Automated Implement Leveling via Sensor Feedback Control

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional hydraulic control systems for agricultural implements require human intervention to achieve precise leveling, leading to potential human error and difficulty in maintaining consistent downforce across multiple frame sections.

Innovation Solution

An automated control system that adjusts frame sections based on input values such as speed, tool depth, tool angle, and attachment settings, using actuators and sensors to reposition components and ensure consistent downforce across the implement.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If manual adjustment is used to level frame sections, then the system is simple and easy to operate, but precision and consistency of downforce are compromised due to human error

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveleveling precisionVSAvoidcontrol system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system incorporates level sensors that continuously monitor the orientation of each frame section and provide feedback to the controller. The controller processes this feedback information and automatically adjusts the frame sections via actuators to maintain precise leveling, eliminating human error while maintaining operational simplicity through automated closed-loop control

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The control system performs self-adjustment by automatically detecting frame orientation through sensors and commanding actuators to reposition frame sections as needed. The system serves itself by autonomously maintaining precise leveling without requiring manual intervention, thereby achieving high precision without proportionally increasing operational complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Reliability

If automated control system is implemented, then precision and consistency of downforce are improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedownforce consistencyVSAvoidcontrol system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The controller serves multiple functions: it receives data from various sensors (level sensors, depth sensors), processes information from multiple frame sections, coordinates actuators across different frames, and maintains both leveling and downforce consistency simultaneously. This multi-functionality consolidates complexity into a single centralized control unit rather than distributing it across multiple separate systems

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The controller acts as an intermediary between the sensors that detect frame position and the actuators that adjust frame position. It processes sensor data and translates it into appropriate actuator commands, mediating the complex interaction between multiple sensors and multiple actuators to achieve reliable and consistent downforce distribution across all frame sections

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Manufacturing precision

If multiple frame sections are adjusted manually, then time consumption is low for simple tasks, but precision and accuracy are reduced due to human error

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveframe leveling accuracyVSAvoidadjustment time
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system pre-positions frame sections by automatically calculating and executing the required adjustments based on sensor feedback. The controller continuously monitors frame orientation and proactively makes adjustments before significant deviations occur, maintaining precise leveling without requiring time-consuming manual re-adjustments

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual mechanical adjustment with an automated electromechanical system. Sensors electronically detect frame position, the controller processes this information, and actuators automatically adjust frame sections. This substitution of manual mechanical operations with automated sensing and actuation achieves high precision while reducing the time required for adjustments through faster sensing and actuation cycles

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Data Source

PatentEP3456163B1Implement optimization by automated adjustments
Publication Date: 2022.01.12 DEERE & CO
  • EP3456163B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3456163B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3456163B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

An implement adjusting system having an implement with a plurality of adjustable components, a plurality of input values, at least one controlled system configured to adjust at least one of the plurality of adjustable components, and a controller that receives the plurality of input values, the controller configured to reposition the plurality of adjustable components based on the plurality of input values. Wherein, the plurality of adjustable components are repositionable by the controller based on the input values.