# Combining the Advantages of Different Processing Solutions Using a Novel Motion Processing Approach
## 5 Combining Processes with Differing Solution Principles
### Applicability of the Approach on Other Processes  
The usage of the hybrid process solution was discussed using the example of an intermittent product transport. In this chapter, some further thoughts on using this new  
Figure 10: Principle of combining the two process solutions and three optimized motion profiles. Between the process solutions, discrete processing is used at \(f_{\rm s}\). Operating speeds above \(f_{\rm s}\) are processed continuously. The maximum operating speed can be further increased.  
Figure 9: Principle of combining the two process solutions and three optimized motion profiles with the help of discrete processing at \(f_{\rm s1}\) and \(f_{\rm s2}\). The maximum operating speed can be increased compared to only using two motion profiles.  
approach with other processes will complete the discussion. This is intended to simplify decisions as to whether the approach is applicable with a process under consideration.  
Technically, more than two different process solutions can be used together in this way. This could be done, for example, to change the process solution only in a small operation speed range (for example, to overrun a resonance). Within this range and on both sides beyond the range, different process solutions could be executed.  
Expanding the process window upwards or downwards by combining different switching methods (discrete-continuous) is also possible in other combinations. For example, two continuously switchable process solutions could also be combined with discrete switching in between. The process windows only have to overlap favorably.  
The following requirements should help to decide if the hybrid approach can be applied to other processes and process solutions.  
* The hybrid approach can be used if both process solutions fulfill one and the same technological task. Combining different technological tasks is possible in principle but does not appear to be reasonable in the context of the discussion. Whether such a combination makes sense or not must be examined individually.
* The normalized cycle time \(\tau\) of the motion profiles to be used in combination has to be synchronized; i.e., the process stroke has to be in the same \(\tau\) range for all process solutions that have to be combined. If this requirement is not met, a synchronization solution for the relevant motion profiles must be considered, e.g., using an offset for different profiles.
* If the process solutions to be combined have common points at which the motion values (\(s\), \(v\), and \(a\)) are equal and located outside the process stroke, the hybrid approach can be used with the discrete switching principal. If the common points are within the process stroke, it must be carefully checked if switching is acceptable. Special attention has to be paid to the fulfillment of all given requirements. In the example of the transportation process, this would not be acceptable. If switching points exist at which the deviations are only small, they must be checked individually for the processes under consideration to determine how significantly the deviations influence the resulting process. Here, too, all given requirements have to be fulfilled, e.g., process stability.
* If there is a part of the motion profile that is not relevant for the process and its stability (e.g., a return stroke), it can be used for switching. The decision about which regions of the motion are not relevant must be made individually for each process under consideration. Furthermore, it is important to check carefully that no disturbances such as collisions between tool and product occur as a result of switching.