Autonomous Vehicle Path Control With Dynamic Safety Relaxation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Autonomous vehicles face challenges in ensuring high integrity and safety while navigating work areas with manual actors, leading to productivity losses due to stringent operational requirements that constrain their speed and operation.

Innovation Solution

A method for autonomous vehicles to relax operational requirements when driving along a predefined path away from work areas with manual actors, triggering preventive actions when turning towards these areas to maintain safety, allowing increased productivity.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If operational requirements are strictly enforced to ensure safety of manual actors, then safety integrity is improved, but productivity of autonomous vehicles deteriorates due to speed constraints

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety integrityVSAvoidvehicle productivity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The operational requirements are made dynamic rather than static. The system continuously monitors vehicle position, path adherence, and work area proximity to adjust operational constraints in real-time. When the vehicle is confirmed to be on the predefined path and moving away from work areas, operational requirements are relaxed to allow optimal speed. This dynamic adjustment resolves the contradiction by adapting safety constraints to the actual operational context.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

Different operational requirements are applied to different spatial zones and operational contexts. Strict safety constraints are maintained only when the vehicle is near work areas with manual actors, while relaxed constraints are applied when the vehicle is on the predefined path away from these areas. This localized application of quality standards allows productivity improvement without compromising safety where it is most critical.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Productivity

If relaxed operational requirements are applied to improve productivity, then vehicle speed and operation efficiency are improved, but safety risks increase when vehicles may enter work areas

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoperation efficiencyVSAvoidsafety assurance
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements continuous feedback monitoring of vehicle position, orientation, and path adherence using localization services and perception systems. This feedback loop detects when the vehicle deviates from the predefined path or turns towards work areas, triggering immediate restoration of strict operational requirements. The feedback mechanism ensures safety assurance is maintained even when relaxed requirements are applied for productivity improvement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system takes preliminary actions to prevent safety risks before they can materialize. By continuously monitoring vehicle trajectory and detecting potential turns towards work areas, the system proactively restores strict operational requirements before the vehicle can enter hazardous zones. This preliminary anti-action approach prevents safety incidents while allowing productivity benefits from relaxed constraints during safe operational periods.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #9Preliminary anti-action

3Reliability

If extensive testing is performed to verify localization accuracy against ground truth data, then localization integrity is improved, but time consumption and costs increase to infeasible levels

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvelocalization integrityVSAvoidtesting time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of performing exhaustive testing against ground truth data in all scenarios, the system applies partial verification sufficient for the specific operational context. The localization system is verified to provide adequate accuracy for path following and work area boundary detection, which is the minimum necessary for safe operation. This partial action approach achieves sufficient localization integrity without the prohibitive time and resource costs of comprehensive testing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP4505263B1A method for handling operational requirements when driving between two areas
Publication Date: 2026.04.01 VOLVO AUTONOMOUS SOLUTIONS AB
  • EP4505263B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4505263B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4505263B1 patent drawingFigure 3a

AI summary

A method for handling operational for an autonomous vehicle (1) driving from a first work area (10) to a second work area (20) via a predefined path (30) is provided. The operations of the autonomous vehicle (1) are constrained by the operational requirements. The method comprises detecting that the autonomous vehicle (1) is initiating driving in the predefined path (30). The method further comprises when detected that the autonomous vehicle (1) is initiating driving in the predefined path (30), triggering a relaxation of the operational requirements. The method further comprises, when the autonomous vehicle (1) is driving in the predefined path (30), detecting whether the autonomous vehicle (1) turns towards the first work area (10). When detecting that the autonomous vehicle (1) turns towards the first work area (10), the method further comprises triggering a preventive action for preventing the autonomous vehicle (1) from driving towards the first work area (10) using the relaxed operational requirements.