U.S. patent application number 11/875152 was filed with the patent office on 2008-02-14 for vehicle collision avoidance system enhancement using in-car air bag deployment system.
Invention is credited to Gregory J. Boss, Rick A. Hamilton, II, James W. Seaman, Timothy M. Waters.
Application Number | 20080036579 11/875152 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 37678544 |
Filed Date | 2008-02-14 |
United States Patent
Application |
20080036579 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Boss; Gregory J. ; et
al. |
February 14, 2008 |
Vehicle Collision Avoidance System Enhancement Using In-Car Air Bag
Deployment System
Abstract
Peer-to-peer communications between vehicles providing warning
of a collision or near-collision event and/or collision avoidance
is controlled by otherwise underutilized air bag deployment
processors in respective vehicles. Direction of reception of
warning signals is used to selectively control relaying of warning
signals at differentiated warning levels, collision avoidance
actions and/or in-vehicle warning alarms to operators of vehicles
in the vicinity of an event.
Inventors: |
Boss; Gregory J.; (American
Fork, UT) ; Hamilton, II; Rick A.; (Charlottesville,
VA) ; Seaman; James W.; (Falls Church, VA) ;
Waters; Timothy M.; (Hiram, GA) |
Correspondence
Address: |
WHITHAM, CURTIS & CHRISTOFFERSON, P.C. (IBM)
11491 SUNSET HILLS ROAD
SUITE 340
RESTON
VA
20190
US
|
Family ID: |
37678544 |
Appl. No.: |
11/875152 |
Filed: |
October 19, 2007 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
11186532 |
Jul 21, 2005 |
|
|
|
11875152 |
Oct 19, 2007 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
340/435 ;
701/301 |
Current CPC
Class: |
B60T 2201/022 20130101;
B60R 21/0134 20130101; B60W 10/184 20130101; B60Q 9/008 20130101;
G08G 1/162 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
340/435 ;
701/301 |
International
Class: |
B60Q 1/00 20060101
B60Q001/00 |
Claims
1. An in-vehicle collision and warning system (IVCAWS) for a
vehicle comprising: a vehicle air bag collision protection system
including sensors and a processor, said processor being capable of
discriminating a collision, near-collision or dangerous condition;
means for transmitting a warning or information signal upon
detection of a said collision, near-collision or dangerous
condition; and means responsive to a received warning or
information signal for providing a warning to an operator of the
vehicle, and selectively relaying a warning or information signal
directionally.
2. An IVCAWS system as recited in claim 1, wherein said means
responsive to said received warning or information signal further
comprises: means for transmitting warning level information
indicating a number of time a warning or information signal has be
relayed.
3. An IVCAWS system as recited in claim 1, wherein said means
responsive to a received warning or information signal is
responsive to a direction of reception of said received warning or
information signal.
4. An IVCAWS system as recited in claim 3, wherein said warning to
an operator is responsive to a said direction of reception of said
warning signal.
5. An IVCAWS system as recited in claim 3, wherein said relaying of
a warning signal is responsive to a said direction of reception of
said warning signal.
6. An IVCAWS system as recited in claim 3, wherein said controlling
of said vehicle is responsive to a said direction of reception of
said warning signal.
7. An IVCAWS system as recited in claim 2, wherein said means
responsive to a received warning or information signal is
responsive to a direction of reception of said received warning or
information signal.
8. An IVCAWS system as recited in claim 7, wherein said warning to
an operator is responsive to a said direction of reception of said
warning or information signal.
9. An IVCAWS system as recited in claim 7, wherein said relaying of
a warning signal is responsive to a said direction of reception of
said warning or information signal.
10. An IVCAWS system as recited in claim 7, wherein said
controlling of said vehicle is responsive to a said direction of
reception of said warning or information signal.
