Vehicle Path Boundary Calculation for Large-Curvature Turns

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing path planning methods for vehicle navigation in large-curvature turning processes result in excessive conservatism or radicalism, leading to inaccurate path bounds and increased collision risk due to insufficient consideration of vehicle contour in collision avoidance.

Innovation Solution

Determine a collision-anticipated overlap corner position under a first coordinate system, construct a contour corner overlap line and decision corner reference line based on the vehicle's trajectory normal, and calculate a collision-avoiding distance to generate an optimized path bound using a second coordinate system.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Device complexity

If path bound is determined based on vehicle and obstacle center line distance, then calculation is simple, but path planning accuracy deteriorates in large-curvature scenarios

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecalculation complexityVSAvoidpath bound accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the vehicle contour into multiple discrete contour points and processes each point individually to determine collision-avoiding distances. This segmentation allows accurate handling of large-curvature scenarios while maintaining computational feasibility through systematic processing of divided elements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent transitions from one-dimensional center line distance measurement to two-dimensional contour point analysis. By considering the full contour geometry in multiple dimensions rather than just center line offsets, the method achieves accurate path bound determination for complex turning scenarios.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

2Reliability

If path bound is set conservatively to ensure safety, then collision risk decreases, but path planning flexibility deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecollision avoidance reliabilityVSAvoidpath planning flexibility
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by determining collision-avoiding distances specific to each contour point's local geometry rather than using uniform conservative margins. The path bound adapts to local contour characteristics, providing tight constraints where safe and relaxed constraints where geometry permits, thus maintaining both safety and flexibility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The path bound becomes dynamic by calculating collision-avoiding distances based on actual vehicle-contour-to-obstacle-contour geometry rather than static conservative offsets. The bound adapts to the dynamic spatial relationship between vehicle and obstacle contours, optimizing safety and flexibility for each specific scenario.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Adaptability or versatility

If path bound is set radically to maximize path freedom, then path planning flexibility improves, but collision risk increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepath planning flexibilityVSAvoidcollision avoidance reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent incorporates feedback by using actual obstacle contour information and vehicle contour geometry to determine collision-avoiding distances. The path bound receives feedback from the spatial relationship between contours, ensuring that flexibility is granted only where geometric analysis confirms safety, thus preventing radical but unsafe path expansions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The method performs preliminary action by pre-calculating collision-avoiding distances based on contour geometry before final path planning decisions are made. This advance geometric analysis ensures that subsequent path planning operates within pre-validated safe boundaries, preventing overly radical paths from being selected.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentEP4335710B1Traveling path boundary determination method and device
Publication Date: 2026.03.25 MOMENTA (SUZHOU) TECHNOLOGY CO LTD
  • EP4335710B1 patent drawingFigure 1~2
  • EP4335710B1 patent drawingFigure 3~4
  • EP4335710B1 patent drawingFigure 5~6

AI summary

The present invention provides a method and an apparatus for determining travel path bound, a vehicle, a storage medium and a terminal and relates to the field of self-driving technologies. The present invention mainly aims to solve the existing problem of the accuracy of performing path planning decision based on path bound in a large-curvature turning process. The method includes: under a first coordinate system, according to contour point positions respectively corresponding to a vehicle and an obstacle in a path trajectory, determining a collision-anticipated overlap corner position; based on a trajectory normal of the vehicle and the overlap corner position, determining a contour corner overlap line and a decision corner reference line; if a first intersection position between the contour corner overlap line and the decision corner reference line is not located on the contour edge, based on the overlap corner position, the decision corner reference line and contour corner positions on the contour corner overlap line, determining a collision-avoiding distance of the vehicle; under a second coordinate system, based on the collision-avoiding distance, generating a travel path bound.