EP2586959B2 - Safety device, closing device and evaluation unit - Google Patents

Description

The invention relates to a securing device for securing a movable, guided movement element against unwanted collisions according to the preamble of claim 1 and a locking device according to the preamble of claim 12 and an evaluation unit according to the preamble of claim 13.

From the prior art is for example from the EP 1 841 942 B1 a device for securing a driven moving member known. In this device, an electronic unit determines the time difference from the first to the second light barrier by triggering these light barriers a time at which a subsequent, third light barrier would be detected, and switches in time before this event occurs, the third light barrier in the measurement state. Furthermore, from the DE 299 12 572 U1 a device according to the preamble of claim 1 known.

In addition, from the DE 299 01 664 U1 a lifting gate with a light grid monitoring device, in which the signal pattern resulting from the output signals of the light receiver is stored prior to the insertion of an object with which there is a danger of collision. Then this signal pattern is compared with the signal pattern after insertion of the object.

The object of the invention is to propose a safety device or a locking device, which allows in an improved manner to detect a risk of collision during movement of the moving element.

The object is achieved on the basis of a securing device or a locking device of the type mentioned above, by the characterizing features of claim 1, claim 12 and claim 13.

The measures mentioned in the dependent claims advantageous embodiments and development of the invention are possible.

The securing device according to the invention for securing a movable, guided movement element against unwanted collisions with an object lying on a movement path of the movement element comprises at least two sensors. for detecting the object or the movement element and for outputting signals as a function of the detection. Furthermore, the security device according to the invention comprises an evaluation unit for evaluating signals from the sensors and for generating a shutdown signal based on the evaluation.

Goals or doors, foil doors, swing gates, roller doors, telescope doors or the like come into consideration as a movement element. If necessary, parts of a closing device that are moved during the movement of the moving element may also belong to the moving element.

Basically, the securing device according to the invention serves to avoid unwanted collisions during the movement of the moving element. If the movement element, such as a gate, closed, it may happen, for example, that a person, an object or any other object enters the range of motion of the movement element. In principle, in such a case, without any securing device, the object could be caught by the moving element. Such accidents should be avoided.

The evaluation unit of the safety device according to the invention detects signals from the sensors and evaluates them, e.g. by an appropriate electronics. This detection can be carried out in the simplest way, that the evaluation unit is connected to the respective outputs of the sensors or wired. The sensors basically serve to detect an object, that is to say an object or a person, which enters the movement space of the movement element. The movement space is the space which is either passed directly by the movement element during the movement of the movement element, or an area which lies in the immediate vicinity of this zone passed by the movement element and thus to a certain extent constitutes a danger zone. An object which is thus located in this danger area may possibly cause a collision with the movement element, for example because of its spatial extent. As a rule, this movement space or at least part of this movement space is monitored by the securing device or the sensors, so that the risk of a collision can be reduced or even eliminated altogether.

The sensors are also arranged or designed so that the Bewegunselement can be detected. The sensors may, for example, be mounted in the guide rail, in which the corresponding movement element is guided and moved. It is also conceivable that the light barriers are arranged laterally offset from the guide rail, e.g. arranged parallel to the guide rail. Sometimes, the movement element is designed or arranged such that it is detected by the sensors during its guided movement, for example by the movement element penetrating into the detection area of the sensor. Among other things, this z. B. be used to determine the position of the moving element or a portion of the Bewegungselemenzes by the sensors.

The sensors are further configured to output signals that, among other things, carry at least the information as to whether the sensor detects an object, a person or the like or not. In the case of a simple light barrier, the signal can accordingly carry the information as to whether the light barrier is interrupted or not. The corresponding signals are transferred to the evaluation unit or of these detected.

The securing device according to the invention offers a particularly advantageous measure, characterized in that, as soon as the sensor detects something, it can be distinguished whether it is an object and if there is a risk of collision or if it is the moving element itself, which in its movement from the sensor was recorded.

The invention makes use of the insight that the distinction of moving element and object which could cause a collision can be found by the stationary analysis of the signal state even without considering a time course. For this purpose, those signal images which correspond to the detection of an object can be defined in advance. The determination as to whether an object is detected is then made by comparison with the defined signal images.

