Adaptive Seat Belt and Seat Control for Real-Time Driving Risk

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Traditional car seats and seat belt systems fail to adapt dynamically to driving conditions and do not account for the unique characteristics of individual occupants, leading to inadequate seat belt tension and compromised occupant safety.

Innovation Solution

A system comprising an alertness detector unit, an alertness determination unit, a sensing module, an analysis unit, a risk assessment unit, and a control unit that adjusts seat belt tension and car seat positioning based on real-time risk levels and occupant alertness.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional car seats and seat belt systems use fixed tension and positioning, then the system complexity is low, but occupant safety is compromised under dynamic driving conditions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoccupant safetyVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic seat belt tensioning and car seat positioning that automatically adjusts based on real-time driving conditions. The control unit modifies restraint system parameters in response to detected driving scenarios, transforming the fixed traditional system into an adaptive dynamic system that maintains optimal safety without requiring overly complex architecture.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The restraint system performs self-adjustment through automated detection and control mechanisms. The system autonomously monitors driving conditions and occupant characteristics, then automatically modifies seat belt tension and seat positioning without requiring manual intervention, thereby improving safety while avoiding the complexity of manual control interfaces.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Adaptability or versatility

If traditional seat belt systems provide fixed tension, then the ease of operation is high, but adaptability to different driving conditions and occupants is poor

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadaptability to driving conditionsVSAvoidease of operation
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system incorporates feedback loops where sensors continuously monitor driving conditions and occupant characteristics, and the control unit adjusts seat belt tension and seat positioning accordingly. This closed-loop feedback mechanism enables the system to adapt to varying driving scenarios and individual occupants automatically, maintaining ease of operation while significantly improving adaptability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the operational parameters of the restraint system dynamically. Instead of fixed tension and positioning, the system varies seat belt pre-tension force and seat angle based on detected driving conditions and occupant characteristics, thereby achieving high adaptability without complicating user interaction.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If traditional systems use a one-size-fits-all approach, then the device complexity is low, but comfort and safety for individual occupants are compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoccupant safetyVSAvoidpersonalization capability
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies localized adjustments to seat belt tension and seat positioning based on individual occupant characteristics such as body size and posture. Different portions of the restraint system are customized for each occupant, providing personalized protection that improves safety without requiring complete system redesign for each user.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary assessment of occupant characteristics and pre-adjusts seat belt tension and seat positioning before driving conditions require restraint. This advance personalization based on occupant metrics enables customized safety profiles without adding complexity during critical moments.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

4Reliability

If traditional seat belt systems lack dynamic adjustment, then the manufacturing precision required is low, but the effectiveness under sudden accelerations and decelerations is insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveseat belt effectivenessVSAvoidtension control precision
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces purely mechanical seat belt systems with an electronically controlled system that uses sensors and actuators to dynamically adjust tension. This substitution enables precise control of seat belt force during sudden accelerations and decelerations, significantly improving effectiveness while the electronic control systems provide the necessary precision through software algorithms rather than mechanical complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Data Source

PatentUS20250033533A1Risk scenario adaption
Publication Date: 2025.01.30 VOLVO CAR CORP
  • US20250033533A1 patent drawing
  • US20250033533A1 patent drawing
  • US20250033533A1 patent drawing

AI summary

An embodiment related to a system, wherein the system comprising an alertness detector unit configured to detect an alertness signal of an occupant an alertness determination unit configured to determine an alertness of the occupant based on the alertness signal, an environment sensing unit configured to sense external data in a route, an analysis unit configured to analyze the external data to determine an external condition, a risk assessment unit configured to determine a risk level in real-time based on an analysis of the external data and the alertness of the occupant, and a control unit configured to adjust a seat if determined that the real-time risk level was above a threshold.