DESC:METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR FAULT DIAGNOSTICS OF PKE SYSTEM
CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS
The present application claims priority from Indian Provisional Patent Application No. 202421079815 filed on 21/10/2024, the entirety of which is incorporated herein by a reference.
TECHNICAL FIELD
Generally, the present disclosure relates to fault diagnostics. Particularly, the present disclosure relates to a system and method for diagnosing faults in a passive keyless entry (PKE) system.
BACKGROUND
Electric vehicles refer to motor vehicles powered by electric energy stored in rechargeable battery packs instead of conventional internal combustion engines. The electric vehicles rely on advanced electronic systems to manage power distribution, control braking, and enhance user convenience. Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) serves as a vehicle access system that enables unlocking and locking of doors without physically handling a key. The PKE system utilizes electronic signals exchanged between a key fob and the vehicle’s control units, allowing seamless access based on proximity and authentication without manual intervention. Such systems enhance user experience by providing secure and convenient vehicle access.
Existing technologies in vehicle access systems include traditional key-based entry, remote keyless entry (RKE), and advanced proximity-based systems such as Passive Keyless Entry. The remote keyless entry involves a handheld device transmitting radio frequency signals to lock or unlock the vehicle from a distance. In contrast, proximity-based arrangements detect the presence of an authenticated key fob within a specified range and automatically trigger access mechanisms. Specifically, the proximity-based passive keyless entry systems authenticate the key fob by exchanging signals between the vehicle’s control unit and the key fob, thereby initiating locking or unlocking processes without physical contact. The PKE focuses primarily on signal exchange and user convenience without deeply integrating continuous validation mechanisms for communication integrity and mechanical response.
However, there are certain problems associated with the existing or above-mentioned mechanism for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle. The above-mentioned technologies face significant challenges in ensuring robust security and reliability due to the lack of continuous validation of communication signals and actuation feedback. Further, signal relay attacks, interference, and mechanical faults introduce vulnerabilities that compromise vehicle access control. Furthermore, the authentication procedures primarily rely on one-time or sporadic signal exchanges, leaving gaps for unauthorized access or mechanical failure.
Therefore, there exists a need for a secure, interoperable, and automated alternative for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle.
SUMMARY
An object of the present disclosure is to provide a system for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle.
Another object of the present disclosure is to provide a method for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle.
Yet another object of the present disclosure is to provide a system and a method for enhanced vehicle security by ensuring periodic authentication signal validation.
In accordance with a first aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a system for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle, the system comprising:
- at least one electronic control unit communicably coupled to at least one key fob;
- at least one body control unit communicably coupled to the at least one electronic control unit; and
- at least one mechanical locking mechanism communicably coupled to the at least one electronic control unit and the at least one body control unit,
wherein the at least one electronic control unit is configured to perform periodic signal validation with the at least one key fob and actuation feedback validation from the at least one mechanical locking mechanism.
The system for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle, as described in the present disclosure, is advantageous in terms of enhancing the vehicle security by ensuring authentication through periodic signal validation between the electronic control unit and the key fob. Further, the computation of communication latency and comparison against the predefined threshold prevents unauthorized access caused by relay attacks or signal interference. Furthermore, the integration of actuation feedback from the sensor module within the mechanical locking mechanism ensures accurate verification of locking and unlocking operations. Moreover, the generation of control and diagnostic signals between the electronic control unit, the body control unit, and the mechanical locking mechanism enables real-time fault detection and corrective action. Additionally, the system delivers improved reliability, fault tolerance, and operational integrity for the Passive Keyless Entry of the vehicle.
In accordance with another aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a method for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle, the method comprising:
- transmitting a low-frequency signal to at least one key fob and receiving a radio frequency signal from the at least one key fob, via a communication module;
- computing a communication latency for a predefined threshold between the low-frequency signal sent to the at least one key fob and the radio frequency signal received from the at least one key fob, via at least one electronic control unit;
- generating and sending a first command signal to the at least one body control unit based on the computed communication latency, via the at least one electronic control module;
- sending a second command signal to the at least one mechanical locking mechanism and receiving the actuation status of the least one mechanical locking mechanism, via the at least one electronic control module; and
- comparing periodically a temporal and positional correlation between the second command signal and the received actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism, via the at least one electronic control module.
