A test method for a vehicle front collision warning system in a closed field
By setting up multiple test areas in a closed test field and controlling vehicle movement, collecting data and determining early warning information, the problems of incomplete scene coverage and poor parameter controllability in existing FCW test methods are solved, achieving efficient and safe test results.
Patent Information
- Authority / Receiving Office
- CN · China
- Patent Type
- Applications(China)
- Current Assignee / Owner
- ANHUI JIANGHUAI AUTOMOBILE GRP CORP LTD
- Filing Date
- 2026-03-17
- Publication Date
- 2026-06-05
AI Technical Summary
Existing closed-site testing methods for FCW suffer from incomplete scenario coverage, poor controllability of test parameters, and low testing efficiency and safety, failing to achieve multi-scenario compatibility, precise and controllable parameters, and high automation.
The test track is set up with straight-line test area, curve test area and slope test area, target vehicle is set up, the movement of test vehicle and target vehicle is controlled according to preset scenario parameters, data is collected and warning information is determined, and the parameters are accurately controllable and automated operation is achieved through central control system.
It achieves comprehensive coverage of various vehicle driving scenarios, with precise and controllable test parameters, significantly improved test efficiency and safety, high degree of automation, and more convincing test results.
Smart Images
Figure CN122149877A_ABST
Abstract
Description
Technical Field
[0001] This invention relates to the field of vehicle control technology, and in particular to a test method for a vehicle forward collision warning system in a closed environment. Background Technology
[0002] Forward Collision Warning (FCW) is a core function of intelligent driving assistance systems. It uses sensors such as cameras and millimeter-wave radar to monitor targets ahead (vehicles, pedestrians, obstacles, etc.) in real time, calculates collision risks, and promptly issues warnings to the driver, effectively reducing the incidence of rear-end collisions and frontal collisions. With the increasing penetration of automotive intelligence, the functional reliability and scenario coverage of FCW systems have become a core focus of industry verification. Closed-track testing, due to its advantages of controllable scenarios, manageable risks, and high repeatability, has become a crucial step in the R&D verification, regulatory certification, and mass production quality inspection of FCW systems.
[0003] Currently, the mainstream FCW (Forward Collision Warning) closed-field testing methods in the industry are mainly divided into two categories. One is static testing based on fixed scenarios, such as setting up fixed dummy cars / dummy targets in a closed field, with the test vehicle driving in a straight line at a preset speed and triggering the FCW warning. The core verification is the accuracy of the warning under the condition of "fixed target + fixed speed". The other is simple dynamic testing, which involves manually driving the target vehicle or using a remote-controlled tablet to carry a dummy car to form relative motion with the test vehicle (such as the target vehicle decelerating or coming to a standstill) to simulate basic scenarios such as longitudinal rear-end collisions. Both of these methods have the disadvantages of incomplete scenario coverage, poor controllability of test parameters, and low test efficiency and safety. They cannot achieve multi-scenario compatibility, precise and controllable parameters, or high automation. Summary of the Invention
[0004] In view of the above, the present invention aims to provide a test method for a vehicle forward collision warning system in a closed environment, so as to solve the aforementioned technical problems.
[0005] The technical solution adopted in this invention is as follows:
[0006] This invention provides a test method for a vehicle forward collision warning system in a closed environment, including:
[0007] A straight-line test area, a curve test area, and a slope test area are set up in a closed test track, and a target vehicle is set in the straight-line test area, the curve test area, and the slope test area.
[0008] Based on preset scenario parameters, control the test vehicle to travel at a preset speed, and control the target vehicle to travel according to preset motion parameters;
[0009] Collect test vehicle status data, target vehicle motion data, and warning information from the vehicle forward collision warning system;
[0010] The test results are obtained based on the warning information and the distance between the test vehicle and the target vehicle.
[0011] Optionally, the preset scenario parameters include straight-line rear-end collision scenario parameters, curve rear-end collision scenario parameters, slope rear-end collision scenario parameters, and interference condition parameters.
