The present invention relates to a system and method for determining whether a previously-detected vehicle sensor malfunction still exists.
Modern vehicles include a variety of sensors for sensing the operating conditions of a vehicle. Such sensors include wheel speed sensors, steering angle sensors, yaw rate sensors, lateral acceleration sensors, longitudinal acceleration sensors, brake light sensors, etc. Each of the sensors is connected to a vehicle control system, such as an electronic stability control (“ESC”) system, or one or more electronic control units (“ECUs”) within the vehicle. The ESC or the ECUs include combinations of hardware and software which determine the operating conditions of the vehicle and compensate or control the vehicle's motion accordingly. However, the sensors and, subsequently, the signals received from the sensors, are susceptible to malfunctions and/or signal corruption. The ECUs are able to detect when a sensor malfunction has occurred or if the signals received from the sensors are abnormal (i.e., outside of an expected range of values). In such situations, the sensor or sensors (or information therefrom) are disregarded or not used by the vehicle control system when controlling the vehicle. When a sensor fault or malfunction is detected, one or more indicators or tell-tales, such as a check engine light, are also activated or illuminated to indicate to a vehicle operator that a malfunction has occurred.
Embodiments of the invention relate to systems and methods for determining if a sensor fault or malfunction is persistent, or if the fault or malfunction no longer exists. Conventionally, when a sensor malfunction is detected, a vehicle control system ignores the signals received from the sensor or shuts down the affected vehicle subsystem until the vehicle and/or the sensors are serviced or replaced. However, based on vehicle and driving conditions, it is possible to diagnose whether a sensor malfunction is still present. One particular embodiment of the invention relates to a yaw rate sensor (“YRS”). A variety of possible YRS faults or malfunctions are able to render the signals received from the YRS incorrect or unreliable. For example, the signals from the YRS sometimes include implausible offsets, incorrect signs (e.g., a negative value instead of a positive value), signal rate errors, or implausible outputs with respect to other vehicle sensors, such as a steering angle sensor (“SAS”). In order to monitor such malfunctions, a plurality of good check functions are used to determine whether the malfunction(s) detected in the YRS signals still exist. If the malfunctions are no longer detected in the YRS signals, the vehicle control system returns to a first operational state or normal operational state with respect to the YRS. In the first operational state, the signals from the YRS are used to compensate or control the vehicle's motion. If the malfunction continues to be detected, the vehicle control system operates in a second operational state or malfunction state with respect to the YRS. In the second operational state, the signals from the YRS are not used to compensate or control the vehicle.
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.
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 memory. The electronic processing unit includes a malfunction monitoring module that monitors the operation of a YRS and generates a first fault signal when the YRS malfunctions. The first fault signal contains first fault information, causes at least one tell-tale indicator to be activated, and causes a vehicle control system to modify its operation from a first operating state to a second operating state. A failure handling module causes the first fault information to be stored in the memory, and a signal checking module retrieves the first fault information from the memory and performs a first signal check on information from the YRS.
In some embodiments, the vehicle control system does not use a signal from the yaw rate sensor to control a vehicle when in the second operating state. The signal checking module sets a flag to indicate to the failure handling module that the yaw rate sensor is no longer malfunctioning. The malfunction monitoring module generates the first fault signal when a yaw rate sensor offset variable exceeds a first predetermined yaw rate sensor offset threshold value.
In some embodiments, the signal checking module determines whether a signal from the yaw rate sensor has an incorrect sign. The signal checking module determines whether the yaw rate sensor is sending a plurality of signals at a rate different than a predetermined signal transmission rate. A signal from the yaw rate sensor is compared to a signal from a steering angle sensor. The vehicle control system modifies its operation from the second operating state back to the first operating state if the yaw rate sensor passes the first signal check.
In another embodiment, the invention provides 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 the steps of monitoring the operation of at least one YRS with a malfunction monitoring module, generating a fault signal containing fault information with the malfunction monitoring module when the at least one YRS malfunctions, and causing at least one 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 method also includes storing fault information in the memory with a failure handling module, retrieving the fault information from the memory, and performing a signal check on information from the at least one YRS with a signal checking module. A reset signal is generated by the signal checking module which causes the at least one tell-tale indictor to be deactivated and the vehicle control system to resume operation in the first operating state if the at least one YRS passes the signal check.