Accordingly, the security device according to the invention is characterized in that the evaluation unit is designed to detect from the at least two sensors a currently detected state vector from a set of state vectors, which unambiguously comprise all possible combinations of the signals of the sensors, and in the case of predetermined state vectors, the shutdown signal to generate.

A state vector in the sense of the invention comprises individual information or information contents of the signals of the sensors. The state vector is designed such that this information or information contents can be assigned to the individual sensors. The information or information contents may in particular include the information as to whether the sensor detects something (an object / a person or the movement element) or not. For example, as a state vector, the entirety of the signals of all outputs of the sensors can be viewed. In the simplest case, the information consists of a digital signal, i. 0 or 1; is e.g. A voltage at the output of the sensor is detected by the sensor and vice versa.

The state vector can be designed in various ways. It is conceivable on the one hand that a memory unit, e.g. a register bank, is provided, wherein each register a corresponding sensor can be assigned. It is also conceivable that only electrical lines are available, each of which can be assigned to a sensor. The information, both about the detection of the sensor and about which sensor it is, can also be encoded in some other way, for example by a numerical code, by assigning different numerical values to certain sensors with specific states. On the assignment, which sensor has supplied which signal or which information, it is then also known where the sensor is arranged or which position it has.

The evaluation unit detects the state vector, i. In the simplest case, the outputs of the sensors are connected to the evaluation unit. The set of all possible state vectors thus unambiguously includes all possible combinations of the signals of the sensors. In particular, it can be clearly identified or deduced from the state vector which sensor detects something or not.

The state vectors can be repeated, for example, periodically, but in principle also continuously detected. The currently detected state vector is the state vector that is used to determine whether or not there is a danger of collision right now or in some current time span.

The safety device according to the invention comprises sensors which can detect both the movement element and an object. The evaluation unit only evaluates the information from the state vector whether an object has been detected by a sensor or not and which sensor it is in each case. Each individual piece of information of a single sensor in itself contains only the information as to whether something is detected by the respective sensor or not. This single information does not yet permit the conclusion as to whether the detected object is the moving element or an object that could cause a collision. But this conclusion can be drawn from the totality of this information of all signals. The movement element, for example, during its movement successively cover one sensor after another and thus be detected by these sensors each. During the movement of the movement element, therefore, a characteristic "pattern" is generated which sensors detect something and which are not. If the signals of the sensors deviate from these possible patterns, an object has regularly entered the movement space and there is a danger of collision; then the evaluation unit generates a shutdown signal. Accordingly, all state vectors are known in principle, which mean that either nothing is detected or the motion element is detected or an object with the risk of collision is detected. Consequently, the shutdown signal is generated at the corresponding predetermined state vectors.

In general, different cases of an evaluation are conceivable. The signals of the sensors can be evaluated, for example, by a logic circuit or by a multiplexer, in particular if digital values are available as signals. The decision as to whether a shutdown signal is generated, that is, whether a predetermined state vector is present, can be made by either addressing certain fixed output lines of the logic circuit or of the multiplexer. However, it is also conceivable in principle that the predetermined state vectors are ready for comparison. For example, the state vectors are also present as numerical values, which are temporarily stored in a register, wherein in a further memory, the predetermined state vectors are stored and then a comparison is made. Also conceivable is a digital comparison by logical switching elements.

The securing device according to the invention is advantageously used not only in the dynamic case, ie during the movement of the moving element, but also in the static case, when, for example, the gate is turned on again, the gate fully extended., Completely retracted or in an intermediate state can be located.

The security device is in particular hardly prone to errors and allows a particularly high level of security, since the actual sensor status is always checked in detail. In addition, sensors do not have to be activated or deactivated.

The securing device according to the invention also has the advantage that virtually no structural changes have to be made to a corresponding closing device on a gate, etc., e.g. in the sense of attaching special reflection flags. It therefore allows a particularly good retrofitting.

In one embodiment of the invention, a detected state vector may also be stored at least temporarily to be used for later comparison with the current state vector. It is conceivable caching in a register, other use of flip-flop circuits or the like. This measure is also advantageous if, for example, there is a state vector during the movement of the movement element and therefore it is known which state vector should be present next. By this measure, therefore, the safety and reliability of the device can be increased again. If necessary, for example, in the case of a gate in which a so-called "blowout" is possible (for example in the case of the film gate), a distinction can be made even more reliably between a blowout case and a danger of collision by an object.