[0012] Optionally, the parameters of the straight-line rear-end collision scenario include the initial speed of the test vehicle, the state of the target vehicle, and the initial relative distance.
[0013] The parameters for the cornering rear-end collision scenario include the test vehicle's cornering speed, corner curvature, target vehicle position, and initial relative distance.
[0014] The parameters for the hill-climb rear-end collision scenario include the hill gradient, the initial speed of the test vehicle, the deceleration and acceleration of the target vehicle, and the initial relative distance.
[0015] The interference condition parameters include at least one of the following interference factors: visibility, camera obstruction area, or backlight intensity.
[0016] Optionally, the test results include:
[0017] Determining the effectiveness and rationality of early warnings.
[0018] Optional, the criteria for determining the effectiveness of the early warning include:
[0019] When there is a collision risk, the system successfully issues a warning; or when there is no collision risk, the system does not issue a false alarm, and the warning is deemed valid.
[0020] Optionally, the criteria for determining the reasonableness of the early warning include:
[0021] If the collision time at the moment the warning is triggered deviates from the predetermined design value by ≤0.2s, and the accuracy of the matching between the warning level and the collision risk level is ≥95%, the warning is deemed reasonable.
[0022] Optionally, the test is terminated when the vehicle forward collision warning system issues a warning and the relative distance between the test vehicle and the target device is ≤2 meters or the test vehicle passes through the target test area.
[0023] The above-described solution of the present invention has at least the following beneficial effects:
[0024] The above-described solution of the present invention establishes straight-line test areas, curve test areas, and slope test areas within a closed test track, each containing a target vehicle. Based on preset scenario parameters, the test vehicle is controlled to travel at a preset speed, while the target vehicle is controlled to travel according to preset motion parameters. Test vehicle status data, target vehicle motion data, and warning information from a forward collision warning system are collected. Test results are obtained based on the warning information and the distance between the test vehicle and the target vehicle. This approach comprehensively covers multiple vehicle driving scenarios, provides precise and controllable test parameters, and significantly improves test efficiency and safety. Attached Figure Description
[0025] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this invention clearer, the invention will be further described below with reference to the accompanying drawings, wherein:
[0026] Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating the test method for a vehicle forward collision warning system in a closed area, as provided in an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation
[0027] Embodiments of the present invention are described in detail below. Examples of these embodiments are shown in the accompanying drawings, wherein the same or similar reference numerals denote the same or similar elements or elements having the same or similar functions throughout. The embodiments described below with reference to the accompanying drawings are exemplary and are only used to explain the present invention, and should not be construed as limiting the present invention.
[0028] This invention proposes an embodiment of a test method for a vehicle forward collision warning system in a closed environment, specifically, as follows: Figure 1 As shown, it includes:
[0029] Step 11: Set up a straight-line test area, a curve test area, and a slope test area in a closed test track, and set up a target vehicle in the straight-line test area, the curve test area, and the slope test area.
[0030] Step 12: According to the preset scenario parameters, control the test vehicle to drive at a preset speed and control the target vehicle to drive according to the preset motion parameters;
[0031] Step 13: Collect test vehicle status data, target vehicle motion data, and warning information from the vehicle forward collision warning system;
[0032] Step 14: Based on the warning information and the distance between the test vehicle and the target vehicle, obtain the test results.
[0033] This embodiment implements the technical solution through "standardized site layout + automated target control + precise parameter linkage + systematic judgment indicators". The specific implementation steps are as follows:
[0034] Test site and equipment setup:
[0035] Site layout: A closed test site with an area of approximately 5,000 square meters was selected and divided into three functional areas: "straight line test area, curve test area (curvature radius 15-30m), and slope test area (slope ±5%-±15%)". Safety areas and equipment placement space were reserved in advance. High-precision positioning markers (GPS / BeiDou dual-mode positioning, error ≤0.1m) were set up in each area.
