Fast detection of error conditions in vehicle vacuum sensors for a hydraulic boost compensation system

Systems and methods of monitoring redundant vacuum sensors in the same vacuum chamber of a braking system to determine when an error condition is present in a braking system. The braking system includes a first sensor positioned in a chamber of the braking system and a second sensor positioned in the same chamber. A first reading is received from the first sensor and a second reading is received from the second sensor. A difference between the first reading and the second reading is determined. An error condition is indicated when the difference between the first reading and the second reading is greater than a threshold.

BACKGROUND

The present invention relates to methods of detecting an error condition in systems with redundant sensors. In particular, embodiments of the present invention related to detecting error conditions in a hydraulic boost compensation braking system by monitoring two vacuum sensors.

SUMMARY

The invention provides a method for determining when an error condition is present in a system that includes at least two redundant sensors for detecting the error condition. In one embodiment, the system includes at least two vacuum sensors for monitoring a braking system that includes hydraulic boost compensation functionality. A processor receives a plurality of readings from each of the two vacuum sensors and performs a plurality of calculations to determine if an error condition is present. These calculations may include comparing the gradient (or rate of change) of a difference between the readings from the two sensors to a first threshold, determining whether the difference between the readings from the two sensors exceeds a second threshold for a predetermine period of time, and determining whether the time integral of the difference between the readings from the two sensors exceeds a threshold. If any of the plurality of calculations indicates an error condition, the processor determines that the error condition exists.

In another embodiment, the invention provides a method of determining when an error condition is present in a braking system. The braking system includes a first sensor positioned in a chamber of the braking system and a second sensor positioned in the same chamber. A first reading is received from the first sensor and a second reading is received from the second sensor. A difference between the first reading and the second reading is determined. An error condition is indicated when the difference between the first reading and the second reading is greater than a threshold.

In another embodiment, the invention provides a hydraulic boost compensation system including a vacuum chamber, a first vacuum sensor positioned in the vacuum chamber, and a second vacuum sensor positioned in the vacuum chamber. A controller receives a first reading from the first vacuum sensor and a second reading from a second vacuum sensor. The controller determines a difference between the first reading and the second reading and indicates that an error condition is detected when the difference is greater than a threshold.

In yet another embodiment, the invention provides a controller for a braking system. The braking system includes a vacuum chamber, a first sensor positioned in the vacuum chamber and a second sensor positioned in the vacuum chamber. The controller includes a processor and a memory storing instructions. When the instructions are executed by the processor, the controller receives a first reading from the first vacuum sensor and a second reading from the second vacuum sensor. The controller then calculates a sensor reading difference and a rate of change of the sensor reading difference. The controller indicates a first error condition when the rate of change of the sensor reading difference remains above a gradient threshold for a first defined period of time. The controller then compares the sensor reading difference to a first difference threshold and indicates that a second error condition is detected when the sensor reading difference remains above the first difference threshold for a second defined period of time. The controller then adds the difference between the sensor reading difference and the first difference threshold to a running sum of previous difference thresholds. The controller indicates a third error condition when the running sum of previous differences exceeds a sum difference threshold. However, the sum of previous threshold differences is reset when the sensor reading difference remains below a second difference threshold for a third defined period of time.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

As illustrated inFIG. 1, the system100includes two vacuum sensors101,103for hydraulic boost compensation (HBC) control of a braking system controller105. In some constructions, the braking system controller105includes a processor and a memory. The memory stores software modules in the form of instructions that are executed by the processor. The braking system controller105includes software modules that monitor supply (module107), line (module109), and plausibility (modules111) factors of the signals from the two vacuum sensors101,103before assessing the quality of the sensed variable (module113) and then operating the HBC control (module115).

The system also includes a redundant check (module117) to monitor for errors or malfunctions in one of the vacuum sensors. The redundant check117compares the signals from both vacuum sensors for amplitude, gradient, and time-integral level to detect a vacuum sensor malfunction before the deviation causes an undesired vehicle behavior. By monitoring for deviations in these three variables, the system is able to detect small errors that were previously undetectable.

