Collision Avoidance Assist Control Apparatus Steering Override

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional collision avoidance assist control systems fail to appropriately execute override control when a driver is attempting to avoid a collision through steering while pressing the acceleration pedal, leading to interference with the driver's intended collision avoidance operation due to mistaken pedal operation detection.

Innovation Solution

The system includes a control unit that determines the probability of collision and performs automatic brake control, while also assessing steering and acceleration pedal operations to differentiate between mistaken and intended actions, using distinct override conditions to prioritize the driver's steering operations over automatic brake control when necessary.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If the system always executes automatic brake control when mistaken pedal operation is detected, then collision avoidance reliability is improved, but it may interfere with driver's intended collision avoidance operations through steering

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecollision avoidance reliabilityVSAvoiddriver operation freedom
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts the override control execution based on real-time detection of steering operations. When steering operation amount exceeds a threshold, the system determines the driver is attempting collision avoidance through steering and suppresses automatic brake control. This dynamic adaptation resolves the contradiction by making the system responsive to driver intent while maintaining collision avoidance reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system incorporates feedback from steering operation detection to modulate automatic brake control execution. By continuously monitoring steering operation amount and using this feedback to determine whether to suppress override control, the system balances reliability with driver operation freedom, allowing intended collision avoidance maneuvers to proceed without interference.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Ease of operation

If the system suppresses automatic brake control when steering operation is detected, then driver's collision avoidance maneuver is preserved, but collision avoidance reliability may be reduced when mistaken pedal operation occurs

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedriver collision avoidance maneuverVSAvoidcollision avoidance reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically switches between two override control strategies based on steering operation detection. When steering operation amount is below the threshold, traditional mistaken pedal operation detection applies. When it exceeds the threshold, the system transitions to a mode that preserves driver collision avoidance maneuvers. This dynamic switching resolves the contradiction by adapting the control strategy to the detected driving context.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the override control execution parameter based on steering operation amount. By using steering operation amount as a critical parameter to determine whether to execute override control, the system balances preserving driver maneuvers with maintaining collision avoidance reliability, as the parameter change reflects the driver's intent state.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Ease of operation

If the system uses strict override conditions to prevent interference with driver operations, then driver operation freedom is maintained, but the system may fail to execute necessary automatic brake control in mistaken pedal operation cases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedriver operation freedomVSAvoidautomatic brake control execution
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies different override control qualities locally based on driving context. For general operations, traditional override control applies. For collision avoidance scenarios detected through steering operation, a modified override control that preserves driver maneuvers is applied. This local differentiation resolves the contradiction by tailoring the control strictness to the specific operational context.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the override condition parameter based on steering operation detection. When steering operation amount exceeds the threshold, the override condition parameter changes to suppress automatic brake control execution, preserving driver operation freedom while maintaining reliability through context-aware parameter adjustment.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS11518375B2Collision avoidance assist control apparatus
Publication Date: 2022.12.06 TOYOTA JIDOSHA KK
  • US11518375B2 patent drawing
  • US11518375B2 patent drawing
  • US11518375B2 patent drawing

AI summary

When a driving assist ECU determines that a mistaken pedal operation has occurred, it starts an automatic brake control, and thereafter, ends the automatic brake control when a steering operation rate ω is greater than a threshold ωf (ω>ωf). Whereas, when the ECU determines that the mistaken pedal operation has not occurred, it performs a steering override control and does not perform the automatic brake control, when a steering operation amount θ is greater than a threshold θe or when the steering operation rate ω is greater than the threshold.