JP2021174014A - Vehicle control device - Google Patents

Abstract

To provide a vehicle control device capable of suppressing useless intervention of collision avoidance processing to avoid a collision between a vehicle and an obstacle.SOLUTION: A vehicle control device 100 for avoiding a collision with an obstacle 3 existing in a traveling direction of a vehicle 1 performs: calculating a first prediction travel route R1 having a width to allow the vehicle 1 to pass based on a traveling direction to be predicted from a present yaw rate of the vehicle 1; calculating a second prediction travel route R2 having a width to allow the vehicle 1 to pass based on a traveling direction to be predicted from a present steering angle of the vehicle 1; and permitting execution of collision avoidance processing when the obstacle 3 is entering an overlap area R0 of the first prediction travel route R1 with the second prediction travel route R2.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 2

Description

The present invention relates to a vehicle control device, and more particularly to a vehicle control device for avoiding a collision between a vehicle and an obstacle.

Conventionally, a driving assistance technique (that is, automatic collision avoidance control) for avoiding a collision with an obstacle (for example, another vehicle) is known (see, for example, Patent Document 1). In the automatic collision avoidance control, the necessity of intervention of the automatic collision avoidance operation (for example, automatic braking, automatic steering) is determined based on the relationship between the future predicted position of the vehicle and the future predicted position of the obstacle.

In automatic collision avoidance control, it is an issue to prevent unnecessary intervention of automatic collision avoidance operation. Therefore, it is required to accurately predict the future position of the vehicle. Regarding this point, Patent Document 1 merely describes that the future predicted position is calculated using the yaw rate, steering angle, etc. of the vehicle, and mentions the improvement of the accuracy of the predicted position. No.

Further, Patent Document 2 describes that the predicted traveling route of the vehicle is calculated by two calculation methods. That is, there are a calculation method using the current steering angle of the vehicle and a calculation method using the current yaw rate of the vehicle. In Patent Document 2, the predicted traveling path obtained by either calculation method is used according to the size of the current steering angle.

Japanese Unexamined Patent Publication No. 2011-86102 Japanese Unexamined Patent Publication No. 8-16998

However, which of the predicted traveling path calculated using the steering angle and the predicted traveling path calculated using the yaw rate as described in Patent Document 2 has higher position accuracy is an element other than the steering angle (for example, , Bank angle, road surface friction coefficient μ). Therefore, in the automatic collision avoidance control, it is still necessary to improve the accuracy of the future predicted position of the vehicle in order to prevent unnecessary intervention of the collision avoidance process.

The present invention has been made to solve such a problem, and to provide a vehicle control device capable of suppressing unnecessary intervention of a collision avoidance process for avoiding a collision between a vehicle and an obstacle. It is an object.

In order to solve the above-mentioned problems, the present invention is a vehicle control device for avoiding a collision with an obstacle existing in the traveling direction of the vehicle, and is based on the traveling direction predicted from the current yaw rate of the vehicle. Therefore, the first predicted traveling route having the width through which the vehicle passes is calculated, and the second predicted traveling route having the width through which the vehicle passes is calculated based on the traveling direction predicted from the current steering angle of the vehicle. When an obstacle has entered the overlapping region of the first predicted traveling route and the second predicted traveling route, the collision avoidance process is allowed to be executed.

According to the present invention configured as described above, the overlapping region between the first predicted traveling route and the second predicted traveling route has a considerably high positional accuracy as an region through which the vehicle will pass in the future, but the overlapping region It is considered that the position accuracy is not so high on the outside of. Therefore, according to the present invention configured in this way, when an obstacle invades the overlapping region with high position accuracy, the collision avoidance process is allowed to be executed, so that unnecessary intervention of the collision avoidance process can be performed. It can be suppressed.

In the present invention, preferably, the vehicle control device allows the execution of the collision avoidance process when the penetration rate of the obstacle in the width direction into the overlapping region is equal to or more than a predetermined penetration threshold value. According to the present invention configured as described above, it is possible to determine whether or not the vehicle is located in a region (overlapping region) with high position accuracy in the predicted traveling route of the vehicle in consideration of the size of the obstacle. can.

In the present invention, preferably, in the vehicle control device, the penetration rate of the obstacle in the width direction to the first predicted traveling route is equal to or more than the first threshold value, and the penetration rate in the width direction of the obstacle to the second predicted traveling route is When the intrusion rate is equal to or higher than the second threshold value different from the first threshold value, the collision avoidance process is allowed to be executed. According to the present invention configured in this way, the necessity of automatic intervention of collision avoidance processing can be more accurately determined by individually setting a threshold value for the intrusion rate to each predicted traveling route. ..

