Digital Stone Slab Blending for Panel Cutting

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The current process of determining cutting parameters for stone slabs is complex and cost-intensive, particularly in the blending stage where aesthetic expectations are assessed, often requiring expert intervention and manual adjustments.

Innovation Solution

A method that digitizes the blending process by creating geometric models of paneling with images of stone slabs, assigning panels to congruent sections, and using cutting parameters derived from these models to simplify the determination of cutting lines, allowing for automated or assisted cutting and layout optimization.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If manual blending and expert assessment are used to determine cutting parameters, then aesthetic quality and matching precision are improved, but process complexity and costs increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaesthetic qualityVSAvoidprocess complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent creates digital copies (photographs) of the stone slab surfaces and uses these copies in a simulation environment to perform blending and determine cutting parameters. This eliminates the need for physical manual blending while preserving aesthetic quality assessment capabilities.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces the manual mechanical process of physical blending and expert visual assessment with an automated computer-based simulation system that processes digital images and calculates optimal cutting parameters algorithmically.

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

2Manufacturing precision

If expert intervention and manual adjustments are used in the blending process, then aesthetic expectations are met, but time consumption and production efficiency decrease

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaesthetic matchingVSAvoidproduction efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The simulation system automatically performs the blending task without requiring expert intervention. The computer program independently analyzes the digital slab images, generates cutting parameters, and determines panel arrangements, making the system self-sufficient for the previously manual aesthetic assessment task.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs the blending and cutting parameter determination in advance during the digital simulation phase, before actual production begins. This preliminary digital planning eliminates the need for time-consuming manual adjustments during physical production.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Manufacturing precision

If physical blending and trial arrangements are performed, then cutting parameter accuracy is improved, but material waste and cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecutting parameter accuracyVSAvoidmaterial waste
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses digital copies of the stone slabs in a virtual simulation environment to determine cutting parameters accurately without touching the actual material. This virtual trial-and-error process eliminates material waste that would occur with physical trial arrangements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The cutting parameters are determined in advance through digital simulation, allowing all optimization and trial arrangements to be completed virtually before any actual cutting begins, thereby eliminating material waste from trial-and-error physical blending.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

4Manufacturing precision

If traditional manual blending processes are used, then aesthetic quality is maintained, but automation extent and production speed decrease

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaesthetic qualityVSAvoidprocess automation
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSExtent of automation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces the entire manual blending process with an automated computer-based simulation system that processes digital images, evaluates aesthetic arrangements, and generates cutting parameters automatically, achieving full automation while maintaining aesthetic quality.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The simulation system autonomously performs aesthetic assessment and cutting parameter determination without human intervention, making the process fully automated while preserving the ability to meet aesthetic requirements through algorithmic optimization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentEP3944120B1Method for the determination of blank parameters for panels and method for producing panels for the panelling of a surface
Publication Date: 2023.11.01 ARTEMOTIONAL GMBH
  • EP3944120B1 patent drawingFigure 1~2
  • EP3944120B1 patent drawingFigure 3
  • EP3944120B1 patent drawingFigure 4

AI summary

The invention relates to a method for determining cutting parameters for plates (4) and a method for producing panels (2) for cladding (3) a surface (1). Illustrations (13) of the plates (4) together with their dimensions, as well as a geometric model (14) of the cladding (3), are provided, which includes at least the position, shape, and size of the panels (2). Furthermore, it is provided that each panel (2) is assigned a congruent section (19) of one of the illustrations (13), and that the cutting parameters are given by geometric parameters of the sections (19). To produce the panels (2), they are then cut from the plates (4) according to the cutting parameters.