Diverse Software Control for Autonomous Vehicle Fault Tolerance

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current autonomous vehicle systems face challenges in achieving fault-tolerant control, particularly at higher automation levels (Level 4 and Level 5), as they struggle to maintain safety due to hardware and software design errors, with complex software systems being difficult to validate thoroughly to meet the required error rates for ASIL D integrity levels.

Innovation Solution

The method involves identifying and separating Non-Deterministic Design Constructs (NDDCs) in the software system, executing simple software on fault-tolerant hardware to mask hardware failures, and using diverse versions of complex software on independent Fault Containment Units (FCUs) to increase reliability through comparison and decision-making by a simple software authority.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If complex software systems are used for autonomous vehicle control, then functionality and adaptability are improved, but validation thoroughness and reliability are worsened due to difficulty in achieving ASIL D error rates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesoftware functionalityVSAvoidvalidation thoroughness
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the software system into distinct functional modules that can be independently validated and tested. This modular approach allows thorough validation of each component while maintaining overall system complexity and functionality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent employs model-based validation where virtual models and simulations are created to replicate real-world scenarios. These models allow extensive testing and validation without requiring physical prototypes, thereby improving validation thoroughness while maintaining system adaptability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

2Reliability

If hardware redundancy is implemented to mask hardware failures, then reliability is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefault toleranceVSAvoidhardware complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts the redundancy function from the main control system and implements it as a separate validation layer. This allows fault tolerance to be added without significantly increasing the complexity of the core hardware architecture.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent designs the redundant hardware components to serve multiple functions - they can operate as primary components when functional and as backup components when needed. This multi-functionality reduces the need for dedicated redundant hardware, thereby limiting complexity increase.

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

3Reliability

If extensive testing and validation are performed to reduce design errors, then reliability is improved, but loss of time and productivity are worsened

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror rate reductionVSAvoidvalidation time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements formal verification methods during the design and development phases to identify and correct errors before they reach the testing stage. This preliminary validation reduces the time required for extensive post-development testing while maintaining high reliability standards.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces physical testing and validation with automated software-based verification and simulation systems. This substitution dramatically reduces validation time while maintaining or improving the thoroughness of error detection compared to traditional manual testing methods.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Data Source

PatentEP3285163B1Fault-tolerant method and device for controlling an autonomous technical plant by means of diverse trajector planning
Publication Date: 2020.10.21 TTTECH AUTO AG
  • EP3285163B1 patent drawingFigure 1~2
  • EP3285163B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The present invention describes an innovative method for realizing a complex electronic system for controlling a safety-critical technical process, e.g., the guidance of an autonomous vehicle. A distinction is made between simple and complex software, wherein the simple software is executed on fault-tolerant hardware, and wherein several diverse versions of the complex software are executed simultaneously on independent Fault Containment Units (FCUs). From the results of the complex software, a decision instance, implemented using simple software, selects a result that is then forwarded to the actuators.