Modern vehicles include computer systems for controlling engine emissions, vehicle braking, and a variety of other items. The systems require data in order to function, such as oxygen level data for controlling engine emissions and wheel speed data for controlling braking. This data is generally supplied by sensors located throughout the vehicle. To ensure the integrity of the data provided by the sensors, controllers perform malfunction testing on the sensors (or the signals or data the sensors provide). If a sensor malfunction is detected (in other words, there is an error in the sensor output or sensor data), a warning light or similar indicator can be activated.
While current vehicle systems are designed to monitor the functioning or operation of vehicle sensors and determine when a sensor malfunction occurs, such systems lack, at least in general, robust abilities for determining when the sensor malfunction ends. For example, a sensor malfunction might be caused by a powerful source of electromagnetic interference (“EMI”). Such a circumstance might occur if a vehicle passes near an electrical power generation plant, a radar or broadcast installation, or similar location. Once the vehicle moves outside the range of the EMI, the output from the sensor might return to within an acceptable range. However, in many vehicles, once a sensor malfunction occurs, the only way in which the malfunction or error may be cleared is to have a mechanic or technician access the system, check its operation, and perform an act that resets the system or otherwise removes the error.
A check of the sensor signal based on a re-detection by the failure monitoring function can be used as a mechanism to determine if a sensor has returned to normal operation. However, “good checking” is more than this. In general, malfunction monitoring functions are designed to avoid misdetection. On the other hand, “good check” functions are, in general, designed to avoid a false good check, i.e., a good check function has smaller tolerances for deviations and fewer conditions on the driving situation to perform the evaluation. Or, in other words, the tolerances and conditions used in good checking are different than those used to detect a malfunction.
Embodiments of the invention provide a mechanism for automatically determining whether a malfunctioning sensor has returned to a normal or acceptable operating range. In the parlance of the inventors, embodiments of the invention perform a “good check” on the sensor to determine whether the sensor has returned to normal or acceptable operation after a malfunction has been detected. When a previously-malfunctioning sensor passes the “good check,” warning lights (or tell-tale) indicators are shut off and systems that relied upon information from the malfunctioning sensor return to normal operation.
In one embodiment, the invention provides a controller for determining whether a previously-detected, vehicle-sensor malfunction still exists. The controller includes an electronic, non-volatile memory and an electronic processing unit connected to the electronic, non-volatile memory. The electronic processing module includes a malfunction monitoring module, a failure handling module, and a signal checking module.
The malfunction monitoring module monitors the operation of a pressure sensor and generates a fault signal when the pressure sensor malfunctions. The fault signal contains fault information and causes a tell-tale indicator to be activated or a vehicle control system (such as an engine control system, traction control system, vehicle stability system or the like) to modify its operation from a first operating state to a second operating state. The failure handling module stores the fault information and corresponding drive cycle information in the electronic, non-volatile memory.
The signal checking module retrieves the drive cycle information from the electronic, non-volatile memory and performs a good check or signal check on information from the pressure sensor. The signal check verifies that a pressure sensor offset compensation function is active for a predetermined time and that a pressure sensor offset is less than a predetermined threshold. Alternatively, the signal check verifies that a test pulse on the pressure sensor completes successfully without generating a pressure sensor test pulse fault. If the pressure sensor passes the signal or good check, the signal checking module generates a reset signal that causes the tell-tale indicator to be deactivated, the vehicle control system to resume operation in the first operating state, or both.
In some embodiments, the signal checking module performs the first signal check on information from the pressure sensor by verifying that at least one pressure sensor offset compensation function is active for a predetermined active time and verifying that an offset value for the pressure sensor is less than a predetermined threshold. The signal checking module verifies that the at least one pressure sensor offset compensation function is active for the predetermined active time by verifying that a pressure sensor positive offset compensation function and a pressure sensor negative offset compensation function are active for the predetermined active time. The signal checking module performs the first signal check on the information from the pressure sensor by verifying that an absolute value of a difference between an actual value of the pressure sensor and the offset value for the pressure sensor is less than a predetermined failure amount. The signal checking module performs the first signal check on information from the pressure sensor while a vehicle monitored by the pressure sensor is traveling substantially forward on a substantially straight path. The signal checking module generates a reset signal if the pressure sensor passes the first signal check, the reset signal configured to cause at least one of the first tell-tale indicator to be deactivated and the first vehicle control system to resume operation in the first operating state.
