Trailer Collision Warning Control Using Impact Function Optimization

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current collision avoidance systems in vehicles are computationally complex and may not have comprehensive or optimal rule sets for determining control values, leading to inefficiencies in predicting and mitigating collisions.

Innovation Solution

A collision warning device that uses equations of motion to predict potential collisions by determining relevance criteria for objects based on their movement data, calculating collision parameters, and optimizing control values to minimize impact, considering both the vehicle and trailer movements.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If rule-based approaches are used to determine control values for collision avoidance, then collision avoidance strategy can be provided, but computational effort is relatively complex

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecollision avoidance strategyVSAvoidcomputational effort
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent transforms the collision avoidance problem from a complex rule-based control value determination into an optimization problem by changing the parameters to be optimized (control parameters that influence vehicle motion) and defining an objective function (impact function) that quantifies collision severity. This allows using efficient optimization algorithms instead of complex rule sets.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces the mechanical rule-based decision-making system with a mathematical optimization framework. Instead of using predefined rules to determine control values, the system uses an impact function and optimization algorithms to automatically determine optimal control parameters, substituting computational mechanics with mathematical optimization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Ease of operation

If rule sets are used for collision avoidance strategies, then control values can be determined, but the rule sets may not be comprehensive or optimal

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol value determinationVSAvoidcomprehensiveness and optimality
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces dynamic optimization where the control parameters are continuously adjusted based on real-time vehicle and object states. The impact function dynamically evaluates different control parameter combinations, allowing the system to adapt to changing situations and find optimal solutions rather than relying on static rule sets.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The optimization framework incorporates feedback through the impact function, which evaluates the potential collision outcome for different control parameter values. This feedback mechanism allows the system to iteratively improve control parameter selection, ensuring comprehensiveness and optimality that static rule sets cannot achieve.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Reliability

If all objects in the environment are considered for collision prediction, then comprehensive collision detection is achieved, but computational effort increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecollision detection comprehensivenessVSAvoidcomputational efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the set of all detected objects into relevant and irrelevant groups based on simple pre-filters (such as distance thresholds and relative velocity criteria). Only objects that pass these filters are subjected to the full impact function evaluation, significantly reducing computational effort while maintaining comprehensive collision detection for potentially relevant objects.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by using a two-stage approach: first applying simple filters to all objects, then applying the computationally intensive impact function only to a subset of potentially relevant objects. This partial application of the full analysis only where necessary maintains comprehensiveness for critical cases while improving overall computational efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP4635814A1Collision warning device, vehicle comprising a collision warning device, method for operating a collision warning device, computer program and computer-readable medium
Publication Date: 2025.10.22 CONTINENTAL AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES GMBH
  • EP4635814A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4635814A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4635814A1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The invention relates to a collision warning device (3), wherein the collision warning device (3) comprises a control device (4). The invention provides that the control device (4) is configured to determine, upon fulfillment of the relevance criterion for the control values ​​of the predefined control value range, respective collision values ​​of the collision parameter relating to a predicted collision event between the trailer (7) and the respective at least one object (5); to determine, based on the respective collision values ​​of the collision parameter for the control value range, an impact function (10) with respect to the trailer (7) for the respective at least one object (5), which impact function assigns to the control values ​​of the control value range an impact value relating to the predicted collision event between the trailer (7) and the respective at least one object (5);to determine the overall turning function (11) of the vehicle combination (2) from the respective turning function (10) in relation to the vehicle (1) of the at least one object (5) and the respective turning function (10) in relation to the trailer (7) of the at least one object (5).