Remote Autonomous Vehicle Safety Arbitration for Dynamic Terrain
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Remote operation of vehicles is susceptible to user error, leading to potential damage to the vehicle, nearby persons or objects, and autonomous vehicles face challenges in navigating dynamic environments, resulting in operational cessation and inefficiencies.
Innovation Solution
A vehicle system with a partitioned architecture, including a safety processor and an application processor, ensures that remote control instructions are arbitrated for safety compliance using safety rules, maintaining safe operation even in dynamic environments.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Ease of operation
If remote operation is implemented, then vehicle control flexibility is improved, but safety risks increase due to user error
Solution Approach 1:
The patent introduces a safety processor as an intermediary between the remote operator and the vehicle systems. This safety processor monitors and validates all remote control commands against pre-defined safety rules before execution, acting as a mediator that allows remote operation while filtering out unsafe commands. The safety processor checks parameters such as vehicle speed, terrain conditions, and operator credentials to prevent harmful operations.
2Productivity
If autonomous systems are used, then operational efficiency is improved, but operational cessation occurs when encountering unknown terrain
Solution Approach 1:
The autonomous vehicle system is designed to self-manage safety-critical functions through the safety processor, which continuously monitors system state and environmental conditions. When the autonomous system encounters an unknown terrain or situation, it can autonomously determine whether to continue operation or safely cease operations without requiring immediate human intervention, thereby maintaining operational continuity while ensuring safety.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements continuous feedback loops where sensors monitor terrain conditions, vehicle state, and system performance in real-time. This feedback is processed by the safety processor and autonomous control algorithms, allowing the system to adapt to new terrain conditions and make informed decisions about whether to continue or pause operations, thus maintaining operational efficiency while preventing unsafe operations.
3Reliability
If safety rules are enforced, then operational safety is improved, but device complexity increases due to partitioned architecture
Solution Approach 1:
The control system is segmented into distinct functional modules: a safety processor dedicated to safety monitoring and rule enforcement, an autonomous processor for autonomous navigation, and remote control interfaces for operator input. This segmentation allows each processor to specialize in its function, improving safety through dedicated safety processing while managing complexity through modular design with well-defined interfaces between components.
Data Source
AI summary
Remote control autonomous vehicles with operator protection and terrain dynamics is described. In one or more implementations, a vehicle includes several subsystems designed to perform different vehicle operations. The vehicle also includes a communication subsystem and a central control unit with one or more processors. The communication subsystem receives instructions from a remote operator to actuate the subsystems to perform vehicle operations (e.g., driving along a path). In response to the instructions from the remote operator satisfying safety rules, the processors cause the subsystems to perform the vehicle operations. In this way, a remote operator may utilize the safety routines and terrain adjustments included in the autonomous systems.