In some embodiments, the malfunction monitoring module is configured to monitor the operation of a brake light switch and generate a second fault signal if the brake light switch malfunctions, the second fault signal containing second fault information and configured to cause at least one of a second tell-tale indicator to be activated and a second vehicle control system to modify its operation from a first operating state to a second operating state.
In some embodiments, the failure handling module causes second drive cycle information and second fault information to be stored in the electronic, non-volatile memory.
In some embodiments, the signal checking module retrieves the second drive cycle information and the second fault information from the electronic, non-volatile memory, performs a second signal check on information from the brake light switch, and if the pressure sensor passes the first signal check and the brake light switch passes the second signal check, generating a reset signal, the reset signal configured to cause at least one of the second tell-tale indicator to be deactivated and the second vehicle control system to resume operation in the first operating state. The signal checking module performs the second signal check on the information from the brake light switch by verifying that the brake light switch exhibits a predetermined pattern. The predetermined pattern includes a low signal for a predetermined time, then a high signal for a predetermined time, and then a second low signal for a predetermined time. The signal checking module performs the first signal check on the information from the pressure sensor by verifying that a pressure sensor test pulse completes successfully without generating a pressure sensor test pulse fault. The signal checking module performs the first signal check on the information from the pressure sensor while a vehicle monitored by the pressure sensor is traveling substantially forward on a substantially straight path or the vehicle monitored by the pressure sensor is substantially stationary.
In another embodiment, the invention provides a controller for determining whether a previously-detected, vehicle-sensor malfunction still exists. The controller includes an electronic, non-volatile memory and an electronic processing unit connected to the electronic, non-volatile memory. The electronic processing module includes a malfunction monitoring module, a failure handling module, and a signal checking module. The malfunction monitoring module monitors the operation of a pressure sensor and a brake light switch and generates a fault signal when the pressure sensor and the brake light switch malfunction. The fault signal contains fault information and causes a tell-tale indicator to be activated or a vehicle control system to modify its operation from a first operating state to a second operating state. The failure handling module stores the fault information and corresponding counter or cycle information (referred to as “drive cycle” information) in the electronic, non-volatile memory.
The signal checking module retrieves the drive cycle information from the electronic, non-volatile memory and performs a signal check on both the pressure sensor and the brake light switch. The signal check executed on the pressure sensor verifies that a pressure sensor offset compensation function is active for a predetermined time and that a pressure sensor offset is less than a predetermined threshold. The signal check executed on the brake light switch verifies that the brake light switch exhibits a predetermined pattern. If the pressure sensor and the brake light switch each pass their signal checks, the signal checking module generates a reset signal that causes the tell-tale indicator to be deactivated, causes the vehicle control system to resume operation in the first operating state, or both.
Other embodiments of the invention provide a method, executed by a controller including an electronic processing unit and an electronic, non-volatile memory, for determining whether a previously-detected, vehicle-sensor malfunction still exists. The method includes monitoring (with a malfunction monitoring module executed by the electronic processing unit) the operation of at least one of a pressure sensor and a brake light switch and generating a fault signal (containing fault information) when at least one of the pressure sensor and the brake light switch malfunctions. The method also includes activating a tell-tale indictor or modifying the operation of a vehicle control system from a first operating state to a second operating state when the fault signal is generated. In addition, the method includes storing the fault information and corresponding drive cycle information in the electronic, non-volatile memory using a failure handling module executed by the electronic processing unit.
