A test method and system for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW

Abstract

The application relates to the technical field of automobile testing, and particularly discloses a test method and system for intelligent automobile collision prewarning based on RCW, which comprises the following steps: S1, a rear collision prewarning test scene of a vehicle is constructed, the rear collision prewarning test scene of the vehicle comprises a plurality of lanes, background vehicles and a test vehicle; S2, a risk-avoiding strategy of the background vehicles is set; S3, the background vehicles and the test vehicle carry out rear collision prewarning tests on the same lane; S4, driving data of the background vehicles and the test vehicle are acquired and analyzed; and S5, after the risk-avoiding strategy is executed by the background vehicles, the rear collision prewarning test is completed, and a rearward warning result of the test vehicle is acquired. The application can improve the accuracy of the rear collision prewarning test of the vehicle.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of automotive testing technology, specifically to a testing method and system for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW (Collision Warning). Background Technology

[0002] Advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) are a crucial component of future intelligent vehicles. Currently, the testing methods for forward collision warning (FCW) systems are relatively mature. Drivers can effectively control the vehicle's braking / steering based on vehicle warnings and their subjective feelings to avoid collisions with vehicles ahead or reduce collision speed. However, because FCW systems rely heavily on driver subjective feelings, inaccurate test data can occur during vehicle crash tests.

[0003] Rear Collision Warning (RCW), as part of an advanced driver assistance system (ADAS), involves the vehicle using sensors to monitor targets behind it in real time. When the system detects a target rapidly approaching the vehicle from behind, posing a risk of a rear-end collision, it issues a warning to the driver, allowing them to react and avoid a collision. Simultaneously, the vehicle activates its hazard lights to warn following vehicles to slow down and maintain a safe distance to prevent a rear-end collision. In RCW-based intelligent vehicle crash tests, a background vehicle is positioned behind the test vehicle to evaluate the RCW capabilities of the test vehicle.

[0004] In existing technologies, such as the testing equipment and method for testing FCW, AEBS, and RCWS described in patent application number CN202210075298.7, the test environment is simulated as road motion to eliminate lateral movement between the background vehicle and the test vehicle, thus reducing lateral deviation. Furthermore, the test vehicle is placed on a fixed track, and the background vehicle is placed on a moving track, converting two independently moving objects into relative motion to reduce longitudinal deviation. However, due to interference from road conditions or other environmental factors in the real environment, deviations already exist. If these deviations are ignored, accurate test values ​​cannot be obtained. The accurate RCW test values ​​obtained by the test vehicle are used to continuously optimize the RCW's TTC (Total Time Capacity) for use in real-world environments. The test environment simulated in this patent is an idealized one, deviating from the real environment, and therefore cannot obtain RCW test values ​​under real-world conditions.

[0005] To obtain RCW (Rear Collision Warning) test values ​​in real-world environments, some technicians refer to test methods based on FCW (Forward Collision Warning). However, for RCW intelligent vehicle collision warning testing, the TTC (Traffic Conversion Time) for rear collision warning is generally later than that for forward collision warning (FCW). Therefore, implementing RCW intelligent vehicle collision warning testing using the same methods as FCW testing could easily result in a collision before the test is completed. Thus, if RCW testing follows the same methods as FCW testing, there will be a high risk of collision. Summary of the Invention

[0006] To improve the accuracy of rear collision warning (RCW) testing while ensuring safety, the first approach provides a testing method for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW, comprising: S1, constructing a rear collision warning test scenario, which includes several lanes, a background vehicle, and a test vehicle; S2, setting the avoidance strategy for the background vehicle; S3, conducting a rear collision warning test between the background vehicle and the test vehicle in the same lane; S4, acquiring and analyzing the driving data of the background vehicle and the test vehicle; S5, completing the rear collision warning test after the background vehicle executes its avoidance strategy, and obtaining the rearward warning result of the test vehicle.

[0007] Beneficial effects: Compared with existing technologies, the first solution can not only improve the accuracy of testing while ensuring security, but also improve testing efficiency.

[0008] Preferably, the control of the background vehicle includes robot braking control, robot steering wheel control, and robot throttle control.

[0009] Beneficial effects: The use of robot control improves testing efficiency, reduces subjective human control, enhances testing consistency, and improves testing security.

[0010] Preferably, the background vehicle is a flatbed dummy vehicle.

