Floor-Based Proximity Fall Detection System

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current fall detection systems for elderly individuals in care facilities are cumbersome, power-intensive, and unreliable, often requiring complex algorithms and manual activation, which can lead to delayed or missed assistance during falls.

Innovation Solution

A proximity-based fall detection system that uses sensors integrated into the floor to transmit activation signals, allowing a central monitoring system to determine if a person is on the floor, eliminating the need for power-hungry wearable devices and enabling automatic assistance summoning.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If highly sophisticated wearable devices with multiple sensors and mobile computer processing are used to detect falls, then fall detection capability is improved, but device weight increases (doubling or tripling the weight) and power consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefall detection capabilityVSAvoiddevice weight
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSWeight of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts the complex processing and sensing functions from the wearable device and relocates them to a floor-based system. The wearable device is reduced to a simple transponder that only needs to transmit presence information, while the floor sensors and central monitoring system perform the complex fall detection algorithms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of placing sophisticated sensors in the wearable device, the patent inverts the approach by placing the sensors in the floor and using a simple transponder in the wearable device. The detection logic is reversed from device-based to environment-based monitoring.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

2Measurement precision

If complex algorithms and mobile computer processing are embedded in wearable devices to determine fall status, then detection accuracy is improved, but device complexity and power requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefall detection accuracyVSAvoiddevice complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts the complex algorithms and processing requirements from the wearable device and relocates them to the floor-based sensor system and central monitoring computer. The wearable transponder is simplified to only transmit basic presence signals.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The floor-based sensor system acts as an intermediary between the simple wearable transponder and the central monitoring system. It receives signals from the transponder, processes the data using complex algorithms to determine fall status, and communicates results to the central system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Speed

If continuous processing and sensing are performed by wearable devices to determine orientation and movement, then real-time fall detection is achieved, but power consumption increases considerably

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereal-time detection speedVSAvoidpower consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
SpeedVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of continuous processing in the wearable device, the system uses periodic transmission from the transponder triggered by floor sensors. The floor sensors continuously monitor for presence changes, and only initiate communication when a fall event is detected, reducing overall power consumption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

Solution Approach 2:

The floor-based system performs the continuous sensing and processing functions that would otherwise require the wearable device to remain active. The environment (floor) serves itself by detecting the presence and status of the person without requiring continuous power from the wearable device.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

4Device complexity

If manual activation input is required in fall detection systems to summon assistance, then device simplicity is maintained, but reliability decreases when the user is unable to activate the input

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice simplicityVSAvoidassistance summoning reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system automatically detects falls through floor sensors and transponder communication, eliminating the need for manual activation. The fall detection and assistance summoning functions serve themselves by automatically identifying fall events and triggering alerts without requiring user action.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously receives feedback from floor sensors and transponders about person presence and status. This feedback loop enables automatic detection of fall events and triggers assistance summoning based on the detected status changes, rather than requiring manual input.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS10984646B2Proximity based fall and distress detection systems and methods
Publication Date: 2021.04.20 MAYO FOUNDATION FOR MEDICAL EDUCATION & RESEARCH
  • US10984646B2 patent drawing
  • US10984646B2 patent drawing
  • US10984646B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A fall detection system includes a plurality of sensors in which at least one of the sensors is coupled to or disposed near a floor. The fall detection system further includes a central monitoring system in signal communication with the plurality of sensors. The central monitoring system is configured to receive a response signal in response to an activation signal being transmitted from at least one of the plurality of sensors, and determine whether the response signal is indicative of a person being arranged in a prone position on the floor.