11-15. (canceled)
16. An in-vehicle collision and warning system (IVCAWS) for a
vehicle comprising: a vehicle air bag collision protection system
including sensors and a processor, said processor being capable of
discriminating a collision, near-collision or dangerous condition;
means for transmitting a warning or information signal in a
selected direction upon detection of a collision, near-collision or
dangerous condition or in response to a directionally received
warning or information signal, said means for transmitting further
including means for transmitting warning level information
indicating a number of times a warning or information signal has be
relayed.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0001] 1. Field of the Invention
[0002] The present invention generally relates to collision
avoidance systems for vehicles and, more particularly, to
enhancements for collision avoidance and warning systems employing
in-car resources including air bag deployment systems.
[0003] 2. Description of the Prior Art
[0004] The number of vehicles of all types which are in use is
increasing rapidly at the present time. As a result, congestion of
airways, waterways and, especially, roadways is also increasing and
leading to increased rates and severity of collisions between
vehicles. Further, the increase in numbers of vehicles on roadways
is increasing more rapidly than it is economically possible to
increase transportation infrastructure (e.g. roads, aids to air and
water navigation, etc), leading to a need to use available routes,
especially roadways, more efficiently and, often, at a higher
population density of vehicles than can be safely accommodated by
unassisted human operators of vehicles at the present state of the
art.
[0005] Vehicle collisions are occurring with increasing frequency
and severity, often caused by sudden slowing or stopping of traffic
flow due to congestion or other collisions or accidents, possibly
involving adverse weather conditions. Accidents caused by such
conditions often involve multiple vehicles due to the inability of
trailing drivers to comprehend and react to sudden changes in
traffic conditions and vehicle speed. The injuries, fatalities and
financial and economic repercussions are thus greatly and
unnecessarily increased.
[0006] Accordingly, there has been much recent interest in
providing increased protection for vehicle occupants such as
energy-absorbing structures and air bags as well as systems which
may assist in controlling the vehicle in response to detected
conditions. However, systems directed to these very different
purposes have necessarily been approached separately and with
varying degrees of success.
[0007] There are several types of in-vehicle collision avoidance
and warning system (IVCAWS) and collision avoidance systems (CAS)
currently in use. These systems generally use radar or ultra-sonic
emissions to detect vehicle distances, relative velocities and
stoppages. Some of these systems also exploit the availability of
global positioning systems (GPS) to determine the exact location of
vehicles relative to each other to enhance automatic intervention.
However, these latter systems are not in general use by the public
due to the cost of implementing such systems using conventional
methods while the compromise of effectiveness is unavoidable
without substantially universal use. Additionally the complexity of
all currently known CAS systems, particularly GPS systems, is
slowing industry and public adoption of such technology.
Specifically, the use of radar and ultrasonic rear-end collision
avoidance systems (RECAS) requires complex sensing equipment and
sensing algorithms to predict when a rear end collision may occur
or has occurred. The use of ultrasonic emissions to determine
vehicle position relative to intersections is also known and, in
combination with ground sensors, could provide enhanced collision
avoidance protection. However, any CAS system which is not wholly
contained within the vehicle, including use of GPS systems, must be
included in the transportation infrastructure and carries
substantial cost and delays in construction and implementation at a
time when resources allocable to construction of transportation
infrastructure are often scarce. Further, known CAS systems of all
types, have limited effectiveness and operate under the relatively
demanding constraint of having their effects limited to the vehicle
in which they are installed.
[0008] In regard to protection of vehicle occupants, air bags have
been the protection device of choice for well in excess of ten
years and have been increasingly employed and later required in
automobiles and some other vehicles. Initially, air bags were
employed for only the driver and for front end impact but later
extended to other passengers and other impact directions. While air
bags were initially implemented with relatively crude mechanical
devices, microprocessors are now currently used to provide for
consideration of more input data, beyond an actual impact
previously sensed, to determine when an air bag should be
deployed.
[0009] Such microprocessors, at the present time, are capable of
collecting and storing at least a brief history of deceleration
characteristics of the vehicle as well as inputs from a speed
sensor, gyroscopic sensors and collision sensors to avoid deploying
an air bag when deployment is not needed, such as low speed
collisions, intense braking of otherwise normal driving and the
like. Current air bag deployment processors employ continuous
sensor sampling with a storage window of a few milliseconds up to
about fifty milliseconds or somewhat longer. If the air bag is
actually deployed, the air bag processor is generally arranged to
store sensor input for later analysis by law enforcement officials
and insurance adjusters to determine the circumstances of the
collision although the saved information for such a purpose is very
limited. Nevertheless, while the air bag deployment system is
wholly contained within the vehicle, at the current state of the
art, it has no function in collision avoidance.