Additional aspects, advantages, features, and objects of the present disclosure would be made apparent from the drawings and the detailed description of the illustrative embodiments constructed in conjunction with the appended claims that follow.
It will be appreciated that features of the present disclosure are susceptible to being combined in various combinations without departing from the scope of the present disclosure as defined by the appended claims.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS
The summary above, as well as the following detailed description of illustrative embodiments, is better understood when read in conjunction with the appended drawings. For the purpose of illustrating the present disclosure, exemplary constructions of the disclosure are shown in the drawings. However, the present disclosure is not limited to specific methods and instrumentalities disclosed herein. Moreover, those in the art will understand that the drawings are not to scale. Wherever possible, like elements have been indicated by identical numbers.
Embodiments of the present disclosure will now be described, by way of example only, with reference to the following diagrams wherein:
Figure 1 illustrates a block diagram of a system for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle, in accordance with an embodiment of the present disclosure.
Figure 2 illustrates a flow chart of a method for monitoring the Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of the vehicle, in accordance with another embodiment of the present disclosure.
In the accompanying drawings, an underlined number is employed to represent an item over which the underlined number is positioned or an item to which the underlined number is adjacent. A non-underlined number relates to an item identified by a line linking the non-underlined number to the item. When a number is non-underlined and accompanied by an associated arrow, the non-underlined number is used to identify a general item at which the arrow is pointing.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
The following detailed description illustrates embodiments of the present disclosure and ways in which they can be implemented. Although some modes of carrying out the present disclosure have been disclosed, those skilled in the art would recognize that other embodiments for carrying out or practicing the present disclosure are also possible.
As used herein, the term “passive key entry” refers to a vehicle access arrangement that enables authorized entry without requiring manual operation of keys or keypads. The arrangement operates by wirelessly communicating between a key fob and the vehicle’s electronic control unit to authenticate user presence and allow door unlocking or locking without direct interaction. Specifically, the passive key entry utilizes two primary signal types for communication, including, but not limited to, a low-frequency signal transmitted from the vehicle to the key fob and a radio frequency signal sent from the key fob back to the vehicle. Further, the types of passive key entry include, but are not limited to, proximity-based systems that trigger unlocking upon detecting the key fob within a preset distance, and motion-activated systems that respond to user gestures such as, but not limited to, touching a door handle. Furthermore, additional classifications include, but are not limited to, arrangements that operate based on the communication latency validation and actuation feedback monitoring, which enhances security by continuously validating signal integrity and mechanical responses, thereby ensuring authorized access and preventing tampering or relay attacks.
As used herein, the term “vehicle” refers to a mechanically powered means of transportation designed to carry passengers or cargo on land. Specifically, the vehicle integrates multiple subsystems, including, but not limited to, the electronic control unit, the body control unit, and the mechanical locking mechanisms to ensure secure operation and user access. The vehicle’s passive key entry system relies on transmitting the low-frequency signals from the electronic control unit to the associated key fob, which responds with the radio frequency signals containing encrypted authentication data. Furthermore, the PKE calculates communication latency by comparing the time intervals between transmission and reception of signals and verifies operation through the periodic correlation between the command signals and the mechanical feedback. Moreover, the types of vehicles include, but are not limited to, passenger cars, which prioritize the user convenience and security features such as, but not limited to, passive key entry; commercial vehicles, which integrate robust locking systems to protect cargo and personnel; electric vehicles, which require advanced control units to manage battery systems and regenerative braking; and autonomous vehicles, which depend on continuous communication validation and actuation monitoring for safe operation. In each case, the integration of communication modules, control units, and mechanical locking mechanisms enhances security, operational efficiency, and user experience, as established through signal validation and actuation feedback as outlined in the claimed system.
