Appeal Number: 2006-3054
Application Number: 10/672,625
A conflict resolution scheme is defined by the specification as a sheme
which resolve conflicts between two control schemes [0040]. The conflict
resolution scheme has rules concerning how to resolve conflicts between control
schemes. The specification discloses:
These conflict control rules may be absolute(e.g., “Safety
scheme rules are always given priority over actuator
control scheme rules.”), or may depend upon sensed
conditions of the vehicle (e.g., “When condition A is
sensed, the rule contained in actuator control scheme X is
given priority over the rule contained in actuator control
scheme Y”).[0040]
. . . conflict rules help resolve conflicts at the control
level. With such a system, for example, inherent
conflicts existing between antilock braking, traction,
manual inputs/outputs, and other vehicle dynamics
schemes no longer lead to “lost” or cycling braking
systems creating a safety hazard [0041].
A person of ordinary skill in the art would be informed by this language of
the specification how to make and use a conflict resolution scheme.
Phoenix discloses an electronic braking control system which includes, as
depicted in Figure 1, a plurality of brake components 20, a vehicle performance
sensor or wheel speed sensor 26, and a central control unit 10 (col. 5, line 54 to col.
6, lines 5). The central control unit 10 receives sensor signals from the sensors 26
and generates a control signal for controlling the brake components 20 (Figure 3).
A distributed electronic control unit 16 also receives the sensor signals from the
vehicle sensors 26 and controls some of the brake components 20. In operation,
the central controller 10 controls the brake components by receiving signals from
the sensors 26 through line 26 and through delay 44a. The central control unit 10
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013