Systems and methods for hazard mitigation

Patent metadata

Field	Value
Publication number	US-2017291602-A1
Application number	US-201615347573-A
Country	US
Kind code	A1
Filing date	Nov 9, 2016
Priority date	Apr 11, 2016
Publication date	Oct 12, 2017
Grant date	—

Abstract

A system and method to avoid collisions on highways, and to minimize the fatalities, injury, and damage when a collision is unavoidable. The system includes sensor means to detect other vehicles, and computing means to evaluate when a collision is imminent and to determine whether the collision is avoidable. If the collision is avoidable by a sequence of controlled accelerations and decelerations and steering, the system implements that sequence of actions automatically. If the collision is unavoidable, a different sequence is implemented to minimize the overall harm of the unavoidable collision. The system further includes indirect mitigation steps such as flashing the brake lights automatically. An optional post-collision strategy is implemented to prevent secondary collisions, particularly if the driver is incapacitated. Adjustment means enable the driver to set the type and timing of automatic interventions.

First claim

1 . A non-transitory computer readable medium, comprising instructions for causing a computing environment to perform a method for mitigating vehicle collisions, the method comprising:
detecting, with a sensor mounted on a subject vehicle, a second vehicle; calculating that a collision is imminent between the subject vehicle and the second vehicle; preparing a plurality of sequences of actions, each action comprising a period of acceleration or deceleration or steering of the subject vehicle for a particular time interval at a particular intensity; calculating whether the collision is avoidable or unavoidable, wherein the collision is avoidable if any of the sequences avoids the collision, and the collision is unavoidable if the collision cannot be avoided by implementing any of the sequences if the collision is avoidable, implementing a particular sequence that avoids the collision; and if the collision is unavoidable, calculating how much harm would result from a collision according to each of the sequences, and implementing a sequence associated with the least harm.

2 . The medium of claim 1 , wherein the detecting includes detecting position and velocity and acceleration data about the second vehicle and calculating a projected position of the second vehicle as a function of time.

3 . The medium of claim 2 , further comprising storing the position and velocity and acceleration data about the second vehicle in a non-transitory computer readable medium.

4 . (canceled)

5 . The medium of claim 1 , wherein the calculating that a collision is imminent includes determining if the subject vehicle and the second vehicle will pass within a predetermined radius of each other in the absence of alterations of greater than plus or minus 5% in velocity or direction of the subject vehicle and the second vehicle.

6 . (canceled)

7 . The medium of claim 1 , wherein the calculating that a collision is imminent includes:
analyzing data from one or more external sensors, thereby determining a position and a velocity and an acceleration of the second vehicle; analyzing data from one or more internal sensors, thereby determining a position and a velocity and an acceleration of the subject vehicle; calculating, from the position and velocity and acceleration of the second vehicle, and from the position and velocity and acceleration of the subject vehicle, future values of a separation distance between the subject vehicle and the second vehicle; calculating from the future values a collision time at which the separation distance is less than a predetermined separation distance; and determining, if the collision time is less than a predetermined time limit, that the collision is imminent.

8 . (canceled)

9 . The medium of claim 1 , wherein:
the sequences of actions include at least one sequence that was stored in non-transient memory before the second vehicle was detected; and the second set of one or more sequential accelerations or decelerations or steering actions is calculated to result in less harm than any other set of one or more sequential accelerations or decelerations or steering actions.

10 . The medium of claim 1 , further comprising repeating one or more of the calculating steps responsive to further sensor data, the further sensor data being measured later in time than the sensor data on which the initial calculating was performed.

11 . The medium of claim 10 , further comprising:
while the particular sequence is being implemented, continuing to analyze further sensor data, thereby determining if the collision remains avoidable or unavoidable; if the continuing analysis indicates that an avoidable collision has become unavoidable, responsively implementing the particular sequence associated with the least harm; and if the continuing analysis indicates that an unavoidable collision has become avoidable, responsively implementing the particular sequence that avoids the collision.

12 . The medium of claim 1 , wherein the calculating that a collision is imminent includes:
measuring a position and a velocity and an acceleration of the second vehicle; calculating, from the position and velocity and acceleration of the second vehicle, future positions of the second vehicle, and if such future positions coincide with at least one future position of the subject vehicle, then determining that the collision is imminent; calculating a collision time at which the second vehicle will collide with the subject vehicle; and if the collision time is less than a predetermined threshold, determining that the collision is imminent.

13 . The medium of claim 1 , wherein the calculating if the collision is avoidable or unavoidable includes:
a. receiving capability-data about the subject vehicle, wherein the capability-data includes information on the maximum acceleration, and the maximum deceleration, and the maximum rate of steering that the subject vehicle is capable of; b. and analyzing, with the capability data, whether the imminent collision can be avoided by applying the maximum acceleration or the maximum deceleration or the maximum rate of steering to the subject vehicle, or by applying sequential combinations of accelerations, decelerations, and steering actions, based on one or more of the maximums.

14 . A non-transitory computer readable medium, comprising instructions for causing a computing environment to perform a method for mitigating vehicle collisions, the method comprising:
detecting, with a sensor mounted on a subject vehicle, a second vehicle, and calculating a projected course of the second vehicle; if the subject vehicle is projected to collide with the second vehicle, calculating a plurality of sets of sequential actions to avoid a collision between the subject vehicle and the second vehicle; if the subject vehicle, when accelerated according to a particular one of the sets of sequential actions, is projected to avoid colliding with the second vehicle, then implementing the one particular set of sequential actions; and if the subject vehicle, when accelerated according to each of the sets of sequential actions, is projected to collide with the second vehicle, then calculating how much harm would be caused by collisions according to each set of sequential actions, and implementing a particular set of sequential actions that would cause the least harm.

15 . The medium of claim 14 , wherein the first set of sequential actions comprises sequential accelerations or decelerations or steering actions of the subject vehicle, and wherein the second set of sequential actions comprises sequential accelerations or decelerations or steering actions of the subject vehicle, and wherein at least one of the sequential actions comprises a positive acceleration.

16 . (canceled)

17 . The method of claim 14 , wherein:
the first set of sequential actions includes a plurality of sequences which are all different from each other; the second set of sequential actions includes a plurality of sequences which are all different from each other and from any of the first set of sequences; and the second set of sequential actions minimizes the harm caused by the collision if, after the second set of sequential actions is implemented, an amount of harm caused by the collision is less than the harm resulting from any of the other sequential actions.

18 . (canceled)

19 . (canceled)

20 . (canceled)

21 . The medium of claim 14 , wherein implementing a particular set of sequential actions

Assignees

• Newman David E
• Massengill R Kemp

Inventors

• Newman David E
• Massengill R Kemp

Classifications

• B60W2554/00

  Input parameters relating to objects · CPC title

• B60W2554/801

  Lateral distance · CPC title

• B60W2554/4041

  Position · CPC title

• B60W2754/10

  Spatial relation or speed relative to objects · CPC title

• B60W2554/804

  Relative longitudinal speed · CPC title