As used herein, the terms “electronic control unit” and “electronic control module” are used interchangeably and refer to an embedded system within the vehicle that manages and regulates electrical functions by processing input signals and generating appropriate output commands. Specifically, the electronic control unit operates as the central processor for monitoring the passive key entry system by managing the signal transmission, reception, latency computation, and actuation validation. The electronic control unit also sends the second command signal to the mechanical locking mechanism and receives actuation feedback through the sensor modules that report the current lock status. Moreover, the electronic control unit periodically compares the temporal and positional correlations between the sent commands and the received feedback to validate the system's integrity and operational accuracy. Additionally, the types of electronic control units include, but are not limited to, powertrain control units that regulate engine performance and emissions, body control modules that handle the user interface features and security functions, braking control units that manage the anti-lock braking systems, and the passive key entry monitoring units, that focus on secure communication, signal validation, and actuation feedback for the user authentication and the vehicle access management. Subsequently, each type of control unit integrates sensors, communication interfaces, and processing algorithms to ensure safe, efficient, and reliable vehicle operation under various conditions.
As used herein, the terms “key fob” and “smart key” are used interchangeably and refer to a compact electronic device that enables remote access and control of the vehicle’s locking and security systems without requiring direct physical interaction. Specifically, the key fob functions as an authentication device that receives the low-frequency signals from the vehicle’s electronic control unit and responds with the radio frequency signals containing the encrypted identification data. The communication process initiates when the electronic control unit transmits the low-frequency signal, which activates the key fob’s internal circuitry. Further, upon receiving the low-frequency signal, the key fob generates a response embedding a secure code that verifies the user’s authorization. Moreover, the types of key fobs include, but are not limited to, proximity-based fobs that automatically unlock doors upon detecting a nearby vehicle, remote start fobs that allow engine activation without entering the vehicle, and multi-function fobs that integrate additional features such as, but not limited to, panic alarms and trunk release mechanisms. The key fob serves as an essential component by providing encrypted responses, enabling secure signal exchange, and ensuring seamless synchronization with the vehicle’s electronic control unit and body control unit. Additionally, the key fob’s ability to transmit radio frequency signals, maintain encryption integrity, and support real-time communication validation establishes secure vehicle access and protects against unauthorized attempts to breach the locking system.
As used herein, the terms “body control unit” and “body control module” are used interchangeably and refer to an electronic module within the vehicle that manages and coordinates various body-related functions, such as, but not limited to, door locking, lighting, and user interface controls, by processing commands from other control units. Specifically, the body control unit acts as the intermediary between the electronic control unit and the mechanical locking mechanism, executing command signals received from the electronic control unit and transmitting diagnostic signals to the locking mechanism for proper operation. Moreover, the types of body control units include, but are not limited to, central body modules that integrate multiple body functions such as, but not limited to, door locks, windows, and lighting; door control units that specifically manage door locking and unlocking operations; comfort modules that regulate interior lighting, climate control, and seat adjustments; and security-focused control units, as exemplified by the passive key entry monitoring system, which ensures secure access through continuous validation of signal latency and actuation feedback.
As used herein, the terms “mechanical locking mechanism”, “locking mechanism”, and “mechanical lock” are used interchangeably and refer to a physical device within the vehicle that secures doors, trunks, or compartments by engaging or disengaging the locking components in response to the electronic commands. Specifically, the mechanical locking mechanism integrates with the electronic control unit and the body control unit to provide secure vehicle access through controlled locking and unlocking operations. Furthermore, the locking mechanism’s actuation latency, measured by comparing the time interval between the command issuance and the sensor feedback, is analysed against the predefined thresholds to ensure alignment with expected operational parameters and to prevent unauthorized tampering or malfunction. Moreover, the types of mechanical locking mechanisms include, but are not limited to, solenoid-operated locks that use electromagnetic force to move locking components, motor-driven locks that rely on electric motors to perform engagement or disengagement, and spring-loaded locks that incorporate mechanical springs to assist in locking motion. In advanced implementations, such as but not limited to the passive key entry monitoring system, the mechanical locking mechanism not only executes locking commands but also provides real-time feedback for the communication validation, enhancing the vehicle security by ensuring that the lock engagement corresponds accurately with authenticated electronic signals. Additionally, the integration of the locking hardware with the sensor modules and the control units ensures robust protection against unauthorized access and maintains synchronization between electronic commands and mechanical responses, providing a secure and efficient locking solution for modern vehicles.