[0011] Beneficial effects: Flatbed dummy vehicles are relatively inexpensive, have low costs, and simple structures, making them easy to test; at the same time, they do not require setting too many parameters, shortening the preparation time before testing.

[0012] Preferably, the background vehicle's hazard avoidance strategies include emergency braking and lane changing.

[0013] Beneficial effects: The background vehicle can provide a variety of risk avoidance strategies, making it suitable for testing in different test environments.

[0014] Preferably, when the background vehicle's avoidance strategy is emergency braking, the background vehicle performs emergency braking when the distance between the two vehicles is S; specifically,

[0015] ;

[0016] V1 is the initial velocity of the background vehicle during the test, V0 is the velocity of the background vehicle at the moment when the relative velocity between the background vehicle and the target vehicle is 0, and A max M represents the maximum deceleration of the background vehicle, and M is the safety threshold.

[0017] Beneficial effects: By setting the distance S between the two vehicles, the accuracy and safety of the test can be improved.

[0018] Preferably, the safety threshold M=n V1; n=0.5s.

[0019] Beneficial effects: By setting a safety threshold M, the accuracy and security of the test can be improved.

[0020] Preferably, when the background vehicle's avoidance strategy is to turn and change lanes, the time for the background vehicle to turn and change lanes is T. 测 ;T 测 =T0+T 安全 T0 represents the time taken for the background vehicle to begin turning and changing lanes to reach the first target point, where the first target point is the position of the background vehicle when the overlap between the background vehicle and the test vehicle is 0%. 安全 The duration is 0.2~1.0s.

[0021] Beneficial effects: By setting T 测 =T0+T 安全 This is to ensure the safety of the test while improving its accuracy.

[0022] Preferably, the rear alarm results of the test vehicle include the test vehicle's alarm sound, instrument warning, rear hazard lights, and parking lights.

[0023] Beneficial effects: The test can accurately obtain a more comprehensive test structure.

[0024] The second approach provides a test system for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW, including a background vehicle and a test vehicle;

[0025] Both the background vehicle and the test vehicle are equipped with a dual-vehicle positioning and interaction module, which is used to share the driving data of the background vehicle and the test vehicle. The background vehicle is equipped with a driving robot module, which is used to control the background vehicle, specifically including robot braking control, robot steering wheel control, and robot throttle control. The test vehicle is equipped with a data acquisition module, which is used to collect the alarm sounds, instrument warnings, rear hazard lights, and parking lights of the test vehicle. The test vehicle is also equipped with a signal processing module, which is used to analyze the driving data of the background vehicle and the test vehicle from the dual-vehicle positioning module, as well as the alarm sounds, instrument warnings, rear hazard lights, and parking lights of the test vehicle.

[0026] Beneficial effects: The second approach can improve the accuracy of testing while ensuring safety, and it can also improve testing efficiency. Attached Figure Description

[0027] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of a test method for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW, as shown in Example 1.

[0028] Figure 2 This is a reference schematic diagram of the steering path of a background vehicle in a test method for an intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW, as described in Example 1.

[0029] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of a test system for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW, as shown in Example 2. Detailed Implementation

[0030] The embodiments of the technical solution of the present invention will now be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings. These embodiments are merely illustrative of the technical solution of the present invention and are therefore intended to limit the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0031] It should be noted that, unless otherwise stated, the technical or scientific terms used in this application should have the ordinary meaning as understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention pertains.

[0032] TTC: A technical term in the field of automotive crash testing, referring to the time to collision. TTC is used to assess the time required for a vehicle to collide with another object (such as another vehicle, pedestrian, or obstacle) under current driving conditions without any corrective action. In this context, it specifically refers to the time required for the background vehicle and the test vehicle to collide.

[0033] Overlap: A technical term in the field of automotive crash testing, referring to the proportion of the area where the test vehicle contacts an obstacle or another vehicle to the width of the front of the vehicle in a frontal crash test.

[0034] RCW: Rear Collision Warning. This function refers to the system's ability to monitor targets behind the vehicle in real time using sensors. When the system detects a target rapidly approaching the vehicle and posing a risk of a rear-end collision, it will issue a warning to the driver, allowing them to react and avoid a collision. Simultaneously, the vehicle will activate its hazard lights to warn following vehicles to slow down and maintain a safe distance to prevent a rear-end collision. According to the current GB 4785-2019 standard for the installation of external lighting and light signaling devices for automobiles and trailers, the activation conditions for the rear-end collision warning signal include the following two points: when the speed difference between the vehicle issuing the warning signal and the vehicle following in the same lane is greater than 30 km / h, and TTC ≤ 1.4s; when the speed difference is less than or equal to 30 km / h, TTC ≤ 1.4s is the product of the speed difference between the vehicle issuing the warning signal and the vehicle following in the same lane, divided by 30 km / h.

