Work Vehicle Obstacle Handover Control Across Sensor Blind Zones

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional automatic traveling systems for work vehicles experience unstable travel due to blind areas between detection zones, leading to unpredictable deceleration and acceleration cycles when obstacles enter and exit these zones, compromising safety and stability.

Innovation Solution

An automatic traveling system that utilizes multiple detection areas with non-detection zones, incorporating an acquisition, detection, and determination processing to continuously monitor obstacle movement and maintain travel restrictions until it is safe to resume normal operation.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Area of stationary object

If multiple detection areas are separated by a predetermined distance to cover wider areas, then the detection coverage is improved, but blind areas are created between detection areas causing unstable travel

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection coverage areaVSAvoidtravel stability
Core Design Contradiction:
Area of stationary objectVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The determination processing part performs preliminary assessment by predicting whether an obstacle will enter the second detection area before the vehicle reaches it. This advance prediction allows the traveling processing part to maintain travel restriction proactively, preventing the instability that would occur if reaction waited until obstacle entry into the second detection area.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The determination processing part acts as an intermediary between the detection processing part and traveling processing part. It receives detection information, predicts obstacle trajectory, and provides refined control decisions that account for the blind area gap, thereby mediating the transition between detection and execution while maintaining travel stability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If detection areas are placed closer together to eliminate blind areas, then travel stability is improved, but device complexity increases due to overlapping zones and coordination requirements

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetravel stabilityVSAvoiddetection system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The function of detecting and predicting obstacles in blind areas is extracted from the physical detection areas and assigned to the determination processing part. This allows detection areas to remain sparse and simple while the determination processing part compensates for blind areas through predictive algorithms, avoiding the complexity of dense sensor placement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces the mechanical approach of placing detection areas close together with an algorithmic approach using trajectory prediction. Instead of physically reducing the gap between detection areas, the determination processing part uses computational methods to predict obstacle movement and maintain appropriate travel restrictions, substituting mechanical density with informational processing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Speed

If travel restriction is canceled when obstacle leaves first detection area, then responsiveness is improved, but false normal travel occurs causing instability

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresponse speedVSAvoidtravel stability
Core Design Contradiction:
SpeedVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The determination processing part continuously monitors obstacle position and predicts future trajectory, providing feedback to the traveling processing part. This feedback loop ensures that travel restriction is maintained not just based on current obstacle position but also on predicted future position, preventing premature cancellation of travel restriction and the resulting instability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary prediction of obstacle trajectory to determine if the obstacle will enter the second detection area before making the decision to maintain or cancel travel restriction. This preliminary action prevents the responsiveness issue where travel restriction would be canceled too early, while still ensuring stable travel by maintaining restriction only when necessary.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentEP4256928B1Automatic traveling system, automatic traveling method, and automatic traveling program
Publication Date: 2026.01.28 YANMAR HLDG CO LTD
  • EP4256928B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4256928B1 patent drawingFigure 2~3
  • EP4256928B1 patent drawingFigure 4

AI summary

In the present invention, an acquisition processing part (111) acquires detection information from a first obstacle sensor which detects an obstacle in a first detection area, and a second obstacle sensor which detects an obstacle in a second detection area. When an obstacle is detected in the first detection area, a traveling processing part (113) executes travel restriction of a work vehicle (10). When the obstacle enters a non-detection area from the first detection area in a state in which the work vehicle (10) is under the travel restriction, a determination processing part (114) determines whether or not the obstacle further enters the second detection area from the non-detection area. When it is determined that the obstacle enters the second detection area from the non-detection area, the traveling processing part (113) continues the travel restriction of the work vehicle (10).