[0036] Core experimental equipment:
[0037] (1) Test vehicle: A vehicle equipped with the forward collision warning system (FCW) to be verified, pre-installed with a data acquisition module to collect vehicle speed, acceleration, steering angle, FCW warning signals, etc. in real time;
[0038] (2) Automated target device: including remote-controlled electric dummy car, supporting stepless speed adjustment from 0-60km / h and ±3m / s² acceleration adjustment; liftable dummy, used to simulate pedestrians suddenly entering the scene; the target device has a built-in positioning module and attitude sensor, which can provide real-time feedback of position, speed and attitude data;
[0039] (3) Environmental simulation equipment: a portable rain and fog generator to simulate a visibility of 50-200m; a strong light simulation lamp to simulate a backlight scene; and a sensor blocking device to simulate a camera / radar blocking or partial blocking scene.
[0040] (4) Central control system: Connects the test vehicle, automated target device and environmental simulation equipment through wireless communication module (delay ≤10ms) to realize parameter setting, real-time monitoring and data synchronization.
[0041] Four core test scenarios were further set up, with multiple sets of parameter combinations set for each scenario:
[0042] Scenario 1: Straight-line basic rear-end collision scenario parameters: test vehicle initial speed (30 / 50 / 70km / h), target vehicle status (stationary / uniform speed [20 / 40km / h] / decelerating [-2 / -4m / s²]), initial relative distance (15 / 25 / 35m);
[0043] Scenario 2: Cornering rear-end collision scenario parameters: test vehicle cornering speed (20 / 30 / 40km / h), corner curvature (15 / 25m), target vehicle position (stationary on the inside / outside of the corner), initial relative distance (10 / 15 / 20m);
[0044] Scenario 3: Ramp Rear-end Scenario Parameters: Ramp gradient (+5% / +10% / -5% / -10%), Initial speed of the test vehicle (30 / 40 / 50 km / h), Deceleration acceleration of the target vehicle (-1 / -3 m / s²), Initial relative distance (12 / 20 / 28 m);
[0045] Scenario 4: Scenario under Interference Conditions Parameters: Basic scenario (same as Scenario 1) + Interference factors (Visibility 50 / 100 / 200 m, Camera occlusion area 20% / 50%, Backlight intensity (5000 / 10000 lux)).
[0046] Before the test process starts, first calibrate the positioning accuracy of the test vehicle and the target device (error ≤ 0.1 m) through the central control system, confirm that the FCW system is in a normal working state, and set the sampling frequency of the data acquisition module to 10 Hz;
[0047] Then start the scenario simulation and test. According to the preset scenario parameters, the central control system issues instructions: The test vehicle travels at the set speed, and the automated target device moves along the set trajectory, speed / acceleration. If the target vehicle is stationary inside the curve, the test vehicle takes the curve at 30 km / h, and the environmental simulation equipment is turned on as needed, such as simulating a visibility of 100 m;
[0048] Record the core data in real time, including the vehicle speed, steering angle, and acceleration of the test vehicle; the position, speed, and acceleration of the target vehicle or dummy; the warning trigger moment, warning level (Level 1: Acoustic and light prompts / Level 2: Emergency braking preparation), and the relative distance / time between the two vehicles when the FCW system gives a warning, etc.;
[0049] Based on the collected test data, judge the effectiveness and rationality of the warning.
[0050] Warning effectiveness: It is determined to be effective if the following conditions are met: a. When there is a collision risk (Collision time TTC ≤ 2 s as set by the FCW system), the system successfully issues a warning; b. When there is no collision risk (Collision time TTC > 3 s), the system does not give a false alarm;
[0051] Warning rationality: a. Warning timing: The collision time TTC at the warning trigger needs to deviate from the system design value by ≤ 0.2 s; b. Warning level: According to the collision risk level (TTC ≤ 1 s is a high risk, 1 s < TTC ≤ 2 s is a medium risk), the system needs to issue a Level 2 / Level 1 warning correspondingly, and the level matching accuracy rate ≥ 95%.