[0010] Some forms of signaling between vehicles are known and may
vary greatly in complexity and functionality from well-known,
simple and ubiquitous audible horns to radio communications. For
Example, U.S. Pat. No. 6,275,733B1 to Lemelson et al. suggests
using radio transmissions from one vehicle to indicate a warning to
a driver of an adjacent vehicle or control internal and/or external
warning signals or indicators and to signal to police. However,
such systems are complex in regard to collision avoidance in the
vehicle in which it is installed (this particular system utilizing
a dedicated processor and supporting an auto-pilot mode in response
to an expanded array of condition sensors of additional types not
generally present on currently available vehicles) and do not
support collision avoidance systems in other vehicles beyond a very
rudimentary level of alerting drivers of adjacent and following
vehicles of a dangerous condition and relying on the alerted
drivers to take appropriate action.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0011] It is therefore an object of the present invention to
provide enhancements for collision avoidance systems without
necessitating use of extravehicular resources, such as ground
sensors, GPS or the like and which may be implemented at low cost
by utilizing air bag deployment processors while providing
signaling and control between vehicles.
[0012] It is a another object of the invention to provide
enhancements of air bag deployment systems and improve collection
of information which may be useful in analyzing an accident or
collision.
[0013] It is a further object of the invention to provide the
ability to communicate relative location specific information,
including vehicle control information, to vehicles in front of,
behind and to the right and left of a given vehicle which may be
subject to or present dangerous conditions and to relay similar
location specific information to yet further vehicles in a
non-interfering, network-like fashion.
[0014] In order to accomplish these and other objects of the
invention, an in-vehicle collision and warning system (IVCAWS) is
provided including a vehicle air bag collision protection system
including sensors and a processor capable of discriminating a
collision, near-collision or dangerous condition, a signalling
arrangement for transmitting a warning or information signal upon
detection of a collision, near-collision or dangerous condition, a
receiver arrangement responsive to a received warning or
information signal for providing a warning to an operator of the
vehicle, relaying a warning or information signal, and/or
controlling the vehicle for collision avoidance.
[0015] In accordance with another aspect of the invention, a method
of in-vehicle collision avoidance and warning comprising steps of
predicting an event in an originating vehicle using an air bag
deployment processor, transmitting a warning signal to another
vehicle, directionally receiving the warning signal at that
vehicle, and selectively and directionally relaying the warning
signal at a different warning level to other vehicles responsive to
a direction of reception of said directionally receiving step.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0016] The foregoing and other objects, aspects and advantages will
be better understood from the following detailed description of a
preferred embodiment of the invention with reference to the
drawings, in which:
[0017] FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram of an in-vehicle
collision avoidance and warning system (IVCAWS) in accordance with
the present invention,
[0018] FIG. 1A illustrates an accident scenario and relay
transmission of inter-vehicle communications,
[0019] FIGS. 2 and 3 are flow charts illustrating exemplary
sequences of IVCAWS operations in accordance with the invention,
and
[0020] FIG. 4 is a table representing preferred responses based on
directionality and warning level of peer-to-peer communications in
accordance with the invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF A PREFERRED EMBODIMENT OF THE INVENTION
[0021] Referring now to the drawings, and more particularly to FIG.
