Robot Safety Control Subsystem for Automated Maintenance Procedures

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current robotics control systems lack effective mechanisms to ensure user safety during maintenance procedures, as they often require human intervention in close proximity to powered robots, posing risks due to potential software malfunctions.

Innovation Solution

A robotic control system with an independent and parallel safety control subsystem that uses a software framework to encode automated safety procedures, allowing for special safety configurations that can be customized and integrated with custom detections and reactions, enabling safer operations and maintenance by reducing the need for human intervention.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If human operators perform maintenance procedures in close proximity to powered robots, then maintenance tasks can be completed, but user safety is compromised due to potential software malfunctions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemaintenance accessibilityVSAvoiduser safety risk
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the robot control system into distinct operational modes (normal operation mode and maintenance mode) with separate safety configurations. Each mode has its own safety parameters and restrictions, allowing the system to switch between them based on the current task. This segmentation enables safe maintenance procedures while preserving full robotic functionality during normal operation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces an intermediary safety control mechanism that mediates between the powered robot system and human operators during maintenance. This intermediary layer implements automated safety procedures, monitors system state, and enforces safety configurations to prevent harmful interactions while allowing necessary maintenance activities to proceed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Object-affected harmful factors

If traditional safety mechanisms are used during maintenance, then user safety is improved, but device complexity increases due to manual intervention requirements

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveuser safetyVSAvoidsafety procedure complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements self-service safety procedures where the robot control system automatically monitors its own state, detects fault conditions, and executes appropriate safety responses without requiring manual intervention. The system self-regulates safety configurations, switches between operational modes, and manages maintenance procedures autonomously, reducing the complexity burden on operators while maintaining high safety standards.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies preliminary action by pre-configuring safety parameters, restrictions, and procedures for different operational modes before maintenance begins. The system proactively establishes safety configurations, defines restricted zones, and prepares automated responses to potential hazards in advance, eliminating the need for complex real-time manual safety decisions during maintenance execution.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Object-affected harmful factors

If fault states are used to improve user safety by halting operation, then safety is enhanced, but productivity decreases due to operational interruptions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveuser safetyVSAvoidoperational efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic safety configurations that adapt in real-time based on the operational mode and system state. During normal operation, the system maintains full functionality with standard safety monitoring. When maintenance mode is activated, the system dynamically transitions to a different safety configuration that enables safe human-robot collaboration. This dynamic adaptation allows the system to optimize both safety and productivity for each operational context without unnecessary interruptions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes safety parameters and system configuration parameters based on the operational mode. During maintenance procedures, the system modifies parameters such as robot velocity limits, restricted zones, and emergency response thresholds to appropriate values for safe human interaction. These parameter changes enable the system to maintain high safety standards during maintenance while preserving operational efficiency during normal production activities.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS11648673B2Automated safety procedures for human intervention in robot systems
Publication Date: 2023.05.16 INTRINSIC INNOVATION LLC
  • US11648673B2 patent drawing
  • US11648673B2 patent drawing
  • US11648673B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Methods, systems, and apparatus, including computer programs encoded on computer storage media, for performing automated safety procedures for a robot. One of the methods includes receiving, by a robotic control system for a robot, a request to execute an automated safety procedure by a safety control subsystem for the robot. Each step of the automated safety procedure is iterated until an end of the automated safety procedure is reached, including if a step requires a new safety configuration, a respective safety configuration for the step is obtained and activated before performing one or more automatic actions for the step.