Furthermore, the time during the movement of the moving element can be recorded by a timer. Based on this information, e.g. to be closed, which state vector should be present. It is also conceivable, on the basis of this time, to select individual predetermined state vectors which can be used for a comparison or for the decision as to whether the shutdown signal is generated. As a result, safety can be increased, for example in the case of a telescopic door, since in such a door gate elements can swing out after a certain time and can no longer be detected by the sensors. In principle, this case can also be used for a blowout detection, since in the case of a "blowout", the movement element partially comes out of the guide and, e.g. at this point is no longer detected.

According to the invention, the evaluation unit is designed to unambiguously assign exactly one state information from a predetermined target quantity via a bijective map to each state vector from a set of state vectors which comprise the signals of the respective sensors individually as a function of their position, and in the case of predetermined state information to signal the switch-off signal to generate.

The evaluation unit uniquely assigns exactly one state information to each state vector. The state information may be, for example, a specific signal. It can be e.g. to act as an electrical or optical signal. The state information can also consist of a numerical value. The target set consists of all possible or possible state information that can be assigned to the state vectors. Any state information is an element of the target set. The target set does not include elements that can not be assigned to a state vector. Accordingly, the set of state vectors can again have as many elements as there are conceivable states of the sensors.

For example, if a fuse device comprises n photoelectric sensors (n: natural number, n> 0), each output as signals 0 or 1 (not interrupted or interrupted), the set of all possible state vectors comprises 2 ⁿ (2 high n) elements. Then, the target amount also includes 2 ⁿ (2 high n) elements.

This illustration is bijective, meaning that it is both injective and surjective. Injectivity means that no value of the target set is assigned to several elements of the set of state vectors. Surjectivity, in turn, means that each value of the target quantity is also assigned to an element of the set of state vectors. Mathematically, this means that there is also an inverse function. That is, from the information which state information (element of the target amount) is currently present, one can uniquely conclude which state vector, i. which combination of signals from which sensors was entered into the evaluation unit.

There are various possibilities conceivable, such as such a bijective mapping can be performed in the evaluation.

Inter alia, it is conceivable that the evaluation unit comprises a multiplexer which has a plurality of inputs and, depending on which inputs are addressed or signals are received, responds to different outputs or outputs signals via different outputs. The associated inputs of the multiplexer together then correspond to the state vector.

Thus, a logical circuit is conceivable, which the states of the individual sensors to zu-ordered Receives signal inputs and logically linked so that only in the case of predefined signal pattern, a corresponding control signal, in particular a shutdown signal is output.

Based on the state information, which is finally obtained by the bijective mapping, a further assignment is clearly possible. Basically, all state information that can be output is known. Some of them are predetermined in the case of regular operation, others in the event of a breakdown or collision hazard. In regular operation, i. the moving element is moved, without an object penetrating into the movement space during this time or any other disturbance is present, certain predetermined state information occurs. If another status information is output, then there is no regular operation: The movement element is to be stopped.

According to the invention, the evaluation unit is designed to assign the sensors in each case a numerical value as a function of their position and of their signal and to assemble the state vector from these numerical values. As an evaluation unit, for example, a microcontroller or a processor can be used. The corresponding mathematical operation can be carried out by a simple programming of the microcontroller or processor.

The signals are used to perform a mathematical operation that results in a single numerical value or result value. The mathematical operation represents a bijective mapping. The set of all possible combinations of signals of all light barriers, which can therefore enter into the evaluation unit, effectively forms the definition set of the mapping. Each element of the definition set is assigned an element of the target set by the mathematical operation, ie the mapping. All numerical values thus obtained, which are assigned to state vectors by the bijective mapping, together form the target quantity.

Since, therefore, the result value effectively represents a coding, which sensor detects something and which does not, it can also be deduced from this information whether the object or the motion element is detected. If only the movement element was detected, it can be continued during movement of the movement element, since in principle no danger of collision is to be feared. However, if exclusively or additionally an object is detected, then in fact this risk of collision is to be feared and the movement of the movement element is to be stopped.