As used herein, the term “periodic signal validation” refers to a recurring process in which the communication signals between components of the vehicle’s security system undergo verification to ensure authenticity, integrity, and proper timing. Specifically, the periodic signal validation within the passive key entry monitoring system involves the electronic control unit transmitting the low-frequency signals at defined intervals to the key fob and receiving the corresponding radio frequency signals containing encrypted identification data. Furthermore, the periodic comparison of the temporal and positional correlation between the second command signal and the received actuation feedback ensures that the mechanical responses correspond accurately to issued commands, thereby maintaining synchronization and detecting potential anomalies. Moreover, the types of periodic signal validation include, but are not limited to, latency-based validation, that focuses on measuring the time interval between signals and comparing the time interval to the secure thresholds; feedback-based validation, which involves monitoring sensor responses for lock actuation status; and integrated validation, where both the communication latency and feedback signals undergo simultaneous analysis to ensure comprehensive security monitoring. Through the systematic repetition of the signal verification at regular intervals, the vehicle’s passive key entry system maintains robust security protocols, prevents unauthorized access, and ensures reliable operation of locking mechanisms by continuously confirming signal integrity and mechanical responsiveness.
As used herein, the term “action feedback validation” refers to the process of verifying the accuracy and integrity of mechanical responses by comparing sensor-reported status with the expected outcomes derived from command signals issued by the vehicle’s control units. Specifically, the action feedback validation within the passive key entry monitoring system involves the electronic control unit sending the second command signal to the mechanical locking mechanism to engage or disengage the lock, followed by continuous monitoring of the actuation status reported by the integrated sensor modules. Furthermore, the types of action feedback validation include, but are not limited to, latency-based validation, where the time interval between the second command signal and the received feedback is measured against the acceptable limits; positional validation, where the sensor readings about the lock’s physical position are compared to the expected states; and consistency validation, where the repeated sensor reports across multiple actuation cycles are analyzed to confirm reliable operation. Within the passive key entry monitoring system, action feedback validation ensures that each locking or unlocking event occurs precisely as commanded, enhancing vehicle security by detecting unauthorized interference, mechanical faults, or signal disruptions, and maintaining synchronization between the electronic controls and physical lock mechanisms through continuous monitoring and real-time analysis.
As used herein, the term “communication module” refers to an electronic component within the vehicle’s control system that facilitates the exchange of signals between various devices, enabling secure authentication, command execution, and feedback monitoring. Specifically, the communication module in the passive key entry monitoring system forms an integral part of the electronic control unit, managing signal transmission to and reception from the key fob. Moreover, the types of communication modules include, but are not limited to, low-frequency transceivers designed for short-range activation and authentication tasks, radio frequency receivers that handle encrypted data exchanges, hybrid modules combining both the low-frequency transmission and the radio frequency reception for seamless authentication protocols, and secure communication interfaces that integrate encryption algorithms to protect against interception or replay attacks. Within the passive key entry monitoring system, the communication module ensures robust, secure, and efficient interaction between the vehicle’s electronic control unit and the key fob, enabling the periodic signal validation and the action feedback validation through precise signal exchange and real-time processing, thereby strengthening vehicle access control and maintaining system reliability under various operational conditions.
As used herein, the term “low-frequency signal” refers to an electromagnetic wave characterized by a relatively low oscillation rate, typically in the range of 30 kHz to 300 kHz, used in the communication systems to establish proximity-based interactions and initiate secure authentication processes. Specifically, the low-frequency signal in the passive key entry monitoring system originates from the vehicle’s communication module within the electronic control unit and serves as the initial trigger for interaction with the key fob. Furthermore, the communication latency between the transmission of the low-frequency signal and the reception of the radio frequency response is measured by the electronic control unit to ensure alignment with predefined thresholds, confirming legitimate access attempts. Moreover, the types of low-frequency signals include, but are not limited to, continuous wave signals used for the steady-state activation, pulsed signals that transmit bursts of energy to initiate communication, frequency-modulated signals that encode authentication data within slight variations of the carrier frequency, and amplitude-modulated signals where the strength of the wave varies to convey specific instructions. Additionally, within the passive key entry monitoring system, the low-frequency signal plays a critical role by enabling secure initiation of communication, limiting activation to close-range interactions, and supporting accurate latency measurements required for validating both signal authenticity and user authorization, thereby ensuring controlled access and safeguarding vehicle security against unauthorized entry or signal manipulation.