In the present invention, preferably, the second threshold value is set smaller than the first threshold value. In the present invention, the second predicted travel path based on the steering angle is likely to fluctuate due to the structural play of the steering wheel. Therefore, in the present invention, the collision avoidance process is not executed due to an erroneous determination by allowing the collision avoidance process to be executed when the approach rate to the second predicted travel path is smaller than the intrusion rate to the first predicted travel path. Can be prevented.

In the present invention, preferably, the collision avoidance process includes a plurality of collision avoidance processes having different operation times, and a second threshold value is set for each of the plurality of collision avoidance processes, so that the collision avoidance process has an earlier operation time. In the process, the second threshold value is set to be smaller. In the present invention, the position accuracy of the second predicted traveling path becomes lower as the distance from the vehicle increases due to the easily fluctuating steering angle. Therefore, the accuracy of the intrusion rate into the second predicted traveling route for a distant obstacle is lower than the accuracy of the intrusion rate for a nearby obstacle. Therefore, in the present invention, the collision avoidance process having an early operation time is allowed to be executed even if the intrusion rate into the second predicted traveling path is relatively small, so that the necessary collision avoidance process is not executed due to an erroneous determination. Can be prevented.

In the present invention, preferably, the collision avoidance process includes the generation of an alarm by the notification device and / or the application of braking force to the vehicle by the braking device.

According to the vehicle control device of the present invention, it is possible to suppress unnecessary intervention of an automatic collision avoidance operation for avoiding a collision between a vehicle and an obstacle.

It is a block diagram of the vehicle control device by embodiment of this invention. It is explanatory drawing of the collision determination by embodiment of this invention. It is explanatory drawing of the 1st predicted travel path by embodiment of this invention. It is explanatory drawing of the 2nd predicted traveling path by embodiment of this invention. This is a processing flow of automatic collision avoidance control according to the embodiment of the present invention. This is the threshold value for automatic collision avoidance control according to the embodiment of the present invention. It is an alternative processing flow of the automatic collision avoidance control according to the embodiment of the present invention. It is an alternative processing flow of the automatic collision avoidance control according to the embodiment of the present invention.

Hereinafter, the vehicle control device according to the embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the accompanying drawings.
First, the configuration of the vehicle control device will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 1 is a configuration diagram of a vehicle control device.

The vehicle control device 100 of the present embodiment is configured to execute automatic collision avoidance control for a vehicle 1 (see FIG. 2 and the like) equipped with the vehicle control device 100. That is, when a collision with an obstacle 3 (see FIG. 2 or the like) existing in front of the vehicle 1 in the traveling direction is expected, the vehicle control device 100 issues an alarm to the driver and operates the hydraulic braking device. The braking force is applied to the vehicle 1.

As shown in FIG. 1, the vehicle control device 100 includes a vehicle control calculation unit (ECU) 10, a plurality of sensors, and a plurality of vehicle devices. The plurality of sensors include an in-vehicle camera 21, a radar 22, a vehicle speed sensor 23, a yaw rate sensor 24, and a steering angle sensor 25. Further, the plurality of vehicle devices include a brake control system 32 and a notification device 34.

The ECU 10 is composed of a computer including a processor, a memory for storing various programs, an input / output device, and the like. The ECU 10 is configured to be able to output an operation control signal to the brake control system 32 and the notification device 34 based on the signals received from the plurality of sensors.

The in-vehicle camera 21 takes an image of the surroundings of the vehicle 1 and outputs the captured image data. The ECU 10 identifies the attributes of a target (for example, a vehicle, a pedestrian, a lane marking (lane boundary line, white line, yellow line), an obstacle, etc.) based on the image data. Further, the ECU 10 calculates the distance between the vehicle 1 and the target, the lateral position of the target with respect to the vehicle 1, the relative speed, and the like based on the image data. The ECU 10 may acquire target information from the outside via an in-vehicle communication device by means of transportation infrastructure, vehicle-to-vehicle communication, or the like.

The radar 22 is a millimeter-wave radar measuring device that measures the position and speed of a target, transmits radio waves (transmitted waves) toward the front of the vehicle 1, and reflects the transmitted waves by the target to generate reflected waves. To receive. Then, the radar 22 measures the distance between the vehicle 1 and the target, the relative speed of the target with respect to the vehicle 1, and the like based on the transmitted wave and the received wave. In the present embodiment, instead of the radar 22, a laser radar, an ultrasonic sensor, or the like may be used to measure the distance to the target and the relative speed.

The vehicle speed sensor 23 detects the absolute speed of the vehicle 1.
The yaw rate sensor 24 detects the yaw rate of the vehicle 1.
The steering angle sensor 25 detects the rotation angle (steering angle) of the steering wheel of the vehicle 1.