[0052] When the FCW system issues a warning, the safe distance between the test vehicle and the target device is ≤2m (no collision), or the test scenario is completed (e.g., the test vehicle passes through the target area), the central control system instructs all equipment to stop operating, and the single test ends; each parameter combination is repeated 3 times to ensure data repeatability (coefficient of variation ≤5%).
[0053] The test method of the vehicle forward collision warning system in the closed field in this embodiment covers a variety of real working conditions under straight lines, curves, slopes and interference conditions. The scenario coverage is comprehensive and can fully verify the working condition adaptability of the FCW system, solving the problem of "single scenario" in existing methods.
[0054] Precise and controllable parameters are achieved through the automated target device and central control system, which enables precise adjustment of core parameters such as vehicle speed, acceleration, and relative distance (speed deviation ±0.5km / h, distance deviation ±0.2m), and supports multi-parameter linkage, improving test repeatability to over 95%.
[0055] The judgment criteria are clear: a two-dimensional judgment system of "effectiveness + rationality" is established, and quantitative indicators for early warning timing and level are clearly defined, making the test results more convincing;
[0056] Improved efficiency and safety: No manual driving of the target vehicle is required, data is automatically collected, the degree of automation is high, the preparation time for a single test is shortened to less than 10 minutes, and the test efficiency is increased by more than 2 times; and through remote control and safe distance setting, the risk of collision is completely avoided.
[0057] An embodiment of the present invention also provides a computing device, including: a processor and a memory storing a computer program, wherein the computer program, when executed by the processor, performs the method described in the above embodiments. All implementations in the above method embodiments are applicable to this embodiment and can achieve the same technical effect.
[0058] In this embodiment of the invention, a computer-readable storage medium is also provided, storing instructions that, when executed on a computer, cause the computer to perform the method described in the above embodiments. All implementations of the methods described in the above embodiments are applicable to this embodiment and can achieve the same technical effect.
[0059] Those skilled in the art will recognize that the units and algorithm steps of the various examples described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented in electronic hardware, or a combination of computer software and electronic hardware. Whether these functions are implemented in hardware or software depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Those skilled in the art can use different methods to implement the described functions for each specific application, but such implementations should not be considered beyond the scope of this invention.
[0060] Those skilled in the art will understand that, for the sake of convenience and brevity, the specific working processes of the systems, devices, and units described above can be referred to the corresponding processes in the foregoing method embodiments, and will not be repeated here.
[0061] In the embodiments provided by this invention, it should be understood that the disclosed apparatus and methods can be implemented in other ways. For example, the apparatus embodiments described above are merely illustrative. For instance, the division of units is only a logical functional division, and in actual implementation, there may be other division methods. For example, multiple units or components may be combined or integrated into another system, or some features may be ignored or not executed. Furthermore, the coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed may be through some interfaces; the indirect coupling or communication connection between devices or units may be electrical, mechanical, or other forms.
[0062] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separate. The components shown as units may or may not be physical units; that is, they may be located in one place or distributed across multiple network units. Some or all of the units can be selected to achieve the purpose of this embodiment according to actual needs.
[0063] In addition, the functional units in the various embodiments of the present invention can be integrated into one processing unit, or each unit can exist physically separately, or two or more units can be integrated into one unit.
[0064] If the aforementioned functions are implemented as software functional units and sold or used as independent products, they can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of this invention, essentially, or the part that contributes to the prior art, or a portion of the technical solution, can be embodied in the form of a software product. This computer software product is stored in a storage medium and includes several instructions to cause a computer device (which may be a personal computer, server, or network device, etc.) to execute all or part of the steps of the methods described in the various embodiments of this invention. The aforementioned storage medium includes various media capable of storing program code, such as USB flash drives, portable hard drives, ROM, RAM, magnetic disks, or optical disks.
