Production Machine Manual Motion Control With Contact Force Limiting

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing production machines face challenges in avoiding damage during manual operation due to collisions, as conventional methods like historical path retracing or collision analysis are inadequate, especially when elements have already warped or are difficult to see, leading to high risks of operator error.

Innovation Solution

A control method that monitors drive following errors and limits contact force by using position and force controllers to ensure compliance with predefined limits, including haptic and visual feedback to the operator, allowing for safe manual operation.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If the operator manually maneuvers the production machine, then the machine can be positioned and operated flexibly, but the risk of collision and damage increases due to operator error or difficult visibility

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemanual operation flexibilityVSAvoidcollision avoidance
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The control unit continuously monitors the contact force between machine elements and provides real-time feedback by limiting the control commands to keep contact force below a specified threshold. This automatic feedback mechanism protects against collisions while maintaining manual operation flexibility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The control unit acts as an intermediary between the operator's manual commands and the drive system. It processes the operator's position commands and introduces force limitation as an intermediate control layer, preventing excessive contact forces while preserving the operator's intent.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If collision analysis using a virtual machine model is performed, then collision detection capability is improved, but the device complexity and computing power requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecollision detectionVSAvoidvirtual model requirements
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The invention extracts the essential collision protection function from complex virtual modeling and implements it directly in the control unit through force limitation of control commands. This simplifies the system by removing the need for separate virtual machine models while maintaining collision detection capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The invention replaces complex computational collision analysis with a simpler force-based control approach. Instead of using virtual models to predict collisions, the system directly limits contact forces through modified control commands, substituting computational complexity with direct force control.

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

3Reliability

If historical path retracing is used for collision recovery, then the machine can return to the starting point, but this approach fails when elements have already warped or bent

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecollision recoveryVSAvoidapplicability to damaged elements
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary protection by limiting contact forces before damage occurs. By continuously monitoring and limiting control commands to maintain contact force below the threshold, the invention prevents element warping or bending in the first place, making recovery unnecessary.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The force limitation acts as a cushioning mechanism that prevents excessive contact forces from damaging elements. By maintaining contact force below the specified threshold, the system provides beforehand protection against the types of damage that would make historical path retracing ineffective.

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

Data Source

PatentEP3890928B1Force-limited method of at least one element of a production machine in manual operation
Publication Date: 2025.11.12 SIEMENS AG
  • EP3890928B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3890928B1 patent drawingFigure 2~3
  • EP3890928B1 patent drawingFigure 4~5

AI summary

The invention relates to a control device (3) of a production machine which receives a present path (B) and a movement command (C1) from an operator (6) via an input device (7) during manual operation of the production machine. At least one element (2) of the production machine should be moved along the present path (B) in a movement direction by means of position-controlled axes (1). The control device (3) determines a series of position setpoint values (x*) for the axes (1) on the basis of the movement command (C1). The position setpoint values (x*) advance with a setpoint velocity (v*) in the movement direction along the present path (B). The control device (3) determines, on the basis of the position setpoint values (x*) and corresponding position actual values (x), control commands (C2) for the drives (12) driving the axes (1) and controls the drives (12) accordingly. The control device (3) determines the control commands (C2) in such a way that a contact force (F), with which the at least one element (2) acts on its environment, is limited to a force limit value (F0) specified to the control device (3). The control device (3) monitors a following error (δx) of the drives (12) for adherence to a predefined maximum value (MAX) and suppresses further movement of the at least one element (2) of the production machine if the maximum value (MAX) is reached.