The brake control system 32 is a controller for controlling the hydraulic brake device of the vehicle 1. When it is necessary to decelerate the vehicle 1, the ECU 10 outputs a brake operation control signal requesting the generation of a braking force to the vehicle 1 to the brake control system 32.

The notification device 34 is a display, an indicator light, a speaker, or the like provided in the vehicle interior of the vehicle 1, and can generate visual and auditory warnings (image display, warning light, warning sound). When there is a possibility of collision with an obstacle, the ECU 10 outputs an operation control signal to the notification device 34 to operate the notification device 34. As a result, the notification device 34 outputs an alarm about the collision with the obstacle to the driver.

Next, the outline of the automatic collision avoidance control in the vehicle control device according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIGS. 2 to 4. FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram of collision determination, FIG. 3 is an explanatory diagram of a first predicted traveling route, and FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram of a second predicted traveling route.

The ECU 10 calculates two predicted travel paths through which the vehicle 1 passes in the automatic collision avoidance control. The predicted travel route is a predicted travel region, that is, a band-shaped region in which the vehicle 1 is predicted to pass. The first predicted travel path R1 is calculated based on the vehicle behavior predicted from the current yaw rate φ of the vehicle 1. The second predicted travel path R2 is calculated based on the vehicle behavior predicted from the current steering angle θ of the vehicle 1. Both the first predicted traveling route R1 and the second predicted traveling route R2 are calculated on the assumption that the current speed V of the vehicle 1 is maintained.

First, the ECU 10 calculates the first predicted traveling path R1 for a predetermined period (for example, 3 to 5 seconds) based on the current vehicle behavior of the vehicle 1 or the vehicle motion (speed V, yaw rate φ). Specifically, the first predicted travel path R1 is based on the assumption that the vehicle 1 maintains the current speed V and the vehicle 1 travels in the traveling direction predicted from the current yaw rate φ, and turns. It is calculated as a region through which the vehicle 1 passes when making a steady circular turn on an arc path defined by a radius r1 (= V / φ). Therefore, the first predicted traveling path R1 is a band-shaped region having a width Wa corresponding to the vehicle width of the vehicle 1. The predicted speed at each position in the traveling direction of the first predicted traveling path R1 is set to the current speed V, and each position is set to the passing position when the vehicle 1 travels on the arc path at the speed V.

Next, the ECU 10 calculates the second predicted traveling path R2 for a predetermined period based on the current driving operation state (speed V, steering angle θ) of the vehicle 1. Specifically, the second predicted travel path R2 is based on the assumption that the vehicle 1 maintains the current speed V and the vehicle 1 travels in the traveling direction predicted from the current steering angle θ. It is calculated as a region through which the vehicle 1 passes when making a steady circular turn on an arc path defined by a turning radius r2. Therefore, the second predicted traveling route R2 is a band-shaped region having a width Wa corresponding to the vehicle width of the vehicle 1 as in the first predicted traveling route R1. The turning radius r2 is expressed by the following equation.
r2 = N · L · (1 + K · V ² ) / θ

Here, N is the steering gear ratio, L is the wheelbase (m), and K is the stability factor. The stability factor is an index of the bendability of the vehicle 1 and depends on the friction coefficient of the road surface and the like. In the present embodiment, the stability factor is set to a predetermined value (fixed value), but it may be a variable value that fluctuates depending on the road surface condition or the like.

The second predicted traveling path R2, which is set based on the driving operation state (specifically, the steering angle θ), tends to fluctuate with time due to a fine rotational operation caused by the structural play of the steering wheel. On the other hand, the first predicted traveling route R1 set based on the vehicle behavior (yaw rate φ) changes with time more than the second predicted traveling route R2 because the vehicle behavior is less likely to fluctuate with time than the steering wheel. hard. Therefore, in the present embodiment, the first predicted traveling route R1 is treated as the main predicted traveling route, and the second predicted traveling route R2 is treated as the subordinate predicted traveling route.

As shown in FIG. 2, the first predicted traveling path R1 and the second predicted traveling path R2 usually do not completely match each other and have overlapping regions R0 (overlapping regions R0) that overlap each other. In FIG. 2, an obstacle 3 (for example, another vehicle) is detected in front of the vehicle 1 in the traveling direction, and a part of the obstacle 3 has entered the overlapping region R0. In the automatic collision avoidance control of the present embodiment, it is determined that the vehicle 1 and the obstacle 3 may collide with each other when at least a part of the obstacle 3 is located in the overlapping region R0.

As shown in FIG. 2, the ECU 10 calculates the overlap rate F0 (penetration rate) of the obstacle 3 in the width direction with respect to the overlapping region R0. Therefore, the ECU 10 calculates the width Wb of the obstacle 3 based on the image data obtained by the in-vehicle camera 21, and also calculates the intrusion length W0 of the obstacle 3 invading the overlapping region R0. The ECU 10 calculates the overlap rate F0 (= W0 / Wb) based on the acquired Wb and W0.