As used herein, the term “radio frequency signal” refers to an electromagnetic wave within the frequency spectrum typically ranging from 3 kHz to 300 GHz, used for wireless communication between devices by carrying encoded information over varying distances. Specifically, the radio frequency signal in the passive key entry monitoring system originates from the key fob in response to the low-frequency activation signal transmitted by the vehicle’s communication module. The key fob generates the radio frequency signal, often at 433 MHz, containing encrypted authentication data that confirms user authorization. Further, upon reception by the vehicle’s communication module in the electronic control unit, the signal undergoes processing for latency computation, where the time interval between transmission of the low-frequency signal and arrival of the radio frequency signal undergoes measurement and comparison against predefined thresholds to ensure proper communication. Moreover, the types of radio frequency signals include, but are not limited to, amplitude-modulated signals where data is embedded in changes to the wave’s strength, frequency-modulated signals where information resides in slight variations of the wave’s frequency. Within the passive key entry monitoring system, the radio frequency signal serves as a secure communication channel that carries authentication information from the key fob to the electronic control unit, supporting accurate latency analysis and enabling action feedback validation through sensor-reported lock status, thereby ensuring secure access, protecting against unauthorized attempts, and maintaining seamless synchronization between user presence and vehicle locking mechanisms.
As used herein, the term “communication latency” refers to the measurable time delay that occurs between the transmission of a signal from one device and the reception of the corresponding response from another device within a communication system. Specifically, the communication latency within the passive key entry monitoring system pertains to the interval between the transmission of the low-frequency signal by the vehicle’s communication module and the reception of the radio frequency signal from the key fob. The electronic control unit records the timestamp at which the low-frequency signal initiates the authentication process and subsequently captures the timestamp when the radio frequency signal arrives, calculating the difference to obtain the communication latency value. The computation of communication latency assists in detecting relay attacks, signal interference, or unauthorized access attempts that may attempt to manipulate the authentication process. Furthermore, the types of communication latency include, but are not limited to, propagation latency, defined as the time required for the electromagnetic wave to travel between the vehicle’s communication module and the key fob; processing latency, referring to the time taken by the key fob’s circuitry to decode the activation signal and generate the response; and queuing latency, which arises when signals experience delays in the communication buffers or processing queues due to high traffic or interference. Moreover, the electronic control unit’s ability to continuously monitor and analyze communication latency guarantees synchronized operation between command signals and mechanical responses, safeguarding against tampering or delay-based attacks and ensuring that authentication remains reliable, efficient, and secure across varied operational environments.
As used herein, the term “first command signal” refers to an electronic instruction generated by the electronic control unit within the vehicle’s communication system to initiate the specific operational response in another subsystem based on verified authentication or computed parameters. Specifically, the first command signal within the passive key entry monitoring system originates from the electronic control unit after calculating the communication latency between the low-frequency signal sent to the key fob and the radio frequency signal received in response. Further, the first command signal encodes parameters such as, but not limited to, authentication validity, timing alignment, and operational directives, ensuring secure execution of locking or unlocking procedures. Upon reception of the first command signal, the body control unit processes the information and accordingly initiates actions such as, but not limited to, sending the second command signal to the mechanical locking mechanism or performing diagnostic protocols if irregularities are detected in communication. Furthermore, the types of first command signals include, but are not limited to, access grant signals that authorize unlocking of the vehicle doors, access denial signals that prevent unlocking due to failed authentication, synchronization signals that instruct timing adjustments between the control units, and diagnostic request signals that prompt error-checking procedures in the mechanical locking mechanism. Within the passive key entry monitoring system, the first command signal ensures that only properly authenticated signals proceed to trigger mechanical actions, thereby integrating latency validation with operational execution. Moreover, the secure formulation and transmission of the first command signal establish a crucial link between the communication validation and the vehicle access control, reinforcing system integrity, preventing unauthorized access, and ensuring synchronized coordination between the electronic control unit, body control unit, and mechanical locking mechanism for seamless and secure vehicle operation.
