Collision Avoidance Control With Condition-Based Brake Release

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Vehicle control systems that execute collision avoidance maneuvers can cause driver discomfort due to sudden deceleration stops and restriction of driver-managed acceleration during steering and braking controls, leading to feelings of strangeness.

Innovation Solution

A vehicle control apparatus with sensors and an electronic control unit that adjusts the termination of steering and braking force controls based on specific conditions, including a first rate for avoiding obstacles and a second, greater rate for accommodating driver maneuvers, to smoothly transition out of collision avoidance modes.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If the steering control and braking force control are terminated simultaneously when collision is avoided, then the collision avoidance maneuver is completed efficiently, but the driver experiences a feeling of strangeness due to sudden deceleration stop

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecollision avoidance efficiencyVSAvoiddriver comfort
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the termination process of collision avoidance control into two distinct phases: a first termination condition for normal completion (gradual deceleration release) and a second termination condition for driver intervention (immediate deceleration release). This segmentation allows the system to provide different termination behaviors based on the specific situation, resolving the contradiction between efficiency and comfort.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements dynamic adjustment of the deceleration release rate based on the termination condition. When the first termination condition is met, the deceleration is released at a first rate that provides smooth transition. When the second termination condition (driver maneuver) is met, the deceleration is released at a second rate that responds quickly to driver intent. This dynamic adjustment resolves the contradiction by adapting the termination behavior to the situation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Reliability

If the braking force control is executed during collision avoidance, then the vehicle deceleration is controlled effectively, but the driver's acceleration maneuver is restricted and not reflected on the vehicle

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedeceleration controlVSAvoiddriver maneuver response
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent incorporates feedback mechanisms that continuously monitor driver inputs (accelerator pedal operation, steering wheel operation) during collision avoidance control. When driver maneuvers are detected beyond certain thresholds, the system adjusts the braking force control accordingly, allowing the driver's acceleration intent to be reflected even during active collision avoidance. This feedback loop resolves the contradiction by maintaining deceleration control while adapting to driver intent.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements dynamic adjustment of braking force based on detected driver maneuvers. The braking control is not static but adapts in real-time to driver inputs, allowing the system to maintain reliable deceleration control while simultaneously responding to driver acceleration maneuvers. This dynamic behavior resolves the contradiction between reliable deceleration control and driver maneuver response.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Adaptability or versatility

If the target deceleration is decreased at a greater rate when driver maneuver is detected, then the driver's acceleration is reflected quickly, but the deceleration control becomes less gradual

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedriver maneuver response speedVSAvoiddeceleration smoothness
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies different deceleration release rates based on the local situation or condition. When the first termination condition is met (normal completion), a first rate is applied that provides smooth, gradual deceleration release. When the second termination condition is met (driver maneuver), a second rate is applied that provides faster response to driver intent. This local differentiation of control parameters resolves the contradiction by optimizing for smoothness in normal conditions and responsiveness in driver-intervention conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS11993258B2Vehicle control apparatus
Publication Date: 2024.05.28 TOYOTA JIDOSHA KK
  • US11993258B2 patent drawing
  • US11993258B2 patent drawing
  • US11993258B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A vehicle control apparatus executes a collision avoiding control of avoiding collision of an own vehicle with an object when a predetermined execution condition becomes satisfied. The collision avoiding control includes a steering control of changing a steering angle of the own vehicle and a braking force control of applying braking force to the own vehicle so as to realize a target deceleration. The vehicle control apparatus terminates the steering control and decreases the target deceleration at a first rate to terminate the braking force control when a predetermined steering termination condition that the collision has been avoided, becomes satisfied. The vehicle control apparatus terminates the steering control and decreases the target deceleration at a second rate to terminate the braking force control when a predetermined cancelation condition that a driver carries out a driving maneuver, becomes satisfied. The second rate is greater than the first rate.