[0035] FCW: Forward Collision Warning uses a radar system to constantly monitor vehicles ahead, determine the distance, position, and relative speed between the vehicle and the vehicle in front, and warn the driver when there is a potential collision hazard.

[0036] Example 1

[0037] Testing intelligent vehicle collision warning systems based on Rear Collision Warning (RCW) cannot entirely follow the testing methods used for Forward Collision Warning (FCW). This is because the Time-to-Catch (TTC) for Rear Collision Warning is later than that for Forward Collision Warning. If the testing methods for Rear Collision Warning (RCW) are applied to Forward Collision Warning (FCW), the obtained TTC for Rear Collision Warning will be later than a normal and realistic TTC for Rear Collision Warning. This means the driver in the background vehicle may not be able to effectively avoid or brake, resulting in a higher collision risk. Specifically, in FCW testing, because the TTC for FCW is earlier, a background vehicle traveling at 60 kph typically receives a warning message within 2 seconds, allowing the driver to take over the vehicle in time. Furthermore, background vehicles equipped with FCW generally also have Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) functionality, enabling them to brake automatically. In real-world scenarios, vehicles behind those equipped with RCW (Real-Time Warning) may not have AEB (Autonomous Emergency Braking) capabilities. When such vehicles are about to collide with the vehicle in front, they can only rely on the driver's active intervention. In such cases, vehicles equipped with RCW will issue a warning to the vehicles behind to ensure that the drivers of the vehicles behind receive the warning signal from the vehicle in front.

[0038] Therefore, in order to obtain accurate and realistic test results in RCW-based testing, and to ensure the security of the test, such as Figure 1 As shown, this embodiment provides a test method for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW, used to conduct RCW testing.

[0039] Specifically, a rear-collision warning test scenario is constructed, which includes several lanes, background vehicles, and a test vehicle. In this embodiment, three parallel lanes traveling in the same direction are used for the collision test; for ease of understanding and description, the background vehicle is the rear vehicle, and the test vehicle is the front vehicle. Dual-vehicle positioning data interaction devices are installed on both the rear and front vehicles to enable real-time interaction of their driving data. A test computer equipped with the dual-vehicle positioning data interaction device is installed on the test vehicle and records and analyzes the driving data of both vehicles.

[0040] In this embodiment, the vehicle behind is controlled by a robot. Specifically, the robot controls the braking, steering wheel, and accelerator of the vehicle behind.

[0041] Before conducting rear-end collision tests, the braking system of the following vehicle is calibrated and adjusted. Specifically, the following vehicle is accelerated to 80 km / h in a straight line, then subjected to full braking to trigger the vehicle's ABS. After the brakes cool down for 90 seconds, this test is repeated at least three times to find the maximum average deceleration value A of the following vehicle during braking. max ; When setting up the robot's braking control during testing, ensure that its braking control execution matches the acceleration of the vehicle behind it. max Consistent.

[0042] The maximum average braking deceleration value A of the vehicles behind was found through three repeated tests. max This method identifies the optimal deceleration that following vehicles can achieve under full braking, shortening the braking distance. During vehicle crash tests, this not only ensures the safety of following vehicles but also maximizes the accuracy of test data while maintaining safety. Furthermore, since full braking is required to trigger the vehicle's ABS, obtaining accurate data through dozens of repeated tests is crucial. max This results in significant wear and tear on the braking systems of following vehicles. In actual vehicle collision tests, the actual braking effect may deviate considerably from the expected braking effect, leading to inaccurate testing. Furthermore, it causes wear on the braking systems of the following vehicles, increasing maintenance costs. Therefore, by conducting only three repeated tests, not only can errors be eliminated, but the lifespan of the braking systems of the following vehicles also be extended.

[0043] Before conducting rear-end collision tests, the steering and lane-changing maneuvers of the following vehicles are calibrated and adjusted. Before conducting the vehicle collision tests, the robot control parameters / path for the following vehicles are calibrated and adjusted. The robot's braking control is calibrated, specifically including the braking force of the brake arms and the deceleration of the following vehicles. The robot's steering timing control parameters are set.