1, there is shown a high level block diagram of the in-vehicle
collision avoidance and warning system (IVCAWS) in accordance with
the invention. As alluded to above, the effectiveness of any
collision avoidance and warning system (CAWS) depends on
communications between vehicles to provide early warning and/or to
begin automatic vehicle control as early as possible. Communication
between vehicles, in turn, depends on similarly equipping most, if
not all, vehicles with CAWS systems which operate similarly and are
compatible with each other. To achieve this latter condition, the
invention exploits the capabilities of processors used to deploy
air bags which are already present in most vehicles. Therefore, the
cost of providing the invention in a vehicle, as original equipment
or by retrofitting, is very much reduced and may be limited to
essentially the cost of radio transmitters and receivers and the
provision of sufficient memory for that processor to expand the
sampling period to about one second or, optionally, longer (and, as
a perfecting feature of the invention, to provide for in-vehicle
messages using voice synthesis and/or extra-vehicular (e.g. coded)
messages for peer-to-peer transmission) if not already available in
the air bag deployment system. The additional memory, if needed
beyond original vehicle equipment, will also provide the additional
benefit of vehicle condition recording immediately prior to any
accident or collision. The remainder of the system in accordance
with the invention may be implemented principally in software.
Accordingly, the invention can be retrofit into existing air bag
systems easily and economically to support near-universal
employment of the invention to further support high levels of
effectiveness. This important feature of the invention is
particularly illustrated in FIG. 1. However, while some of the
elements of FIG. 1 are indicated as "existing" it should be
understood that no portion of FIG. 1 or any other Figure is
admitted to be prior art.
[0022] By way of basic introduction, FIG. 1 is intended to
illustrate several aspects of a preferred form of the invention
which will be discussed in greater detail below. In particular, the
invention preferably employs multiple, directional transmitters and
receivers so that not only can a direction of reception be
discriminated and different messages can be transmitted in
particular directions and with transmitters having different ranges
to better accommodate traffic scenarios. Conversely, the
illustration of FIG. 1 is intended to indicate that the invention
is preferably configured to operate among multiple vehicles which
may be arrayed in any arbitrary spatial relationship to each other.
Further, as will be evident from FIG. 1, different vehicles may be
differently equipped and employ different combinations of elements
in various implementations of the invention; the only required
common feature being the signaling frequency. The system need not
be confined to any specific wireless frequency or medium (e.g.
radio, microwave, ultrasonic acoustic waves, etc.) by may, and
preferably employ a plurality of frequencies and media. These
applications of the invention to vehicles will be discussed in more
detail below and many variations thereon will be evident to those
skilled in the art.
[0023] However, as a matter of ease and economy of deployment of
the system in accordance with the invention, FIG. 1 also indicates
that a substantial portion of the hardware required is already
available (and under-utilized) in many if not most vehicles in
current use. Specifically chain lines 100 within the depictions of
vehicles 1 and 2 delineate the hardware generally present in
vehicles manufactured within the past few years. In regard to
vehicle 1, while air bag deployment arrangements were initially,
when introduced more than ten years ago, had comparatively very
primitive sensors (e.g. mercury switches) and deployment systems,
erroneous deployments have led to much more sophisticated
deployment systems including sophisticated processing of data
derived from a variety of sensors such as collision sensors 110,
gyroscopic deceleration (and possibly other motion) sensors 120 and
wheel speed indicators 130 and possibly others as inputs to
processor 200 which determines whether or not an air bag (or which
air bags of a plurality of air bags) should be deployed at any
given time. More or fewer sensors of these or other types (such as
for detecting sharp or sudden steering to the left or right or
movement to the left or right not correlated with steering) may be
deployed on a given vehicle and all such sensors are collectively
illustrated at 150 of Vehicle 2. Similarly, recently manufactured
vehicles will generally have some portion of the array of response
systems generally indicated in regard to Vehicle 2 as an audible
alert system 410 to provide audible alarm messages to the vehicle
operator or possibly to other personnel or vehicles in the vicinity
through a speaker system (e.g. by voice synthesis, warning tone(s)
or the like), horn or buzzer or the like, collectively illustrated
at 420. Some degree of automatic collision avoidance logic 430 may
be provided and implemented through an anti-lock braking system and
possibly other arrangements such as steering wheel shakers
prompting or urging but not necessarily compelling or controlling a
particular steering action on the part of the driver/operator.