The method also includes retrieving the drive cycle information and performing a signal check on information from at least one of the pressure sensor and the brake light switch. Performing a signal check on the pressure sensor includes verifying that a pressure sensor offset compensation function is active for a predetermined time and that a pressure sensor offset is less than a predetermined threshold or verifying that a pressure sensor pulse test completes successfully without generating a pressure sensor test pulse fault. Performing a signal check on the brake light switch includes verifying that the brake light switch exhibits a predetermined pattern. If at least one of the pressure sensor and the brake light switch pass their signal checks, a reset signal is generated by the signal checking module. The reset signal causes the tell-tale indicator to turn off, the vehicle control system to resume operation in the first operating state, or both.
In some embodiments, performing the signal check includes verifying that at least one pressure sensor offset compensation function is active for a predetermined active time and verifying that an offset value for the pressure sensor is less than a predetermined threshold. Verifying that at least one pressure sensor offset compensation function is active for the predetermined active time includes verifying that a pressure sensor positive offset compensation function and a pressure sensor negative offset compensation function are active for the predetermined active time. Performing the signal check includes verifying that an absolute value of a difference between an actual value of the pressure sensor and the offset value for the pressure sensor is less than a predetermined failure amount. Performing the signal check includes verifying that a pressure sensor test pulse completes successfully without generating a pressure sensor test pulse fault. Performing the signal check includes verifying that the brake light switch exhibits a predetermined pattern. Verifying that the brake light switch exhibits a predetermined pattern includes verifying that the brake light switch generates a low signal for a predetermined time, then a high signal for a predetermined time, and then a second low signal for a predetermined time. Performing the signal check includes performing the signal check while a vehicle monitored by the pressure sensor and the brake light switch is traveling substantially forward on a substantially straight path or is substantially stationary.
Other aspects of the invention will become apparent by consideration of the detailed description and accompanying drawings.
a-c illustrate a first brake light switch test of
a illustrates the values of a cycle flag, a monitoring flag, a detection flag, and a completion flag during the third pressure sensor signal check with a successful outcome (i.e., passed good check).
b illustrates the values of a cycle flag, a monitoring flag, a detection flag, and a completion flag during the third pressure sensor signal check with an unsuccessful outcome (i.e., failed good check).
Before any embodiments of the invention are explained in detail, it is to be understood that the invention is not limited in its application to the details of construction and the arrangement of components set forth in the following description or illustrated in the following drawings. The invention is capable of other embodiments and of being practiced or of being carried out in various ways.
It should also be noted that a plurality of hardware and software based devices, as well as a plurality of different structural components, may be utilized to implement the invention. Furthermore, and as described in subsequent paragraphs, the specific configurations illustrated in the drawings are intended to exemplify embodiments of the invention. Alternative configurations are possible.
As shown in
The BLS 18 is also connected to the bus 15 and sends information to other components also connected to the bus 15, such as the controller 16. The BLS 18 sends information over the bus 15 indicating whether the circuit between the BLS 18 and the brake lights 19 is complete (i.e., whether the brake lights are illuminated). For example, if the circuit is complete and the brake lights are being illuminated, the BLS 18 outputs a power or “high” signal to the bus 15. Alternatively, if the circuit is incomplete and the brake lights 19 are not being illuminated, the BLS 18 outputs a no-power or “low” signal to the bus 15.
As shown in
The EPU 34 receives the information from the input/output interface 32 and processes the information by executing one or more applications or modules. The applications or modules are stored in memory (such as EEPROM 36b). The EPU 34 also stores information (e.g., information received from the bus 15 or information generated as a result of executing instructions) in memory. For example, as described below, the EPU 34 stores drive cycle information and fault information in the EEPROM 36b.
