Power-Closing Vehicle Door With Non-Contact Obstacle Detection

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing power closure member actuation systems for vehicle doors face complexity in obstacle detection due to varying obstacles and require improved operational convenience and enhanced capabilities.

Innovation Solution

A power door system with an actuator, sensor, and controller that detects obstacles within a varying field of view during door movement, using non-contact obstacle detection sensors to optimize door movement and enhance operational efficiency.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If non-contact obstacle detection sensors are used to detect obstacles during door movement, then obstacle detection capability is improved, but device complexity increases due to variations in obstacles and operational complexity

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveobstacle detection capabilityVSAvoidsensor operation complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent divides the door movement into discrete phases (opening phase and closing phase) with different detection requirements. During opening, the sensor detects obstacles in the door's path; during closing, the sensor detects obstacles near the door edge. This segmentation allows simpler detection logic for each phase while maintaining overall reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent makes the sensor's field of view dynamic by adjusting its detection zone based on door position and movement direction. The sensor focuses on different areas during different phases of door operation, optimizing detection coverage without requiring a fixed complex sensor arrangement. This dynamic adjustment simplifies the sensor operation compared to a static all-encompassing detection system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Device complexity

If a fixed field of view sensor is used, then device complexity is reduced, but obstacle detection accuracy deteriorates during varying door movement

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesensor structure simplicityVSAvoidobstacle detection accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a dynamic field of view that adapts to door position and movement direction. During opening, the sensor monitors the door's swing path; during closing, it monitors the area near the door edge. This dynamic adjustment maintains detection accuracy without requiring a complex fixed multi-sensor system, achieving a balance between simplicity and precision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the sensor's detection parameters (field of view, detection zone) based on door position and movement phase. By adjusting these parameters dynamically, the system maintains high detection accuracy across varying door positions without increasing hardware complexity, as the same sensor can be reconfigured through parameter changes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Measurement precision

If complex obstacle recognition algorithms are used, then obstacle detection accuracy is improved, but processing time and computational complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveobstacle recognition accuracyVSAvoidprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the obstacle detection task by phase: during opening, it checks for obstacles in the door's path; during closing, it checks for obstacles near the door edge. This segmentation allows simpler, faster detection algorithms for each phase compared to a single complex all-purpose recognition system, reducing processing time while maintaining accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial detection coverage appropriate to each phase rather than using a comprehensive complex algorithm throughout. During opening, it performs a specific type of obstacle check; during closing, a different type. This partial action approach reduces computational load compared to a full comprehensive recognition algorithm while maintaining sufficient accuracy for each specific task.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

The system provides enhanced obstacle detection accuracy and operational convenience by simplifying obstacle recognition, reducing sensor complexity, and optimizing door movement through intelligent control algorithms.

Implementation Method 1

various other sensors, such as non-contact obstacle detection (NCOD) sensors may be used to detect obstacles

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectNon-contact obstacle detection: Electromagnetic Induction

Data Source

PatentUS20250305339A1Vehicle door with power close function having non-contact obstacle detection and method
Publication Date: 2025.10.02 MAGNA CLOSURES INC
  • US20250305339A1 patent drawing
  • US20250305339A1 patent drawing
  • US20250305339A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A power door system for a door of a vehicle is provided. The system includes an actuator for moving the door. The system also includes a sensor having a field of view for detecting an obstacle between the door and a body of the vehicle. The system further includes a controller connected to the actuator and to the sensor. The controller is adapted to detect the obstacle within the field of view that varies during movement of the door