without requiring continuous manual intervention. The system serves itself by autonomously completing design tasks, reducing both time consumption and resource waste associated with manual design processes.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

2Productivity

If automated optimization tools are implemented, then design time and resource efficiency improve, but system complexity and implementation difficulty increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedesign efficiencyVSAvoidsystem complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent creates a universal design system that handles multiple functions including nozzle placement optimization, piping configuration, constraint validation, and cost estimation within a single integrated platform. This multi-functional approach manages system complexity by consolidating various design tasks into one cohesive tool rather than requiring separate specialized systems.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The system acts as an intermediary between design requirements and optimal solutions, translating user inputs and constraints into optimized design configurations. This intermediary role manages complexity by providing a user-friendly interface that abstracts away the computational complexity of the optimization algorithms while delivering sophisticated design results.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Manufacturing precision

If manual design processes are used, then system customization to building-specific requirements is possible, but manufacturing precision and compliance accuracy decrease

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedesign precisionVSAvoiddesign implementation ease

Core Design Contradiction:

Manufacturing precisionVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual design processes with automated optimization algorithms that precisely calculate optimal nozzle placements and piping configurations. This substitution ensures manufacturing precision by systematically evaluating multiple scenarios and selecting the best design that meets all building-specific requirements and compliance standards, eliminating human error inherent in manual processes.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

4Reliability

If comprehensive constraint validation is performed, then compliance accuracy improves, but computational requirements and processing time increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecompliance accuracyVSAvoidcomputational energy

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary validation of constraints and requirements before executing the full optimization process. By pre-processing and validating input data, the system reduces the computational energy required during the main optimization phase while maintaining high compliance accuracy. This preliminary action ensures that only valid and compliant design scenarios are fully evaluated.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a multi-level validation approach where critical constraints are validated with high priority and computational resources, while less critical constraints receive proportionate validation. This partial action strategy ensures compliance accuracy for essential requirements while managing computational energy consumption by not applying excessive validation to all constraints uniformly.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP3850525B1Fire suppression system - end-to-end solution for fire suppression sales & design

Publication Date: 2025.01.08 CARRIER CORP

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

AI summary

A method of designing a fire suppression system including: determining nozzle placement for nozzles of a fire suppression system within a location; determining piping placement for pipes of the fire suppression system within the location; determining whether the nozzle placement or piping placement violate a constraint; and generating a map displaying the nozzle placement and the piping placement on a computing device.