Modular Power Tool Motor Control for Attachment Kickback Mitigation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing modular power tools with interchangeable attachments face inadequate kickback detection and mitigation due to fixed output axes, as existing algorithms are not adaptable to attachments with varying orientations and axes.

Innovation Solution

A modular power tool system that includes a sensor and electronic controller to detect the configuration and orientation of attachments, allowing for adaptive motor control based on the detected parameters, including kickback detection and mitigation.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If fixed output axis algorithms are used for kickback detection, then the control system is simple, but it cannot adapt to attachments with varying orientations and axes

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadaptability to different attachment configurationsVSAvoidcomplexity of control system
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The control system dynamically adapts its parameters based on the detected attachment configuration. The electronic controller modifies motor control settings in real-time according to the detected orientation and axis of the attached tool, transforming a static control system into a dynamic one that responds to changing conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes control parameters (such as motor speed, torque, and activation thresholds) based on the detected attachment configuration. By adjusting these parameters according to the specific attachment type and orientation, the system achieves adaptability without requiring a completely different control architecture for each attachment.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Adaptability or versatility

If sensor-based detection is implemented, then adaptability to different attachments is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection capability for attachment configurationVSAvoidcomplexity of electronic controller
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The electronic controller serves multiple functions: it processes sensor data, detects attachment configurations, determines orientation and axis, and controls motor operation. By consolidating these diverse functions into a single multi-functional controller, the system achieves high adaptability while managing complexity through functional integration rather than adding separate dedicated systems for each function.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses the existing sensor infrastructure of the power tool to detect attachment configurations. Rather than adding complex external detection systems, the controller leverages data already available from the tool's operational sensors, allowing it to self-determine attachment properties without requiring extensive additional hardware or complex processing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Reliability

If adaptive motor control is implemented, then kickback mitigation is improved, but energy consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvekickback mitigation effectivenessVSAvoidenergy consumption of motor control system
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system continuously monitors operational parameters and uses this feedback to adjust motor control in real-time. By detecting attachment configuration and monitoring tool operation, the controller provides adaptive feedback control that optimizes kickback mitigation while managing energy consumption through responsive rather than continuous high-level control.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The adaptive control system applies enhanced motor control only when and where needed based on detected kickback risk factors. Rather than maintaining maximum control readiness at all times, the system applies partial adaptive control actions specifically when attachment configurations or operational conditions indicate potential kickback scenarios, reducing unnecessary energy consumption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS12569972B2Adaptable motor control of modular power tool
Publication Date: 2026.03.10 MILWAUKEE ELECTRIC TOOL CORP
  • US12569972B2 patent drawing
  • US12569972B2 patent drawing
  • US12569972B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A power tool includes an electronic controller including a processor and a memory, one or more attachments, a motor, and a sensor communicatively coupled to the electronic controller. The electronic controller obtains, via the sensor, one or more indications for the one or more attachments and determines information about a configuration of the one or more attachments based on the one or more indications. The electronic controller adaptively controls the motor based on the information about the configuration to, for example, prevent or mitigate a kickback occurrence.