As a mathematical operation, for example, an addition may be provided in an embodiment of the invention. Such a mathematical function is usually provided by most commercially available processors / microcontrollers. In addition, such a microcontroller or processor enables rapid signal processing.

To generate a shutdown signal, the predetermined state information is stored as comparison numbers in a comparison table stored in a memory unit such as a register bank on an EEPROM. Subsequently, the numerical values / result values are compared with the comparative figures. If the result values are one of the comparison values, then e.g. a regular case, otherwise a shutdown signal is generated. It is also conceivable, in principle, to store only comparison values that correspond to a non-regular operation, so that a shutdown signal is generated if they match.

The evaluation of the result value can be done not only by specifying a comparison table and performing a numerical comparison, but also by programming another mathematical operation (eg, a mathematical function, logic gates (English: AND, OR, NAND, NOR or combinations thereof) or the like Such electronic components as microcontrollers, as well as corresponding memory elements and registers, can generally be acquired inexpensively The memories or registers of a commercially available microcontroller may well be sufficient for this purpose, which means that cost-effective production can also be made possible, and advantageously such a microcontroller can also be reprogrammed in a simple manner ert be, if, for example, additional sensors to be installed later.

It is also conceivable first to assign the numerical value zero to each sensor when the sensor detects nothing, e.g. the photocell is not interrupted.

The evaluation unit can, for example, perform the assignment of numerical values inter alia as a function of the respective sensor. This assignment is made so that, depending on the position of the individual sensors, fundamentally different numbers are assigned. For example, if there are N sensors in total (where N≥2 and N is a natural number). The N sensors can be counted individually, for example. The order of counting, for example, done so that after starting the movement of a moving element in the open state of the moving element, the sensors are counted in the order as they are passed successively by the moving element.

In an advantageous embodiment of the invention, the nth sensor (where n = 1, 2, ... N and where n, N: natural numbers) then becomes a result value assigned, which can be described as a function of n, if the n-th sensor is detected something. Otherwise, a sensor that does not detect anything is assigned the value zero. It is conceivable, for example, to assign the numerical value 2 ^n-1 to the n-th sensor. It is particularly advantageous to choose an exponential function, because in this way a steadily increasing distance between the numerical values which can be assigned to the individual interrupted light barriers is achieved. Furthermore, if an addition is selected as the mathematical operation, this makes it easier to realize a bijective mapping, since the result values thus deviating from the regular operation differ from those of the non-regular operation.

It is also conceivable to choose powers to another basis, eg. to base 3.

The safety of the security device can be increased in particular by additionally assigning to the signals and / or result values a time value which corresponds to the time of detection. For example, the timer may begin to run when the motion element is activated. Optionally, the timer can then be stopped, even if the movement of the moving element is stopped. Thus, the timer keeps track of the amount of time that has already passed during the movement of the moving element. As a result, the timer measures the time of movement of the movement element.

Incidentally, it is also conceivable to design the evaluation unit to determine, based on the time determined by the timer, a desired position of the movement element at which the movement element would have to be in regular operation. This information can for example be compared with the information which photocells are currently interrupted or not. If, for example, a light barrier is interrupted, which still can not have happened at all by the movement element, then the detected object can only be an object, and not the movement element. So there is a risk of collision. It will then generate a shutdown signal. The evaluation unit can be designed to determine based on the desired position, which sensors should be interrupted and released again as a result of the movement of the moving element, and accordingly calculate by means of the mathematical operation a target value that would result from the signals of the sensors passed during normal operation , Accordingly, in an advantageous development of the invention, the evaluation unit is designed to compare the result value with the desired value. Accordingly, it can be particularly advantageous to design the evaluation unit in such a way that, based on the desired position, it is determined which sensors should have detected the movement element as a result of the movement of the movement element. By means of the mathematical operation, a setpoint value is calculated, which would result from the signals of the light barriers which are interrupted during normal operation, if, as sensors, e.g. Photocells are available. The evaluation unit can thus be designed, for example, to carry out a countercheck. Due to the time determined by the timer, which has elapsed during the movement of the movement element, for example, a certain number of light barriers would have already happened and thus be interrupted. Furthermore, therefore, a certain result value would have to exist, a so-called setpoint. This setpoint is compared with the actually determined result value. If the values do not match, then there is no regular operation. If necessary, the movement element must be stopped. It is conceivable, for example, that an object is detected by a light barrier and therefore results in a deviation in the result value from the desired value. In principle, it is therefore also possible to detect whether there is another fault. For example, it could be that the speed of the moving element does not correspond to the speed required during regular operation. Thus, the moving element has passed too few or too many light barriers. Optionally, in this case, a stop of the movement element can be effected by a corresponding switch-off signal.