In some embodiments, the vehicle control system does not use a signal from the yaw rate sensor to control a vehicle when in the second operating state. A flag is set to indicate to the failure handling module that the yaw rate sensor is no longer malfunctioning.
In some embodiments, the malfunction monitoring module generates the fault signal when a yaw rate sensor offset variable exceeds a first predetermined yaw rate sensor offset threshold value. The controller determines whether a signal from the yaw rate sensor has an incorrect sign. The controller determines whether the yaw rate sensor is sending signals at a rate different than a predetermined signal transmission rate.
In some embodiments, a signal from the yaw rate sensor is compared to a signal from a steering angle sensor. The fault information includes an indication of a type of yaw rate sensor malfunction.
In another embodiment, the invention provides a vehicle that includes a plurality of vehicle sensors which provide a plurality of sensor signals to a vehicle control system. The vehicle control system controls the vehicle based at least in part on the plurality of sensor signals and switches from a first operating state to a second operating state when a malfunction in one or more of the vehicle sensors is detected. The vehicle includes at least one controller connected to the vehicle control system which includes an electronic memory and an electronic processing unit connected to the electronic memory. The electronic processing unit includes a malfunction monitoring module that activates at least one indicator when a YRS malfunction is detected, a failure handling module that stores a first set of fault information in the electronic memory when the YRS malfunction is detected, and a signal checking module that retrieves the set of fault information from the electronic memory and executes a first malfunction checking function to determine if the YRS malfunction is persistent. The vehicle control system modifies its operation from the second operating state to the first operating state when the YRS malfunction is not persistent. When operating in the first state, the vehicle control system uses signals from the YRS to compensate the motion of the vehicle. When operating in the second state, the vehicle control system does not use the signals from the YRS to compensate the motion of the vehicle.
In some embodiments, the vehicle control system is an electronic stability control system. The first set of fault information includes an indication of a type of yaw rate sensor malfunction. The electronic memory is an electronic, non-volatile memory.
Other aspects of the invention will become apparent by consideration of the detailed description and accompanying drawings.
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.
Embodiments of the invention described herein relate to good check functions for a vehicle control system, such as an electronic stability control (“ESC”) system. The good check functions are used to determine whether a malfunction previously detected in the signals received from a vehicle sensor still exists. If the malfunction is no longer detected in the sensor signals, the ESC system returns to a first operational state or normal operational state. In the first operational state, the signals from the sensor are used to compensate or control the vehicle's motion. If the malfunction continues to be detected, the ESC system operates in a second operational state or malfunction state. In the second operational state, the signals from the malfunctioning sensor are not used to compensate or control the vehicle.
The ECU 25 includes an input/output interface 60, an electronic processing unit (“EPU”) 65, and one or more memory modules, such as a random access memory (“RAM”) module 70 and an electronically erasable programmable read-only memory (“EEPROM”) module 75. The input/output interface 60 transmits and/or receives information over the bus 50. In some embodiments, the input/output interface 60 transmits and/or receives information directly to and from the sensors 55 rather than over a bus 50.
The EPU 65 receives information from the input/output interface 60 and processes the information by executing one or more applications or functions. The functions are stored in a memory, such as the EEPROM 75. The EPU 65 also stores information (e.g., information received from the bus 50 or information generated as a result of executing instructions) in memory. For example, as described below, the EPU 65 stores drive cycle or fault information in the EEPROM 75.
One of the primary functions of the malfunction monitoring module 100 is to determine whether a particular sensor is malfunctioning or faulty. For example, if a sensor offset becomes too large, the malfunction monitoring module 100 determines that the sensor is malfunctioning. As shown in
As shown in
After obtaining the previously-detected faults, the vehicle control system 110 activates one or more warning indicators or tell-tales in the vehicle 15 (e.g., on the vehicle's dashboard or instrument panel) in response to the detected faults. In some embodiments, the indicators provide information to the vehicle operator related to the one or more faulty sensors. In other embodiments, the indicators provide information related to a vehicle system. For example, if a faulty YRS is detected, the vehicle 15 activates a warning indicator or tell-tale related to an electronic stability control (“ESC”) system, rather than activating a specific warning light related to the YRS 20. As such, the indicator only provides information to the driver regarding the existence of a fault, whereas the vehicle control system 110 includes information related to the specific nature of the fault.
