Automated Driving Pedal Locking for Safe Takeover Readiness

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In vehicles with partially automated driving systems, drivers face discomfort and increased risk due to prolonged foot positioning over pedals during automated driving, leading to potential pedal confusion and unintentional operation, especially when transitioning back to manual control.

Innovation Solution

A device and method that lock the accelerator or brake pedal within predetermined position limits based on the degree of automation, generating distinct haptic effects during mode transitions, ensuring the pedal can be used as a footrest only after a certain level of automation is achieved and with user confirmation, thereby reducing muscle tension and improving safety.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Speed

If the driver keeps their foot ready on the pedal during automated driving, then the driver can react quickly to manual control requests, but the driver experiences discomfort and muscle tension during extended periods

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereaction speed to manual control requestsVSAvoiddriver comfort during extended automated driving
Core Design Contradiction:
SpeedVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The pedal control function is segmented into automated control mode and manual control mode. During automated driving, the system separates the pedal's primary function (vehicle control) from the driver's foot positioning requirement (readiness), allowing the foot to be removed from the pedal while maintaining rapid response capability through system architecture that prioritizes safety.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary action by providing takeover requests and warnings to the driver before manual control is needed. This allows the driver to prepare mentally and physically for manual control without maintaining continuous physical contact with the pedal, reducing muscle tension while ensuring rapid response when needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Ease of operation

If the driver places their foot next to the pedal or bends it during automated driving, then the driver experiences less discomfort, but the reaction time increases and the risk of confusion between accelerator and brake pedals increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedriver comfort during automated drivingVSAvoidrisk of accidental pedal operation
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system provides continuous feedback to the driver through takeover requests, warnings, and notifications that inform the driver of the automated system's status and limitations. This feedback loop maintains situational awareness and reduces the risk of accidental operation by keeping the driver engaged with the driving context without requiring continuous physical readiness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The automated driver assistance system acts as an intermediary between the driver and the pedal control function. During automated driving, the system mediates the control function, allowing the driver to relax foot positioning while the system maintains safe operation. The intermediary provides warnings and takeover requests that bridge the gap between relaxed positioning and safe control.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Adaptability or versatility

If the pedal is made fully operable during automated driving, then the driver has complete control, but the driver may inadvertently press the pedal due to falling asleep or confusion

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedriver control flexibilityVSAvoidrisk of inadvertent pedal pressing
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The pedal's operational state is made dynamic, transitioning between fully operable, restricted, and locked states based on driving context, automation level, and driver status. This dynamic adaptation allows the system to provide complete control when needed while preventing inadvertent operation during automated driving, particularly when the driver may be fatigued or distracted.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the pedal's operational parameters (availability, responsiveness, force requirements) based on the driving mode and detected driver state. During automated driving, parameters are adjusted to reduce the risk of inadvertent pressing while maintaining the ability to provide full control when the driver needs to take over.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

4Reliability

If the driver's foot remains in a ready position on the pedal for extended periods, then the driver can maintain control readiness, but the driver's foot becomes cramped and hovering causes discomfort

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol readinessVSAvoidfoot comfort during extended periods
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The requirement for continuous physical readiness is extracted from the driver's body and transferred to the automated system. The driver's foot is taken off the pedal during automated driving, eliminating the physical discomfort of maintaining readiness position, while the automated system assumes the control function that previously required continuous physical monitoring.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Data Source

PatentEP3423328B1Device for controlling longitudinal guidance of a vehicle designed to be driven in an at least partly automated manner
Publication Date: 2024.11.13 BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AG
  • EP3423328B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3423328B1 patent drawingFigure 2

AI summary

The invention relates to a device for controlling longitudinal guidance of a vehicle (1) designed to be driven in an at least partly automated manner. The vehicle comprises at least one actuation element (11) for having a driver control longitudinal guidance, said at least one actuation element (11) being blockable within predefined limit positions in accordance with a variable representing the degree of automation of the traveling vehicle (1) and a first condition. The actuation element (11) can be unblocked in accordance with the variable representing the degree of automation of the traveling vehicle (1) and at least one second condition.