Haptic Feedback Pulse Scheduling for Power and Actuator Conflicts

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing haptic feedback systems struggle with delivering customizable and efficient feedback in cases of simultaneous or near-simultaneous events due to limited power and hardware resources, leading to conflicts and potential damage to actuators.

Innovation Solution

A scheduler system that prioritizes and adjusts haptic feedback pulses using predefined rules to manage conflicts, ensuring safe and effective delivery of haptic feedback by adjusting pulse timing, energy distribution, and actuator usage.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If multiple haptic feedback events are delivered simultaneously or near-simultaneously, then user feedback responsiveness is improved, but power consumption increases and actuator damage risk increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvehaptic feedback delivery reliabilityVSAvoidpower consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system pre-renders a haptic event pipeline in response to receiving an input signal, scheduling pulses beforehand. This allows the system to plan power delivery and actuator usage in advance, preventing simultaneous high-power events that would cause damage or excessive consumption, while still maintaining responsive feedback delivery.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts pulse scheduling based on conflicts detected in the haptic event pipeline. When multiple events are requested, the system modifies pulse timing, duration, or amplitude dynamically to resolve conflicts, ensuring power consumption and actuator stress remain within safe limits while preserving essential feedback functionality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Reliability

If multiple haptic feedback events are delivered simultaneously or near-simultaneous, then user feedback responsiveness is improved, but actuator damage risk increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvehaptic feedback delivery reliabilityVSAvoidactuator damage risk
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system pre-renders a haptic event pipeline in response to receiving an input signal, scheduling pulses beforehand. This allows the system to plan power delivery and actuator usage in advance, preventing simultaneous high-power events that would cause damage or excessive consumption, while still maintaining responsive feedback delivery.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies predefined rules to adjust pulses and provide cushioning before conflicts cause damage. By scheduling and prioritizing pulses in advance, the system prevents actuator overload and damage before it can occur, rather than reacting after damage happens.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #11Beforehand cushioning (Prior cushioning)

3Measurement precision

If haptic feedback pulses are delivered without scheduling conflicts, then feedback accuracy is improved, but system complexity increases when conflict resolution is implemented

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvehaptic feedback timing precisionVSAvoidscheduling system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the haptic feedback delivery into discrete pulses within a pipeline, allowing individual pulse scheduling and conflict resolution. This segmentation enables precise timing control for each pulse while managing complexity through structured, rule-based conflict resolution rather than monolithic control.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces a scheduler as an intermediary component that manages conflicts between haptic events. This scheduler acts as a mediator between multiple feedback requests and the actuator, applying predefined rules to resolve conflicts and ensure precise pulse delivery without requiring complex real-time decision-making logic.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

4Reliability

If haptic feedback events are prioritized using predefined rules, then feedback reliability is improved, but loss of time occurs due to pulse delays

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvehaptic feedback delivery reliabilityVSAvoidpulse scheduling delay
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system pre-renders a haptic event pipeline in response to receiving an input signal, scheduling pulses beforehand. This allows the system to plan power delivery and actuator usage in advance, preventing simultaneous high-power events that would cause damage or excessive consumption, while still maintaining responsive feedback delivery.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts pulse scheduling based on conflicts detected in the haptic event pipeline. When multiple events are requested, the system modifies pulse timing, duration, or amplitude dynamically to resolve conflicts, ensuring power consumption and actuator stress remain within safe limits while preserving essential feedback functionality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentEP3969989B1Scheduling haptic feedback
Publication Date: 2025.07.02 CAMBRIDGE MECHATRONICS
  • EP3969989B1 patent drawingFigure 1~2
  • EP3969989B1 patent drawingFigure 3
  • EP3969989B1 patent drawingFigure 4

AI summary

Broadly speaking, embodiments of the present techniques provide techniques for generating haptic feedback or haptic sensations and, in particular, techniques for scheduling such feedback or sensation when there are possibly conflicting requirements for such feedback or sensations.