Further, as shown in FIG. 3, the ECU 10 calculates the overlap rate F1 (penetration rate) in the width direction of the obstacle 3 with respect to the first predicted travel path R1. Therefore, the ECU 10 calculates the intrusion length W1 of the obstacle 3 invading the first predicted traveling path R1 based on the image data obtained by the in-vehicle camera 21. The ECU 10 calculates the overlap rate F1 (= W1 / Wb) based on the acquired Wb and W1.

Further, as shown in FIG. 4, the ECU 10 determines the overlap rate F2 (penetration rate) in the width direction of the obstacle 3 with respect to the second predicted travel path R2. Therefore, the ECU 10 calculates the intrusion length W2 of the obstacle 3 invading the second predicted traveling path R2 based on the image data obtained by the in-vehicle camera 21. The ECU 10 calculates the overlap rate F2 (= W2 / Wb) based on the acquired Wb and W2.

When the obstacle 3 is located in the overlapping area R0, the possibility that the vehicle 1 collides with the obstacle 3 is high. In the present embodiment, when the overlap rates F1 and F2 satisfy predetermined conditions under the condition that the obstacle 3 is located in the overlapping region R0, the execution of the collision avoidance process becomes an allowable state (standby state). Specifically, when the overlap rates F0, F1 and F2 are equal to or higher than the predetermined threshold values S0, S1 and S2, respectively, the execution of the collision avoidance process is permitted. Then, in the present embodiment, the collision avoidance process is executed when the collision margin time TTC becomes equal to or less than a predetermined threshold time (T1, T2) in a state where the execution of the collision avoidance process is permitted.

As described above, in the present embodiment, one of the execution conditions of the collision avoidance process is that the obstacle 3 exists in the overlapping region R0 of the two predicted traveling routes calculated by different methods. Thereby, in the present embodiment, it is possible to prevent the automatic collision avoidance process from being erroneously executed in a state where the collision with the obstacle 3 does not occur.

In the present embodiment, in the automatic collision avoidance control, a plurality of collision avoidance processes (first, second, and third collision avoidance processes) are sequentially executed. The plurality of collision avoidance processes include the generation of an alarm by the notification device 34 (alarm process) and the application of braking force to the vehicle 1 by the brake control system 32 (emergency automatic brake process). The emergency automatic braking process includes a primary braking process for giving a predetermined deceleration and a secondary braking process for giving a deceleration even larger than the primary braking process. For example, the deceleration of the primary braking process is set so that the vehicle 1 stops within 1.6 seconds, and the deceleration of the secondary braking process stops the vehicle 1 within 1.0 second. It is set to the size like.

The first collision avoidance process is only a preliminary alarm process, and is executed when the collision margin time TTC reaches a predetermined threshold time (for example, 2.4 seconds). Preliminary alarm processing notifies the driver that there is a risk of collision. The second collision avoidance process is a primary brake process and a primary alarm process, and is executed when the collision margin time TTC reaches a predetermined threshold time (for example, 1.6 seconds). In the primary alarm processing, it is notified that a preliminary brake for collision avoidance is applied. The third collision avoidance process is a secondary brake process and a secondary alarm process, and is executed when the collision margin time TTC reaches a predetermined threshold time (for example, 1.0 second). In the secondary alarm processing, it is notified that the final brake for collision avoidance is applied.

As described above, these plurality of collision avoidance processes are executed according to the collision margin time TTC. The threshold time for TTC is set to be different for each collision avoidance process. The collision margin time TTC is calculated by dividing the distance D between the vehicle 1 and the target (obstacle 3) by the relative velocity Vr of the vehicle 1 with respect to the target (TTC = D / Vr).

As the collision avoidance process, in addition to or instead of the primary brake process and the secondary brake process, the stelling process may be automatically intervened in the vehicle 1 in order to avoid a collision with the obstacle 3. ..

Next, the processing flow of the automatic collision avoidance control in the vehicle control device 100 of the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIGS. 5 and 6. FIG. 5 shows a processing flow of automatic collision avoidance control, and FIG. 6 shows a threshold value of automatic collision avoidance control.

The ECU 10 repeatedly executes the processing flow shown in FIG. 5 at predetermined time intervals (for example, 0.1 seconds). First, the ECU 10 executes the sensor information acquisition process (S101). In the sensor information acquisition process, the ECU 10 acquires sensor information from the vehicle-mounted camera 21, radar 22, vehicle speed sensor 23, yaw rate sensor 24, steering angle sensor 25, and the like.

