Heavy-Duty Vehicle Partial Deactivation Using Usage-Pattern Control

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing vehicle deactivation control systems in heavy-duty vehicles lack versatility and accuracy, often leading to unnecessary energy consumption and excessive deactivation, which can increase wear and tear on components and reduce energy efficiency.

Innovation Solution

A computer system using an autonomous model that determines controlled partial deactivation instructions based on historical usage patterns and geographical data to selectively deactivate vehicle subsystems, minimizing energy consumption and optimizing deactivation timing.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Device complexity

If a fixed timer is used to determine vehicle deactivation, then the control procedure is simple, but the energy efficiency is poor and deactivation accuracy is low

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol procedure complexityVSAvoidenergy consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary analysis of vehicle state, component states, and environmental conditions before making deactivation decisions. This allows the system to predict whether deactivation will be beneficial, avoiding unnecessary deactivations and reducing energy consumption while maintaining reasonable control complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously monitors vehicle operational data, component states, and energy consumption patterns, using this feedback to dynamically adjust deactivation decisions. This feedback mechanism enables the system to learn from past behavior and optimize energy efficiency without requiring overly complex control procedures.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Measurement precision

If comprehensive analysis of vehicle component states is performed to determine deactivation suitability, then deactivation accuracy improves, but energy consumption increases and cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedeactivation determination accuracyVSAvoidenergy consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs partial analysis by selectively evaluating only the most critical vehicle states and components relevant to deactivation decisions, rather than comprehensively analyzing all vehicle systems. This approach achieves sufficient deactivation accuracy while minimizing the energy and computational resources required.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies different levels of analysis depth to different vehicle components based on their relevance to deactivation decisions. Critical components receive detailed analysis while less relevant components receive minimal or no analysis, optimizing the balance between accuracy and energy consumption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Use of energy by moving object

If frequent deactivation is performed to save energy, then energy consumption decreases, but component lifetime decreases due to increased wear and tear

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveenergy consumptionVSAvoidcomponent lifetime
Core Design Contradiction:
Use of energy by moving objectVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system cushions against excessive wear by analyzing component conditions and predicting wear patterns before making deactivation decisions. This allows the system to avoid deactivations that would cause excessive wear while still achieving energy savings through selective deactivation of appropriate components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #11Beforehand cushioning (Prior cushioning)

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts deactivation strategies based on real-time component states, operational history, and predicted usage patterns. This dynamic approach allows the system to optimize the balance between energy savings and component protection, deactivating components when safe to do so while maintaining them when wear risk is high.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentEP4400380A1Vehicle deactivation control
Publication Date: 2024.07.17 VOLVO TRUCK CORP
  • EP4400380A1 patent drawingFigure 1~2
  • EP4400380A1 patent drawingFigure 3
  • EP4400380A1 patent drawingFigure 4

AI summary

A computer system (900) comprising a processor device (902) is provided. The processor device (902) is configured to receive a deactivation request (20) to deactivate a heavy-duty vehicle (10). The processor device (902) is further configured to determine a controlled partial deactivation instruction (40) of at least one subsystem (14) of the vehicle (10), wherein the controlled partial deactivation instruction (40) is determined by an autonomous model (36) comprising a historical usage pattern (34) of the vehicle (10). The historical usage pattern (34) comprises information of deactivation events and activation events of the vehicle (10) that has historically occurred at reference locations (33). The processor device (902) is further configured to control the vehicle (10) to execute the controlled partial deactivation instruction (40) such that the vehicle (10) is at least partially deactivated either immediately, or after a delay, as determined by the controlled partial deactivation instruction (40).