Braking System Fallback Activation via Parameter Monitoring

Solution Overview

Problem

During automated driving processes in motor vehicles, existing systems face challenges in ensuring safe deceleration and fault detection in brake systems, leading to potential hazards due to long fault detection times and the risk of uncontrolled vehicle movement.

Innovation Solution

A method that utilizes a second braking device to automatically decelerate the vehicle if operating parameters do not meet specified criteria, allowing for earlier detection of first braking device faults and activation of the fallback system, independent of the first braking device's self-detection and signaling, thereby ensuring safer and more rapid deceleration.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Device complexity

If the first braking device waits for self-detection and signaling of faults before activating the fallback level, then the system maintains operational simplicity, but the fault detection time is extended and vehicle safety is compromised

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvebraking system control structureVSAvoidfault detection time

Core Design Contradiction:

Device complexityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The control device performs preliminary monitoring of operating parameters (speed, acceleration, yaw rate) to detect faults in the first braking device before they manifest as complete failures. By continuously checking whether these parameters satisfy test criteria, the system activates the second braking device in advance, eliminating the time delay associated with traditional fault detection and signaling mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements a feedback mechanism where the control device continuously monitors operating parameters and compares them against expected values. When deviations indicate a fault in the first braking device, the feedback loop triggers immediate activation of the second braking device, creating a closed-loop safety system that responds dynamically to detected anomalies without requiring manual intervention or complex fault signaling protocols.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

2Device complexity

If the first braking device uses traditional fault detection and signaling, then the system structure remains simple, but the vehicle may continue unbraked endangering road users

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvefault detection mechanismVSAvoidvehicle safety during fault detection

Core Design Contradiction:

Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The control device performs preliminary monitoring of operating parameters (speed, acceleration, yaw rate) to detect faults in the first braking device before they manifest as complete failures. By continuously checking whether these parameters satisfy test criteria, the system activates the second braking device in advance, eliminating the time delay associated with traditional fault detection and signaling mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements a feedback mechanism where the control device continuously monitors operating parameters and compares them against expected values. When deviations indicate a fault in the first braking device, the feedback loop triggers immediate activation of the second braking device, creating a closed-loop safety system that responds dynamically to detected anomalies without requiring manual intervention or complex fault signaling protocols.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

3Productivity

If the second braking device is activated only after first braking device fault confirmation, then the system avoids unnecessary fallback activation, but the stopping distance increases and safety is reduced

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvebraking system efficiencyVSAvoidstopping distance and vehicle safety

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The control device performs preliminary monitoring of operating parameters (speed, acceleration, yaw rate) to detect faults in the first braking device before they manifest as complete failures. By continuously checking whether these parameters satisfy test criteria, the system activates the second braking device in advance, eliminating the time delay associated with traditional fault detection and signaling mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements a feedback mechanism where the control device continuously monitors operating parameters and compares them against expected values. When deviations indicate a fault in the first braking device, the feedback loop triggers immediate activation of the second braking device, creating a closed-loop safety system that responds dynamically to detected anomalies without requiring manual intervention or complex fault signaling protocols.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS10538225B2Method for operating a motor vehicle, control device for a braking system, and braking system for a motor vehicle

Publication Date: 2020.01.21 ROBERT BOSCH GMBH

AI summary

A method for operating a motor vehicle includes carrying out an automated driving process that includes using a first braking device to decelerate the motor vehicle in an automated manner. The method further includes recording at least one operating parameter of the motor vehicle during the automated driving process, and carrying out a check in order to determine whether the at least one operating parameter satisfies a predetermined test criterion. The method also includes decelerating the motor vehicle in an automated manner using a second braking device if the at least one operating parameter does not satisfy the test criterion.