Next, the ECU 10 executes the vehicle information acquisition process using various information acquired in the sensor information acquisition process (S101) (S102). In the vehicle information acquisition process, the ECU 10 acquires the speed V, yaw rate φ, steering angle θ, and the like of the vehicle 1, and also acquires the target information regarding the targets existing in the periphery and the front area of the vehicle 1. The target information includes the attributes of the target, the position (vertical position, horizontal position, separation distance with respect to the vehicle 1), relative speed, dimensions (particularly, the width of the target), and the like. Further, the ECU 10 acquires other data (steering gear ratio, wheelbase, stability factor, etc.) from the memory or other control device.

Next, the ECU 10 calculates the first predicted traveling route R1 and the second predicted traveling route R2 based on the acquired vehicle information (S103), and the overlap between the first predicted traveling route R1 and the second predicted traveling route R2. The region R0 is calculated (S104). Further, when the target (obstacle 3 in FIG. 2) exists in the overlapping region R0, the ECU 10 calculates the overlap rate F0 and determines whether or not the overlap rate F0 is equal to or higher than the predetermined threshold value S0 ( S105). In this embodiment, the threshold value S0 is 0.2 (20%).

When the overlap rate F0 is less than the threshold value S0 (S105: No, F0 <S0), the ECU 10 ends the process. Therefore, when the obstacle 3 is not detected, or when the obstacle 3 is detected but the overlap rate F0 is smaller than the threshold value S0, the possibility of collision is low, and the ECU 10 ends the process. Alternatively, the threshold value S0 may be a positive number of substantially zero. That is, this processing flow may be configured so that step S106 is performed if at least a part of the target is located in the overlapping region R0 in step S105 (if F0 is positive).

On the other hand, when the overlap rate F0 is equal to or higher than the threshold value S0 (S105: Yes, F0 ≧ S0), the ECU 10 calculates the overlap rate F1 and determines whether or not the overlap rate F1 is equal to or higher than the predetermined threshold value S1. S106). In this embodiment, the threshold value S1 is 0.34 (34%). When the overlap rate F1 is less than the threshold value S1 (S106: No, F1 <S1), the ECU 10 ends the process.

On the other hand, when the overlap rate F1 is equal to or higher than the threshold value S1 (S106: Yes, F1 ≧ S1), the ECU 10 calculates the overlap rate F2 and, according to the calculated overlap rate F2, the first to third collisions. Judgment processing is executed as to which processing of avoidance processing is to be executed.

First, a case where the overlap rate F2 is equal to or higher than the threshold value S2a (S107: Yes, F2 ≧ S2a) will be described. In this embodiment, the threshold value S2a is 0.30 (30%). In this case, the ECU 10 determines which of the first to third collision avoidance processes is to be executed according to the TTC (S109, S113, S117). That is, when the TTC becomes equal to or less than the threshold value T1a for the secondary brake process (S109: Yes, TTC ≦ T1a), the ECU 10 executes the third collision avoidance process (S110) and ends the process. In the third collision avoidance process, the ECU 10 outputs a brake operation control signal for executing the secondary brake process to the brake control system 32, outputs an operation control signal to the notification device 34, and executes the secondary alarm process. .. In this embodiment, the threshold value T1a is 1.0 (seconds).

Further, when the TTC is larger than the threshold value T1a but becomes equal to or lower than the threshold value T1b for the primary braking process (S113: Yes, T1a <TTC ≦ T1b), the ECU 10 executes the second collision avoidance process (S114). End the process. In the second collision avoidance process, the ECU 10 outputs a brake operation control signal for executing the primary brake process to the brake control system 32, outputs an operation control signal to the notification device 34, and executes the primary alarm process. .. In this embodiment, the threshold T1b is 1.6 (seconds).

Further, when the TTC is larger than the threshold value T1b but becomes equal to or lower than the threshold value T1c for the secondary brake processing (S117: Yes, T1b <TTC ≦ T1c), the ECU 10 executes the first collision avoidance processing (S118). End the process. In the first collision avoidance process, the ECU 10 outputs an operation control signal to the notification device 34 to execute the preliminary alarm process. In this embodiment, the threshold T1c is 2.4 (seconds).

Further, when the TTC is larger than the threshold value T1c (S117: No, T1c <TTC), the ECU 10 ends the process. In this case, since the target (obstacle 3) is away from the vehicle 1, the collision avoidance process is not executed.

