Two-Layer Safety Rule Reconfiguration for Autonomous Control
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Autonomous control systems face inefficiencies and increased man-hours when safety rules need to be redesigned due to changes in equipment or use objectives, leading to either overly restrictive or inadequate safety measures.
Innovation Solution
Implementing a first safety layer to monitor and control safety based on safety rules, and a second safety layer to detect deviations from design estimates, allowing for the reconfiguration or redesign of safety rules as needed.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If safety rules with large margins are set to ensure safety when equipment or use objectives change, then safety is improved, but efficiency of the autonomous control system deteriorates due to unnecessary restrictions
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements a two-layer safety system where the first safety layer applies fixed safety rules with margins for stability, while the second safety layer dynamically adjusts these rules based on actual system prerequisites. This allows the system to maintain safety margins when needed while removing unnecessary restrictions when conditions change, resolving the contradiction between safety reliability and operational efficiency.
Solution Approach 2:
The system changes the parameters of safety rules by comparing actual system prerequisites against design prerequisites. When parameters deviate beyond thresholds, the second safety layer modifies safety rule parameters (such as distance margins, speed limits) to match current conditions, thereby maintaining safety while improving efficiency by removing overly conservative restrictions.
2Productivity
If limitative safety rules are set for current equipment and use objectives, then efficiency is improved, but the system cannot cope with addition of equipment or changes in use objectives, requiring system redesign with large man-hours
Solution Approach 1:
The second safety layer automatically detects changes in system prerequisites and self-adjusts safety rules without requiring manual intervention or system redesign. This self-service mechanism allows the system to adapt to new equipment or changed use objectives by autonomously modifying safety parameters, thereby maintaining efficiency while improving adaptability.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements feedback by continuously monitoring actual system prerequisites and comparing them against design prerequisites. When deviations are detected, the feedback loop triggers automatic adjustment of safety rules through the second safety layer, enabling the system to adapt to changes without manual redesign while maintaining operational efficiency.
3Adaptability or versatility
If safety rules are frequently reviewed and redesigned to adapt to changes, then adaptability is improved, but development time and man-hours increase significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The patent establishes safety rules in advance with built-in thresholds for prerequisite deviations. This preliminary action creates a framework that automatically adapts to changes without requiring frequent reviews or redesigns. The pre-configured second safety layer handles adaptations automatically, reducing development time while maintaining adaptability.
Data Source
AI summary
The present invention addresses the problem of providing an autonomous control system and a safety monitoring system that, even if a variety of circumstances of the autonomous control system have changed, enable proper reconfiguration of safety rules according to the changed circumstances or design conditions. The problem can be solved by including: a first safety layer for monitoring and controlling the safety of an apparatus on the basis of safety rules in the field; and a second safety layer for detecting system precondition deviations within design assumptions and reconfiguring the safety rules.