In most but not all instances, the vehicle control system 110 modifies its operation in response to faults detected by the malfunction monitoring module 100, in addition to activating a warning indicator. For example, if a particular sensor is malfunctioning, the vehicle control system 110 changes its operation from a first operating state (e.g., a state in which the particular sensor is used for vehicle control) to a second operating state (e.g., a state in which the particular sensor is not used for vehicle control). In the first or “normal” operating state, the vehicle control system 110 operates as intended or programmed using all of the data received from the sensors 55. In the second operating state, the vehicle control system 110 operates such that information from faulty sensors is ignored, but control is still provided based on information from the remaining, non-malfunctioning sensors. Alternatively, in the second operating state, the vehicle control system 110 is disabled and no vehicle control is provided, or the vehicle control system 110 is operated in a reduced operational state in which only some of its functionality or features are disabled. The functions and features which are disabled during the reduced operational state are selected based on the importance or critical nature of the information provided by the malfunctioning sensor. For example, information from the YRS is critical to vehicle control functions such as stability control, but is less important or less critical to other vehicle control functions, such as traction control. Accordingly, if the YRS malfunction is detected, traction control continues to operate based on information from other sensors, but stability control is disabled. If the vehicle control system 110 modifies its operation or disables one or more features or functions, one or more warning indicators or tell-tales are activated to warn the vehicle operator of the modified operating state.
The signal checking module 115 retrieves fault information stored in memory and performs various signal check or good check (“GC”) functions to determine whether a previously-detected sensor malfunction still exists. In some embodiments, the signal checking module 115 is initialized and retrieves the stored fault information at the start of each new ignition cycle. In other embodiments, the signal checking module 115 retrieves stored fault information from the memory at different times (e.g., on a predetermined schedule or at uniform intervals) while the ECU 25 is operating.
Executing a GC function includes testing current readings or information from one or more vehicle sensors. The signal checking module 115 obtains current sensor readings from, for example, the RAM 70, the bus 50, and/or the malfunction monitoring module 100. 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. After the signal checking module 115 has obtained the current sensor readings, the signal checking module 115 compares the information to one or more threshold values or ranges to determine whether a previously-detected fault still exists. Additionally or alternatively, the signal checking module 115 performs a test on a sensor by sending signals to a previously-malfunctioning sensor, monitoring a response from the sensor, and comparing the response to an expected result.
If the signal checking module 115 determines that a previously-detected fault no longer exists, the signal checking module 115 resets the corresponding fault information by generating a reset signal or setting one or more status flags or bits. The failure handling module 105 receives the reset signal or checks the status flags, and updates the fault information accordingly. When the vehicle control system 110 subsequently requests the current faults from the failure handling module 105, the failure handling module 105 indicates to the vehicle control system 110 that the previously-detected fault no longer exists (e.g., by failing to list the fault as one of the current faults or not setting a corresponding fault flag). The vehicle control system 110 evaluates the current faults and, in some embodiments, deactivates a previously-activated warning indicator or tell-tale, and/or switches its operation from one operational state (e.g., the second operating state) to another operational state (e.g., the first operating state).
Alternatively, if the signal checking module 115 determines that the previously-detected fault still exists, the signal checking module 115 does not alter the corresponding fault information, in order to ensure that the stored fault information continues to indicate that the fault exists. As such, the vehicle control system 110 continues to detect the presence of the sensor malfunction and the signal checking module 115 executes a subsequent GC function (e.g., at the start of the next ignition cycle). In other embodiments, the signal checking module 115 generates a subsequent set fault signal to ensure that the fault information remains in the same state as before the signal checking module 115 executed the GC function.
