Rejection System Pusher Deflection Monitoring

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing methods for checking the rejection of objects by a rejection system, such as those in the beverage industry, often fail to reliably detect incorrect rejections, especially when a light barrier downstream is insufficient.

Innovation Solution

A method involving the determination of the time profile of load-dependent variables of the rejection system, comparing the actual value over time with the target value, to ensure accurate detection of object rejection, using variables like deflection of a pusher or current consumption of an electronically controlled linear motor.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If a light barrier is installed downstream of the rejection system to verify object rejection, then verification capability is provided, but faulty diversion cannot be reliably detected in all situations

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveverification reliabilityVSAvoiddetection accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces optical detection (light barrier) with mechanical detection by using the pusher's own load-dependent quantities (force, position, acceleration) to verify rejection. The control device monitors the pusher's mechanical behavior during the rejection process, comparing actual values with target values to determine whether rejection occurred correctly, eliminating the reliability gaps of optical methods.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements feedback by continuously monitoring the pusher's load-dependent quantities during operation and using this information to verify rejection correctness. The control device receives signals from sensors monitoring the pusher's mechanical state, processes this feedback information, and determines whether the rejection was successful, enabling real-time verification without additional downstream detection devices.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If downstream verification using light barrier is used, then rejection verification is provided, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverejection verificationVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent makes the pusher serve multiple functions: it both performs the rejection action and provides verification information through its load-dependent quantities. The same pusher mechanism that diverts objects also generates the mechanical signals (force, position, acceleration) used to verify whether diversion occurred correctly, eliminating the need for separate verification devices and reducing system complexity.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The pusher performs self-verification by generating its own verification signals through its mechanical behavior during rejection. The load-dependent quantities measured during pusher operation inherently contain information about whether rejection was successful, allowing the system to verify its own operation without external verification devices, thereby reducing overall system complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Loss of information

If light barrier verification is implemented, then rejection checking is enabled, but incorrect rejection cannot be reliably detected in all cases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveverification informationVSAvoidfault detection capability
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces optical verification information with mechanical verification information from the pusher's load-dependent quantities. By monitoring force, position, and acceleration during the pusher's operation, the system obtains more reliable verification data that directly reflects whether mechanical contact and diversion occurred, eliminating the information loss and reliability issues of optical detection.

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

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This approach provides a reliable means to verify the correct rejection of objects by analyzing the time profiles, allowing for the identification of faults in the rejection system and upstream processes, thereby preventing damaged or faulty items from being sold.

Implementation Method 1

A device and method for moving a product is known, for example, from DE 10 2005 021 109 A1. In this device, a plunger moved by a drive is placed against the product.

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectMechanical Force: Force

Implementation Method 2

determining the time course of an actual value of at least one load-dependent quantity of the removal system

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectForce measurement: Force

Data Source

PatentEP2407846B1Method and apparatus for monitoring the deviation of an object from a sequence and corresponding control system
Publication Date: 2019.10.30 KRONES AG
  • EP2407846B1 patent drawingFigure 1~2
  • EP2407846B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The method involves determining the time course of an actual value of a size dependent on load of the rejection system, and comparing of the time course of the actual value with the time course of the desired value of the size dependent on load. The size dependent on load comprises a deflection of a contact element of a pusher of the rejection system. An independent claim is also included for a device for checking rejection of an object from sequence of objects through rejection system.