[0044] When using robotic steering for rear collision warning testing of vehicles behind, the steering timing needs to be set synchronously based on the steering path. Considering the time from when the rear vehicle begins changing lanes to point P is T0, the robot steering timing is then TTCT (Time to Collision Trace) away from the vehicle in front. 测 =T0+T 安全 0.2s≤T 安全 ≤1s.

[0045] In other embodiments, a flatbed dummy vehicle (GST, etc.) can be used as the rear vehicle, with its braking acceleration set by default at -6 m / s².

[0046] Before conducting collision warning tests, point P is defined as the point when the overlap between the rear and front vehicles is 0%. The time required for the vehicle to move from the start of lane changing to point P is used as the automatic steering time (TTC). Before the test begins, control parameters for the timing of the robot braking / steering of the rear vehicle are set.

[0047] Specifically, such as Figure 2 As shown, when the overlap rate between the vehicle behind and the vehicle in front is 0% at point P, the time from when the vehicle behind begins to change lanes to point P is generally not less than 1 second. This can be adjusted according to the function of the vehicle in front, and the lateral acceleration of the vehicle behind during the turning process should be less than 3 m / s².

[0048] Table 1 Path Parameter Table

[0049]

[0050] When the background vehicle's hazard avoidance strategy is to steer and change lanes, as shown in Table 1 and... Figure 2 As shown, based on the location range referenced by the path parameters, when the initial radius of the vehicle behind at point P is 72m, it should turn, with an ending radius of 1200mm, an angle of 0.33°, and a speed maintained at 60km / h. After the turn, the lateral acceleration of the vehicle behind should be less than 3m / s². When the background vehicle's avoidance strategy is a lane change, the time for the background vehicle to turn and change lanes is T. 测 ;T 测 =T0+T 安全 ;

[0051] T0 represents the time taken for the background vehicle to begin turning and changing lanes to reach the first target point, where the first target point is the position of the background vehicle when the overlap between the background vehicle and the test vehicle is 0%. 安全 The duration is 0.2~1.0s.

[0052] In this embodiment, the turning time needs to be set synchronously according to the turning path. Specifically, if the time from when the following vehicle starts changing lanes to point P is T0, then the time TTC between the robot's turning time and the vehicle in front is T. 测 =T0+T安全 T 安全 The duration is 0.2-1.0 seconds. This is achieved by setting T... 测 This can improve the security of the test while ensuring its own security.

[0053] Test Example 1

[0054] Test Example 1 is used to test the hazard avoidance strategy performed by the vehicle behind as in Example 1, which is to turn and change lanes.

[0055] In this test case, the evasive strategy adopted by the following vehicle was the RCW test involving a lane change maneuver, and the test results are shown in the table below.

[0056] Table 2 shows the evasive strategies employed by vehicles behind in tests involving steering and lane changes.

[0057]

[0058] like Figure 2 As shown in Table 3, the test time for the first-level alarm is T. 测 Steering and lane-changing tests were conducted at speeds of 60, 70, and 80 km / h. The theoretical time (T0) to reach point P on the path was 0.95 s, while the actual time taken differed from the theoretical time by 0.18 to 0.21 s. To ensure both safety and accuracy, the lateral overlap displacement difference was set to 0.57 to 0.71 m after T0 + 0.2 s. The test results show that the first-level alarm time (TTC) for the RCW test was between 0.98 and 1.21 s.

[0059] According to the current GB 4785-2019 standard for the installation of external lighting and light signaling devices for automobiles and trailers, the activation conditions for a rear-end collision warning signal include the following two points: the speed difference between the vehicle issuing the warning signal and the vehicle following it in the same lane is greater than 30 km / h, and the time to collision (TTC) is ≤1.4s. Therefore, in this test example, using a T0+0.2s setting not only ensures the safety of the test vehicle but also meets the TTC ≤1.4s requirement of GB 4785-2019.

[0060] In summary, when the overlap rate between the vehicle behind and the vehicle in front is 0% at time P, the time from when the vehicle behind starts changing lanes to time P is T0. Therefore, the TTC between the robot's turning moment and the vehicle in front is T. 测 =T0+T 安全 It meets the requirements of the standard.

