AEB Control Region Expansion for Multi-Vehicle Collision Avoidance

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) systems face limitations in utility and availability when multiple vehicles are present in the forward region, making it difficult for the host vehicle to perform steering avoidance and preventing collisions, especially when vehicles are present in both longitudinal and lateral directions.

Innovation Solution

A system comprising a front lateral detection sensor, vehicle dynamics sensor, and electronic control unit (ECU) that detects peripheral objects and determines the availability of steering avoidance, increasing the AEB control available region and speed when steering avoidance is not possible, allowing for enhanced collision avoidance by adjusting the AEB control parameters based on the presence of objects in multiple lanes.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of manufacture

If the AEB system is designed with a maximum collision avoidable speed of 60km/h assuming only one leading vehicle in longitudinal direction, then the system complexity is reduced and ease of manufacture is improved, but the adaptability to multiple vehicle scenarios and collision avoidance capability deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem design simplicityVSAvoidapplicability to multiple vehicle scenarios
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The AEB system dynamically adjusts the maximum collision avoidable speed based on the number and position of detected leading vehicles. When multiple leading vehicles are detected in both longitudinal and lateral directions, the system increases the speed threshold from 60km/h to 90km/h, allowing the control parameters to adapt to complex traffic scenarios rather than remaining fixed

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the speed parameter of AEB control based on peripheral situation analysis. By detecting the presence of leading vehicles in multiple directions using sensors, the ECU modifies the speed parameter from a fixed 60km/h to a variable threshold that can reach 90km/h when steering avoidance is unavailable, thereby expanding the operational range

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Device complexity

If the AEB system maintains a fixed AEB control available speed of 60km/h, then the control logic is simplified and device complexity is reduced, but the collision avoidance effectiveness in complex scenarios deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol logic complexityVSAvoidcollision avoidance effectiveness
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements feedback by continuously monitoring peripheral situations through detection sensors and adjusting the AEB control available speed accordingly. The ECU receives feedback about leading vehicle positions and dynamically modifies the speed threshold, creating a closed-loop control system that responds to real-time traffic conditions

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The control logic transitions from static to dynamic by enabling the AEB control available speed to vary between 60km/h and 90km/h based on the detected peripheral situation. This dynamic adjustment allows the system to maintain reliability across different scenarios without requiring overly complex control algorithms

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Device complexity

If the AEB system assumes steering avoidance is always possible, then the AEB control available speed can be limited to 60km/h reducing system complexity, but the safety and stability in scenarios where steering avoidance is blocked deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection and control complexityVSAvoidsafety and stability
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary detection of leading vehicles in both longitudinal and lateral directions before determining the appropriate AEB control available speed. By提前 detecting the presence of leading vehicles that would block steering avoidance, the system proactively adjusts the speed threshold to 90km/h, ensuring safety is maintained before the collision risk materializes

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the speed parameter based on the feasibility of steering avoidance. When leading vehicles are detected in configurations that would block steering maneuvers, the parameter transitions from 60km/h to 90km/h, allowing the vehicle to maintain safer operation in scenarios where avoidance maneuvers are constrained

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentEP3476676B1System and method for performing autonomous emergency braking
Publication Date: 2021.07.21 MANDO MOBILITY SOLUTIONS CORP
  • EP3476676B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3476676B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3476676B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A system and method for performing autonomous emergency braking (AEB) based on peripheral situations of a vehicle are disclosed. The AEB system includes a front lateral detection sensor, a vehicle dynamics sensor, and an electronic control unit (ECU). The front lateral detection sensor detects a distance and a relative speed between a host vehicle and a peripheral object, or transmits peripheral images of the host vehicle to the ECU. The vehicle dynamics sensor detects a driving speed of the host vehicle, and transmits the detected driving speed to the ECU. The ECU receives detection signals from the front lateral detection sensor and the vehicle dynamics sensor, and increases a size of an AEB control available region and an AEB control available speed when at least one leading moving object or at least one external object is present in longitudinal and latitudinal directions of a forward region of the host vehicle and the host vehicle is unable to perform steering avoidance capable of preventing collision with the leading moving object or the external object. Accordingly, even when several leading vehicles are present not only in longitudinal and latitudinal directions of a forward region of the host vehicle and the host vehicle is unable to perform steering avoidance, the possibility of collision between the host vehicle and the leading vehicles can be reduced.