The main function or purpose of the malfunction monitoring module 40 is to determine if a particular sensor is malfunctioning or faulty. For example, as mentioned above, if a sensor's offset becomes too large, the malfunction monitoring module 40 may determine that the sensor 20 is malfunctioning. A variety of other algorithms and techniques for determining whether a sensor is malfunction can also be used including those disclosed in, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 6,834,221. As shown in
As shown in
After obtaining them, the vehicle control system 44 determines how to handle the current faults. In some embodiments, the vehicle control system 44 activates one or more warning lights or tell-tales in the vehicle 10 (e.g., on the vehicle's dashboard or instrument panel) in response to the currently-detected faults. In some applications, the warning lights or tell-tales provide information to the vehicle operator regarding the one or more faulty sensors 20. In other applications, the warning lights or tell-tales provide information about a vehicle system. For example, if a faulty brake pressure sensor is detected, the vehicle may activate a warning light regarding the anti-lock braking system rather than activating a specific warning light regarding the brake pressure sensor. Thus, the warning light or tell tale may only provide general information to the driver regarding the existence of a fault, whereas the control system 44 knows the specific nature of the fault.
Although not strictly required, in almost all instances the vehicle control system 44 modifies its operation in response to faults determined by the malfunction monitoring module 40 in addition to activating a warning light or tell tale. For example, if a particular sensor 20 is malfunctioning, the vehicle control system 44 changes its operation from a first operating state (e.g., ON) to a second operating state (e.g., OFF). In the first or “normal” operating state, the vehicle control system 44 operates as intended or programmed using all the data it receives from the sensors 20. In the second operating state, the vehicle control system turns itself off (as noted) or, alternatively, operates in a state where information from faulty sensors is ignored, but control is still provided based on information from the remaining, non-malfunctioning sensors. Yet another option is for the vehicle control system 44 to operate in a manner in which some of its functionality or features are reduced. The factors determining the exact parameters of the second state of operation of the vehicle control system is a measure of the criticality or importance of the information provided by the malfunctioning sensor. For example, information from a yaw rate sensor may be critical to certain vehicle control functions (such as ESC), but may be unimportant or less critical to others (such as traction control). Thus, if a yaw rate sensor malfunction is detected, traction control may continue to function based on information from other sensors, but ESC might be turned off. If the vehicle control system 44 deactivates or modifies its functionality or other types of vehicle control or monitoring functionality, the vehicle control system 44 can activate one or more warning lights or tell-tales that warn the vehicle operator of the modified operating state.
The signal checking module 46 retrieves drive cycle information stored in the EEPROM 36b and performs various good checks or signal checks to determine whether a previously-detected sensor malfunction still exists. In some embodiments, the signal checking module 46 is initialized during each new ignition cycle and retrieves the stored drive cycle information upon each initialization. In other embodiments, the signal checking module 46 retrieves stored drive cycle information from memory at various times while the controller 16 is operating.
Performing a signal check includes testing current readings or information from a particular sensor 20. Therefore, the signal checking module 46 obtains current sensor readings from memory, the bus 15, the malfunction monitoring module 40, or from other components of the system 11. The current sensor readings include compensated or filtered sensor signals or information, raw sensor information, current sensor offsets, and/or other statistical information about a particular sensor 20. Once the signal checking module 46 obtains current sensor readings, the module 46 compares the information to one or more thresholds to determine whether a previously-detected fault still exists. The signal checking module 46 can also execute a test on a sensor by sending information to a sensor and observing the response.
If the signal checking module 46 determines that a previously-detected fault doesn't exist anymore, the module 46 resets the corresponding fault information and/or drive cycle information in memory. The signal checking module 46 resets the drive cycle information by generating a reset signal. The failure handling module 42 receives the reset signal and updates the fault information and/or drive cycle information stored in memory to indicate that the previously-detected fault no longer exists (e.g., by deleting the previous fault and/or drive cycle information or setting a fault bit or flag to an “okay” or “no fault” value). When the vehicle control system 44 subsequently requests the current faults from the failure handling module 42, the failure handling module 42 informs the vehicle control system 44 that the previously-detected fault no longer exists (e.g., by failing to list the fault as one of the current faults). The vehicle control system 44 re-assesses the current faults and, in some embodiments, deactivates a previously-activated warning light or tell-tale within the vehicle 10 and/or returns its operation back to a first or original operating state (e.g., an ON state).