It is also conceivable to take into account a certain tolerance in connection with such a desired value. The speed of the movement element is regularly known only within a certain tolerance range. Therefore, it may happen that under normal operating conditions taking these tolerances into account, a sensor will or may not be passed, because the moving element would have just passed the sensor at the highest acceptable and still tolerable speed, while at a speed at the lower tolerance limit the sensor would not have happened yet or not yet can capture the movement element, as it is eg is still out of range of the sensor.

Such an embodiment is particularly advantageous when it is a moving element that performs a telescopic movement. A telescopic moving element has at least two elements, which are guided in parallel rails. When fully opened, the elements are perpendicular to the closing plane at the edge of the corresponding opening during the closing process or the movement is at least one element in motion. When the closing operation is completed, the elements are arranged next to each other. For example, move the individual elements so that when the door is open, the sensors are first passed one after the other until about half of the door opening is reached. Thereafter, the detection by the first-passed sensor ends, and so one sensor after another is temporarily "released" in the same order.

In order to determine a target value accordingly, it is necessary to obtain a corresponding time information. Otherwise it could only be explained by a risk of collision or an accident, why the initially passed photocells are opened again and, for example, only sensors in the middle of the door opening indicate a detection. This case must then be interpreted as a regular operation and not as an accident. In principle, it is therefore conceivable that two different cases may occur, but in which the sensors detect something in the same way or not. In one case, for example, there may be a fault (e.g., gate at the top of the guide), while in the other case there is regular operation (e.g., no interruption of the upper photocell at the telescope gate after some time).

The sensors can be designed, for example, as light barriers. It is also conceivable, however, to use a time-of-flight (abbreviation: TOF) sensor. In principle, a TOF sensor advantageously also allows a distance or Position determination of a detected object. However, it is conceivable to use the TOF sensor in such a way that only the information is obtained whether something is detected at all or not.

The sensors can be arranged in a preferred development of the invention parallel to the direction of movement of the moving element, further in particular so that they lie in the plane of movement of the moving element. The parallel arrangement along the direction of movement allows successively one sensor after another to detect the moving moving element. The arrangement in the plane of motion allows the movement space in which a risk of collision could exist to be monitored as completely as possible.

The sensors may further be arranged perpendicular to the direction of movement, e.g. to evenly scrape the movement space.

The evaluation unit can also be designed to interrupt the movement of the movement element. For example, a corresponding switching unit, a contactor or a relay or the like may be integrated into the evaluation unit. It is conceivable to integrate the control and / or regulation of the movement element in the evaluation unit to a compact unit as possible. The evaluation unit can therefore also be used as a control unit for checking, i. for the control and / or regulation of the movement the Bewegungselenentes be formed. Among other things, the control unit may also be configured to receive a command from a user to close the gate or to interrupt the movement of the gate. Such a command can be issued, for example via a control panel, a remote control, optionally acoustically or in any other way.

In principle, the evaluation unit can repeatedly detect the state vectors continuously or at intervals, in particular also periodically.

Furthermore, accordingly, a closing device with a movable, guided moving element and a securing device is characterized in that a securing device according to the invention or an embodiment of the invention is used. In an advantageous embodiment of the invention, the movement element is designed as a gate. At least one of the sensors is arranged so that the movement element can be detected by the sensor.

It is conceivable to retrofit an existing security device or an existing locking device by merely incorporating an evaluation unit according to the invention for evaluating sensors for generating a shutdown signal. The existing security device or the existing locking device can be somitzu an embodiment of the invention. If necessary, the evaluation unit can also be designed as a control unit for checking the movement of the movement element.

Embodiment:

An embodiment of the invention is illustrated in the drawings and is explained in more detail below in the specification of further details and advantages.