The interactions between the signal checking module 115, the malfunction monitoring module 100, and the failure handling module 105 with respect to one or more YRSs are shown in greater detail in
If the malfunction monitoring module 100 detects one or more malfunctions among the YRSs, one or more YRS drive cycle or fault flags corresponding to the detected malfunction are set in the failure handling module 105. The malfunction monitoring module 100 is configured to detect a variety of YRS malfunctions. For example, the malfunction monitoring module 100 monitors the signals received from the YRS and determines whether the signals include an implausible offset, an incorrect sign, an incorrect signal rate, or an implausible value with respect to an YRS. Expected values or ranges of values for the signals from the YRSs are stored in memory and are adjusted as necessary to compensate for dirt build-up on the YRSs, damage to the YRSs, and the like. It is to be understood that “implausibility” refers to a sensor signal outside of an expected scope and/or existing for a predetermined length of time. Further, not all implausible data is related to a sensor malfunction.
If a YRS malfunction is detected, the failure handling module 105 receives a set fault signal 130 from the malfunction monitoring module 100. The set fault signal 130 sets the drive cycle or fault flag in the failure handling module 105 which, in turn, initiates one or more YRS test functions (e.g., at the start of the next ignition cycle). In the illustrated embodiment, a detected yaw rate sensor malfunction sets any of first, second, third and fourth YRS good check (“GC”) fault flags or bits. For example, the fault flags include a YRS common GC fault flag, a YRS wrong-sign GC fault flag, a YRS counter-failure GC fault flag, and a YRS plausibility vs. SAS GC fault flag. Each of the YRS fault flags and associated GC functions are described below. In other embodiments, more or fewer fault flags are set when a YRS malfunction is detected.
Each YRS fault flag has a corresponding GC function and module. For example, the signal checking module 115 includes a first YRS GC module 130, a second YRS GC module 140, a third YRS GC module 145, and a fourth YRS GC module 150. In some embodiments, the first, second, third, and fourth GC modules correspond to a YRS common GC module, a YRS wrong-sign GC module, a YRS counter-failure GC module, and a YRS plausibility vs. SAS GC module. The failure handling module 105 initiates a GC function by sending a test or initiation signal to one or more of the GC modules. In the illustrated embodiment, the GC modules output a release signal which indicates to the failure handling module 105 (and subsequently the vehicle control system 110) that a fault still exists, and that the signals from the YRS 20 should not be used as inputs to control the vehicle 15. In other embodiments, additional signals are sent from the GC functions to the failure handling module 105, such as GC “OK” signals which set corresponding GC “OK” flags.
Each of the GC functions also has associated vehicle status indicators which are selectively activated based on which fault flags are set. For example, when the first YRS GC fault flag is set, a first YRS fault indicator or an ESC failure indicator is activated. The vehicle status indicators are, for example, visual indicators (e.g., lamps), audible indicators, tactile indicators, or combinations thereof.
As described above, the operation of vehicle sensors is affected by the vehicle's environment. For example, sensors become dirty or damaged during the normal operation of the vehicle and, as a result, the signals output from the sensors include an offset. The YRS 20 is compensated for such offsets using at least one compensation function. In one embodiment, at the start of each ignition cycle, the ECU 25 checks the output value of the YRS when the vehicle is at a standstill, and compares the YRS output to a sensor-offset threshold value. For example, the sensor-offset threshold value is a predetermined sensor offset value that is used to determine if the YRS 20 is malfunctioning. If the output of the YRS 20 when the vehicle is at a standstill exceeds the sensor-offset threshold value, a corresponding fault flag is set. If the output of the YRS 20 does not exceed the sensor-offset threshold value, the YRS output is compensated for the sensor offset. These threshold values can vary depending on the vehicle in which an embodiment of the invention is implemented. For example, in one embodiment, the sensor-offset threshold value is 5.0 deg/s. If the output of the YRS while the vehicle is at a standstill is 2.0 deg/s, the output of the YRS is compensated by 2.0 deg/s. If a value stored in the malfunction monitoring module 100 (or a memory connected to the malfunction monitoring module 100) has a value of 0.0 deg/s stored as an expected value for the output of the YRS 20, this value is deleted or overwritten with a value of 2.0 deg/s or −2.0 deg/s (depending on the sign of the sensor offset), and a YRS compensation flag or bit is set to ‘1’.