[0061] Furthermore, existing technologies include vehicle collision warning tests using V2V communication, such as patent application CN202010408413.9, which describes a test method and system for a V2V-based vehicle emergency braking warning system. The aforementioned method includes: constructing test cases, including at least single-lane straight, curved, and ramp test road conditions and adjacent two-lane straight and curved test road conditions; driving a target vehicle and a background vehicle on the test road conditions according to the test cases, recording the warning information issued by the target vehicle, and recording the runtime information of the target vehicle and the background vehicle; and analyzing whether the warning information meets the test indicators based on the runtime information. Although V2V communication enables mutual data exchange and analysis between vehicles, V2V-based vehicle collision testing relies heavily on the preceding vehicle analyzing the behavior of the following vehicle during the test to obtain test results. However, Test Example 1 and Example 1 differ by using a pre-set T... 测 =T0+T 安全 The vehicle in front only needs to record the test results, without needing to analyze the driving behavior of the vehicle behind during the test, thus reducing test errors and improving test accuracy.

[0062] Meanwhile, compared to emergency braking, which is a safety evasion strategy, the speed of general braking is limited. Specifically, braking at high speeds requires a longer TTC (Traction Time Tolerance) because vehicles behind will also move forward a certain distance due to inertia when braking, which affects the accuracy of the test. Therefore, using a steering lane-changing safety evasion strategy is suitable for situations where the relative speed between the two vehicles is relatively high.

[0063] Finally, to ensure the accuracy and safety of the test, the following vehicle will brake suddenly when it reaches the braking distance. After multiple tests, the repeated "emergency braking" of the following vehicle will cause wear on its braking system. This wear will affect the braking performance of the following vehicle, potentially creating a safety hazard. When the following vehicle is about to turn, its turn signal will be activated. The vehicle in front can receive the turn signal from the following vehicle through an installed camera device, allowing for timely detection of the turning time and obtaining accurate test data. Furthermore, the following vehicle does not need to use "emergency braking," resulting in less wear on its braking system, making it suitable for multiple tests while ensuring safety.

[0064] Example 2

[0065] Unlike Embodiment 1, this embodiment employs an emergency braking strategy to mitigate risks. The control parameters for the braking moment of the robot's braking arm are set in this embodiment.

[0066] The target vehicle employs a robotic braking test with rear collision warning; the braking timing is designed considering the target vehicle's maximum braking acceleration Amax and a reserved safety threshold M, with the braking distance S set as follows:

[0067]

[0068] Where: V1 is the speed of the vehicle behind at the start of the test, V0 is the speed of the vehicle behind when the relative speed between the two vehicles is 0, and A max The maximum deceleration calibrated for the target vehicle, with a safety threshold M=n V1. In this embodiment, n=0.5s.

[0069] In other embodiments, if a flatbed dummy vehicle (GST, etc.) is used as the rear vehicle, its braking deceleration is set by default to -6 m / s², and the TTC value for the collision warning time of the vehicle in front is estimated to be T2 based on the design value of the vehicle in front, and the braking time of the GST is set to T2-0.2s.

[0070] According to the above-mentioned parameter values ​​and experimental methods, the vehicle behind and the vehicle in front are controlled to conduct vehicle collision tests and the test data and results are recorded.

[0071] Beneficial effects of this embodiment

[0072] Compared to existing technologies, the RCW-based intelligent vehicle collision warning test in this embodiment can not only improve the accuracy of the test while ensuring safety, but also improve the test efficiency.

[0073] First, dual-vehicle positioning data interaction devices are installed on both vehicles to obtain real-time data such as distance, speed, and collision time between the two vehicles. This facilitates the analysis of test results and improves the accuracy of the test. At the same time, the distance, speed, and collision time between the two vehicles are sent to the robot. By understanding this data, the robot can control the vehicles in a timely manner, ensuring the safety of the test.

[0074] Secondly, a robot is used to control the background vehicle. When using robot control, the braking device is tested within a limited number of trials to find the optimal deceleration for the background vehicle, shortening the braking distance. This not only ensures the safety of following vehicles but also extends the testing time for both vehicles during RCW (Range Cross-Traffic) tests, allowing for the identification of the RCW test limits and improving test accuracy. Furthermore, the background vehicle's lane-changing path, including angle and radius, is processed to enable testing of both the background and test vehicles in a single lane or multiple lanes, meeting the needs of various testing environments.

[0075] Meanwhile, by setting the braking moment distance S and TTC value, the accuracy and safety of the test can be improved.

