1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to the field of access control devices, such as the type that are used to control vehicular traffic. More specifically, the present invention comprises a control system for actuating the opening and closure of dual swing gates.
2. Description of the Related Art
Dual swing gates are common devices used to control vehicular traffic. Dual swing gates are characterized by a pair of swing gates that move in unison. Typically, each gate blocks approximately half of the width of the access point when in the closed position. These gates are commonly used to regulate vehicular access to residences, parking garages, and industrial or commercial areas.
Most dual swing gates are electronically controlled so that an authorized vehicle is permitted to pass through the gate when the authorized vehicle approaches the gate. Various mechanisms are used to regulate the opening of the dual swing gate. Bar code scanners, card readers, infrared motion detectors, and currency counters are all commonly used to send an “open gate” command to a controller. The controller interfaces with a prime mover to open the gate when this signal is received. Motion sensors or sensors embedded in the roadway are often used to provide an “all clear” signal to the controller when the vehicle is clear of the dual swing gate. The controller is then provided with a “close gate” signal after the “all clear” signal is received.
Many dual swing gates employ locking or closing features which help secure the access point. For most locking or closing features to work properly, the swing gates must arrive at the closed position in the correct sequence.
Conventionally, this sequencing problem has been addressed by using a time delay between the movement of one gate (the “master”) and the other (the “slave”). The time delay is controlled by the circuitry of a control card that electronically actuates the movement of the master gate and the slave gate. Typically, the fixed time delay is user adjustable via DIP switch or potentiometer. A time delay of approximately four seconds is customary. When the “close gate” command is initiated, the controller first actuates closure of slave arm 18. Once the designated delay time elapses, master arm 12 is actuated. Assuming that both gates are traveling at the same speed, slave arm 18 should reach the closure point before master arm 12. This method is considered “open-loop” control.
There are many problems with this open-loop control protocol. First, the delay time may be insufficient to ensure correct sequencing if the master arm moves faster than the slave arm. Also, the relative speed of the gates may change over time due rendering the original delay time insufficient. The slave arm may have a smaller opening angle than the master arm. For example the slave arm may open to 80 degrees while the master arm opens to 100 degrees. In addition, using extended delay periods to compensate for the potential of aging can cause some to perceive that master gate has stopped working. For example, if the master arm is set to a 4 second delay period and the slave arm takes 2 seconds to close, there will be a period of 2 seconds when neither gate is moving. These control systems are not user friendly since the sequencing of the gates must be observed periodically because of the aforementioned factors which can negatively affect proper sequencing. As a result, may users tend to select the longest delay times that are possible to ensure proper closure. This increases the total time of closure and decreases the security and effectiveness of the access control system.
The present invention comprises a control system and method for ensuring proper closure of a dual swing gate. The control system employs position sensors for monitoring the position of each arm. A “differential position” is maintained between the arms during closing to ensure proper sequencing. The control system regulates the speed of both the master arm and the slave arm to ensure that the differential position is maintained throughout the closure process.
The present invention comprises a control system and method for ensuring proper closure of a dual swing gate. Although the proposed control system actuates both the opening and closing processes, the closing process will be considered in greatest detail. The control system employs position sensors for monitoring the position of each gate leaf arm. Each arm is actuated by a motor and, in one embodiment, a linear actuator. As an arm moves from the closed position to the open position, the outboard end of the arm (the end which is in proximity to the opposing gate arm when in the closed position) defines an arc. This arc typically is in the range of 70 degrees to 120 degrees.
The position sensors track the rotation of the motor by observing the motor or the shaft of the linear actuator. Many different position sensors capable of tracking or counting the revolutions of a motor shaft are known in the prior art. By tracking the number of rotations of each motor it is possible for the controller to “know” the position of each arm along its respective arc. The present method maintains a “differential position” between the arms during the closing process to ensure proper sequencing. The control system accomplishes this by regulating the speed of the master arm and the slave arm to ensure that the differential position is maintained throughout the closure process.
A method for controlling the closure of a dual swing gate system is illustrated in
The controller next determines whether or not the actual differential position (DP) between the slave position (SP) and the master position (MP) is greater than the designated differential position as indicated by comparison step 26. The designated differential position (DP) represents the preset “lag” that is maintained between the slave arm and the master arm during closing. The actual differential position (SP-MP) is the actual difference in position between the slave arm and the master arm. Those that are skilled in the art will appreciate that values may be assigned for discrete positions along the closing arc (from the fully open position to the fully closed position). For example, when in the fully opened position, the master arm positional value (MP) may have the value of zero (0). When in the closed position, MP may have the value of nine thousand (9000). Likewise, when in the fully opened position, the slave arm positional value (SP) may have the value of zero (0). When in the closed position SP may have the value of nine thousand (9000). The value for DP may be set to any reasonable number. To maintain a three (3) degree lag between the slave arm and the master arm, DP should be set to the value of three hundred (300) in the present example.
If the actual differential position (SP-MP) has not exceed the designated differential position (DP), don't run command 28 is generated. Don't run command 28 triggers a time delay before comparison step 26 is repeated. If after the designated time has lapsed, the actual differential position exceeds the designated differential position, run master command 30 is generated. This command actuates the master arm motor to operate at a preset speed. The master arm motor is preferably set to operate at the same speed as the slave arm motor.
After run master command 30 is transmitted, the controller determines whether the actual differential position is less than the designated differential position as indicated by comparison step 32. If the actual differential position is less than the designated differential position, reduce master speed command 34 is generated. The controller then checks to see if the slave arm has reached the closed position (i.e., it checks to see if MP=9000) as indicated by comparison step 36. If the slave arm has not reached the closed position, the controller returns to comparison step 32 to repeat the process. Those that are skilled in the art will recognize this as a closed loop control process.
If the controller determines that the actual differential position is not less than the designated differential position via comparison step 32, the controller determines whether the actual differential position exceeds a designated differential position range via comparison step 44. In the present example, the differential position range is between 300 and 310 (DP+10). If the actual differential position does not exceed the range, the controller repeats comparison step 36. If the actual differential position exceeds the designated differential position range, increase master command 46 is generated. Increase master command 46 increases the operational speed of the master arm motor. After increase master command 46 is generated, the controller returns to comparison step 36 to determine if the slave arm has reached the closed position.
Once the controller determines that the slave arm has reached the closed position via comparison step 36, stop/run command 38 is generated. This command causes the slave arm motor to stop running and the master arm motor to operate at maximum speed. After stop/run command 38 is generated, the controller determines whether the master arm has reached the closed position (i.e., it checks to see if MP=9000) via comparison step 40. If the master arm has not reached the closed position, the controller waits for a designated amount of time and then repeats comparison step 40. When controller 40 determines that the master arm has reached the closed position, stop command 40 is generated. Stop command 40 causes the master arm motor to stop running.
Turning to
Turning to
The preceding description contains significant detail regarding the novel aspects of the present invention. It should not be construed, however, as limiting the scope of the invention but rather as providing illustrations of the preferred embodiments of the invention. As an example, many different actuation mechanisms other than linear actuators may be used to open and close master arm 12 and slave arm 18. Thus, the scope of the invention should be fixed by the following claims, rather than by the examples given.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4186521 | Hunter | Feb 1980 | A |
5193307 | Chupp | Mar 1993 | A |
5963000 | Tsutsumi et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6943508 | Morris et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
7202615 | Morris et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
20060086050 | Matsuyama et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20080309275 A1 | Dec 2008 | US |