Dual-Controller Trajectory Integrity Co-Pilot for Autonomous Vehicles
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current automated driving systems lack robustness in maintaining vehicle control on desired routes, particularly when deviations occur, and there is a need for independent validation of control commands to diagnose software or hardware issues.
Innovation Solution
A dual-controller system is implemented, where a primary controller communicates actuator control signals based on a primary automated driving system control algorithm, and a secondary controller, with distinct algorithms, verifies and overrides the primary system by predicting perpendicular distances between the desired route and actual paths to maintain current actuator settings or execute fallback commands when deviations exceed a threshold.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If a single automated driving controller is used, then the system is simpler, but the reliability and robustness of vehicle control deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The control system is divided into a primary controller that executes the main automated driving control algorithm and a secondary controller that performs independent verification. This segmentation allows each controller to have specialized functions, improving overall reliability while keeping individual controller complexity manageable.
Solution Approach 2:
The secondary controller acts as an intermediary verification layer between the primary controller and the actuators. It independently calculates expected actuator commands and compares them with actual commands, providing an additional safety check without requiring complete system redesign.
2Reliability
If the secondary controller continuously monitors and overrides primary controller commands, then the reliability improves, but the response time and operational efficiency deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The secondary controller does not continuously override the primary controller but only intervenes when deviations exceed a threshold. This partial action approach maintains normal operation efficiency while providing sufficient monitoring to ensure reliability.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements feedback by continuously comparing the actual vehicle path with the desired route and only triggering override actions when the deviation exceeds a predefined threshold. This feedback mechanism ensures timely intervention only when necessary.
3Measurement precision
If the threshold for deviation is set low, then the route following precision improves, but the frequency of false alarms and unnecessary overrides increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system uses a threshold parameter to filter out minor deviations that are within acceptable tolerances. By setting an appropriate threshold level, the system maintains precision in detecting significant deviations while avoiding false alarms from normal operational variations.
Data Source
AI summary
An automotive vehicle includes a vehicle steering system, an actuator configured to control the steering system, a first controller, and a second controller. The first controller is in communication with the actuator. The first controller is configured to communicate an actuator control signal based on a primary automated driving system control algorithm. The second controller is in communication with the actuator and with the first controller. The second controller is configured to, in response to a first predicted vehicle path based on the actuator control signal deviating from a desired route by a threshold distance, control the actuator to maintain a current actuator setting. The second controller is also configured to, in response to the first predicted vehicle path not deviating from the desired route by the threshold distance, control the actuator according to the actuator control signal.