[0076] Finally, by using robots to control the background vehicles for testing, labor costs are reduced, the subjective control of humans over the background vehicles is reduced, the accuracy of testing is improved, and multiple tests can be performed, thus improving testing efficiency.

[0077] Test Example 2

[0078] In this test case, the avoidance strategy adopted by the following vehicle is based on the results of the RCW test during emergency braking. The calibration setting is the maximum deceleration A of the following vehicle. max The value was 9 (m / s²). Eight tests were conducted with the preceding vehicle stationary, and the test data are shown in the table below.

[0079] Table 3 shows the RCW test during emergency braking when the vehicle in front is stationary.

[0080]

[0081] In this test example, the speed of the vehicle in front is 10 km / h, and the maximum deceleration A of the vehicle behind is calibrated. max The speed is 9 (m / s²). The evasive strategy adopted by the following vehicle is the result of the RCW test during emergency braking. The test data are shown in the table below.

[0082] Table 4. RCW Test for Emergency Braking When the Vehicle in Front is Moving.

[0083]

[0084] In Tables 3 and 4, the theoretical formula for calculating the braking distance is: The actual formula for the preset braking distance is: Safety threshold M = n=0.5s. The safety allowance distance is... Where V1 is the initial velocity of the background vehicle during the test, V0 is the velocity of the background vehicle when the relative velocity between the background vehicle and the target vehicle is 0, and A max The maximum deceleration of the background vehicle is given; the actual braking / collision avoidance distance during calibration is S1.

[0085] Table 3 shows that when the vehicle in front is stationary, the braking speed of the vehicle behind increases by 10 km / h in each test, up to a maximum of 80 km / h. In existing technical theory, the formula for calculating braking distance is: Current technical theory provides a limit, meaning that when the braking distance calculation formula is satisfied, two vehicles will be close enough to avoid a collision. However, in actual testing, using the theoretical braking distance calculation formula as the braking distance can easily lead to accidents. Therefore, to improve safety while ensuring test accuracy, a safety threshold M is added to this test example. When setting the safety threshold M, multiple tests, as shown in Tables 3 and 4, are needed to confirm whether the safety threshold M can guarantee both safety and accurate RCW test results.

[0086] In summary, the test method for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW (Real-Time Collision Warning) does not derive its technical inspiration from existing technologies, as demonstrated in Embodiment 1, Test Example 1, Embodiment 2, and Test Example 2. Specifically, both emergency braking and lane-changing avoidance strategies are implemented after the test has been completed. The avoidance strategy is selected and its parameters are calibrated before the test begins. This differs from other tests conducted in real-world environments, where the avoidance strategy is only implemented after the test is confirmed to be complete. This test method selects different avoidance strategies based on the speed of following vehicles before the test begins to obtain more accurate test results. Furthermore, before the test begins, the avoidance strategies that following vehicles should implement within the target time period after the test is completed are calibrated; that is, the formulas for emergency braking and lane changing are used to calculate the avoidance strategies that following vehicles should implement within the target time period. The formulas provided by this test method can complete automated and integrated vehicle crash testing and are applicable to any vehicle model. Existing test methods, such as V2V and FCW, require vehicles with AEB functionality to complete the test.

[0087] Furthermore, other conventional testers do not obtain the relevant formulas for risk avoidance strategies through simple means, because factors such as the braking distance S and the steering / lane change time T... 测The design is not only based on standard optimizations but also on multiple trials, and the test formula has been simplified. The purpose of formula simplification is that, due to the short TTC time in RCW testing, a complex formula would result in a longer processing time for the processor in the following vehicle. This extended processing time not only makes it difficult to obtain accurate test values ​​but also risks accumulating enough time for collision avoidance and processing to reach the point where a collision occurs, reducing test safety. Furthermore, obtaining and determining the formula through multiple trials is something that conventional technicians in this field would not typically consider. This is because when acquiring large amounts of test data, there is an inherent error in determining the braking, speed, weight, test scenario, and torque of the following vehicle before the test. Multiple adjustments, such as braking distance, before the test reduce this error, and different avoidance strategies are adjusted based on the speed of the following vehicle to obtain more accurate test results.

