Vehicle Response Time Evaluation Using Threshold-Triggered Fault Detection

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing methods for non-intrusive response time evaluation of vehicle components are inadequate, particularly in heavy-duty vehicles, as they may interfere with normal operation or fail to accurately assess response times under various conditions.

Innovation Solution

A method involving a control unit and sensors to repeatedly measure the difference between set and actual operation values of vehicle components, with active response time measurement only when the difference exceeds a predefined threshold, ensuring accurate evaluation without interference.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If non-intrusive response time evaluation is performed by continuously monitoring set and actual operation values, then measurement precision is improved, but device complexity increases due to continuous monitoring requirements

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveresponse time measurement precisionVSAvoidmonitoring system complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The monitoring system dynamically adjusts its measurement activity based on operational conditions. Response time measurement is only actively performed when the difference between set and actual operation values exceeds a predefined threshold, otherwise monitoring operates in a reduced mode. This dynamic adaptation maintains measurement precision when needed while reducing system complexity during normal operation.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes its monitoring parameters based on the difference between set and actual operation values. When this difference exceeds a threshold, the system transitions to active response time measurement mode; otherwise, it operates in passive monitoring mode. This parameter-based state change resolves the contradiction by adapting monitoring intensity to actual operational needs.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

2Reliability

If response time measurement is continuously active, then reliability of fault detection is improved, but loss of time in normal operation increases due to constant monitoring overhead

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvefault detection reliabilityVSAvoidprocessing time during normal operation

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of continuous response time measurement, the system employs periodic measurement triggered by specific conditions. Response time is measured periodically when the difference between set and actual operation values exceeds a threshold, rather than continuously during all operational phases. This periodic approach maintains fault detection reliability for critical events while reducing processing time overhead during normal operation.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #19Periodic action

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies partial monitoring action by only actively measuring response time when necessary (when threshold is exceeded), rather than performing full continuous monitoring. This partial action approach ensures reliable fault detection when anomalies occur while minimizing processing overhead during normal operational periods.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Ease of operation

If control strategies slow down component responses for smooth operation, then ease of operation is improved, but measurement precision of response time deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesmooth component operationVSAvoidresponse time measurement accuracy

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary identification of measurement opportunities by continuously monitoring the difference between set and actual operation values. When this difference exceeds a threshold, the system prepares to initiate response time measurement at the optimal moment, before control strategies can slow down the response. This preliminary detection ensures measurement precision is maintained while allowing smooth operation during normal conditions.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The difference threshold between set and actual operation values serves as an intermediary trigger that mediates between smooth control operation and accurate response time measurement. This intermediary mechanism allows the control system to maintain smooth operation during normal conditions while automatically initiating precise measurements when significant deviations occur, resolving the contradiction between operational smoothness and measurement accuracy.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS12276241B2Method for non-intrusive response time evaluation of a component, unit or system of a vehicle

Publication Date: 2025.04.15 VOLVO TRUCK CORP

AI summary

A method including:repeatedly obtaining information in a control unit regarding a set operation value and an actual operation value of a component, unit, or system;repeatedly evaluating a difference between a set operation value and the actual operation value;if a difference exceeds a predefined minimum difference, measuring a response time from when the minimum difference was exceeded until a predefined change of the actual value is achieved, and/or measuring a change of the actual value during a predefined response time, remaining active if the set operation value is continuously exceeds the actual value; andif the response time is longer than the predefined response time and/or if the change of the actual value has not achieved the predefined change, generating a fault signal.