Vehicle Collision Avoidance Re-Acceleration Control After Braking

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing collision avoidance systems in vehicles experience undesirable sudden re-accelerations after deceleration interventions, leading to repeated interventions and driver discomfort due to unpredictable vehicle behavior, especially in mobile work machines with obscured paths of travel.

Innovation Solution

A method that decelerates a vehicle upon detecting a collision-relevant object, conditionally enables re-acceleration only if the object is determined to be less critical, and limits re-acceleration at the beginning of the release period to prevent sudden increases, using a controlled re-acceleration strategy based on time to collision (TTC) and vehicle speed.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If full re-acceleration is enabled immediately after deceleration intervention, then vehicle availability and response time are improved, but driver comfort deteriorates due to sudden re-acceleration causing repeated interventions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevehicle availabilityVSAvoiddriver comfort
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary assessment of the collision-relevant object during the deceleration period to determine if it is less critical before enabling re-acceleration. This preliminary action prevents sudden re-acceleration by ensuring the object will not cause immediate collision, thus improving driver comfort while maintaining vehicle availability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts the re-acceleration behavior based on the criticality assessment of the collision-relevant object. For less critical objects, full re-acceleration is enabled; for critical objects, re-acceleration is limited. This dynamic adaptation resolves the contradiction by making the system responsive to real-time conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Ease of operation

If re-acceleration is limited at the beginning of the release period, then driver comfort is improved by preventing sudden re-acceleration, but vehicle productivity deteriorates due to reduced acceleration availability

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedriver comfortVSAvoidvehicle response time
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies different re-acceleration strategies to different situations: full re-acceleration is enabled when the collision-relevant object is determined to be less critical, while limited re-acceleration is applied when the object remains critical. This local differentiation resolves the contradiction by tailoring the acceleration behavior to the specific risk level.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the acceleration parameter dynamically based on the criticality assessment. The acceleration capability is adjusted from limited to full based on the determined criticality of the collision-relevant object, thereby optimizing both driver comfort and vehicle productivity for each specific situation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If the collision-relevant object is continuously monitored during the release period, then collision safety is improved by detecting critical objects, but system complexity increases due to continuous monitoring requirements

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecollision safetyVSAvoidmonitoring system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs a partial assessment of the collision-relevant object during the deceleration period to determine if it is less critical, rather than continuous monitoring throughout the release period. This partial action is sufficient to prevent repeated interventions while reducing system complexity compared to continuous monitoring.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP4582321A1Collision avoidance method and means for implementing same
Publication Date: 2025.07.09 ROBERT BOSCH GMBH
  • EP4582321A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4582321A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4582321A1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A collision avoidance method (400) is proposed which comprises braking (420) a vehicle (1) during a braking period when a collision-relevant object (2) is detected in a collision monitoring area (3), and which comprises conditionally enabling (430) a restart of the vehicle (1) during a release period after the braking period, wherein the enabling (430) of the re-acceleration of the vehicle (1) is carried out under the condition that the collision-relevant object (2) is determined to be a less critical collision-relevant object (2), and wherein a limitation of the re-acceleration is carried out at the beginning of the release period if the collision-relevant object (2) is still detected in the collision monitoring area (3).