Vehicle Hazard Avoidance Control With Minimal Driver Interference
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing obstacle avoidance systems for human-operated vehicles interfere with the driver's control, as they either generate alternative paths that deviate from the operator's intentions or apply unnecessary interventions, lacking effective determination of when interventions are necessary and considering the vehicle's current motion and driving intentions.
Innovation Solution
A driving assistance system that uses on-board perception to detect hazards and adjust unsafe driving commands minimally, ensuring seamless assistance by computing a range of safe driving commands based on hazard locations, vehicle dynamics, and safety clearances, without generating alternative paths, thus respecting the operator's intentions and reducing interference.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If conventional hazard avoidance systems generate alternative paths to avoid obstacles, then collision-free navigation is achieved, but the driver's control and driving intention are interfered with
Solution Approach 1:
The system introduces an intermediary safety verification layer between the driver's intent and vehicle execution. Instead of directly generating alternative paths that override driver control, the system computes a safety margin and adjusts only unsafe commands while passing safe commands through unchanged, thereby mediating between hazard avoidance requirements and driver autonomy
Solution Approach 2:
The system applies different processing qualities to different driving commands based on their safety assessment. Safe commands are passed through with minimal intervention (high driver control), while unsafe commands receive adjusted processing (high safety assurance). This local differentiation resolves the contradiction by applying hazard avoidance only where necessary rather than uniformly overriding all driver inputs
2Reliability
If hazard avoidance systems apply frequent interventions to ensure safety, then collision avoidance is improved, but unnecessary interventions increase interference with normal driving
Solution Approach 1:
The system implements continuous feedback by monitoring each driving command against the computed safety margin before execution. This real-time feedback mechanism allows the system to distinguish between safe and unsafe commands, intervening only when necessary and avoiding unnecessary interventions that would interfere with normal driving
Solution Approach 2:
The system applies partial action by adjusting only the portion of driving commands that exceed safety margins rather than applying full interventions to all commands. This selective adjustment ensures safety while minimizing interference with legitimate driver intentions
3Reliability
If path re-planning is performed frequently to avoid hazards, then hazard detection and avoidance are improved, but system complexity and computational load increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system extracts the essential safety verification function from complex path re-planning algorithms. Instead of performing full path re-planning for every hazard detection, the system computes a simplified safety margin metric that captures the critical safety information needed to make intervention decisions, thereby reducing computational complexity while maintaining hazard detection effectiveness
Data Source
AI summary
The present disclosure provides a driving assistance method and system for a mobile vehicle to avoid hazards in its environment. This system can detect hazards in a vehicle's surroundings and unobtrusively adjust its driving module's driving commands when necessary to avoid hazards. The system is configured to allow it to provide interference-free assistance to the operator of a human-operated vehicle or the motion controller of an autonomous vehicle to avoid hazards.