Next, a case where the overlap rate F2 is equal to or more than the threshold value S2b and less than S2a (S107: No, S111: Yes, S2b ≦ F2 <S2a) will be described. In this embodiment, the threshold value S2b is 0.20 (20%). In this case, the ECU 10 determines which of the first and second collision avoidance processes is to be executed according to the TTC (S113, S117). That is, since the target (obstacle 3) overlaps with the first predicted traveling route R1 at an intrusion rate of the threshold value S1 or more (S106: Yes), there is a possibility of collision, but the second predicted traveling route. Since it overlaps with R2 only at the intrusion rate in the range of the threshold values S2b to S2a (S107: No), it is determined whether or not to execute only the first and second collision avoidance processes.

Since the rudder angle θ is liable to fluctuate with time as described above, the second predicted traveling path R2 is also liable to fluctuate. Therefore, the farther the obstacle 3 is located, the more easily the overlap rate F2 fluctuates. Therefore, in the present embodiment, even if the overlap rate F2 is less than the threshold value S2a (S107: No), the collision avoidance process (in this case, the first and second collision avoidance processes) having a longer threshold time is executed. By allowing it, it is possible to prevent the necessary collision avoidance process from being executed due to an erroneous determination.

Specifically, when the TTC becomes equal to or less than the threshold value T1b (S113: Yes, TTC ≦ T1b), the ECU 10 executes the second collision avoidance process (S114) and ends the process. On the other hand, when the TTC is larger than the threshold value T1b but becomes equal to or lower than the threshold value T1c (S117: Yes, T1b <TTC ≦ T1c), the ECU 10 executes the first collision avoidance process (S118) and ends the process. Further, when the TTC is larger than the threshold value T1c (S117: No, T1c <TTC), the ECU 10 ends the process.

Next, a case where the overlap rate F2 is equal to or more than the threshold value S2c and less than S2b (S107: No, S111: No, S115: Yes, S2c ≦ F2 <S2b) will be described. In the present embodiment, the threshold value S2c is 0.20 (20%), which is the same as the threshold value S2b. However, instead, the threshold value S2c may be smaller than the threshold value S2b (for example, 0.15). In this case, the ECU 10 determines whether or not to execute the first collision avoidance process according to the TTC (S117). That is, since the target (obstacle 3) overlaps with the first predicted traveling route R1 at an intrusion rate of the threshold value S1 or more (S106: Yes), there is a possibility of collision, but the second predicted traveling route. Since it overlaps with R2 only at the intrusion rate in the range of the threshold values S2c to S2b (S111: No), it is determined whether or not to execute only the first collision avoidance process.

In the present embodiment, even if the overlap rate F2 is less than the threshold value S2b (S111: No), it is necessary by allowing the execution of the collision avoidance process (in this case, the first collision avoidance process) having a longer threshold time. It is possible to prevent the collision avoidance process from being executed due to an erroneous determination.

Specifically, when the TTC becomes equal to or less than the threshold value T1c (S117: Yes, TTC ≦ T1c), the ECU 10 executes the first collision avoidance process (S118) and ends the process. On the other hand, when the TTC is larger than the threshold value T1c (S117: No, T1c <TTC), the ECU 10 ends the process.

In the present embodiment, the position accuracy of the second predicted traveling path R2 calculated based on the current driving operation state (steering angle θ) of the vehicle 1 is based on the current vehicle behavior (yaw rate φ) of the vehicle 1. It is assumed that the calculated position accuracy of the first predicted traveling path R1 is higher. Therefore, under the condition that the obstacle 3 overlaps the overlapping region R0, the first to third collision avoidance processes are executed only when the overlap rate F1 is high (F1 ≧ S1). Then, the overlap rate F2 is used to determine which collision avoidance process is to be executed. Specifically, the higher the overlap rate F2, the higher the collision avoidance process is executed. That is, the higher the overlap rates F1 and F2 (or the smaller the difference between the two), the higher the accuracy of the future predicted position of the vehicle (that is, the position accuracy of the first and second predicted traveling paths). Is determined. As a result, in the present embodiment, when it is determined that the position accuracy is higher, the first to third collision avoidance processes are executed, so that unnecessary intervention of the automatic collision avoidance process can be suppressed.

Next, an alternative processing flow of the automatic collision avoidance control in the vehicle control device 100 of the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIGS. 7A, 7B, and 6. 7A and 7B are alternative processing flows for automatic collision avoidance control. The vehicle control device 100 can use the alternative processing flow shown in FIGS. 7A and 7B instead of the processing flow of FIG.

In the processing flow of FIG. 5, when the overlap rate F1 is smaller than the threshold value S1 (S106: No), none of the collision avoidance processing is executed. On the other hand, in the alternative processing flow, even if the overlap rate F1 is smaller than the threshold value S1 (S206: No), one of the collision avoidance processes is executed depending on the situation. There is. Further, in the processing flow of FIG. 5, when the overlap rate F2 is smaller than the threshold value S2c (S115: No), the processing is completed. On the other hand, in the alternative processing flow, even if the overlap rate F2 is smaller than the threshold value S2c (S215: No), any collision avoidance processing is executed depending on the situation. .. Since steps S201 to S218 shown in FIG. 7A are the same as steps S101 to S118 in FIG. 5, description thereof will be omitted.

