3D Robot Collision Safety Evaluation for Speed and Posture Control

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for ensuring robot safety during collisions with operators are inefficient, as they either significantly reduce robot speed, leading to reduced productivity, or rely on inaccurate collision force measurements that do not account for the robot's shape, and require costly separate devices for evaluation.

Innovation Solution

A method that calculates collision pressure and force based on the three-dimensional shape, movement speed, and path of the robot, adjusting its speed and posture to meet ISO safety standards, using a three-dimensional model and simulation to evaluate and control the robot's movement.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If the speed of the robot is significantly reduced to ensure safety, then the safety of the robot is improved, but the productivity is significantly reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoidproductivity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the parameter of robot speed dynamically based on the operator's position and collision risk assessment. Instead of maintaining a constantly low speed, the robot operates at high speed when safe and reduces speed only when necessary, thereby maintaining productivity while ensuring safety.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements dynamic speed adjustment where the robot's operating speed varies in real-time based on the operator's location and movement. The control unit continuously monitors and adjusts speed parameters, allowing the robot to maintain high productivity during safe operations while automatically reducing speed to prevent harm when operators are nearby.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Reliability

If a fence is installed around the robot to ensure safety, then the safety is improved, but the workspace flexibility and operator-robot collaboration capability are reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoidworkspace flexibility
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces the mechanical fence system with a software-based safety monitoring and control system. The control unit uses sensors and algorithms to monitor operator positions and automatically adjust robot speed, eliminating the need for physical barriers while maintaining safety and preserving workspace flexibility.

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

3Measurement precision

If separate devices are installed in the test robot to measure collision pressure and force, then the measurement capability is improved, but the evaluation cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecollision force measurementVSAvoidevaluation cost
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces a simulation model as an intermediary between the robot and the safety evaluation process. Instead of directly measuring collision forces with expensive sensors, the system uses a simulation model to calculate and predict collision pressures and forces based on robot parameters and operator position, providing accurate measurements without additional hardware costs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent creates a virtual copy or simulation model of the robot and collision scenario to evaluate safety parameters. This digital twin approach allows comprehensive safety assessment including collision force calculations without requiring physical measurement devices, reducing evaluation costs while maintaining measurement precision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

4Measurement precision

If the test robot repeatedly stops and operates during safety evaluation, then the safety assessment completeness is improved, but the work efficiency is reduced and strain on the test robot increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety evaluation accuracyVSAvoidwork efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs preliminary safety evaluation through simulation before actual robot operation. By calculating collision risks and determining safe operating speeds in advance using the simulation model, the system eliminates the need for repeated stopping and testing during evaluation, improving work efficiency while maintaining comprehensive safety assessment.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS11511429B2Method of improving safety of robot and method of evaluating safety of robot
Publication Date: 2022.11.29 SAFETICS INC
  • US11511429B2 patent drawing
  • US11511429B2 patent drawing
  • US11511429B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method of evaluating safety of a robot includes a step of obtaining a three-dimensional image or three-dimensional model of a test robot comprising shape information of a real robot, a step of setting a movement time and movement path of the test robot by inputting profile information comprising movement time information and movement path information of the test robot, a step of calculating a collision pressure and collision force applied to a collision object in consideration of a shape, effective mass, movement speed, and direction of an injury-causing dangerous portion of the test robot, and a step of evaluating safety of the robot by determining whether magnitudes of the calculated collision pressure and collision force fall within magnitudes of a predetermined maximum collision pressure and predetermined maximum collision force.