Mobile Cleaning Robot Geofence Scheduling for User-Adaptive Automation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional mobile robot scheduling systems are inefficient and inconvenient, relying on static time-based schedules that fail to adapt to user behavior and context, leading to manual errors and lack of automation in dynamic environments.

Innovation Solution

A mobile cleaning robot system that uses geofencing and contextual information, such as user location and behavior, to automatically schedule and control cleaning missions, allowing for dynamic mission planning and execution based on user presence, behavior, and environmental conditions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Extent of automation

If static time-based schedules are used for robot mission scheduling, then the scheduling system is simple to implement, but it fails to adapt to user behavior and context, leading to inefficiency and lack of automation

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveautomation of mission schedulingVSAvoidcomplexity of scheduling system

Core Design Contradiction:

Extent of automationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The robot autonomously monitors geofence conditions and automatically initiates or suspends cleaning missions based on user presence detection, eliminating the need for manual scheduling intervention. The system serves itself by making scheduling decisions based on real-time contextual data without requiring complex user programming or intervention.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously monitors user location data from the mobile device and uses this feedback to dynamically adjust mission scheduling. When the user enters the geofenced area, the robot receives feedback and suspends the mission; when the user exits, the robot receives feedback and resumes the mission, creating a closed-loop adaptive scheduling system.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

2Adaptability or versatility

If manual scheduling methods are used, then the system requires less computational resources, but it leads to manual errors and lacks adaptability to dynamic environments

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveadaptability to user behaviorVSAvoidcomplexity of scheduling system

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual mechanical scheduling operations with an automated electronic system that uses geofence monitoring and contextual data processing. The mobile device's location services and the robot's controller work together to automatically adjust scheduling based on user behavior patterns, eliminating manual errors while adapting to dynamic environmental changes.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Productivity

If the robot continuously monitors user location and behavior, then it can dynamically adjust mission scheduling, but it increases system complexity and energy consumption

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveefficiency of cleaning operationsVSAvoidenergy consumption of robot

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of continuous monitoring, the system uses periodic location checks triggered by geofence boundary events. The robot and mobile device only exchange data and perform computations when the user enters or exits the predefined geographical zone, reducing energy consumption while maintaining the ability to dynamically adjust scheduling based on user presence.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #19Periodic action

4Reliability

If geofencing and contextual information are used for automatic scheduling, then user presence detection is improved, but the system requires more sophisticated hardware and software components

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvereliability of user presence detectionVSAvoidcomplexity of geofencing system

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The mobile device serves as an intermediary between the user and the robot. It handles the complex geofencing logic, location monitoring, and communication protocols, while the robot simply receives suspension/resume commands. This distributes system complexity to the mobile device, which already has the necessary GPS and processing capabilities, rather than requiring the robot to have sophisticated geofencing hardware.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS20220151450A1Systems and methods for scheduling mobile robot missions

Publication Date: 2022.05.19 IROBOT CORP

AI summary

Described herein are systems, devices, and methods for scheduling and controlling a mobile robot based on user location, user behavior, or other contextual information. In an example, a mobile cleaning robot comprises a drive system configured to move the mobile cleaning robot about an environment in a user's residence, and a controller circuit configured to receive an indication of a user entering or exiting a pre-defined geographical zone with respect to a location of the user's residence. Such indication may be detected using location and geofencing services of a mobile device. Based on the indication of the user entering or exiting the geofence, the controller circuit may generate a motion control signal to navigate the mobile cleaning robot to conduct a mission in the environment.