Rear-End Collision Control Using Time-to-Impact Vehicle Movement

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing vehicle collision warning systems often fail to provide timely and effective interventions for rear-end collisions, as warnings are sometimes issued too late, leading to driver panic and inadequate response time.

Innovation Solution

A method and apparatus for vehicle anti-collision control that calculates the estimated time to potential rear-end collision and performs automatic forward movement or sends warnings based on pre-determined thresholds, integrating data from sensors and cloud information to determine appropriate actions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If a warning reminder is sent to the driver when a rear-end collision risk is detected, then the driver is alerted to the potential danger, but the warning may be issued too late for the driver to respond effectively or may cause excessive panic

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecollision prevention effectivenessVSAvoiddriver response time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary action by automatically moving the vehicle forward before the collision actually occurs. When a rear-end collision risk is detected and the estimated time T is less than the threshold, the vehicle automatically moves forward by a distance d' to increase the safety margin, preventing the collision before it happens rather than just warning the driver at the last moment.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces an intermediary automatic control mechanism between the detection of collision risk and the actual collision. This intermediary system calculates the estimated time T, determines the forward safe distance d, and automatically executes the forward movement, serving as a mediator that acts on behalf of the driver when immediate human response is insufficient.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If the vehicle automatically moves forward to prevent rear-end collision, then the collision risk is reduced, but the vehicle may move into a forward obstacle or create new safety issues

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverear-end collision preventionVSAvoidforward obstacle collision risk
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies local quality by differentiating the safety assessment for different directions. It separately evaluates the rearward distance to the following vehicle (for potential rear-end collision) and the forward safe distance d to any forward obstacles. The automatic forward movement is only executed when the forward safe distance is sufficient, ensuring that the local condition ahead is safe before moving forward to prevent rear-end collision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses feedback by continuously monitoring both the rear vehicle status and the forward environment. It calculates the forward safe distance d based on real-time sensor data about obstacles ahead, and only permits forward movement when d > 0, ensuring that the feedback from the forward environment confirms safety before executing the protective action.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Loss of time

If the system calculates estimated time T and performs automatic anti-collision operations, then timely intervention is achieved, but the system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveintervention timingVSAvoidcontrol system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies parameter changes by introducing a threshold parameter T threshold for the estimated time T. When T < T threshold, the automatic anti-collision operation is triggered. This parameter-based decision mechanism simplifies the control logic compared to complex rule-based systems, as it relies on a single critical threshold comparison to determine whether intervention is necessary.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs self-service by automatically calculating the estimated time T, determining the forward safe distance d, and executing the forward movement without requiring driver input or complex decision-making. The system serves itself by using its own sensors and processors to make and execute the anti-collision decision, reducing the need for complex human-machine interaction interfaces.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentEP4082852B1Method and apparatus for vehicle Anti-collision control
Publication Date: 2023.11.15 NIO TECH ANHUI CO LTD
  • EP4082852B1 patent drawingFigure 1~2

AI summary

A method for vehicle anti-collision control includes: receiving information about a rear vehicle status and a relative distance between a vehicle behind and a present vehicle; when the information about the status indicates that there is a vehicle coming from behind and the relative distance between the vehicle behind and the present vehicle is less than a pre-determined distance, calculating an estimated time T for which the present vehicle is to be rear-ended by the vehicle behind; and performing an anti-collision operation for the present vehicle if T &lt; Tthreshold, where Tthreshold is a pre-determined first anti-collision time threshold.