As used herein, the term “sensor module” refers to an electronic assembly designed to detect, measure, and report physical states or changes in the system, converting mechanical or environmental inputs into electrical signals for further processing by control units. Specifically, the sensor module within the passive key entry monitoring system integrates with the mechanical locking mechanism to monitor actuation status, providing real-time feedback regarding the lock’s position, movement, and operational integrity. The sensor module detects whether the locking mechanism is fully engaged, disengaged, or in transition by measuring factors such as, but not limited to, displacement, angular rotation, or contact states. Furthermore, the types of sensor modules include, but are not limited to, reed switch sensors that respond to magnetic fields for detecting open or closed states, Hall-effect sensors that measure variations in magnetic flux to determine component position, optical sensors that use light-based measurements to detect movement or obstruction, and strain gauge sensors that measure deformation forces during lock actuation. Moreover, the sensor module’s real-time reporting of actuation status provides the electronic control unit with the necessary data to compare temporal and positional correlations, detect anomalies, and initiate corrective actions through diagnostic signals. By continuously monitoring lock engagement and feeding back precise measurements, the sensor module fortifies the system security, guarantees synchronization between the electronic commands and the mechanical responses, and prevents unauthorized access or mechanical failures that compromise vehicle safety and operational reliability.
As used herein, the term “actuation status” refers to the measurable condition of a mechanical system indicating whether a commanded action has been executed, partially executed, or failed, based on sensor inputs and physical movement. Specifically, within the passive key entry monitoring system, the actuation status describes the state of the mechanical locking mechanism as detected by sensor modules integrated into the lock assembly. The sensor modules monitor parameters such as, but not limited to, bolt engagement, rotational alignment, or contact continuity, converting mechanical movements into electrical signals that report whether the locking mechanism is fully locked, unlocked, transitioning, or experiencing faults. Furthermore, the types of actuation status include, but are not limited to, locked, where the locking components are fully engaged to prevent unauthorized entry; unlocked, where the lock is fully disengaged to allow access; transitioning, where the locking mechanism is in motion between engagement and disengagement, often identified by fluctuating or partial signals; and fault, where sensor anomalies, obstructions, or incomplete movements indicate a failure in executing the commanded action. Moreover, the continuous monitoring and analysis of actuation status establishes a secure interface between the electronic controls and the mechanical execution, reinforcing the integrity and reliability of vehicle access management.
As used herein, the term “second command signal” refers to an electronic instruction generated by the vehicle’s control system to initiate or control a mechanical action based on validated authentication and system status feedback. Specifically, within the passive key entry monitoring system, the second command signal originates from the electronic control unit and is transmitted to the mechanical locking mechanism through the body control unit to execute locking or unlocking operations. The electronic control unit periodically compares the second command signal’s timing and expected outcome with the received actuation feedback, validating the accuracy and reliability of the lock’s response. Furthermore, the types of second command signals include, but are not limited to, lock activation signals that instruct the locking mechanism to secure the door, unlock activation signals that direct the mechanism to release the lock, status inquiry signals that prompt the mechanism’s sensors to report current lock conditions, and error correction signals that initiate troubleshooting or reset procedures in the event of a detected malfunction. Moreover, the continuous exchange of second command signals and corresponding actuation feedback enables the system to maintain integrity, prevent unauthorized access, and rapidly identify discrepancies that may compromise lock functionality, thereby reinforcing both user convenience and vehicle security.