Figur 1

eine Schließvorrichtung gemäß der Erfindung,

Figur 2

eine Vergleichstabelle für eine Sicherungsvorrichtung gemäß der Erfindung,

Figur 3

eine Vergleichstabelle für eine Sicherungsvorrichtung gemäß der Erfindung, welche den Fall einer Entgleisung berücksichtigt, sowie

Figur 4

eine Vergleichstabelle für eine Sicherungsvorrichtung gemäß der Erfindung, die für den Fall eines Teleskoptors vorgesehen ist.

In detail show:

FIG. 1

a locking device according to the invention,

FIG. 2

a comparison table for a security device according to the invention,

FIG. 3

a comparison table for a safety device according to the invention, which takes into account the case of a derailment, as well as

FIG. 4

a comparison table for a securing device according to the invention, which is provided in the case of a telescope optics.

FIG. 1 shows a closing device 1 with a gate 2, which consists of individual gate elements 2a, 2b and 2c. The gate two or the individual elements 2a, 2b, 2c are guided in guide rails 3. In the guide of the guide rails 3 are light barriers 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d, 4e, wherein the individual optical Pfande are shown as dashed lines. In the drawing are in the left guide rail of the guide 3, the transmitter of the light barriers 4a to 4e and in the right guide rail, the corresponding receiver. The direction of movement when closing the door 2 is shown by an arrow 5. The movement of the gate 2 is effected by a drive motor M, which in turn is controlled by a control unit K. The individual receivers of the light barriers 4a to 4e are connected to the control unit K via the corresponding lines 6a, 6b, 6c, 6d, 6e. The output of the control unit K is in turn connected to the motor M, which is controlled or regulated via this output 7.

The closing plane in which the door 2 moves between the two guide rails of the guide 3 is identified by the reference numeral 8. In this level or in the movement space of the gate 2 is currently in the FIG. 1 a person 9. This person 9 interrupts the photocells 4c, 4d and 4e. The light barriers 4a and 4b are not interrupted.

In FIG. 2 a corresponding comparison table is shown. There are six photoelectric switches here, which are counted out by the variable n direction of movement of the door. If the photocell is not interrupted (indicated by the "o" symbol in the "Status" column), each of these photocells is assigned the value x _n = 0. If one of the light barriers is interrupted (indicated by the symbol "---" in the "Status" column), then the value of this broken nth light barrier is assigned the value x _n = 2 ^n-1 , ie the first value becomes 1 in the event of an interruption, the second value 2, the third the value 4, the fourth the value 8, the fifth the value 16 and the sixth 32. If the gate is set in motion in the open state, it first interrupts the first, then the second, then the third light barrier etc.

Case I (see columns 3 - 4 in FIG. 2 ): There are three light barriers interrupted; In the present case, the value 1 is assigned to the first light barrier, the value 2 to the second light barrier, and the value 4 to the third light barrier. The remaining photocells are each assigned the value 0. In the present embodiment, since addition is provided as a mathematical operation, in case 1, the result value (sum) is 7. In the comparison table, the value 7 is included because the comparison table contains all the values that can be formed when the series after 1 to a maximum of N light barriers is interrupted / are. The comparison table thus contains the values 1, 3, 7, 15, 31, 63. The result value 7 means that the first three light barriers are interrupted.

Case II (see columns 5 - 6 in FIG. 2 ): By a different constellation, in particular an invaded object, this value can not arise in principle. Case II shows that the photocells 1, 2, 3 and 5 are interrupted. This case II can not correspond to a movement of the gate, because otherwise the gate would have to have an interruption in the area of the fourth light barrier, which would have to allow the light beam of the light barrier to pass. The interruption of the fifth light barrier is therefore caused by an object that can cause a collision and thus the control unit must stop the movement of the gate. Mathematically, the result is 23, which is not included in the comparison table. This leads to a corresponding interruption. Since this mapping is advantageously bijective, a corresponding state can be clearly assigned to the result values. The control unit can thus infer whether an interruption is necessary or not.

The present embodiment can be further improved by running a timer. For example, it could be that in the present example, the gate has actually passed the photocells 1 and 2 and the remaining photocells should actually be open. However, if an object penetrates into the movement space of the gate in such a way that the next, ie the third, light barrier is interrupted, the control unit would accordingly interpret this intrusion as movement of the gate because the total value is 7, which is also shown in the comparison table is included. If, however, the timer runs along, then a time correlation can take place, ie at this time of movement of the gate, the value 7 can not yet be reached, but only the value 1 + 2 = 3. Accordingly, the control unit can stop the movement of the gate.

