Autonomous Robot Path Planning for Dynamic Asset Inspection

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional asset management relies heavily on human inspectors, which can be time-consuming, unsafe, and inefficient, especially for inaccessible or complex assets, leading to potential over- or under-inspection and delayed defect detection.

Innovation Solution

A robotic system equipped with sensors and effectors that autonomously monitor and maintain assets by generating plans to detect defects, acquire additional data, and perform maintenance tasks, using a processing system to adjust plans based on sensor data and execute instructions for repair or remediation.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If human inspectors perform asset inspection, then defect detection can be performed, but inspection time increases and productivity decreases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedefect detection capabilityVSAvoidinspection speed

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces human inspectors with an autonomous robotic system that uses sensors (cameras, LIDAR, thermal imaging) to detect defects. The robot navigates autonomously along the asset, capturing data that is processed by machine learning algorithms to identify defects, thereby eliminating the need for manual inspection while maintaining detection accuracy.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The robotic inspection system operates autonomously without requiring human intervention during the inspection process. The robot independently navigates, collects sensor data, processes information to detect defects, and generates inspection reports, enabling the system to serve itself and perform the entire inspection task without human operators.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

2Reliability

If human inspectors manually inspect assets, then maintenance decisions can be made, but time consumption increases and operational efficiency decreases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvemaintenance decision accuracyVSAvoidinspection duration

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The robotic system enables continuous inspection operations by eliminating breaks, shifts, and human fatigue limitations. The robot can operate continuously along the entire asset length, capturing data without interruption, while parallel processing of sensor data and autonomous navigation occur simultaneously, maximizing the efficiency of the inspection process.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #20Continuity of useful action

Solution Approach 2:

The system replaces slow manual inspection processes with automated robotic navigation and rapid sensor data acquisition. The robot moves along the asset at controlled speeds while multiple sensors simultaneously capture various types of data, and onboard processors analyze the information in real-time, dramatically reducing the time required to complete inspections.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Reliability

If human inspectors perform inspection tasks, then asset health can be monitored, but safety risks increase for dangerous or inaccessible locations

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveasset health monitoring capabilityVSAvoidsafety risks to inspectors

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The autonomous robot serves as an intermediary between the inspector and dangerous asset locations. The robot navigates to hazardous areas (high voltages, toxic environments, confined spaces, extreme temperatures) and collects data, eliminating direct human exposure to these harmful conditions while maintaining the ability to monitor asset health in previously inaccessible locations.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

4Ease of manufacture

If fixed inspection schedules are used, then routine maintenance can be performed, but over-inspection or under-inspection may occur

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvemaintenance scheduling simplicityVSAvoidinspection adequacy

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of manufactureVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The inspection system transitions from static, predetermined schedules to dynamic, adaptive inspection planning. The robot autonomously determines inspection frequency and depth based on real-time asset condition data, historical performance, and risk assessments, allowing inspection intervals to be adjusted dynamically to match actual asset needs rather than following rigid schedules.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system incorporates feedback loops where inspection results from previous visits inform future inspection planning. The robot analyzes detected defects, asset degradation trends, and environmental factors to adjust subsequent inspection schedules, intensifying monitoring for deteriorating assets and reducing frequency for stable assets, thereby optimizing resource allocation and inspection adequacy.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS10618168B2Robot system path planning for asset health management

Publication Date: 2020.04.14 GE INFRASTRUCTURE TECH LLC

AI summary

A robotic system includes a processing system comprising at least one processor. The processor generates a plan to monitor the asset. The plan comprises one or more tasks to be performed by the at least one robot. The processor receives sensor data from at least one sensor indicating one or more characteristics of the asset. The processor adjusts the plan to monitor the asset by adjusting or adding one or more tasks to the plan based on one or both of the quality of the acquired data or a potential defect of the asset. The adjusted plan causes the at least one robot to acquire additional data related to the asset when executed.