On the other hand, if the signal checking module 46 determines that the previously-detected fault still exists, the signal checking module 46 sets the corresponding fault and/or drive cycle information in memory. By setting the corresponding fault and/or drive cycle information in memory, the signal checking module 46 ensures that the stored fault information and/or drive cycle information continues to indicate that the fault exists so that (1) the vehicle control system 44 is informed of the existence of the fault and (2) the signal checking module 46 will run another signal check on the fault during subsequent operation. The signal checking module 46 sets the fault and/or drive cycle information by generating a set signal. The failure handling module 42 receives the set signal and ensures that the fault information and/or drive cycle information in memory continues to indicate that the fault still exists. In other embodiments, the signal checking module 46 simply fails to reset the fault and/or drive cycle information (e.g., fails to generate and output a reset signal), which retains the fault and/or drive cycle information in the same state as before the signal checking module 46 performed its signal checks.
As shown in
If this flag is set, the signal checking module 46 executes a first pressure sensor test 54 (e.g., a pressure sensor offset test). Generally, the first pressure sensor test 54 determines whether one or more pressure sensor offset compensation functions have been active for a predetermined time and whether a current pressure sensor offset is less than a predetermined threshold. For example, as shown in
As part of the initial step 56, the signal checking module 46 also verifies that the absolute value of the difference between a current sensor reading from the pressure sensor 14a and a current pressure sensor offset is less than a predetermined failure amount (e.g., 0 to 100 bar, which varies based on the characteristics of the vehicle). By performing this check, the signal checking module 46 verifies that the pressure sensor offset has not grown as large as or larger than the actual pressure sensor readings. For example, if the pressure sensor's current sensor reading is 4 bar and the current pressure sensor offset is 7 bar (causing the compensated sensor signal output by the malfunction monitoring module 40 to be approximately 11 bar), the pressure sensor 14a is probably still malfunctioning because its offset is greatly changing its current sensor readings. This large offset probably indicates that the pressure sensor 14a is still malfunctioning and, therefore, needs to be serviced or replaced.
As shown in
Alternatively, if the signal checking module 46 determines that the proper pressure sensor offset compensation functions are active and the current pressure sensor reading and the current pressure sensor offset differ by less than the predetermined failure amount (step 56), the signal module 46 determines whether the proper pressure sensor offset compensation functions have been active for at least a predetermined active time (e.g., 0 to 120 seconds, which varies depending on the characteristics of the vehicle). As described above, the signal checking module 46 uses a pressure sensor offset active counter to track how long a compensation function has been active. The active counter is initialized to 0 seconds when a pressure sensor offset compensation function is activated and the signal checking module 46 or another component in the system 11 increments and decrements the counter accordingly.
If the pressure sensor offset active counter is set to less than the predetermined active time (step 62), the checking module 46 increments the counter (step 64). Next, the signal checking module 46 determines if the counter is set to at least the predetermined active time (step 66). If so, the signal checking module 46 also checks if the current pressure sensor offset is less than or equal to a predetermined threshold (e.g., 0 to 100 bar, which varies based on the characteristics of the vehicle) (step 66). If both conditions of step 66 are satisfied, the signal checking module 46 concludes that the previously-detected pressure sensor offset malfunction no longer exists. In other words, if the malfunction monitoring module 40 has been actively calculating an offset for the pressure sensor 14a for at least the predetermined active time and the current pressure sensor offset is less than the predetermined threshold, the signal checking module 46 concludes that a pressure sensor offset malfunction no longer exists.
As shown in
On the other hand, as shown in
As shown in
a-c illustrate the first BLS test 82, which determines whether the BLS 18 exhibits a predetermined pattern. The pattern includes a low signal, followed by a high signal, and followed by second low signal. It is to be understood that the second low signal may be substantially the same as the first signal or may vary therefrom. This particular pattern indicates that the BLS 18 is not stuck in a permanent high state. In some embodiments, the BLS 18 must exhibit each signal of the pattern for a predetermined time (e.g., 0 to 1 second, which varies based on the characteristics of the vehicle). The predetermined time may be the same for each signal of the pattern or may be different.
