Work Vehicle Route Checks for Sensor Blind Spot Safety

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The existing automatic traveling systems for work vehicles face a trade-off between cost and safety, as the installation of obstacle sensors on all sides to eliminate blind spots increases costs, while reducing the number of sensors compromises safety, especially during tasks that require offset operations.

Innovation Solution

An automatic traveling system that includes a route acquisition processing unit and a report processing unit, which acquires a travel route for the work vehicle and reports whether it is safe to start automatic traveling if the route includes directions not covered by the installed obstacle sensors, allowing the operator to adjust or change the route to ensure safety without unnecessary sensor installations.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If obstacle sensors are installed on all sides of the work vehicle to eliminate blind spots, then safety is improved, but cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoidnumber of obstacle sensors
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies dynamics by making the detection area configurable based on the travel route. The system dynamically adjusts which directions require obstacle detection depending on whether the vehicle travels forward, backward, or performs offset operations. This allows the same physical sensor installation to adapt to different operational scenarios, resolving the contradiction by making sensor coverage dynamic rather than static.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the parameter of detection area configuration based on travel route parameters. By modifying which directions are monitored according to the planned route (forward, backward, offset), the system achieves comprehensive safety coverage without requiring sensors in all possible directions simultaneously. This parameter-based adaptation resolves the contradiction between complete coverage and sensor quantity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Quantity of substance

If the number of obstacle sensors is reduced to lower cost, then cost decreases, but safety is reduced due to increased blind spots

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenumber of obstacle sensorsVSAvoidsafety
Core Design Contradiction:
Quantity of substanceVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent makes the obstacle detection system universal by configuring the detection area according to the specific travel route requirements. The same sensor installation serves multiple functions: detecting obstacles during forward travel, backward travel, and offset operations, depending on how the detection area is configured for each route type. This multi-functionality allows reduced sensor quantity while maintaining safety across diverse operational scenarios.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The system resolves the contradiction by changing detection parameters (which directions are monitored) based on route parameters rather than changing physical sensor installation. This allows a reduced number of sensors to provide adequate coverage by dynamically adjusting their effective monitoring directions according to the travel route, maintaining safety while reducing cost.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If obstacle sensors are installed in the work machine to eliminate blind spots during offset operations, then safety is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoidsensor installation configuration
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts the detection area configuration from the physical sensor installation. Instead of adding sensors to the work machine to cover offset blind spots, the system extracts and reconfigures the virtual detection area based on the travel route. This separation allows the same physical sensors to serve different directional requirements through software configuration rather than physical redistribution, reducing device complexity while maintaining safety.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

4Adaptability or versatility

If comprehensive sensor coverage is implemented to handle all tasks, then adaptability is improved, but cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecoverage for all tasksVSAvoidnumber of obstacle sensors
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent achieves comprehensive adaptability through dynamic configuration of the detection area based on the specific travel route. Rather than installing sensors for all possible directions simultaneously, the system dynamically activates detection in the directions relevant to the current task (forward, backward, or offset operations). This dynamic adaptation provides versatile coverage across all tasks without requiring comprehensive permanent sensor installation in all directions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentUS20240004390A1Automatic traveling system, automatic traveling method, and automatic traveling program
Publication Date: 2024.01.04 YANMAR HLDG CO LTD
  • US20240004390A1 patent drawing
  • US20240004390A1 patent drawing
  • US20240004390A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A route acquisition processing unit acquires a travel route for a work vehicle. A report processing unit provides a report of an inquiry as to whether or not automatic traveling of the work vehicle is to be started in the case when the travel route acquired by the route acquisition unit includes a first travel route that goes in a direction different from that of a detection area of an obstacle sensor installed in the work vehicle to detect obstacles around the work vehicle.