FIG. 3 shows an embodiment in which a so-called "blow-out effect" takes place. This may be the case in particular with so-called film doors. Such film doors are guided so that at a corresponding gust of wind or a gust, which could lead to damage to the gate as a result of the large force against the gate, that the gate at the corresponding point at which the force is too large, from the leadership slips out. The force is reduced, and there is no damage to the gate. The present embodiment makes it possible to distinguish whether an object has entered the movement space or whether such a so-called "blow-out effect" has taken place. The time is tracked by a timer. The first two columns of the table show a case in which the gate has passed the first three light barriers, at time t-1. As a result, the value 7 (sum) contained in the comparison table is correctly stated at time t-1. If the result value still has the value 7 at time t, this means that the gate has been stopped.

Case I (in FIG. 3 ): If the gate is moved further, it also passes until the time t, the fourth light barrier and thus correctly assumes the value 15, which is also included in the comparison table and is also provided for the time t. The control unit thus recognizes that the gate is moving downwards.

Case II (in FIG. 3 ): In case II, the gate did not move further after passing the third light barrier, but an object has penetrated that passes the fifth light barrier. Would have been that Tor moved on, so at the time t as already mentioned in the first case, the result would have been 15 expected. By interrupting the light barrier 5, however, the value 23 (sum) is now available as a result value. This is greater than the expected result value and therefore means an interruption by an object. The gate must be stopped.

Case III (in FIG. 3 ): Case III indicates a "blowout" case. The gate has moved and meanwhile the fourth light barrier has happened. However, the result value is not 15, as would be the case with regular operation, but only 13, since a gust of wind has spoiled the guidance in the area of the second light barrier (so-called "blow-out"). The light barrier 2 is therefore no longer interrupted. In such a case, it may therefore no longer be an interruption of a light barrier by an object at the time t. A light barrier is set in motion again, which has already been interrupted by the gate and thus should basically continue to be interrupted. Therefore, the sum is smaller than the expected result value, namely the desired value 15.

FIG. 4 shows a table in which a telescopic gate performs a movement. In total there are eight photocells. Each column shows a different moment of movement of the gate at successive times t = 1, 2, ..., 8. The first column (t = 1) shows a fully opened state. If the gate starts to move, first the first (at t = 2), at a later time t = 3 the first and second light barrier, then at t = 4 the first, second and third light barrier, at t = 5 the first to fourth photocell interrupted. From then on, the next, the fifth photocell will be interrupted (t = 6). However, the first light barrier is opened again at t = 6, since the corresponding element swings out of the area of the first light barrier. Subsequently, in addition to the first in the further course of the movement, the second light barrier is also opened (t = 7). The comparison table is therefore designed so that, depending on elapsed time during the movement of the gate thus initially, in the case according to FIG. 2 the comparison table can take the values 0, 1, 3, 7 and 15. Subsequently, however, the comparison table does not assume the value 31 but the value 30, since the first light barrier is opened again. The next value is 60 because the first and second photocells are opened, ie 63 - 1 -2. Accordingly, the next value of the comparison table is 120. If these values are deviated at the respective times, this means that either an object has invaded, which is the case when the result values are greater than the setpoint values of the comparison table at the respective times. In principle, if the time information were not available, it could also be a so-called "blow-out case" if the value is smaller than the setpoint value.

LIST OF REFERENCE NUMBERS

1

closing device

2

gate

2a

gate element

2 B

gate element

2c

gate element

3

guide

4a

photocell

4b

photocell

4c

photocell

4d

photocell

4e

photocell

5

movement direction

6a

signal line

6b

signal line

6c

signal line

6d

signal line

6e

signal line

7

control line

8th

movement plane

9

Object / person

K

control unit

M

engine

Claims (13)

