PRODUCT DESIGN OF ELECTRONIC PARKING BRAKE

M. H. Lin, T. Y. Lin, and R. Q. Hsu

Department of Mechanical Engineering
National Chiao Tung University
Email:m.h.lin.taiwan@gmail.com

Abstract a way for idea generations and patentability analysis.

This paper presents the product design of an
Electronic Parking Brake (EPB) system. A complete
product design procedure including market survey,
mechanical design, control design, system integration,
and system test is provided. The main object is to develop
a prototype which has patent around ability and
patentability. In addition, customer requirements are
considered for designing a competitive product.
Furthermore, a real prototype is manufactured to prove
the system feasibility. Finally, the integration of the
mechanism design and the control design provide a grate
progress for a commercializing.
keyword: Parking, Brake, Electronic, Product.
Indroduction
The EPB is popular in recent years. An electronic
actuator substitutes the labor and simplifies the parking
action. The small volume system makes the vehicle
interior space more commodious. Moreover, a computer-
controlled unit actuates the parking brake is used. The
parking becomes more intelligent in different situations,
such as stopping brake, climbing start, and impermanent
stop.
Besides, the survey analysis also leads the design to fill
the customer’s requirements.
Then, three mechanism concepts are created and
evaluated. The best one, including an operator, a reducer,
a self-locker, a manual releaser, and a balancer, is selected
to be embodied. Additionally, finite element analysis
(FEA) is used to help materials selection and ensure the
required strength after the CAD model is developed
Finally, the PC-based control method is used to
integrate the mechanism and controller (Figure 1). The
developed LabVIEW program controls the EPB in a
virtual environment with considerations of various driving
conditions. In addition, the sensor switch signals are fed
back to PC to ensure the parking success. Then, testing
instrumentation is built to prove the system feasibility.
Finally, the system specifications are compared with
commercial products to be the criterion for future designs.
Controller
Mechanism

There are more and more vehicles installing the EPB

system, such as the Jaguar XJ and S-type, the Audi A6
and A8, the Renault New Vel Satis and Scenic, the BMW
7-Series and the Volkswagen Passat. Market needs will
strongly support the product development.
Figure 1 Structure of Electronic Parking Brake System
Although, the EPB system is more convenient and
smarter than traditional ones, it still has some problems,
such as complexity and high cost. These shortages are Mechanism Conceptual Design
needed to be improved.
Brainstorming is chosen as the design method for its
The main object is to develop a prototype which has advantage of collecting every member’s viewpoints.
patent around ability and patentability. In addition, There were several ideals supported through the
customer’s requirements are considered for designing a brainstorming design method. To make profound ideas of
competitive product. Market survey ,including each brainstorming idea, these concepts were discussed
commercial products review and patent analyses, provides individually. In the second step of brainstorming, some
members can trigger ideas from the other team members. rear brakes. The redundant or insufficient force between
Some useful concepts were picked as followed. two cables can be absorbed by the springs, until the cable
force equilibrates.
2.1 Concept 1

Reducer function of planetary gearbox was used in

this concept. Two planet gears which connect with the
cables rotate along the fixed planet carrier (Figure 2 and
Figure 3). Clockwise and counterclockwise motion of
planet gears will pull and release the cables separately. In
addition, the releaser, the pin, which connects the cables
and the planet gears, can be drawn out when the devise is Figure 4 The Concept 2 structure (Engaging)
failed.

With the planetary gearbox, the volume of the EPB

mechanism can be reduced efficiently. However, the self-
locker function can’t be provided directly through the
design. It means that other lockers will be attached in
order to make the mechanism safer. The locker will make
the devise far more complex than present designs.
Figure 5 The Concept 2 structure (Disengaging)

