Forestry Boom Control With Conditional Auto-Timed Felling

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Operators face challenges in controlling tree-processing devices and booms during tree felling due to poor visibility, leading to potential damage to the machine, tree, or both, and inefficiencies in work timing, particularly when moving the harvester head at inappropriate speeds or waiting excessively between movements.

Innovation Solution

A semi-automatic control method where pre-recorded functions for the booms and tree-processing device are defined and initiated based on operator inputs and conditional criteria, allowing automated operation while ensuring operator supervision to prevent damage, reducing the need for extensive sensoring and maintaining machine simplicity.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If the operator manually controls the tree-processing device and booms simultaneously, then the operator can respond to visual conditions, but the operator cannot see the harvester head clearly and may time movements incorrectly causing damage

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety against damageVSAvoidoperator control capability
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The control system is segmented into two independent control channels: a manual control channel for emergency override and an automatic control channel for routine operations. This allows the operator to disengage from precise timing operations while maintaining ultimate control authority, resolving the contradiction between safety and operational capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

An automatic control unit acts as an intermediary between the operator's intent and the actual machine movements. The unit receives high-level commands from the operator and automatically executes the complex sequencing of boom and harvester head movements, eliminating the operator's need to visually track and manually time each movement while maintaining safety through override capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If the operator waits to ensure safety before moving booms, then damage is avoided, but work efficiency decreases due to unnecessary waiting

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedamage preventionVSAvoidwork efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The automatic control unit continuously monitors the operational state of the harvester head and booms, using sensor feedback to determine when it is safe to execute movements. This automated feedback loop replaces the operator's conservative waiting behavior with precise, real-time safety assessment, allowing movements to proceed immediately when safe rather than waiting for uncertain visual confirmation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The control system performs self-assessment of safety conditions through automated sensors and state monitoring. The system independently determines when movements are safe without requiring the operator to visually verify conditions, enabling continuous efficient operation while maintaining safety through automated self-monitoring.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Measurement precision

If full automation is implemented to eliminate operator visibility problems, then control precision improves, but the system becomes complex with extensive sensoring increasing cost and failure points

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol precisionVSAvoidsensing system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of implementing complete automation with comprehensive sensing of all machine parameters, the system applies partial automation only to the critical sequencing functions where automatic control provides value. The automatic control unit manages boom and harvester head coordination while relying on basic sensor feedback, avoiding the complexity of full system automation while achieving sufficient control precision for safety-critical operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP3506735B1Method and system for controlling the functions of set of booms, or of a tree-processing device attached to it in connection with the felling of a tree, as well as a corresponding arrangement and a forestry machine
Publication Date: 2021.09.22 PONSSE OY
  • EP3506735B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3506735B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3506735B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The invention relates to a method for controlling the functions of set of booms or of a tree-processing device attached to it, in connection with the event of felling a tree, in which method the attitude or state, relative to at least one degree of freedom, of the set of booms (12) is determined and/or estimated, the momentary operating state of the tree- processing device (14) is determined, the tree-processing device (14) is controlled and the set of booms (12) is controlled, in which method either the set of booms (12) or the tree-processing device (14) is an operating unit and the other is correspondingly a control unit, in which method at least one pre-recorded function of the operating unit is defined in the memory (32) and, in connection with the felling event of the tree (16) : - the pre-recorded function of the operating unit is selected on the basis of the first input (36) created by the operator, - a second input (38) is formed, which contains a conditional criterion for the initiation of the selected pre-recorded function of the operating unit, - the selected pre-recorded function is initiated when the criterion of the input (38) is met, and - the selected pre-recorded function of the operating unit initiated by the second input (38) is performed. The invention also relates to an arrangement and a forestry machine.