[0088] Example 3

[0089] like Figure 3 As shown, this embodiment provides a test system for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW, and executes the test method described in the aforementioned embodiments and test examples, including a background vehicle and a test vehicle; both the background vehicle and the test vehicle are equipped with a dual-vehicle positioning interaction module, which is used to share the driving data of the background vehicle and the test vehicle; the background vehicle is equipped with a driving robot module, which is used to control the background vehicle, specifically including robot braking control, robot steering wheel control, and robot throttle control; the test vehicle is equipped with a data acquisition module, which is used to acquire the alarm sound, instrument warning, rear hazard lights, and parking lights of the test vehicle; the test vehicle is equipped with a signal processing module, which is used to analyze the driving data of the background vehicle and the test vehicle from the dual-vehicle positioning module, as well as the alarm sound, instrument warning, rear hazard lights, and parking lights of the test vehicle.

[0090] Numerous specific details are set forth in this specification. However, it will be understood that embodiments of the present invention may be practiced without these specific details. In some instances, well-known methods, systems, and techniques have not been shown in detail so as not to obscure the understanding of this specification. In the description of this specification, references to the terms "one embodiment," "some embodiments," "example," "specific example," or "some examples," etc., mean that a specific feature, method, material, or characteristic described in connection with that embodiment or example is included in at least one embodiment or example of this specification.

[0091] In this specification, the illustrative expressions of the terms used do not necessarily refer to the same embodiments or examples. Furthermore, the specific features, systems, materials, or characteristics described may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments or examples. Moreover, those skilled in the art can combine and integrate the different embodiments or examples described herein, as well as the features of those different embodiments or examples, without contradiction.

[0092] Finally, it should be noted that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention, and not to limit them. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that modifications can still be made to the technical solutions described in the foregoing embodiments, or equivalent substitutions can be made to some or all of the technical features. Such modifications or substitutions do not cause the essence of the corresponding technical solutions to deviate from the scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, and they should all be covered within the scope of the claims and specification of the present invention.

Claims

1. A test method for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW, characterized in that, include: S1, Construct a vehicle rear collision warning test scenario, which includes several lanes, background vehicles and test vehicles; S2, set the background vehicle's avoidance strategy; the background vehicle's avoidance strategy includes emergency braking and lane changing; When the background vehicle's avoidance strategy is emergency braking, and the distance between the two vehicles is S, the background vehicle performs emergency braking; specifically, ； V1 is the initial velocity of the background vehicle during the test, V0 is the velocity of the background vehicle when the relative velocity between the background vehicle and the target vehicle is 0, Amax is the maximum deceleration of the background vehicle, and M is the safety threshold. Safety threshold M=n V1; n=0.5s; When the background vehicle performs a lane-changing avoidance strategy, the time for the background vehicle to perform the lane-changing is Tmeasure. Tmeasurement = T0 + Tsafety; T0 is the time taken for the background vehicle to start turning and changing lanes to the first target point. The first target point is the position of the background vehicle when the overlap rate between the background vehicle and the test vehicle is 0%. The safety time T is 0.2~1.0s; S3, Background vehicle and test vehicle conduct rear collision warning test in the same lane; S4, acquire and analyze driving data of the background vehicle and the test vehicle; S5: After the background vehicle executes the avoidance strategy, complete the rear collision warning test and obtain the rear alarm results of the test vehicle.

2. The test method for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW according to claim 1, characterized in that, The operation of the background vehicle includes robotic braking control, robotic steering wheel control, and robotic throttle control.

3. The test method for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW according to claim 1, characterized in that, The vehicle in the background is a fake flatbed truck.

4. The test method for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW according to claim 1, characterized in that, The rear-view warning results for the test vehicle include the vehicle's alarm sound, instrument panel warnings, rear-view flashers, and parking lights.

5. A test system for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW, characterized in that, A test method for intelligent vehicle collision warning based on RCW as described in any one of claims 1-4; the system includes a background vehicle and a test vehicle; Both the background vehicle and the test vehicle are equipped with a dual-vehicle positioning interaction module, which is used to share the driving data of the background vehicle and the test vehicle. The background vehicle is equipped with a driving robot module, which is used to control the background vehicle, specifically including robot braking control, robot steering wheel control, and robot throttle control. The test vehicle is equipped with a data acquisition module to collect alarm sounds, instrument warnings, rear hazard lights, and parking lights. The test vehicle is equipped with a signal processing module, which is used to analyze the driving data of the background vehicle and the test vehicle of the dual-vehicle positioning module, as well as the alarm sounds, instrument warnings, rear hazard lights and parking lights of the test vehicle.

Images