Trapping Prevention Guard and Method for Controlling a Motor-Driven Adjusting Device for an Adjusting Device

• US 20090240401A1
• Filed: 02/15/2007
• Published: 09/24/2009
• Est. Priority Date: 02/17/2006
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Brose Fahrzeugteile GmbH & Co. KG
• Original Assignee: Brose Fahrzeugteile GmbH & Company KG Coburg
• Inventors: Rösch, Thomas
• Application Number:
  US12/279,707
• Publication Number:
  US 20090240401A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 701/49
• CPC Class Codes: H02H 7/0851 for motors actuating a movable member between two end positions, e.g. detecting an end position or obstruction by overload signal

Abstract

In order to draw a reliable conclusion about the existence of a jamming situation, in particular in a seat adjusting means, provision is made to distinguish between the following movement classes: a) running difficulty of the adjusting apparatus, b) jamming of an object, c) encountering an end stop, and d) sudden counter-reaction, with a decision criterion (c, c1, c₂, M₃) being derived from detected characteristic variables (u, i, n) of a motorized drive (2), and the current state of the adjusting apparatus being associated with one of the movement classes on the basis of said decision criterion.

Claims

1. A trapping prevention means for an adjusting device, in particular a seat adjusting means of a motor vehicle, having a motorized drive (2) and a control unit which is designed in such a way that a distinction is made between at least the movement classes a) running difficulty of the adjusting device, b) trapping of an object, c) run-up against an end stop of the adjusting device and d) sudden reaction in order to monitor for a trapping instance, with a decision criterion (c, c1, c2, M₃) being derived from detected characteristic variables (u, i, n) of the motorized drive (2), on the basis of which decision criterion the current state of the adjusting device is associated with one of the movement classes.

3. The trapping prevention means as claimed in claims 1 and 2, in which a distinction is made between the movement classes a) to e).

4. The trapping prevention means as claimed in one of the preceding claims, in which a spring model is used as the basis for classification purposes and at least one spring constant (c) is derived from the detected characteristic variables as the decision criterion.

5. The trapping prevention means as claimed in one of the preceding claims, in which a characteristic change in the total load of the motor, in particular a characteristic change in the motor moment (M_Mot) is used as the decision criterion (c, c1, c2).

6. The trapping prevention means as claimed in claim 5, in which at least one spring constant (c, c1, c2) is determined from the total load of the motor, from the motor moment (M_Mot).

7. The trapping prevention means as claimed in claim 5 or 6, in which the mathematical derivative of the total load (M_Mot) is used as the decision criterion (c1, c2).

9. The trapping prevention means as claimed in one of claims 6 to 8, in which the spring constant (c1, c2) is associated with the movement classes in the order a-b-c-d as the value increases.

10. The trapping prevention means as claimed in one of the preceding claims, in which, in order to determine values for the decision criterion (c1, c2, M₃) which are required for the classification operation, a measurement is performed on a physical model and the measurement results are stored as values which can be used in the classification operation.

11. The trapping prevention means as claimed in one of claims 6 to 10, in which the profile of the spring constant (c1, c2) is used for association with one of the movement classes, in particular for movement class b) of trapping.

12. The trapping prevention means as claimed in claim 11, in which a trapping instance is identified when association is made with movement class b) and when a maximum value of the spring constant (c1, c2) is exceeded.

13. The trapping prevention means as claimed in one of the preceding claims, in which the decision criterion (c, c1, c2) is first determined after a lower load threshold value (M₁) is exceeded.

14. The trapping prevention means as claimed in one of the preceding claims, in which at least three load threshold values (M₁-M₃) are defined and a value of the decision criterion is determined and evaluated between two load threshold values in each case.

15. The trapping prevention means as claimed in one of the preceding claims, in which the value pair comprising the load value (M₁-M₃) and a variable value of a variable (t, x), as a function of which the load is determined, is stored when a load threshold value (M₁-M₃) is reached, and the value for the decision criterion is determined with the aid of interpolation between the value pairs.

16. The trapping prevention means as claimed in one of the preceding claims, in which an upper load threshold value (M₃) is defined, and a trapping instance is identified only when the upper load threshold value (M₃) is exceeded and when association is made with the movement class b).

17. The trapping prevention means as claimed in one of claims 4 to 15, in which the total load (M_Mot) is firstly determined during a start phase (I) in each case at the beginning of an actuation operation of the adjusting device and stored as the nominal load (M_G) of the adjusting device, and in which the decision criterion (c, c1, c2) is first determined when there is a characteristic deviation between the nominal load (M_G) and the total load (M_Mot) which varies during the actuation operation of the adjusting device.

2. A trapping prevention means for an adjusting device, in particular a seat adjusting means of a motor vehicle, having a motorized drive (2) and a control unit which is designed in such a way that a distinction is made between at least the movement classes a) running difficulty of the adjusting device, b) trapping of an object, c) run-up against an end stop of the adjusting device and e) load movement of a load on the adjusting device in order to monitor for a trapping instance, with a decision criterion (c, c1, c2, M₃) being derived from detected characteristic variables (u, i, n) of the motorized drive (2), on the basis of which the current state of the adjusting device is associated with one of the movement classes.

8. The trapping prevention means as claimed in one of claims 2 to 7, in which the same value range, but different profiles of the decision criterion (c1, c2), are associated with the movement class e) of the load movement and the movement class c) of run-up against an end stop.