[0024] Chain lines 100 in vehicles 1 and 2 are depicted as passing
through the air bag deployment logic processors 200. As alluded to
above, such processors are now generally provided but underutilized
to provide an essentially binary decision as to whether or not an
air bag should be deployed. It is an important feature of the
invention that the hardware of the existing processor can generally
be used with only software modification and, possibly, augmentation
of memory to develop substantial and flexible CAWS functionality
extending over a plurality of vehicles and which can be readily
expanded as other technologies for collision avoidance become
available.
[0025] It will be appreciated from the system architecture
illustrated in FIG. 1 that the principal hardware required by the
invention is transmitters and receivers 300 providing an additional
input to and receiving control and/or message signals from
processors 200. The receiver also preferably includes a signal
strength measurement or other ranging arrangement to obtain a
general indication of distance from the transmitter of the received
signal as well as evaluation of whether or not the signal is
received over a signal path which includes a reflection of the
transmitted signal energy so that the response of the system to
redundant/re-transmitted signals (e.g. received by reflection) can
be avoided. It is also preferred to limit energy of transmitted
signals to limit reflections and facilitate ranging at receivers
with relatively simple signal strength or other signal reception
parameter (e.g. signal to noise ratio) detection arrangements. It
is also preferred to provide for directional transmission and
reception of signals over at least four discrete channels oriented
to the front/fore, rear/aft, left and right of each vehicle. The
received signals can be considered as long range and/or
extra-vehicular inputs in parallel with the on-board condition
sensors 150 and are processed in combination therewith to determine
not only corrective action to be taken and/or warnings to be issued
but also additional signals to be transmitted and thus relayed to
other vehicles for similar processing in those vehicles and which
may evoke an entirely different response in such other
vehicles.
[0026] For example, referring to FIG. 1A, assume a crash occurs
between cars 1 and 2, the crash origination, and that the invention
is provided in at least one of them. The in-vehicle collision and
warning system (IVCAWS) of the present invention will transmit a
crash signal prior to deployment of the air bag immediately prior
to a collision. This signal will be received within the limited
transmission range by car 3 and car 5 and read as a "level 1"
transmission based on proximity (e.g. signal strength), the signal
indicating crash origination, lack of secondary transmission or the
like, or the detected nature of the crash or a combination
thereof). The respective IVCAWS systems in car 3 and car 5 will do
one or more of the following:
[0027] 1.) Emit an audible buzzer/alarm,
[0028] 2.) depress the brake pedal,
[0029] 3.) retransmit the "level 1" signal as a "level 2" signal
(which may reflect the particular stage of relay hierarchy and/or a
lesser degree of proximity in terms of number of intervening
vehicle and the originating vehicle) to other vehicles in, for
example, a twenty-five yard radius.
[0030] Car 4 and car 6 will receive the "level 2" signal and do one
or more of the following:
[0031] 1.) Emit an audible buzzer/alarm,
[0032] 2.) depress the brake pedal,
[0033] 3.) retransmit the "level 2" signal as a "level 3" warning
signal (which, again, may indicate the particular stage of relay
hierarchy and/or an even lesser degree of proximity) to other
vehicles in, for example, a twenty-five yard radius. Thus, car 7
(e.g. well beyond the range of the signal from car 1 or car 2 will
detect the warning signal and take a generally lesser response such
as only providing an audible warning, possibly including some
collision avoidance action such as automatic braking in car 7 and
suggesting acceleration in car 6.
[0034] It should be noted that the choice of actions taken in each
of cars 3-7, respectively, can generally be made based upon the
directionality, ranging of the received signal and/or level of the
warning signal which may also indicate distance and/or the number
of intervening vehicles. For example, since cars 3 and 4 are behind
the collision and could potentially become involved in it (e.g. as
a so-called chain reaction collision) and receive the "level 1"
signal from the front (or side for car 3), some collision avoidance
function such as braking or providing a steering prompt would
generally be applied in both cars (possibly differentiated by the
difference between response to a "level 1" and a "level 2" signal
or directionality of signal reception while in cars 5 and 6, in
front of the collision and receiving the "level 1" or "level 2"
warning signal from the rear, may receive only an audible prompt to
accelerate or to be alert for emergency vehicles and/or to avoid
each other while doing so. Again, the response may be different
between cars 5 and 6 based on whether a "level 1" or "level 2"
signal is received and/or the ranging detected.
