Vehicle Acceleration Control Arbitration Hierarchy
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
The existing methods for controlling motor vehicle acceleration devices, such as engines and retarders, face complexity and inefficiency in managing multiple input commands from various systems like the accelerator pedal, ASR, and transmission, which limits effective torque and speed control.
Innovation Solution
A parallel method with a cascade structure is introduced, where input commands are divided into groups and selected based on predetermined rules, allowing for simple implementation and scalability, using generic interfaces and prioritization to determine the optimal input command for controlling acceleration devices.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If sequential selection method (SAE J1939/71) is used for torque and speed arbitration, then control efficiency is maintained, but device complexity increases and testability deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the arbitration process into multiple hierarchical levels: first grouping input commands into first groups, then selecting specific commands from each group,接着 grouping the selected commands into second groups, and finally selecting specific commands from the second groups. This segmentation transforms a complex sequential arbitration into structured parallel processing, reducing overall system complexity while maintaining control efficiency.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces a hierarchical dimensional structure to the arbitration process by creating multiple levels of grouping and selection. Instead of a single-dimensional sequential processing, the system now operates in multiple dimensions (first groups → selected commands → second groups → final selected commands), which simplifies the arbitration logic at each level while achieving efficient overall control.
2Ease of operation
If sequential selection method is used for input command arbitration, then control logic is straightforward, but expandability and scalability are limited
Solution Approach 1:
By dividing the arbitration into hierarchical segments (first groups, second groups, final selection), the system maintains simple control logic at each segment while enabling easy expansion. New input commands can be added by creating new groups or modifying existing groups without restructuring the entire arbitration system, thus improving scalability and adaptability.
Solution Approach 2:
The hierarchical grouping structure creates a universal framework that can handle various types of input commands (accelerator pedal, transmission intervention, vehicle speed controller, anti-slip control, etc.) through the same arbitration mechanism. This multi-functional design allows the system to easily adapt to different vehicle configurations and control requirements.
3Reliability
If parallel method with cascade structure is implemented for command selection, then testability and expandability improve, but control process complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the control process into distinct hierarchical levels (first grouping, first selection, second grouping, second selection), where each segment can be independently tested and validated. This segmentation improves testability by allowing systematic verification of each arbitration level separately, while the structured nature actually reduces overall process complexity compared to unstructured parallel methods.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
AI summary
The invention relates to a method for controlling an acceleration device (2) for motor vehicles, wherein a plurality of input commands (4a, 4b, 4c, 4d) are supplied to a selection device (6) and an input command (4a, 4b, 4c, 4d) is selected from this plurality of input commands (4a, 4b, 4c, 4d) and a value preset for the acceleration device (2) is determined on the basis of this selected input command. First, a plurality of input commands (4a, 4b, 4c, 4d) are divided into at least two first groups (42) and then a predetermined input command (4a, 4b, 4c, 4d) is selected from each first group (42). Subsequently, the multitude of input commands (4a, 4b, 4c, 4d) selected from the first groups (42) are divided into at least one second group (44) and a predetermined input command (4a, 4b, 4c, 4d) is selected from the at least one second group (44).