[0065] Furthermore, it should be noted that in the apparatus and method of the present invention, it is obvious that the components or steps can be decomposed and / or recombined. These decompositions and / or recombinations should be considered equivalent solutions of the present invention. Moreover, the steps performing the above series of processes can naturally be executed in the order described, but are not necessarily required to be executed in chronological order; some steps can be executed in parallel or independently of each other. Those skilled in the art will understand that all or any step or component of the method and apparatus of the present invention can be implemented in any computing device (including processors, storage media, etc.) or network of computing devices, in hardware, firmware, software, or a combination thereof. This is something that those skilled in the art can achieve by using their basic programming skills after reading the description of the present invention.
[0066] Therefore, the object of the present invention can also be achieved by running a program or a set of programs on any computing device. The computing device can be a known general-purpose device. Therefore, the object of the present invention can also be achieved simply by providing a program product containing program code implementing the method or apparatus. That is, such a program product also constitutes the present invention, and the storage medium storing such a program product also constitutes the present invention. Obviously, the storage medium can be any known storage medium or any storage medium developed in the future. It should also be noted that in the apparatus and method of the present invention, it is obvious that the components or steps can be decomposed and / or recombined. These decompositions and / or recombinations should be considered equivalent to the present invention. Furthermore, the steps performing the above series of processes can naturally be performed in the order described, but are not necessarily required to be performed in chronological order. Some steps can be performed in parallel or independently of each other.
[0067] The above description represents the preferred embodiments of the present invention. It should be noted that those skilled in the art can make various improvements and modifications without departing from the principles of the present invention, and these improvements and modifications should also be considered within the scope of protection of the present invention.
Claims
1. A test method for a vehicle forward collision warning system in a closed area, characterized in that, include: A straight-line test area, a curve test area, and a slope test area are set up in a closed test track, and a target vehicle is set in the straight-line test area, the curve test area, and the slope test area. Based on preset scenario parameters, control the test vehicle to travel at a preset speed, and control the target vehicle to travel according to preset motion parameters; Collect test vehicle status data, target vehicle motion data, and warning information from the vehicle forward collision warning system; The test results are obtained based on the warning information and the distance between the test vehicle and the target vehicle.
2. The test method for a vehicle forward collision warning system in a closed area according to claim 1, characterized in that, The preset scenario parameters include straight-line rear-end collision scenario parameters, curve rear-end collision scenario parameters, slope rear-end collision scenario parameters, and interference condition parameters.
3. The test method for a vehicle forward collision warning system in a closed area according to claim 2, characterized in that, The parameters of the straight-line rear-end collision scenario include the initial speed of the test vehicle, the state of the target vehicle, and the initial relative distance. The parameters for the cornering rear-end collision scenario include the test vehicle's cornering speed, corner curvature, target vehicle position, and initial relative distance. The parameters for the hill-climb rear-end collision scenario include the hill gradient, the initial speed of the test vehicle, the deceleration and acceleration of the target vehicle, and the initial relative distance. The interference condition parameters include at least one of the following interference factors: visibility, camera obstruction area, or backlight intensity.
4. The test method for a vehicle forward collision warning system in a closed area according to claim 1, characterized in that, The test results include: Determining the effectiveness and rationality of early warnings.
5. The test method for a vehicle forward collision warning system in a closed area according to claim 4, characterized in that, The criteria for determining the effectiveness of an early warning include: When there is a collision risk, the system successfully issues a warning; or when there is no collision risk, the system does not issue a false alarm, and the warning is deemed valid.
6. The test method for a vehicle forward collision warning system in a closed area according to claim 4, characterized in that, The criteria for determining the reasonableness of the early warning include: If the collision time at the moment the warning is triggered deviates from the predetermined design value by ≤0.2s, and the accuracy of the matching between the warning level and the collision risk level is ≥95%, the warning is deemed reasonable.
7. The test method for a vehicle forward collision warning system in a closed area according to claim 1, characterized in that, The test is terminated when the vehicle forward collision warning system issues a warning and the relative distance between the test vehicle and the target device is ≤2 meters or the test vehicle passes through the target test area.