Overlapping Sensor Zones for Dynamic Hazard Proximity Detection
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional industrial automation systems fail to effectively identify and adapt to the presence of people or objects in hazardous zones, leading to unnecessary shutdowns and downtime due to the use of larger-than-necessary safety margins and lack of dynamic hazard detection.
Innovation Solution
The system employs multiple sensors with overlapping sensing zones to determine the location and distance of people or objects from potential hazards, using a proximity evaluation component and safety logic component to assess and respond to the proximity, thereby enabling dynamic adjustment of operations and providing optimized safety and availability.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If conventional safety margins are employed to ensure safety, then safety is improved, but productivity deteriorates due to unnecessary shutdowns
Solution Approach 1:
The system dynamically adjusts safety monitoring based on real-time conditions by using multiple sensors to detect the presence and proximity of people or objects. The voting mechanism dynamically determines whether to shut down based on current sensor readings rather than relying on fixed safety margins, allowing operations to continue when it is safe to do so while maintaining protection when hazards are present.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements continuous feedback through multiple sensors that monitor the environment and provide real-time information about people or objects in hazardous zones. This feedback loop enables the system to make informed decisions about shutdown necessity, contrasting with conventional open-loop safety margins that trigger shutdowns without assessing actual hazard conditions.
2Measurement precision
If multiple sensors with overlapping sensing zones are employed to accurately detect presence, then measurement precision is improved, but device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The monitoring system is segmented into multiple independent sensors, each with its own sensing zone, rather than using a single complex sensor. This segmentation allows the system to achieve comprehensive coverage and improved detection accuracy through the collective input of simpler individual sensor components.
Solution Approach 2:
The system merges the outputs from multiple sensors through a voting mechanism to make a unified safety determination. By combining simple sensor readings through logical voting rather than processing complex data from a single sophisticated sensor, the system achieves high measurement precision while keeping individual components relatively simple.
3Device complexity
If fixed voting relationships are used between sensors, then device complexity is reduced, but adaptability deteriorates when people or objects are present
Solution Approach 1:
The voting relationship dynamically adapts based on the detected presence of people or objects. When no presence is detected, the system operates with normal safety monitoring. When presence is detected, the voting mechanism adapts to evaluate proximity to hazardous zones and determine appropriate responses, allowing the system to adjust its behavior based on real-time conditions rather than following a fixed predetermined voting pattern.
Data Source
AI summary
The claimed subject matter provides industrial automation systems and/or methods that evaluate a proximity to potential hazards. A plurality of sensors can provide redundant detected data. Additionally, a proximity evaluation component can evaluate the detected data, determine a location of at least one of a person and an object, and identify a distance from the location to one or more hazardous zones in a monitored region.