Figure 6 Springs and Button Plate

Figure 2 The Concept 1 structure (Engaging)
2.3 Concept 3

This concept combines the EPB functions with the

Figure 3 The Concept 1 structure (Disengaging)
2.2 Concept 2
This concept combines the EPB functions with the
balancer function. The EPB functions include operator,
reducer, self-locker, and releaser. Pull and release brake
cables by a worm shaft, two links, and two plates (upper
and bottom plates) (Figure 4 and Figure 5). The vertical
distance change between two plates can be transferred to
horizontal motion between cables. In addition, the speed
reduced ratio and the self-lock function can be provided
by the worm shaft which is proposed to connect with
motor axis. Furthermore, the pin (Figure 4) called as
releaser can be drawn out when the devise is failed.
balancer function. Pull and release the cables by an S
plate, a worm gear, rollers and pin screws (Figure 7,
Figure 8, and Figure 9). The worm shaft connected with
motor will actuate the worm gear to rotate. The S plate
was fixed in the X direction and can slide in the Y
direction. The pin screws and the rollers sliding along the
worm gear track which can pull or release the cables as
the worm gear rotating. In addition, the speed reduced
ratio and the self-lock function can be provided by the
worm shaft and the worm gear. Furthermore, the pin
screws called releaser can be drawn out when the devise
is failed.
Beside, the balance function can be supplied by S
plate’s DOF (degree of freedom). The S plate can adjust
the unbalance force by moving in the Y direction. For
example, the S plate will move along the positive Y
direction, if the A cable need greater force than B cable.
The balance function is more convince and the whole
EPB mechanism is smaller than prior art.

Beside the basic EPB functions, two springs in the

button plate (Figure 6) can supply the balance function,
automatically adjusting the unbalance force between two
 Concepts
Criteria
Importance
(Specifications) 1 2 3

1 Brake force kg 17 - +
States of
2 # 19 + +
adjustable force

3 Assembly time hr 10 - +
4 Number of sensors # 13 S S
5 Number of motor # 13 S S
6 Operating time S 9 + Datum +
Number of
7 component # 22 - +

Figure 7 The Concept 3 structure I 8 Manual button y/n 8 S S

9 Releaser y/n 9 S S
10 Weight kg 3 - +
11 CNS test y/n 9 S S
12 Cost KNT 14 - -
Total + 2 - 6
Total - 5 - 1
Sat isfact ion
Overall total -3 - 5
Weighted total -38 - 66

Table 1 Evaluation Table

Figure 8 The Concept 3 structure II

2.5 F.E.M.

The FEA results shown in Figure 10 and Figure 11

find that the maximum stress of the structure was
1.46×108 N/m2 which is smaller than the yield stress of
the steel, S45C ( 3.1× 10 8 ~ 6×10 8 N/m2). It means that the
plastic deformation will not occur if it is made by S45C.
Furthermore, the safety factor 2.5 had been considered in
Figure 9 The Pin Screw and The Roller the first step of the analysis process. As a result, the
mechanism agrees with the plastic deformation limit, and
also conforms to the vehicle component safety regulation.
2.4 Concept Evaluation

Evaluation bases on a basic decision matrix. This

matrix includes several items, such as criteria, importance
for each criterion, concepts, evaluation of each concept
using criteria, and the final scores. As the evaluation
(Table 1) shows, one concept, the concept 2, should be
chosen as a judging datum. The “+”,”S”, and “-” symbols
are used as the mark of “superior”, ”the same”, and
”inferior” separately.

