Autonomous Work Vehicle Road Travel With Selective Obstacle Avoidance
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Autonomous work vehicles experience reduced traveling efficiency due to unnecessary avoidance maneuvers when detecting fixed objects like trees along predetermined routes, as existing systems perform uniform avoidance processes without distinguishing between collision risks.
Innovation Solution
An autonomous travel method and system that differentiate between avoidance and non-avoidance travel targets by using a detection processor to identify objects on connecting roads and a travel processor to execute avoidance only when necessary, allowing the vehicle to bypass non-threatening obstacles.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If uniform avoidance travel process is applied when obstacle is detected, then collision avoidance is ensured, but traveling efficiency is reduced due to unnecessary deceleration and stopping
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies different avoidance travel processes to different obstacles based on their characteristics. For movable obstacles (e.g., animals, vehicles), the system executes full avoidance travel including deceleration and stopping. For fixed objects (e.g., trees, poles), the system skips avoidance travel. This local differentiation resolves the contradiction by applying reliability measures only where necessary while maintaining productivity elsewhere.
Solution Approach 2:
The system dynamically adjusts the avoidance travel process based on real-time obstacle classification. The travel restriction process is made adaptive rather than uniform, allowing the vehicle to switch between full avoidance (for movable obstacles) and normal travel (for fixed objects). This dynamic adjustment resolves the contradiction between ensuring collision avoidance and maintaining traveling efficiency.
2Reliability
If obstacle detection and avoidance process is executed for all detected objects, then safety is improved, but travel time increases due to frequent stopping
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies safety measures selectively based on obstacle type. Movable obstacles trigger full avoidance travel with deceleration and stopping to ensure safety. Fixed objects trigger only detection without avoidance travel, eliminating unnecessary time loss. This local quality approach resolves the contradiction between safety and travel time.
Solution Approach 2:
The system applies partial avoidance action only to movable obstacles rather than all detected objects. For fixed objects, the avoidance travel is completely skipped. This partial application of safety measures resolves the contradiction by providing sufficient safety for real threats while avoiding excessive action that would increase travel time.
3Reliability
If uniform avoidance travel is performed for all obstacles, then collision risk is eliminated, but fuel consumption increases due to repeated acceleration and deceleration
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies energy-intensive avoidance travel only to movable obstacles where collision risk exists. For fixed objects, the system skips avoidance travel entirely, eliminating unnecessary fuel consumption from repeated acceleration and deceleration. This local quality differentiation resolves the contradiction between collision risk elimination and fuel consumption.
Data Source
AI summary
A detection process unit detects obstacles while the work vehicle is traveling on the road connecting the fields. A travel processor causes the work vehicle to perform avoidance travel when the obstacles are registered as the avoidance travel target that is a subject to be avoided by the work vehicle's avoidance travel, while it causes the work vehicle not to perform the avoidance travel when the obstacles are registered as the non-avoidance travel target that is a subject not to be avoided by the work vehicle's avoidance travel.