The signal checking module 46 uses a BLS “OK” Counter to detect the predetermined pattern. The BLS “OK” Counter includes a bit for each state of the predetermined pattern, and the signal checking module 46 sets each bit as it observes each state. Therefore, the BLS “OK” Counter includes 3 bits, wherein the bits represent whether the BLS 18 has demonstrated the first (low signal), second (high signal), and third (low signal) state of the desired pattern. Initially the BLS “OK” Counter bits is set to 000 (i.e., the decimal value of zero) to indicate that the BLS 18 has not yet demonstrated any of the states of the pattern. As the signal checking module 46 observes each state, the module 46 sets the corresponding bit. In particular, after the module 46 observes the first state of the pattern, the signal checking module 46 sets the first bit of the BLS “OK” Counter (i.e., bit 0) to “1,” which sets the BLS “OK” Counter to a decimal value of 1. Similarly, after the module 46 observes the second state of the pattern, the module 46 sets the second bit of the BLS “OK” Counter (i.e., bit 1) to “1,” which sets the BLS “OK” Counter to a decimal value of 3. Finally, after the module 46 observes the final state of the pattern, the module 46 set the third bit of the BLS “OK” Counter (i.e., bit 2) to “1,” which sets the BLS “OK” Counter to a decimal value of 7.
a illustrates the portion of the first BLS test 82 that determines whether the BLS 18 is demonstrating the first state of the desired pattern (i.e., a low signal). The signal checking module 46 starts by determining if the BLS “OK” Counter is set to the decimal value of 0 (step 90a). If the BLS “OK” Counter is not set to 0, the signal checking module 46 has already observed at least one of the states of the desired pattern, and the signal checking module 46 proceeds to check for other states of the pattern (see
If the BLS “OK” Counter does equal 0 (step 90a), the signal checking module 46 determines whether the BLS 18 is currently demonstrating a low signal (step 92a). If the BLS 18 is not currently outputting a low signal, the signal checking module resets a filter timer (step 94a) (whose function is described below) and ultimately exits the test 82. The test 82 may be subsequently re-initiated (e.g., in subsequent initiations of the signal checking module 46) to check for the first pattern state.
If, however, the BLS 18 is currently outputting a low signal (step 92a), the signal checking module 46 determines whether the BLS 18 has been outputting this signal for the predetermined time (step 96a). The signal checking module 46 uses a filter timer to track how long the BLS 18 outputs a particular signal. The filter timer is initially set to 0 when the test 82 is started and is reset after a particular pattern state is observed (see step 99a) or when a particular state is not initially observed (see step 94a). As shown in
However, if the BLS 18 has been outputting a low signal for at least the predetermined time (step 96a), the BLS 18 has satisfied the first state of the desired pattern and the signal checking module 46 sets a first bit (i.e., bit 0) of the BLS “OK” Counter to “1” (i.e., setting the BLS OK Counter to the decimal value of 1) (step 98a). In addition, the signal checking module 46 resets the filter timer (step 99a) and proceeds to check for the second state of the desired pattern (see
b illustrates the portion of the test 82 that determines whether the BLS 18 is outputting a high signal for at least the predetermined time and
Returning to
If tests 82 and 42 are not passed, the signal checking module 46 exits the signal check 80. By not resetting the BLS plausibility signal check flag before exiting the signal check 80, the signal checking module 46 retains the fault and/or drive cycle information stored in memory in the same state as before the signal checking module 46 executed the signal check 80. Alternatively, the signal checking module 46 may set the BLS plausibility signal check flag before exiting the second pressure sensor signal check 80 by generating a set signal. The failure handling module 42 receives the set signal and ensures that the fault information or drive cycle information stored in memory continues to indicate that the BLS versus pressure sensor plausibility malfunction exists.
