Machine Tool Event Re-Notification Based on State Change

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Supervisors often forget to address event notifications for machine tool operations, leading to unresolved maintenance tasks due to frequent re-notifications being bothersome or notifications being delayed, resulting in unexecuted tasks.

Innovation Solution

A monitoring device that acquires event and state information from machine tools, judges the resolution of events based on predefined state changes, and re-notifies supervisors when necessary, ensuring timely attention to pending tasks without overwhelming notifications.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If re-notification of event information is performed every fixed time until the event is executed, then the machine tool can be prevented from being left with the event unexecuted, but the supervisor feels troublesome due to frequent notifications

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveevent execution reliabilityVSAvoidsupervisor operation comfort
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system establishes a feedback loop where the monitoring device continuously checks whether the event has been executed by comparing current state information against the required state change. Re-notification is triggered only when the event remains unexecuted, creating a responsive feedback mechanism that adapts to the actual execution status rather than following a fixed schedule.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The notification interval is made dynamic rather than fixed. The system adjusts the timing of re-notifications based on whether the event has been executed or not, transitioning from a static time-based approach to a dynamic state-based approach that adapts to real-time conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Loss of time

If the interval of notifying the event is shortened, then the event can be monitored more frequently, but the notification feels troublesome for the supervisor

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveevent resolution timeVSAvoidsupervisor operation comfort
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The notification system uses feedback from state information to determine when re-notification is necessary. Instead of shortening the fixed interval universally, the system provides frequent monitoring only when the event remains unexecuted, and stops notifying once the event is resolved, thereby reducing unnecessary notifications while maintaining timely event detection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The notification frequency parameter is changed dynamically based on event execution status. When the event is unexecuted, the system transitions to a higher notification frequency to ensure timely resolution. When the event is executed, the frequency parameter is reduced or stopped, avoiding unnecessary frequent notifications to the supervisor.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Ease of operation

If the interval of notifying the event is lengthened, then the supervisor feels less troublesome, but there is a risk of the machine tool being left with the event unexecuted

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesupervisor operation comfortVSAvoidevent execution reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system uses continuous feedback from state information to monitor event execution status. When an event occurs, the system enters a monitoring mode where it checks for the expected state change. If the event remains unexecuted, re-notification is triggered to ensure reliability. This feedback mechanism ensures that longer intervals do not compromise event execution reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system prepares for potential event non-execution by establishing a monitoring and re-notification mechanism in advance. When an event is generated, the system proactively checks for its execution and initiates re-notification before the event is left unexecuted for too long, preventing reliability issues before they occur.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentEP3525051B1Monitoring device and method of monitoring
Publication Date: 2022.01.12 FANUC LTD
  • EP3525051B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3525051B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3525051B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A monitoring device (12) for monitoring an operation condition of a machine tool (10) includes: an information acquiring section (20) that acquires event information generated by operation of the machine tool (10) and state information of the machine tool (10); a judging section (22) that when, after generation of the event information, there has occurred a predetermined change of state of the machine tool (10) corresponding to content indicated by the event information, judges whether or not the content indicated by the event information has been resolved, based on the event information and the state information; and a notifying section (24) that, in the case where when there has occurred the predetermined change of state of the machine tool (10) corresponding to the content indicated by the event information, it has been judged that the content indicated by the event information has not been resolved, re-notifies of the generated event information.