[0035] It should be noted that this example of a peer-to-peer
warning communication system in accordance with the invention
provides three levels of notification but the number of relayed
levels could be fewer or extended, as desired, to cover a desired
distance range (e.g. one-quarter or one-half mile, particularly to
the rear of the collision) and the range and number of levels may
be made variable depending on detected conditions such as speed or
braking history (which may be indicative of traffic congestion). It
is considered preferable to maintain information regarding the
level/number of retransmissions and to possibly reflect such
information in audible warnings as well as approximating distances
from the crash origination but it is considered to be unnecessary
to otherwise differentiate the responses beyond a certain level
number (e.g. beyond "level 3" or so where only audible warnings but
not collision avoidance control are likely to be of use and/or
beyond level 10, warning signals should not be further propagated
as warnings but only as driver information). It should also be
noted that the example in FIG. 1A is not limited to a "crash"
situation but could similarly apply to a "near-crash" situation
such as severe braking or swerving of a single vehicle to avoid a
deer, aggressive driver or the like or even dangerous driving
conditions such as spillage, obstacles or so-called "tail-gating"
which increases the likelihood of some crash or presents a
hazard.
[0036] The sequence and an exemplary timing of operation of the
IVCAWS system in accordance with the invention is shown in FIG. 2.
Beginning in a normal state at 505 with all sensor outputs within
nominal values, at T-200 ms a vehicle which will be involved in an
accident at time T=0 and which will be referred to as a target
vehicle detects operator depression of the brake pedal as shown at
510. As shown at 515, at T-100 ms, rapid deceleration with intense
braking is detected. While a collision may be predictable at this
point, deployment of the air bag would be premature but, as shown
at 520, at T-98 ms, the IVCAWS in accordance with the invention is
activated (e.g. above the stand-by state). Thus, at T-97 ms, the
IVCAWS transmits a warning signal to vehicles in the immediate
vicinity (525). The operation of the IVCAWS system in other
vehicles will be discussed in greater detail below, beginning with
step 550. However, it is important to note that it is possible for
the invention to discriminate a problem and to begin distribution
of information and control signals through a peer-to-peer wireless
network within a very short period of time and typically less than
half the time between initial condition detection and air bag
deployment in the target vehicle. Further, it is important to
understand that peer-to-peer communications in accordance with the
invention are initiated and completed well before any need for air
bag deployment and cannot interfere with air bag deployment and,
moreover, is performed while the air bag deployment processor
otherwise would be essentially in a wait state between detection of
an abnormal condition and the onset of a collision (e.g. at T-2 ms)
and thus communications in accordance with the invention can be
executed as an intermediate action during a period when the
processor is greatly underutilized and indicating that no
additional processing power is required for implementing the
invention. It is also important to note that the communication
branches very quickly at about two to three milliseconds per
distribution level which would allow warning through twenty levels
or more prior to an actual crash occurrence.
[0037] Later, in the target vehicle, at T-3 ms further rapid
deceleration is detected and the collision sensor is activated
(530), causing the air bag to deploy at T-2 ms (535) and at T=0 the
shock and deceleration from the collision impact (540) is
propagated back to the passenger compartment of the vehicle where
the air bag is already deployed to protect the occupants.
[0038] In surrounding vehicles, as shown at 550, the IVCAWS in
surrounding vehicles receives the transmission from the target
vehicle at T-95 ms and retransmits the level 1 signal received as a
level 2 signal at T-95 ms, as shown at 555 to cause another level
of peer-to-peer communication branching 580, 590, as before, but
with a different branching level identified in the signal. An
audible alert 560 is begun within a few milliseconds followed
shortly thereafter by the onset of application of brakes as a
collision avoidance action at, for example, T-80. Thus, collision
avoidance is begun in adjacent vehicles well before the collision
involving the target vehicle takes place. This action can
supplement and accelerate the effects of the operator response
(generally delayed by a reaction time of more than 100 ms) such
that full braking may be achieved quickly (e.g. T+100 ms as shown
at 570). Similar actions propagate rapidly through the wireless
peer-to-peer network of surrounding vehicles in a spatially
expanding manner initiating repetitions of the actions indicated by
bracket 590, although the sequence may be truncated as the level
number increases through multiple transmissions and increasingly
remote vehicles are contacted.