As used herein, the term “temporal and positional correlation” refers to the relationship between the timing of command signals and the physical position or state of a mechanical component, used to verify that mechanical actions occur in alignment with issued instructions. Specifically, within the passive key entry monitoring system, the temporal and positional correlation involves the periodic comparison between the second command signal sent from the electronic control unit to the mechanical locking mechanism and the actuation feedback reported by the sensor modules embedded within the lock assembly. The temporal correlation measures the time interval between the issuance of the command and the corresponding mechanical response, ensuring that the locking or unlocking operation occurs within an acceptable latency range defined by system thresholds. Further, the positional correlation assesses the physical state of the locking mechanism, verifying whether the lock’s engagement or disengagement matches the expected position according to the command signal. The types of positional correlation include, but are not limited to, state verification, which confirms whether the lock is fully engaged or disengaged; partial movement detection, which identifies incomplete transitions or mechanical resistance; and anomaly recognition, which flags inconsistencies between expected and reported lock positions. Moreover, within the passive key entry monitoring system, the temporal and positional correlation serves as a critical validation framework, enabling the electronic control unit to ensure that locking operations occur precisely as commanded, enhancing vehicle security by detecting timing irregularities or positional discrepancies, and maintaining reliable, synchronized interaction between electronic commands and mechanical responses.
As used herein, the term “control signal” refers to an electronic instruction generated by the control unit to regulate, manage, or coordinate the operation of the subsystem by conveying specific directives based on processed data and system conditions. Specifically, within the passive key entry monitoring system, the control signal originates from the electronic control unit after periodic comparisons of the temporal and positional correlation between the second command signal and the actuation feedback from the mechanical locking mechanism. The control signal directs the body control unit to perform actions such as, but not limited to, transmitting diagnostic instructions to the mechanical locking mechanism, adjusting operational parameters, or triggering safety protocols in response to deviations detected in timing or positional alignment. The types of control signals include, but are not limited to, diagnostic control signals that instruct the body control unit to initiate self-check procedures within the locking mechanism, synchronization signals that align actuation timing between command issuance and mechanical response, corrective control signals that adjust or repeat operations to resolve detected discrepancies, and authorization control signals that confirm or deny access based on communication latency and actuation feedback validation. By continuously transmitting and updating the control signals based on real-time monitoring of the actuation status and the temporal-positional correlations, the system maintains secure vehicle access, detects anomalies or unauthorized attempts, and preserves synchronization across the electronic control unit, body control unit, and mechanical locking mechanism, thereby guaranteeing reliable and secure operation of the passive keyless entry functionality.
As used herein, the term “diagnostic signal” refers to an electronic communication transmitted by the control unit to initiate, monitor, or verify the operational status of the subsystem, ensuring proper functionality and detecting anomalies. Specifically, within the passive key entry monitoring system, the diagnostic signal originates from the body control unit based on control signals received from the electronic control unit and is directed toward the mechanical locking mechanism. Further, the types of diagnostic signals include, but are not limited to, status inquiry signals, which request current actuation and sensor data from the locking mechanism; error detection signals, which trigger evaluation of mechanical or sensor malfunctions; calibration signals, which instruct adjustment of sensor thresholds or mechanical alignment; and reset signals, which command the locking mechanism to restore default operating conditions after anomaly resolution. Furthermore, within the passive key entry monitoring system, the diagnostic signal ensures that mechanical and electronic components operate in strict accordance with authentication and command directives, providing continuous validation of system integrity. Moreover, by integrating diagnostic signalling with communication latency analysis, action feedback validation, and temporal-positional correlation, the system detects mechanical faults, and unauthorized interference.
In accordance with a first aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a system for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle, the system comprising:
- at least one electronic control unit communicably coupled to at least one key fob;
- at least one body control unit communicably coupled to the at least one electronic control unit; and
- at least one mechanical locking mechanism communicably coupled to the at least one electronic control unit and the at least one body control unit,
wherein the at least one electronic control unit is configured to perform periodic signal validation with the at least one key fob and actuation feedback validation from the at least one mechanical locking mechanism.