Consequently, the concept 3 was presented as the

best design by the decision matrix evaluation. The total
weighted scores are 66, which are greater than other two Figure 10 Von Mises Stress Distribution (Front View)
designs, datum and -38. The results exhibit that the
concept 3 is good at confirmable brake force, less
assembly time, less components, and light weight.
Figure 11 Von Mises Stress Distribution (Back View)
Significantly, the S45C material is overestimated and
wasted. Keeping the cost down purpose, plastic materials
can substitute for S45C. The tensile yield strength of
plastics ranging from 3× 10 to 7 × 10 is strong enough to
7 7
the component materials. The Figure 12 and Figure 13
(Von Mises stress distribution of plastic) illustrate that the
axis link, the rotating plate, and the S plate still suffer
light stresses. The design might be safe and cheap if the
7
plastic material is chosen properly (few larger than 3×10 ).
However, the plastic material is not suitable for
prototypes, but mass productions. Although the S45C is
cumbersome and expansive, the easy manufacturing
advantage is more important for prototype comparing to
plastics. As a result, the S45C is chosen to be the material
in the continuous process, manufacturing the prototype.
Figure 12 Von Mises Stress Distribution of Plastics (Front
View)
Figure 13 Von Mises Stress Distribution of Plastics (Back
View)
Control Design
3.1 Control Logic
The prototype is stimulated by PC based method,
and LabVIEW is selected for development software. The
Figure 14 shows the flow chart of the control logic. There
are seven varieties of decision steps (gradient, ignition,
speed, shift lever, EPB button, gas pedal, brake pedal, and
cable feedback) presented as rhombuses in the flow chart.
The decision tree is built orderly with these rhombus
determinations. The purpose is to determine engaging or
disengaging the EPB. Finally, the cable feedback signal
will be used to check the completeness of the motion.
There are some special functions in the flow chart
described below:
• Engaging the brake automatically when the shift
lever was in P position. In the other words, the EPB
system can substitute the labor handbrake lever to
simplify the parking action.
• Engaging the brake suddenly will cause huge
dangers as the vehicle is at high speed. To ensure
the safety, the EPB button is effective only when
the vehicle speed is lower than 8 km/hr. As a result,
the system works safely even if someone pushes
the button accidentally.
• The hill brake force will be larger than the ground
one. The process boxes, “engage cable x 2 times”
and “disengage cable x 2 times”, mean to enlarge
cable force and to lower the releasing speed
separately.
• Furthermore, the brake system can avoid the
accident hill sliding when the vehicle is sliding to
unexpected directions. For example, the backward
sliding will be stopped as the shift lever is in D
position. Anyway, the hill holding function will
make the hill stopping safer.

Figure 14 The Flow Chart of Control Logic
EMBODIMENT DESIGN
4.1 Mechanism Prototype
The prototype is manufactured and assembled as
Figure 15 and Figure 16 showed. The power supply can
supply the voltage, 12 volt, to start the prototype. The
opposite motions, engaging and disengaging movements,
can act successfully and smoothly as expectancy. In
addition, the couplings position feedback sensors, limit
switches, are built in the both end sides of the sliding
track as showed in Figure 17. They are used to ensure the
operating success.
Figure 15 The Assembled Prototype
Figure 16 The Engaging (Left) and Disengaging (Right)
Situations
Figure 17 Limit Switch Sensors
4.2 Control Prototype
The LabVIEW user interface is a simulation of real
driving user interface. There are three parts in the
interface, consisted of the feedback, the control and the
motor control. For example, sensors situations are
returned to the feedback zone (Figure 18). Besides, a
speedometer, an EPB LED, a hand brake button, an
ignition button, a brake pedal, a gas pedal, and a shift
lever are built in the control zone (Figure 19).
Furthermore, what actions the motor will behave,
delaying for certain seconds, turning clockwise or
counterclockwise, after receiving logic orders is defined
in motor control zone (Figure 20). The coupling position
signals are pass back to check the successful parking.
Four limit switch signals are presented in Figure 20-
Signal 1 to Signal 4
Figure 18 Feedback Zone

Figure 19 Control Zone
Figure 20 Motor Control Zone
4.3 Integration System
The final system, including a computer, a date
acquisition (DAQ) card, a terminal, a motor driving
circuit, a power supplier, and a mechanism prototype, is
showed in Figure 21. The control logic and the user
interface are programmed by LabVIEW in the computer.
It will pass instructs or receive feedback signals through
the DAQ card and the terminal. Then through the driving
circuit, the motor will be controlled to rotate clockwise or
counterclockwise. Moreover, the mechanism prototype
will pass feedback signals to the PC through the DAQ
card and terminal to ensure the successful motion.
However, the power supplier provides the power of motor
(12V) and the motor rotating circuit (5V and 12V).
Figure 21 The Integrated System
4.4 System Test
The output force of the prototype is measured by the
test instrumentation (Figure 22). The relation between
cable positions and the force, and the maximum force are
the objectives of the measurement. Moreover, the result
will illustrate the proper engaging distance and required
force for future design.
The cable distances are recorded by nicking the load
cell position in graduation. The distance is equal to the
cable pulled. For example, the 0 cm position means that
the prototype starts to pull the cable. Furthermore, the 3
cm position means that the prototype has pulled the cable
for 3 cm.
The load cell (for maximum load 50 Kg) can
measure the prototype force and show in the signal
indicator. The signal indicator is an amplifier that can
magnify the slight variations of load cell. After repeated
counterpoise adjustment, the indicator can read the tensile
and the pressure forces with precision 0.01 Kg. In
addition, the power supplier actuates the motor by 12
volts and 1~3 amp currents.
 CONCLUSIONS

The EPB study provides a complete procedure of

product design from patent analysis, the market survey,
mechanical design, electronic design, and system
integration.