[0039] A variation of this sequence illustrating some additional
perfecting features and preferred modifications for near collisions
and dangerous conditions (such as tail-gating) alluded to above is
shown in FIG. 3. At 605, the vehicle is continually monitoring
conditions including, proximity to other vehicles as well as
conditions alluded to above and experiences a rapid deceleration. A
near-collision or dangerous condition is determined by suitable
programming of the air bag deployment processor, details of which
are unimportant to the successful practice of the invention, as
shown at 610. Once such a condition is determined, a level 1
warning is sent to surrounding vehicles (615) and detection of
warning signals from other vehicles is suppressed (620) for a short
period of time (e.g. thirty to sixty seconds). This is done since
the vehicle is the possible origination of the warning and is at
greatest risk while other vehicles are necessarily more remote.
Additionally, it is desirable that the response speed of the system
be maintained as short as possible and it is preferable to avoid
making more complex responses which consider additional transmitted
peer-to-peer warning messages that are less likely to be relevant.
On the other hand, it may be preferable to allow detection of a
level 1 collision signal or signals above a certain level over
which a current dangerous condition warning may be redundant. The
particular arrangement employed in this regard is considered a
perfecting feature of the basic invention and unnecessary to the
successful practice thereof.
[0040] The near collision or dangerous condition information is
transmitted at 625 and received by another vehicle at 630 in which
the IVCAWS constantly monitors 635 for such warnings. It is
preferred that the nature of the warning be communicated (e.g.
"sudden braking", "close following", etc. which may be encoded as
desired or transmitted on unique frequencies; WiFi and WiMax
formats being generally preferred at the present time). Constant
monitoring for such warnings implies a continual testing for such a
received warning 640. If no warning is received, no action is
taken. However, if such a warning is received, IVCAWS interprets
the warning level, transmission proximity (if desired) and text,
code or frequency, as before at 645. It is also considered to be
desirable in view of the concerns discussed above, to provide for a
suppression of detection of additional signals for a short period
of time (e.g. 15 to 30 seconds or the time required for the
required response) to allow a simpler and more direct response to
be made to each warning, in turn, as such warnings are received
since they are not originating with the vehicle receiving such
signals, a slightly different rationale than that described above.
Since a wide variety of conditions (including collisions) could be
represented in accordance with the received message, it is
particularly desirable in this variant operational sequence to
alter response in accordance with the transmitted level information
of the warning signal, again recalling that the level will reflect
the distance from the originating vehicle, in terms of intervening
cars. Assuming the signal is received from the front or the side of
the vehicle (since response may be further modified or chosen in
accordance therewith, as described above), if the warning is level
1 (or any other level chosen), brakes are activated with medium
pressure to begin slowing the vehicle to increase distance from the
problem, a buzzer or other annunciator is sounded to alert the
driver and the warning is re-transmitted as level 2 or the next
lower level as shown at 670. However, if the received signal is of
level 2 or a lower level than that invoking operations 670, the
same actions are performed except for the retransmission of the
warning if the level is considered to be to remote in view of the
nature of the condition reflected in the warning as shown at 660.
That is, the decision to block retransmission of the warning can be
performed at any of a range of levels depending on the condition
and the level at which such discrimination is performed is at
operation 650.
[0041] In either of the above collision or near-collision scenarios
(hereinafter sometimes collectively referred to as an "event"), it
is considered important but not required to differentiate between
peer-to-peer signal communication directions. Such differentiation
of responses is generally illustrated in FIG. 4 in which the
responses encompass both of the foregoing scenarios. In this
regard, it is considered preferable to separately respond to and
control reception in four directions: fore, aft, left and right.
