Collision Detection via Predicted Path Profiles

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing vehicle collision avoidance systems often fail to accurately detect critical driving situations, leading to incorrect warnings and interventions, especially in complex traffic scenarios, due to simplified assessment of driving and traffic conditions.

Innovation Solution

A method that predicts the future path profiles of both the vehicle and an object in front by assuming acceleration profiles based on current data, allowing for early detection of potential collisions and initiation of driver-independent emergency braking if necessary.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Device complexity

If simplified assessment of driving and traffic conditions is used, then device complexity is reduced, but measurement precision of collision risk detection deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomplexity of collision avoidance systemVSAvoidaccuracy of critical driving situation detection
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The assessment of driving situations is segmented into multiple independent parameters (distance to preceding vehicle, relative speed, acceleration, deceleration rate, path profile deviations) that are evaluated separately and combined to determine collision risk. This allows comprehensive analysis without requiring a single complex assessment model.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system transitions from evaluating only current spatial parameters (distance, speed) to incorporating temporal dimensions by predicting future path profiles and evaluating deviations over time. This adds the dimension of time-based prediction to the collision assessment, improving accuracy without proportionally increasing system complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

2Loss of time

If early warning is issued based on predicted path profiles, then time for collision avoidance is increased, but false alarms increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetime available for collision avoidanceVSAvoidaccuracy of collision risk assessment
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary prediction of future path profiles and identifies potential collisions before they occur, allowing early warning to be issued. By calculating anticipated trajectories and comparing them with safety thresholds in advance, the system provides lead time for avoidance while maintaining reliability through multiple parameter validation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously monitors actual vehicle motion against predicted path profiles and adjusts assessments based on deviations from expected behavior. This feedback mechanism allows the system to distinguish between normal variations and genuine collision risks, reducing false alarms while maintaining early detection capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Measurement precision

If multiple parameters are evaluated for collision risk, then measurement precision is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaccuracy of driving situation assessmentVSAvoidcomplexity of sensor and evaluation system
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The evaluation system is designed to process multiple parameters (distance, speed, acceleration, deceleration, path deviations) through a unified assessment framework that determines collision risk. This multi-functional approach allows comprehensive evaluation without requiring separate specialized systems for each parameter, managing complexity through integration.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Loss of time

If automatic emergency braking is initiated without driver warning, then collision avoidance time is reduced, but reliability of intervention is improved

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresponse time for collision avoidanceVSAvoiddriver control over braking intervention
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system issues a driver warning before initiating automatic emergency braking, providing the driver with an opportunity to take preventive action. This preliminary alert allows the driver to respond voluntarily, and only if unsuccessful does the system proceed to automatic intervention, balancing rapid response with driver control.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #9Preliminary anti-action

Data Source

PatentEP2637905B1Method for detecting critical driving situations of lorries or passenger vehicles and method for avoiding collisions
Publication Date: 2015.02.25 ZF ACTIVE SAFETY GMBH
  • EP2637905B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2637905B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP2637905B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A method for detecting critical driving situations of motor vehicles, in particular for avoiding collisions with an object located in front of a driver's own vehicle, has the following steps: sensing a current vehicle acceleration and a current vehicle speed of the driver's own vehicle; predefining an acceleration profile which is dependent on driving variables of the driver's own vehicle; adopting a time profile of an acceleration of the driver's own vehicle which is to be predicted on the basis of the current acceleration thereof; determining a travel profile of the driver's own vehicle from the chronological profile of the acceleration which is to be predicted; sensing a current distance and a current relative speed of an object located in front of the driver's own vehicle; calculating the current absolute speed of the object and the absolute current acceleration of the object; adopting a chronological profile of an acceleration of the object which is to be predicted on the basis of the current acceleration thereof; determining a travel profile of the object from the chronological profile of the acceleration which is to be predicted; comparing the travel profile of the driver's own vehicle with the travel profile of the object; and if the two travel profiles intersect, determining an anticipated collision time of the driver's own vehicle with the object; defining a time before the anticipated collision time, comparing this time with the specific anticipated collision time; and outputting a warning to the driver of the driver's own vehicle if the anticipated collision time is before the defined time.