Under certain conditions, the output of the YRS 20 requires compensation when the vehicle 15 is not at a standstill. For example, although the ignition normally remains on while the vehicle is moving, if the vehicle ignition cycles while the vehicle 15 is moving, a different compensation function is used to compensate the output signals from the YRS 20. Under such conditions, a fast YRS compensation is executed. During a fast YRS compensation, a higher sensor compensation threshold value is used, such as 7.0 deg/s. If the output of the YRS 20 does not exceed the sensor compensation threshold value, the YRS output is compensated for the sensor offset, as described above. If the YRS is compensated using fast compensation, a YRS fast compensation flag is set to ‘1’. The compensation of the YRS in either a standstill state or a driving state is not described in further detail herein. Compensating the signals from the YRS in the above-described manners, as well as additional or different techniques for compensating the signals from the YRS 20, are know to those skilled in the art.
The first YRS GC function 300 shown in
The second YRS GC fault flag or bit or the YRS wrong-sign GC fault flag or bit is set when the malfunction monitoring module 100 determines that the output of the YRS 20 has an incorrect sign (based on information related to the SAS and wheel speed sensors). The ECU 25 determines a model yaw rate based on an output signal of the SAS and output signals of the wheel speed sensors. An ideal or median yaw rate for the model yaw rate is determined based on the output signal of the SAS. A two-sided band around (i.e., a band above and a band below) the ideal yaw rate value provides a range above and below the ideal yaw rate value to which the output of the YRS is compared. The band of yaw rate values is calculated based on the difference in wheel speeds between left and right wheels on the same axle (e.g., a front axle). For example, when a vehicle 15 is turning to the right, a right front wheel turns slower than a left front wheel. As described in greater detail below, the model yaw rate is used to calculate a yaw rate integral when executing the YRS wrong-sign GC function.
As described above, each of the GC functions also has associated vehicle status indicators which are selectively activated based on which fault flags are set. When the YRS wrong-sign GC fault flag is set, a YRS wrong-sign fault indicator or an ESC failure indicator is activated (such as a lamp or other visual indicator, audible indicators, tactile indicators, or combinations thereof).
In process 500, the output of the YRS 20 is compared to the yaw rate model (step 505). In the illustrated embodiment, the yaw rate value based on the SAS is given as SAS_YAW, and the band of yaw rate values is based on the wheel speed sensors. The first step in calculating the yaw rate integral is to determine whether the vehicle is turning. For example, because the yaw rate model is based on a yaw rate value determined from the SAS, if the vehicle is not turning, the yaw rate value from the SAS is zero or close to zero. Additionally, the band of yaw rate values is determined based on signals from the wheel speed sensors, or more particularly, a difference between the signals from two wheel speed sensors on the same axle. Accordingly, if the vehicle is not turning, the difference between the speeds of two wheels is, in most instances, small (e.g., <1.0 deg/s) or negligible. A YRS value determined using the signals from the YRS is compared to the absolute value of a cornering threshold value (e.g., 1.5-4.5 deg/s). In other embodiments, the cornering threshold value is greater than 4.5 deg/s or less than 1.5 deg/s, or is dependent upon the speed of the vehicle 15. If the YRS value is not greater than the cornering threshold value, the process 500 ends, and the yaw rate integral is not calculated (or is not updated). If no yaw rate integral is calculated, a default value for the yaw rate integral of, for example, 0.0 deg is used in the YRS wrong-sign GC function 400 of
If the YRS value is greater than the cornering threshold value, the YRS value is compared to the yaw rate model described above to determine if the sign of the YRS value is correct. A first comparison is made between the YRS value and the SAS_YAW value +/−a YRS band of values (e.g., +/−2.0 deg/s) (step 510). If (1) the YRS value is less than the SAS_YAW value +2.0 deg/s, and (2) the YRS value is greater than the SAS_YAW value −2.0 deg/s, the yaw rate integral is incremented by predetermined amount, for example, the YRS value multiplied by 0.04 (i.e., YRS*0.04) (step 515). Then, a second set of comparisons is performed (step 520). If either of conditions (1) or (2) is not satisfied, the YRS integral is not incremented and the second set of comparisons is performed (step 520). The second set of comparisons is similar to the first set, but instead of comparing the YRS value to the YRS model, a negation or negative YRS value (i.e., −YRS) is compared. If (1) the (−YRS) value is less than the SAS_YAW value +2.0 deg/s, and (2) the (−YRS) value is greater than the SAS_YAW value −2.0 deg/s, the yaw rate integral is decremented by predetermined amount, for example, the YRS value multiplied by 0.04 (i.e., YRS*0.04) (step 525). If either of conditions (1) or (2) is not satisfied, the yaw rate integral is not decremented.