In step S206, when the overlap rate F1 is smaller than the threshold value S1 (S206: No), the ECU 10 calculates the overlap rate F2 and avoids the first to third collisions according to the calculated overlap rate F2. The determination process is executed as to which of the processes is to be executed.

First, a case where the overlap rate F2 is equal to or higher than the threshold value S2a (S219: Yes, F2 ≧ S2a) will be described. In this case, which of the first to third collision avoidance processes is to be executed is determined according to the TTC (S221, S225, S229). That is, when the TTC becomes equal to or less than the threshold value T2a for the secondary brake processing (S221: Yes, TTC ≦ T2a), the third collision avoidance processing is executed (S222). Further, when the TTC is larger than the threshold value T2a but becomes equal to or lower than the threshold value T2b (S225: Yes, T2a <TTC ≦ T2b), the second collision avoidance process is executed (S226). Further, when the TTC is larger than the threshold value T2b but becomes equal to or lower than the threshold value T2c (S229: Yes, T2b <TTC ≦ T2c), the first collision avoidance process is executed (S230). When the TTC is larger than the threshold value T2c (S229: No, T2c <TTC), the process is terminated.

The threshold value T2a is set to 0.8 (seconds), which is smaller than the threshold value T1a, the threshold value T2b is set to 1.4 (seconds), which is smaller than the threshold value T1b, and the threshold value T2c is smaller than the threshold value T1c. It is set to 2 (seconds).

Therefore, in the alternative embodiment, the first to third collision avoidance is performed at a later timing than when the overlap rate F1 is low (S206: No) and when the overlap rate F1 is high (S206: Yes). The process is executed. As a result, unnecessary intervention of the automatic collision process can be suppressed when the future position accuracy of the vehicle 1 is considered to be relatively low (S206: No).

Next, a case where the overlap rate F2 is equal to or more than the threshold value S2b and less than S2a (S219: No, S223: Yes, S2b ≦ F2 <S2a) will be described. In this case, which of the first and second collision avoidance processes is to be executed is determined according to the TTC (S225, S229). Specifically, when the TTC becomes equal to or less than the threshold value T2b (S225: Yes, TTC ≦ T2b), the second collision avoidance process is executed (S226). On the other hand, when the TTC is larger than the threshold value T2b but is equal to or lower than the threshold value T2c (S229: Yes, T2b <TTC ≦ T2c), the first collision avoidance process is executed (S230). When the TTC is larger than the threshold value T2c (S229: No, T2c <TTC), the process is terminated.

Next, a case where the overlap rate F2 is equal to or more than the threshold value S2c and less than S2b (S219: No, S223: No, S227: Yes, S2c ≦ F2 <S2b) will be described. In this case, it is determined whether or not to execute the first collision avoidance process according to the TTC (S229). Specifically, when the TTC becomes equal to or less than the threshold value T2c (S229: Yes, TTC ≦ T2c), the first collision avoidance process is executed (S230). On the other hand, when TTC is larger than the threshold value T2c (S229: No, T2c <TTC), the process is terminated.

In the alternative embodiment shown in FIGS. 7A and 7B, the overlap rate F1 for the first predicted travel path R1, which is considered to be more reliable, under the condition that the obstacle 3 overlaps the overlapping region R0. Even if it is small (S206: No), the first to third collision avoidance processes can be executed by delaying the operation timing. Thereby, in the alternative embodiment, it is possible to suppress unnecessary intervention of the automatic collision avoidance process while ensuring safety.

Next, the operation of the vehicle control device 100 in this embodiment will be described. In the present embodiment, the vehicle control device 100 for avoiding a collision with an obstacle 3 existing in the traveling direction of the vehicle 1 is such that the vehicle 1 is based on the traveling direction predicted from the current yaw rate φ of the vehicle 1. The first predicted traveling path R1 having the width Wa to pass is calculated, and the second predicted traveling path R2 having the width Wa to pass by the vehicle 1 is calculated based on the traveling direction predicted from the current steering angle θ of the vehicle 1. When the obstacle 3 has entered the overlapping region R0 of the first predicted traveling route R1 and the second predicted traveling route R2, the collision avoidance process is allowed to be executed.

In the present embodiment, the overlapping region R0 of the first predicted traveling route R1 and the second predicted traveling route R2 has a considerably high positional accuracy as an region through which the vehicle 1 will pass in the future, but is outside the overlapping region R0. It is considered that the position accuracy is not so high. Therefore, in the present embodiment configured as described above, when the obstacle 3 invades the overlapping region R0 having high position accuracy, the collision avoidance process is allowed to be executed, so that the collision avoidance process is unnecessary intervention. Can be suppressed.

