Vehicle Rollover Safety Logic Using Lateral Acceleration Thresholds

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing vehicle rollover detection systems face challenges in accurately detecting near rollover events without unnecessary deployment of protection devices, particularly due to mechanical vibrations and the need for additional sensors, which increases complexity and cost.

Innovation Solution

A safety logic for vehicle rollover detection systems that utilizes a main rollover detection logic and lateral acceleration sensors to generate activation signals based on predefined threshold values, with additional signals from the main logic at intermediate stages, ensuring protection device activation only when both logics confirm a dangerous situation, thereby reducing false activations and maintaining simplicity and low manufacturing costs.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If additional sensors are added to improve detection accuracy, then measurement precision is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection accuracyVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The safety logic uses the existing lateral acceleration sensor signals that are already processed by the main logic, making these signals serve dual purposes: both the main rollover detection and the safety logic confirmation, eliminating the need for additional dedicated sensors

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The main logic's intermediate stage signals and processed sensor data are reused by the safety logic to generate its activation signal, allowing the existing system components to serve the additional safety function without requiring external additions

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Measurement precision

If additional sensors are added to improve detection accuracy, then measurement precision is improved, but manufacturing costs increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection accuracyVSAvoidmanufacturing cost
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The safety logic uses the existing lateral acceleration sensor signals that are already processed by the main logic, making these signals serve dual purposes: both the main rollover detection and the safety logic confirmation, eliminating the need for additional dedicated sensors

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The main logic's intermediate stage signals and processed sensor data are reused by the safety logic to generate its activation signal, allowing the existing system components to serve the additional safety function without requiring external additions

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Device complexity

If the safety logic uses signals from the main logic, then device complexity is reduced, but reliability may be affected

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem simplicityVSAvoiddetection reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The safety logic uses intermediate stage signals from the main logic that are generated before the final activation decision, allowing the safety logic to independently verify the detection process and provide an additional confirmation layer that enhances reliability

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The safety logic receives feedback signals from the main logic's intermediate processing stages and uses these to independently confirm whether activation conditions are met, creating a feedback loop that improves system reliability without adding complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

4Measurement precision

If the activation threshold is lowered to improve detection sensitivity, then measurement precision is improved, but false activations increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection sensitivityVSAvoidfalse deployment
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSObject-generated harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The safety logic uses intermediate stage signals from the main logic that are generated before the final activation decision, allowing the safety logic to independently verify the detection process and provide an additional confirmation layer that enhances reliability

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The safety logic receives feedback signals from the main logic's intermediate processing stages and uses these to independently confirm whether activation conditions are met, creating a feedback loop that improves system reliability without adding complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS7702441B2Safety logic for vehicle rollover detection systems and a method for detecting near rollover situations
Publication Date: 2010.04.20 INVENSENSE INC
  • US7702441B2 patent drawing
  • US7702441B2 patent drawing
  • US7702441B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A safety logic for vehicle rollover detection systems comprising a main rollover detection logic and at least one protection device for the occupant or occupants of the vehicle, including a vehicle lateral acceleration sensor (11), which generates an output signal indicating a near rollover event, when a lateral acceleration of a vehicle exceeds the first predefined threshold value (15) or, when a lateral acceleration of vehicle exceeds the second predefined threshold value (16) that is lower than the first predefined threshold value (15) and simultaneously at least one additional safety logic activation signal is present (1, 1′, 1″, 1′″).