In general, if the YRS value has the correct sign, the first set of comparisons is satisfied, the yaw rate integral is incremented, and the second set of comparisons is not satisfied. If the YRS value has the wrong sign, the first set of comparisons is not satisfied, the second set of comparisons is satisfied, and the yaw rate integral is decremented. Although generally true, if the yaw rate determined from the SAS is incorrect or invalid (e.g., the SAS is malfunctioning), the yaw rate integral may be decremented even if the sign of the YRS value is correct. Alternatively, the yaw rate integral may be incremented even if the YRS value has an incorrect sign. For the sake of the description of the second YRS GC function, it is assumed that the SAS is functioning properly and that, if the sign of the YRS value is correct, the yaw rate integral is incremented.
In one embodiment, the yaw rate integral is calculated or updated only once each time the second YRS GC function is executed. In some embodiments, the yaw rate integral is calculated and updated a predetermined number of times during a single execution of the second YRS GC function, is calculated or updated for a predetermined period of time during a single execution of the second YRS GC function, or is calculated and updated until the yaw rate integral is greater than +180° or a new ignition cycle is initiated. In other embodiments, the yaw rate integral is calculated and updated whenever the speed of the vehicle is greater than a high-speed threshold (e.g., 72 km/h). In any of the above embodiments, the value of the yaw rate integral is stored in the memory of the ECU 25. For example, if the yaw rate integral is stored in a non-volatile memory such as the EEPROM 75, the value of the yaw rate integral is maintained from one ignition cycle to the next. If the yaw rate integral is stored in a volatile memory such as the RAM 70, the value of the yaw rate integral is reset to zero at the start of each ignition cycle.
Referring once again to
The third or YRS message-counter GC fault flag is set when more or fewer than an expected number of sensor signals are received in a predetermined period of time. When this flag is set, a YRS message-counter fault indicator or an ESC failure indicator is activated. As noted, the indicator could be a visual indicator (e.g., a lamp), an audible indicator, a tactile indicator, or a combination thereof.
In one embodiment, the YRS 20 is expected to send two signals to the ECU 25 in an “expected signal transmission period” (e.g., 10-30 ms). However, if the malfunction monitoring module 100 detects that the YRS 20 sent zero, one, or three or more signals to the ECU 25 during the signal sending period, the YRS 20 is not sending signals at the expected rate, and the YRS message-counter GC fault flag is set. Additionally, if the YRS 20 is sending more signals than expected, a YRS message-counter value-too-large flag is set to indicate that the rate at which signals are being sent from the YRS is too fast. If the YRS 20 is sending fewer signals than expected, a YRS message-counter value-too-small flag is set to indicate that the rate at which signals are being sent from the YRS is too slow.
A third GC process or signal checking function 600, such as a YRS message-counter GC process, is illustrated in
When the YRS plausibility vs. SAS GC fault flag is set, a YRS plausibility vs. SAS fault indicator or an ESC failure indicator is activated. As noted, the indicators are lamps or other indicators, audible indicators, tactile indicators, or combinations thereof.
The YRS plausibility vs. SAS GC fault flag is set when there is a substantial difference between the YRS value and a yaw rate determined from the SAS. In one embodiment, a plausibility threshold is established with a value of, for example, 1.0-4.5 deg/s. The plausibility threshold value is compared to the difference between the YRS value and the value of the yaw rate determined from the SAS. If the difference is greater than the plausibility threshold, the YRS plausibility vs. SAS GC fault flag is set. The plausibility threshold value can vary based on the type of vehicle, driving conditions, vehicle stability conditions, and other factors.