The patent analyses and the commercial products

surveys bring out the product potential tendency, the
function comparisons of commercial products, and the
patent technique matrixes. The survey clarifies the
customer requirements, for designing a competitive
product.
Figure 22 The Test Instrumentation
The new EPB system is developed and embodied.
The mechanism combines the balancer with the original
4.5 Comparisons EPB, providing operator, reducer, self-locker, releaser,
and balancer functions. Moreover, the PC-based method
The system is integrated by mechanism and is used to integrate the mechanism and electronics.
electronics completely. Then, the system specifications LabVIEW program is used to control the EPB in the
should be compared with the commercial products. These virtual environment with considerations of various driving
product specifications are defined considerately by the conditions. The program provides a convenient manner to
patent analysis and the market survey. An estimative modify the control algorithm in the future.
criterion for future design will be build by the
comparison. As Table 2 shows, these commercial product Finally, the test instrumentation for the EPB system
specification are presented in the “MBS”, ”Renault is developed. It proves the system feasibility. In addition,
scenic”, and “Audi A8” columns. In addition, the system the comparison between commercial products and the
specification is showed in the “Achieved” column. system specification can be the criterion for future
modifications.
Obviously, the performance of the system is better in
some specification items. Especially, the acts of operating
time and the cost are better than commercial products. References:
However, the releaser function, the weight, and the CNS
test are worse or uncompleted. The release function 1. 潘正評，姜至旦，“汽車學”，財團法人徐氏基
concept is required to be modified and machined. 金會，p.464，1998。
Moreover, the reason for the bulky weight has been
discussed in section 2.5. For the explanation, plastics can
substitute the S45C to reduce weight in mass production.
Finally, the product is proposed to have the CNS test as a 2. United States Patent Number: 6,609,595, August 26,
quality proof. 2003.
States of adjustable force

Specifications
Component amount

3. United States Patent Number: 6,863,162, February 8,

Operating time
Sensor amount
Assembly time

Manual button
Motor amount
Brake force

2005.
CNS test
Releaser

Weight

Cost

Brands

kg # hr # # S # y/n y/n kg y/n KNT

MBS 300 1 1 7 1 2 3 y y 1~2 10
Renault Scenic
Audi A8
2
2 1~2
1 8
7
1
2
1 1
3
y
y
y
y
1~2
1~2
y
y
40
37
4. United States Patent Number: 6,851,525, February 8,
2005.
Achieved 240 1 1.5 7 1 1 1 y n 7 n 16

Notices ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ◎ ○ ○ × × × ◎

5. United States Publication Number: 20050034939,

Table 2 The Comparisons between Commercial Products February 17, 2005.
and Achieved Specifications
6. United States Patent Number: 5,092,432, March 3, 18. 車輛型式安全及品質一致性審驗作業要點-附件二，
1992. p.37，2005。

7. United States Patent Number: 6,513,632, February 4,

2003.

8. United States Publication Number: 20050077782,

April 14, 2005.

9. United States Patent Number: 6,905,181, June 14,

2005.

10. United States Patent Number: 5,148,894, September

22, 1992.

11. United States Patent Number: 5,704,693, January 6,

1998.

12. United States Patent Number: 5,590,744, January 7,

1997.

13. United States Patent Number: 6,543,587, April 8,

2003.

14. United States Patent Number: 6,550,870, April 22,

2003.

15. United States Patent, Patent Number: 5,588,335,

December 31, 1996.

16. D. G.. Ullman, “The Mechanical Design Process” 3rd

ed., Mcgraw-Hill, 2003.

17. The QFD institute, Available: http://www.qfdi.org/,

last visited on October, 27, 2005