As shown in
As shown in
In some embodiments, the signal checking module 46 executes particular signal checks during certain driving maneuvers. For example, the signal checking module 46 may execute the signal checks 50 and 100 when the vehicle 10 is traveling in a forward direction on a substantially straight path. The module 46 may execute the signal check 80 when the vehicle 10 is substantially stationary or when it is traveling in a forward direction on a substantially straight path. The signal checking module 46 may also execute other tests during a particular signal check or may only perform individual tests included in a particular signal check. For example, the signal checking module 46 may execute the first BLS test 82 as part of a signal check without also performing the first pressure sensor test 42, such as when the BLS 18 malfunctions but the pressure sensor 14a does not.
Thus, the invention provides, among other things, a controller for determining whether a previously-detected, vehicle sensor malfunction still exists by executing various signal checks using sensor-related information. Various features and advantages of the invention are set forth in the following claims.
The present application claims the benefit of prior filed U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/236,407 filed on Aug. 24, 2009, the entire content of which is hereby incorporated by reference. This application is related to the following U.S. Patent Applications: U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/860,362, filed on Aug. 20, 2010 entitled GOOD CHECKING FOR VEHICLE WHEEL SPEED SENSORS; and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/860,370, filed on Aug. 20, 2010 and entitled GOOD CHECKING FOR VEHICLE LONGITUDINAL ACCELERATION SENSOR; and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/860,376, filed on Aug. 20, 2010 and entitled GOOD CHECKING FOR VEHICLE LATERAL ACCELERATION SENSOR; and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/860,389, filed on Aug. 20, 2010 and entitled GOOD CHECKING FOR VEHICLE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/860,407, filed on Aug. 20, 2010 and entitled GOOD CHECKING FOR VEHICLE STEERING ANGLE SENSOR; and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/860,418, filed on Aug. 20, 2010 and entitled GOOD CHECKING FOR VEHICLE YAW RATE SENSOR.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3798596 | Sumiyoshi et al. | Mar 1974 | A |
3803425 | Carp | Apr 1974 | A |
3916375 | Sumiyoshi et al. | Oct 1975 | A |
4219244 | Griner et al. | Aug 1980 | A |
4233599 | Brearley | Nov 1980 | A |
4234866 | Kuroda et al. | Nov 1980 | A |
4379520 | Tomsu | Apr 1983 | A |
4395677 | Petersdorf | Jul 1983 | A |
4484119 | Kerr | Nov 1984 | A |
4497201 | Allen et al. | Feb 1985 | A |
4609905 | Uzzo | Sep 1986 | A |
4648662 | Fennel et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
4785295 | Fukui et al. | Nov 1988 | A |
4839811 | Kanegae et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4886291 | Okamoto | Dec 1989 | A |
4892101 | Cheung et al. | Jan 1990 | A |
4934474 | Sugasawa | Jun 1990 | A |
4953652 | Ohmura et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
4961144 | Yabe et al. | Oct 1990 | A |
4975897 | Tanahashi | Dec 1990 | A |
4996657 | Shiraishi et al. | Feb 1991 | A |
5008823 | Takahashi | Apr 1991 | A |
5014801 | Hirose | May 1991 | A |
5181011 | Okano | Jan 1993 | A |
5186153 | Steinbrenner et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5190522 | Wojcicki et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5200911 | Ishikawa et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5201380 | Callahan | Apr 1993 | A |
5271475 | Takeshita | Dec 1993 | A |
5282135 | Sato et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5283740 | Sato et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5305723 | Kadota | Apr 1994 | A |
5357141 | Nitschke et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5448480 | Rauner et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5457632 | Tagawa et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5473147 | Hoshino et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5481906 | Nagayoshi et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5532476 | Mikan | Jul 1996 | A |
5544073 | Piety et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5564429 | Bornn et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5572670 | Puckett | Nov 1996 | A |
5594228 | Swartz et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5636121 | Tsuyama et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5642180 | Yoshida | Jun 1997 | A |
5671981 | Sasaki et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5696690 | Richardson et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5707117 | Hu et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5710704 | Graber | Jan 1998 | A |
5712784 | Fendt et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5748483 | Richardson et al. | May 1998 | A |
5752208 | Lerner | May 1998 | A |
5899948 | Raphael et al. | May 1999 | A |
5928110 | Vornehm et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5959529 | Kail, IV | Sep 1999 | A |
6035693 | Horiuchi | Mar 2000 | A |
6134491 | Kawagoe et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6144904 | Tseng | Nov 2000 | A |
6198988 | Tseng | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6212465 | Sielagoski et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6225901 | Kail, IV | May 2001 | B1 |
6292733 | Sugiyama et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6301536 | Vaessen et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6305760 | Otake | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6354607 | Kawashima et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6408229 | Loudon et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6427102 | Ding | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6491357 | Holst | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6502025 | Kempen | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6519515 | Baumann et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6577948 | Skellenger et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6682153 | Okai | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6834221 | Jäger et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