Although the system illustrated inFIG. 1includes multiple software modules executed by a single controller, other constructions can include, for example, one or more ASICs, multiple software-based controllers, or a combination.

FIG. 2illustrates the method of performing the redundant check in detail. If the status of both vacuum sensors is positive (“OK”) (step201), the controller determines that the system is operating properly and resets all of the tracking variables (step203) used in the redundant check. However, if one or both of the vacuum sensors indicates an adverse conditions, the controller then calculates the difference between the values measured by the two sensors (difference) and the rate of change (or gradient) of the difference over time (Delta_Diff) (step205).

The first check performed by the controller is the gradient test. The rate of change of the sensor reading difference is compared to a gradient threshold (TH1) (step207). If the rate of change exceeds the threshold a gradient counter is incremented (step209). If the gradient counter exceeds a time threshold (F1), the controller determines that the rate of change has exceeded the gradient threshold for a defined period of time and indicates that a fault has been detected (step213). However, if the rate of change is lower than the gradient threshold, the gradient counter is reset to zero (step215) and the controller proceeds to the difference test.

In the difference test, the controller looks to the magnitude of the difference between the readings for the two sensors to detect an error conditions. The controller compares the sensor reading difference to a first difference threshold (TH2) (step217). If the sensor reading difference exceeds the first difference threshold, a difference test counter is incremented (step219). If the difference test counter exceeds a time threshold (F2) (step221), the controller determines that the sensor reading difference has remained above a threshold for a second defined period of time and indicates that a fault has been detected (step213). However, if the sensor reading difference falls below the first difference threshold (TH2), the controller resets the difference test counter to zero (step223) and proceeds to the integrated difference test.

In the integrated difference test, the controller evaluates the time-integral difference of the signals. The controller begins the integrated difference test by comparing the sensor reading difference to a second difference threshold (TH3) (step225). If the sensor reading difference exceeds the second threshold, the controller calculates the difference between the sensor difference and the first threshold and adds that value to a running sum of previous threshold differences (Integ_Diff) (step227). When the running sum of previous threshold differences exceeds a threshold (TH4) (step229), the controller indicates that a fault has been detected (step213). However, if the sensor reading difference is less than the second difference threshold (TH3), the controller evaluates how long the sensor reading difference has remained below the threshold in order to determine when to reset the running sum of previous differences to zero.

If the sensor reading difference is below the second difference threshold (step225) and the running sum of previous threshold differences is not equal to zero (step231), the controller increments an integrated difference test counter (step233). If the integrated difference test counter exceeds a time threshold (F3) (step235), the controller determines that the sensor reading difference has remained below the second difference threshold for a third defined period of time and resets the running sum of previous threshold differences to zero (step237). If, however, the sensor reading difference is below the second difference threshold (step225) and the running sum of previous threshold differences is equal to zero (step231), the controller determines that the sensor reading difference has just fallen below the second difference threshold (TH3) and, therefore, resets the integrated difference test counter to zero (step239).

After the controller has either detected a fault (step213) or passed through all three tests without detecting a fault, the controller stores the current sensor reading difference (“Difference”) as a previous sensor reading difference (“Difference_K1”).

FIG. 2uses the notation K1to indicate a value of a variable from a previous iteration of the method illustrated inFIG. 2. Furthermore, the various thresholds and defined testing time periods are determined based on factors that are evaluated during testing or are adjusted during operation of the vehicle. These factors include the maximum deviation between the two signals that can exist without causing an undesired vehicle behavior and the acceptable duration for which the deviation between the two signals can be allowed to occur without causing an undesired vehicle behavior.

Although the time periods for the tests illustrated inFIG. 2are the same, in some constructions of the system, the defined time periods can be different. Furthermore, althoughFIG. 2illustrates each test being performed serially, in other embodiments, it is possible to perform these three or other tests in a different order or in parallel.

Thus, the invention provides, among other things, systems and methods for determining when an error condition is present in a system that includes at least two redundant sensors for detecting the error condition. Various features and advantages of the invention are set forth in the following claims.