1. Safety device for safeguarding a movable, guided movement element against undesired collisions with an object (9) lying on a movement path of the movement element (2, 2a, 2b, 2c), said device comprising at least two sensors (4a, 4b, 4c, 4d, 4e) for detecting the object and the movement element and for outputting signals as a function of the detection, and an evaluation unit (K) for evaluating signals of the sensors and for generating a switch-off signal on the basis of the evaluation, wherein the evaluation unit is configured to acquire from the at least two sensors a currently detected state vector (6a, 6b, 6c, 6d, 6e), which represents the totality of the signals of all the outputs of the sensors, from a set of state vectors which clearly comprise all possible combinations of the signals of the sensors, and to generate the switch-off signal (7) in the case of predetermined state vectors, wherein the evaluation unit is configured, from a set of state vectors, which comprise the signals of the respective sensors individually as a function of their position, to assign to each state vector clearly exactly one piece of state position from a predetermined target amount by means of bijective mapping and in the case of predetermined state information to generate the switch-off signal, characterised in that the evaluation unit is configured:

   - to assign to the sensors respectively a numerical value as a function of their position and their signal and to create the state vector from these numerical values, and

   - to carry out the bijective mapping as a mathematical operation of the numerical values, in particular as addition, so that a corresponding result value is obtained as state information,

   wherein a storage unit is provided in which a comparison table with comparison numbers corresponding to the predetermined state vectors can be stored, and wherein the evaluation unit is configured to compare the determined result value with the comparison numbers of the comparison table and to generate the switch-off signal as a function thereof, wherein the evaluation unit is preferably designed to assign the numerical value zero to each of the sensors if the sensor is not interrupted, and to carry out the assignment of the numerical value as a function of the respective sensor in the case of a total of N sensors, (N ≥ 2, N; natural number) according to what position the sensor has within the arrangement of N sensors, wherein the evaluation unit is configured in particular to assign the numerical value 2^n-1 (2 to the power (n-1)) to the n-th (n = 1, 2, ...N) sensor within the arrangement of sensors.
2. Safety device according to claim 1, characterised in that the evaluation unit is configured to use predetermined state vectors and to compare a currently detected state vector with the predetermined state vectors and to generate the switch-off signal in the case of predetermined state vectors.
3. Safety device according to one of the preceding claims, characterised in that the evaluation unit is configured to save at least temporarily at least one state vector determined before the currently detected state vector and to compare it with the currently detected state vector.
4. Safety device according to one of the preceding claims, characterised in that a timer is provided which can be activated at the beginning of the movement of the movement element and can be stopped when the movement of the movement element stops, wherein the timer is configured to communicate a time value to the evaluation unit.
5. Safety device according to one of the preceding claims, characterised in that the evaluation unit is configured to determine the state vectors predetermined for the generation of the switch-off signal on the basis of the time value.
6. Safety device according to one of the preceding claims, characterised in that the evaluation unit is configured to assign in addition to the signals and/or to the result values a time value which corresponds to the moment of detection, wherein the evaluation unit comprises a timer, which can be activated at the beginning of the movement of the movement element and can be stopped when the movement of the movement element stops, so that the timer measures the elapsed time of the movement of the movement element, and wherein the evaluation unit is configured to calculate on the basis of the time value a desired value which would result from the signals of the sensors interrupted during regular operation, and to compare the result value with the desired value and generate the switch-off signal as a function of this.
7. Safety device according to one of the preceding claims, characterised in that the sensor is configured as a beam barrier, in particular as an interruption light barrier or as a reflection light barrier or as a time of flight (TOF) sensor.
8. Safety device according to one of the preceding claims, characterised in that the sensors are arranged parallel to the movement direction (5) of the movement element (2) and/or in the movement plane (8) of the movement element (2).
9. Safety device according to one of the preceding claims, characterised in that the sensors are oriented perpendicular to the movement direction (5) of the movement element (2).
10. Safety device according to one of the preceding claims, characterised in that the evaluation unit is configured to interrupt the movement of the movement element when the switch-off signal is present.
11. Safety device according to one of the preceding claims, characterised in that the evaluation unit is configured to carry out the comparison with the comparison table repeatedly during the movement of the movement element.
12. Closing device (1) comprising a movable, guided movement element and a safety device according to one of the preceding claims, wherein at least one of the sensors is arranged in such a way that it can detect the movement element during the movement thereof.
13. Evaluation unit for evaluating sensors of a safety device and for generating a switch-off signal for switching off the drive of the movement element, wherein the evaluation unit and the safety device are configured according to one of the preceding claims.

Images