However, the invention can be successfully practiced with only
omnidirectional transmission and reception although practice of the
invention using two directions of transmission and reception (e.g.
longitudinal or parallel to vehicle movement and transverse or
generally orthogonal to the direction of vehicle movement) is
possible. Differentiation between fore and aft directions of
reception is more important than differentiation between left and
right directions of reception in order to avoid a collision
avoidance response of braking as a collision avoidance response
when a warning is received from behind a given vehicle. Therefore,
differentiation of three directions of signal reception is also
possible and preferable to any lesser number. If three directions
of signal reception as chosen for implementation of the invention,
it may be preferable to suppress reception from behind a vehicle
and to only transmit originating or relayed warnings to the rear of
a given vehicle. A minimum of four independent directions of signal
reception and response is preferred since it is generally
unnecessary to transmit a lower warning level signal in the
direction from which a higher warning level signal has been
received and response to any such transmission should generally be
suppressed as with suppression of response to reflected
transmissions as alluded to above.
[0042] As shown in FIG. 4, if a warning level 1 signal is received
from the front of a vehicle, it is preferred to provide an
in-vehicle warning, perform braking, preferably in accordance with
signal strength or other parameter, and re-transmit the warning
level 1 signal as a level 2 signal which may also be different for
either or both lateral directions from the re-transmitted signal to
at least the rear. If a warning level 1 signal is received from the
left or right or aft of the vehicle, the same or a similar (e.g.
also indicating the direction of reception corresponding to a
collision or near-collision) in-vehicle warning signal is provided
to an operator and re-transmission of the signal as a warning level
2 signal are preferably performed while braking is avoided but a
steering prompt may be optionally provided, preferably in response
to signal strength. If, on the other hand, a warning level 2 signal
is received from the front of the vehicle, an in-vehicle warning,
which may be different from the response to a warning level 1
signal, is provided together with a possibly lesser braking
response and re-transmission of a reduced level and possibly
generic (e.g. without a particular level) warning signal is
transmitted. If a warning level 2 signal is received from another
direction, an in-vehicle warning is preferably performed without
collision avoidance action being taken (since braking is
inappropriate and the collision or near-collision may be too remote
for a steering prompt to be appropriate) and a generic warning
signal is transmitted. If such a generic warning signal is received
from any direction only an in-vehicle warning is provided although
it may convey directional information. No collision avoidance
action is taken since the vehicle is, at this peer-to-peer
re-transmission level, too remote from the collision or
near-collision for any such action to be appropriate. Further, at
this or some arbitrarily further reduced warning level,
peer-to-peer re-transmission is truncated. In general, it is
considered preferable to truncated re-transmission at a lower level
in the lateral directions than in the forward direction and to
maintain re-transmission through a greatest number of warning
levels in the aft direction.
[0043] In view of the foregoing, it is seen that the invention can
be implemented to good effect with minimal hardware, basically
limited to peer-to-peer communication transmitters and receivers
and directional antennas and shielding with the remainder of the
invention implemented in software on existing air bag deployment
processors which are otherwise underutilized in current vehicles.
The invention, by providing for responsiveness to hierarchical
levels of peer-to-peer relaying of warning information, the nature
of the warning, proximity of the transmitters and direction of
reception can provide a wide variety of warnings of increased
specificity to the nature of the warning and relative location of
each vehicle to the originating vehicle for each vehicle receiving
a peer-to-peer transmission or re-transmission. Further, while it
is preferred to use short-range transmissions of warnings, the
geographical extent of warnings is limited only by predetermined
limits of relevance of the information or the absence of vehicles
to which the information would be relevant based on remoteness to
an event. Conversely, suitable reaction time for collision
avoidance would be provided to other vehicles which would not
receive a re-transmitted warning due to a large distance between
vehicles.
[0044] While the invention has been described in terms of a single
preferred embodiment and variations thereon, those skilled in the
art will recognize that the invention can be practiced with
modification within the spirit and scope of the appended
claims.
* * * * *