Modular Robotic Assemblies for Safe Structural Traversal

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Traversing vertical or horizontal structures safely and efficiently often requires expensive equipment, complex scaffolding, and specialized training, which are frequently bypassed due to resource or training limitations, posing risks to personnel.

Innovation Solution

Development of lightweight robotic assemblies that allow remote operation from a safe location, enabling traversal and installation of leave-behind modules on various structures without extensive training or certification, using motorized robots and circumferential modules to securely attach and lift items like strings of lights or cables.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional equipment and methods are used for traversing structures, then safety and efficiency are improved, but cost and complexity increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:

ImprovesafetyVSAvoidequipment complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system is divided into separate functional modules: a climbing robot unit for traversal, a leave-behind module for task execution, and a remote control system. This segmentation allows each component to be optimized independently while reducing overall system complexity compared to traditional integrated equipment.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

A remote control system acts as an intermediary between the operator and the climbing robot, allowing safe operation from ground level. This mediator eliminates the need for operators to be physically present on hazardous structures while maintaining control over the traversal and installation operations.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Stability of the object's composition

If traditional equipment and scaffolding are used, then stability and support are improved, but portability and ease of deployment deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvestructural stabilityVSAvoidsystem portability

Core Design Contradiction:

Stability of the object's compositionVSWeight of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The climbing robot uses dynamic climbing mechanisms with adjustable claws and adhesion systems that adapt to different surface conditions. This allows the lightweight robot to achieve stable traversal on various structures without requiring heavy static scaffolding support systems.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

Traditional mechanical scaffolding systems are replaced with a robot-based system using robotic climbing mechanisms, motors, and controlled adhesion. This substitution maintains traversal stability while dramatically reducing system weight and improving portability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Reliability

If specialized training and licensing are required, then operational reliability is improved, but ease of use and accessibility worsen

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveoperational reliabilityVSAvoiduser accessibility

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system incorporates automated safety features, obstacle detection, and error correction mechanisms that allow the robot to self-regulate during operation. This reduces the need for highly trained operators while maintaining operational reliability through built-in protective systems.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The remote control system provides real-time feedback from sensors, cameras, and system status indicators to the operator. This feedback loop enables users without extensive training to monitor and control the robot safely, improving accessibility while maintaining reliability through continuous system monitoring.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

4Productivity

If expensive equipment is used, then performance and capability are improved, but cost-effectiveness and resource efficiency deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvetraversal capabilityVSAvoidresource consumption

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The climbing robot is designed as a universal platform capable of traversing multiple types of structures (trees, poles, towers) and performing various tasks (installation, maintenance, inspection). This multi-functionality reduces the need for specialized expensive equipment for each specific application, improving cost-effectiveness while maintaining productivity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses a modular leave-behind module that can be easily replaced or upgraded independently from the main robot platform. This approach allows cost-effective task-specific attachments without requiring expensive specialized equipment for each function, optimizing resource efficiency.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #27Cheap short-living objects (Disposable)

Data Source

PatentUS20240181628A1Robotic Assemblies and Methods of Use

Publication Date: 2024.06.06 ASCENDER SYST INC

AI summary

A robotic assembly includes a robot and a module, wherein the robot is configured to selectively move the module substantially linearly. The robot includes at least one motor-driven component. The robot is configured to separate from the module after selectively moving the module substantially linearly to a desired location. The module is configured to selectively retain its position after the robot selectively moves the module substantially linearly to a desired location. The module selectively performs a function while the module selectively retains its position in the desired location. The module is configured to selectively release its position to remove the module from the desired location.