Vehicle Motion Control Weighting for Driver Mode Tradeoffs
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing vehicle control systems face challenges in managing conflicting priorities between longitudinal acceleration and steering control, particularly in driver-selectable modes such as sport and tour modes, which affect vehicle handling and driver experience.
Innovation Solution
A system and method that calculate desired future longitudinal and lateral horizons based on driver inputs and vehicle parameters, using weighting factors to prioritize driver-selectable modes, thereby controlling vehicle propulsion, braking, and steering systems to minimize differences between desired and predicted states.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Speed
If priority is given to longitudinal acceleration in sport mode, then acceleration performance is improved, but steering control and vehicle stability deteriorate
Solution Approach 1:
The system dynamically adjusts control priorities based on the selected driver mode. In sport mode, the controller increases the weighting factor for longitudinal acceleration commands while reducing the weighting for steering control, allowing the vehicle to prioritize acceleration performance while maintaining adequate steering responsiveness. This dynamic reweighting resolves the contradiction by making the control system adaptable to different operational contexts.
Solution Approach 2:
The controller changes the weighting parameters in the cost function based on driver mode selection. When sport mode is selected, the weighting factor for longitudinal acceleration is increased and the weighting for yaw rate and lateral velocity is decreased, optimizing acceleration performance. When tour mode is selected, the opposite weighting is applied to prioritize stability. This parameter adjustment directly resolves the technical contradiction between acceleration and stability.
2Stability of the object's composition
If priority is given to steering control in tour mode, then vehicle stability is improved, but acceleration performance deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The control system dynamically reconfigures its priorities based on the selected driver mode. In tour mode, the controller increases the weighting factors for steering control, yaw rate, and lateral velocity while reducing the weighting for longitudinal acceleration commands. This dynamic adjustment ensures that stability is prioritized during normal driving conditions without permanently sacrificing acceleration capability when needed.
Solution Approach 2:
The controller adjusts the weighting parameters in the cost function according to driver mode selection. In tour mode, higher weighting is assigned to steering control and vehicle stability parameters, while lower weighting is assigned to acceleration commands. This parameter change allows the system to optimize for stability when required while maintaining the ability to prioritize acceleration when sport mode is selected.
3Adaptability or versatility
If multiple driver modes are supported, then adaptability is improved, but control system complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The vehicle motion controller is designed as a universal system that handles multiple driver modes (sport, tour, off-road, trailering) through a single unified control architecture. The same controller uses different weighting factors in the cost function to achieve different operational characteristics, eliminating the need for separate control systems for each mode. This multi-functionality approach resolves the contradiction by providing adaptability without proportionally increasing complexity.
Solution Approach 2:
The system supports multiple driver modes by changing the weighting parameters in the cost function rather than implementing separate control algorithms for each mode. The controller receives the selected driver mode as input and adjusts the weighting factors accordingly, providing adaptability through parameter adjustment rather than structural complexity. This approach allows multiple modes to be supported with minimal increase in system complexity.
Data Source
AI summary
The concepts described herein relate to a calculation of desired future longitudinal horizons related to torque or acceleration, and desired future lateral horizons related to yaw rate and lateral velocity, and their use in response to driver-selectable modes. In the longitudinal direction, driver inputs of pedal and brake position as well as drivability metrics are used to calculate the desired future torque trajectory. In the lateral direction, the front and rear steering angles may be used with a bicycle model to derive the trajectories. The trajectories are used in a vehicle motion controller that uses weighting to tradeoff competing requests and deliver performance that is consistent with a selected driver mode, such as a tour mode, a sport mode, an off-road mode, a trailering mode, etc.