7057503 | Watson | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7058490 | Kim | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7085642 | Samuel et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7191041 | von Schwertfuehrer et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7197917 | Hasegawa | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7200524 | Kang et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7286083 | Xie | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7823986 | Ruffer et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
8155823 | Itoh | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8159945 | Muro et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8260516 | Bechtler et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
20010044688 | Okita et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010051845 | Itoh | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020075137 | Hofbeck et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020101115 | Holst | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020113587 | Kim | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020189889 | Demerly | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030109939 | Burgdorf et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030149540 | Kachel et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20040026148 | Matsuno | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040030474 | Samuel et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040061500 | Lou et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040243287 | Yanaka et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050131602 | Souda | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050182555 | Yu et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050228546 | Naik et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060173584 | Einig et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060181066 | Andres et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20070129871 | Post, II et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070250183 | Howell et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070279207 | Clark et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070282558 | Sagisaka | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080059020 | Sato | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080097671 | Kojo et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080176122 | Wake et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080183350 | Noguchi | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080195275 | Kojo et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080209992 | Murayama | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20090055033 | Gansler et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090069978 | Inage | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090164059 | Takeda | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20100014302 | Okumura et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100138105 | Shibasaki et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100269500 | Ruffer et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100274436 | Kodaka et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20110066319 | Bechtler et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110066320 | Bechtler et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110066321 | Bechtler et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110068913 | Bechtler et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110071723 | Bechtler et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110071726 | Bechtler et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110071727 | Bechtler et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
19936596 | Jan 2001 | DE |
1227019 | Jul 2002 | EP |
1116563 | Feb 1986 | IT |
Entry |
---|
Office Action from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,362 dated Jul. 19, 2012 (23 pages). |
Harland, David M., Lorenz, Ralph D., “Space Systems Failures”, Springer Praxis Books, 2005, Part Two, 211-226, available at http://www.springerlink.com/content!n886138036412186/. |
Office Action from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,370 dated Jul. 5, 2012 (21 pages). |
Office Action from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,376 dated Aug. 3, 2012 (24 pages). |
Notice of Allowance from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,389 dated May 15, 2012 (8 pages). |
Office Action from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,407 dated Sep. 14, 2012 (18 pages). |
Office Action from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,418 dated Jul. 5, 2012 (23 pages). |
EP10173774 European Search Report dated Nov. 30, 2010, 5 pages. |
EP10173775 European Search Report dated Feb. 18, 2013, 2 pages. |
Notice of Allowance from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,376 dated Dec. 17, 2012 (11 pages). |
Notice of Allowance from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,362 dated Feb. 21, 2013 (11 pages). |
Final Rejection from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,370 dated Dec. 31, 2012 (22 pages). |
Final Rejection from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,407 dated Feb. 21, 2013 (28 pages). |
Final Rejection from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,418 dated Dec. 6, 2012 (7 pages). |
Notice of Allowance from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,418 dated Feb. 22, 2013 (14 pages). |
Notice of Allowance from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,370 dated Dec. 6, 2013 (12 pages). |
Final Rejection from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,407 dated Feb. 21, 2014 (9 pages). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110068913 A1 | Mar 2011 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61236407 | Aug 2009 | US |