A fourth GC process 700, such as a YRS plausibility vs. SAS GC process, is illustrated in
The YRS common GC “OK” flag is set as described above with respect to
If, at step 805, the SAS common GC fault flag was set during the previous ignition cycle, the signal checking module 115 determines if the SAS common GC “OK” flag is set. In order to set the SAS common GC “OK” flag, the signal checking module 115 executes a second SAS GC function 825 (e.g., an SAS GC for straight driving function) (see
If the difference between maximum and minimum straight driving yaw rates is less than a difference threshold (e.g., 1.0-5.0 deg/s), the signal checking module 115 determines whether an SAS GC for straight driving “OK” counter is less than a duration threshold (e.g., 100 ms-2.0 s) (step 845). If the SAS GC for straight driving “OK” counter is not less than the duration threshold, the second SAS GC function 825 ends. If the SAS GC for straight driving “OK” counter is less than the duration threshold, the SAS GC for straight driving “OK” counter is incremented (step 850), and the second SAS GC function 825 ends.
The signal checking module 115 then executes the third SAS GC function 855. The signal checking module 115 determines if the vehicle 15 is turning and if the speed of the vehicle 15 is greater than the speed threshold value (e.g., 50-150 km/h) (step 860). In some embodiments, the signal checking module 115 determines whether the vehicle 15 is turning when a yaw rate detected by the YRS 20 is greater than a YRS threshold value (e.g., 3.0-9.0 deg/s). If the speed of the vehicle 15 is not greater than the speed threshold, or the YRS value is not greater than the YRS threshold value, the third SAS GC function 855 ends. If the speed of the vehicle 15 is greater than the speed threshold and the YRS value is greater than the YRS threshold value, the signal checking module 115 determines whether a difference between maximum and minimum turning yaw rates is less than the difference threshold (step 865). If the difference between the maximum and minimum turning yaw rates is not less than YRS threshold, an SAS GC for turning “OK” counter is reset (e.g., set to zero) (step 870). If the difference between the maximum and minimum turning yaw rates is less than the YRS threshold, the signal checking module 115 determines whether the SAS GC for turning “OK” counter is less than the duration threshold (e.g., 100 ms-2.0 s) (step 875). If the SAS GC for turning “OK” counter is not less than the duration threshold, the SAS GC for turning function 855 ends. If the SAS GC for turning “OK” counter is less than the duration threshold, the SAS GC for turning “OK” counter is incremented (step 880), and the SAS GC for turning function 855 ends.
Referring once again to
With reference once again to
Thus, the invention provides, among other things, a controller for determining whether a previously-detected, vehicle sensor malfunction still exists by executing various signal check functions using signals from one or more vehicle sensors. 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. 61/236,412 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 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. 12/860,396, filed on Aug. 20, 2010 and entitled GOOD CHECKING FOR VEHICLE PRESSURE SENSOR; and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/860,407, filed on Aug. 20, 2010 and entitled GOOD CHECKING FOR VEHICLE STEERING ANGLE 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 | Wokcicki 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 |
6122577 | Mergenthaler et al. | Sep 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 |
7200524 | Kang et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7286083 | Xie et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7823986 | Ruffer et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7920981 | Fennel et al. | Apr 2011 | 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 |
20040243287 | Yanaka et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050131602 | Souda | Jun 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 |
20070282558 | Sagisaka | Dec 2007 | 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 |
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 |
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 |
---|---|---|
10333323 | Jan 2004 | DE |
1227019 | Jul 2002 | EP |
Entry |
---|
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/. |
EP10173774 European Search Report dated Nov. 30, 2010, 5 pages. |
Office Action from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,362 dated Jul. 19, 2012 (23 pages). |
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). |
Search Report from the European Patent Office for Application No. 10173776 dated Apr. 4, 2012 (6 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). |
Office Action from the United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,396 dated Mar. 6, 2013 (16 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). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110066321 A1 | Mar 2011 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61236412 | Aug 2009 | US |