Further, in the present embodiment, the vehicle control device 100 allows the execution of the collision avoidance process when the overlap rate F0 in the width direction of the obstacle 3 with the overlapping region R0 is equal to or higher than the predetermined intrusion threshold value S0. In the present embodiment configured as described above, it is determined whether or not the vehicle 1 is located in the region with high position accuracy (overlapping region R0) in the predicted traveling route of the vehicle 1 in consideration of the size of the obstacle 3. be able to.

Further, in the present embodiment, the vehicle control device 100 has an overlap rate F1 in the width direction of the obstacle 3 with the first predicted traveling path R1 of the first threshold value S1 or more, and goes to the second predicted traveling path R2. When the overlap rate F2 in the width direction of the obstacle 3 is equal to or higher than the second threshold value S2 (S2a-S2c) different from the first threshold value S1, the collision avoidance process is allowed to be executed. In the present embodiment configured in this way, it is necessary to automatically intervene in the collision avoidance process by individually setting a threshold value for the overlap rate (F1, F2) to each predicted traveling route (R1, R2). The sex can be judged more accurately.

Further, in the present embodiment, the second threshold value S2 (S2a-S2c) is set to be smaller than the first threshold value S1. In the present embodiment, the second predicted travel path R2 based on the steering angle θ is likely to fluctuate due to the structural play of the steering wheel. Therefore, in the present embodiment, necessary collision avoidance is performed by allowing the execution of the collision avoidance process when the overlap rate F2 with respect to the second predicted travel path R2 is smaller than the overlap rate F1 with respect to the first predicted travel path R1. It is possible to prevent the process from being executed due to an erroneous determination.

Further, in the present embodiment, the collision avoidance process includes a plurality of collision avoidance processes (first to third collision avoidance processes) having different operation times, and the second threshold value S2 (S2a-S2c) includes a plurality of collision avoidance processes. The second threshold value is set smaller for the collision avoidance process, which is set for each of the above and the operation time is earlier. In the present embodiment, the position accuracy of the second predicted traveling path R2 becomes lower as the distance from the vehicle 1 increases due to the easily fluctuating steering angle θ. Therefore, the accuracy of the overlap rate F2 with respect to the second predicted travel path R2 for the distant obstacle 3 is lower than the accuracy of the overlap rate F2 with respect to the nearby obstacle 3. Therefore, in the present embodiment, for the collision avoidance process whose operation time is early, the necessary collision avoidance process is erroneously determined by allowing the execution even if the overlap rate F2 with the second predicted traveling path R2 is relatively small. It is possible to prevent it from being executed by.

Further, in the present embodiment, the collision avoidance process includes the generation of an alarm by the notification device 34 and / or the application of braking force to the vehicle 1 by the braking device.

1 Vehicle 3 Obstacle 10 ECU
100 Vehicle control device R0 Overlapping area R1 First predicted travel route R2 Second predicted travel route Wa width Wb width

Claims (6)

A vehicle control device for avoiding a collision with an obstacle existing in the direction of travel of the vehicle.
Based on the traveling direction predicted from the current yaw rate of the vehicle, a first predicted traveling route having a width through which the vehicle passes is calculated.
Based on the traveling direction predicted from the current steering angle of the vehicle, a second predicted traveling route having the width through which the vehicle passes is calculated.
A vehicle control device that allows execution of a collision avoidance process when the obstacle has entered the overlapping region of the first predicted traveling route and the second predicted traveling route. The vehicle control device according to claim 1, wherein the vehicle control device allows execution of the collision avoidance process when the penetration rate of the obstacle in the width direction into the overlapping region is equal to or higher than a predetermined penetration threshold value. In the vehicle control device, the penetration rate of the obstacle in the width direction into the first predicted travel path is equal to or higher than the first threshold value, and the penetration rate of the obstacle in the width direction into the second predicted travel path. The vehicle control device according to claim 1 or 2, wherein when is equal to or higher than a second threshold value different from the first threshold value, the execution of the collision avoidance process is permitted. The vehicle control device according to claim 3, wherein the second threshold value is set smaller than the first threshold value. The collision avoidance process includes a plurality of collision avoidance processes having different operation times.
The second threshold value is set for each of the plurality of collision avoidance processes.
The vehicle control device according to claim 3 or 4, wherein the second threshold value is set smaller for the collision avoidance process having an earlier operation time. The vehicle control device according to any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein the collision avoidance process includes generation of an alarm by a notification device and / or application of a braking force to the vehicle by a braking device.

Images