Referring to figure 1, in accordance with an embodiment, there is described a system 100 for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle. The system 100 comprises at least one electronic control unit 102 communicably coupled to at least one key fob 104. Further, the system 100 comprises at least one body control unit 106 communicably coupled to the at least one electronic control unit 102. Furthermore, the system 100 comprises at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108 communicably coupled to the at least one electronic control unit 102 and the at least one body control unit 106. Moreover, the at least one electronic control unit 102 is configured to perform periodic signal validation with the at least one key fob 104 and actuation feedback validation from the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108.
The system 100 operates by integrating the electronic control unit 102, the body control unit 106, the mechanical locking mechanism 108, and the key fob 104 in the communicative architecture designed for monitoring the PKE. Specifically, the electronic control unit 102 establishes a communication link with the key fob 104 through periodic signal validation by transmitting low-frequency signals and receiving radio frequency signals. Further, the electronic control unit 102 continuously validates signal integrity through periodic interactions, ensuring synchronization between user presence and vehicle access authorization. The process of operation includes, but is not limited to, transmitting the low-frequency signal from the communication module 110 of the electronic control unit 102 to the key fob 104 and receiving the corresponding radio frequency signal in response. Furthermore, the electronic control unit 102 computes the communication latency by calculating the difference between timestamps associated with signal transmission and reception and compares the computed latency against a predefined threshold to assess signal authenticity. Based on the computed latency, the electronic control unit 102 generates a first command signal to the body control unit 106, triggering appropriate vehicle access responses. Moreover, the electronic control unit 102 further sends a second command signal to the mechanical locking mechanism 108 to actuate unlocking or locking and receives actuation feedback through the sensor module 112 embedded in the mechanical locking mechanism 108. Additionally, the integration of the actuation feedback from the mechanical locking mechanism 108 with temporal and positional correlation checks ensures that the mechanical unlocking only proceeds in authorized scenarios, thus preventing relay attacks or system tampering. The system 100 offers advantages such as, but not limited to, improved reliability in access authorization, reduced vulnerability to signal-based attacks, real-time monitoring of actuation events, and increased safety through controlled vehicle locking operations. Subsequently, the architecture of the system 100 provides a robust framework for secure and fault-tolerant Passive Keyless Entry monitoring in modern vehicle applications.
In an embodiment, the at least one electronic control unit 102 comprises a communication module 110, wherein the communication module 110 is configured to transmit a low-frequency signal to the at least one key fob 104 and receive the radio frequency signal from the at least one key fob 104. Specifically, the system 100 operates by incorporating the communication module 110 within the electronic control unit 102, enabling transmission of the low-frequency signal to the key fob 104 and reception of the radio frequency signal from the key fob 104. The communication module 110 initiates the signal transmission at a defined frequency, such as, but not limited to, 125 kHz, to establish contact with the key fob 104. Further, upon receiving the low-frequency signal, the key fob 104 generates the radio frequency response signal, for instance, at 433 MHz, which the communication module 110 receives and processes. Further, the electronic control unit 102 utilizes the two-way communication for authentication, ensuring that the signals originate from the authorized key fob 104 linked to the vehicle access system. The interaction between the communication module 110 and the key fob 104 remains continuous, allowing periodic verification of presence and validity of the key fob 104, thereby supporting secure and efficient Passive Keyless Entry operations. The communication module 110 continuously repeats the signal exchange at defined intervals, ensuring uninterrupted verification of user presence. Additionally, the process further involves filtering received signals to distinguish genuine responses from interference, and prioritizing signal integrity by evaluating signal strength, timing accuracy, and data consistency. Subsequently, the use of distinct frequencies for transmission and reception eliminates signal interference and enhances the detection of legitimate signals from the key fob 104. The process ensures that the vehicle access only proceeds upon successful validation of signal integrity, timing, and identification data, thereby safeguarding against relay attacks and spoofing attempts. Ultimately, the system 100 offers advantages such as, but not limited to, high resilience to signal-based tampering, reduced false acceptance rates, improved access control accuracy, and enhanced vehicle security. The structured communication between the electronic control unit 102 and the key fob 104 through the communication module 110 delivers consistent and dependable authentication, forming the core of the secure Passive Keyless Entry framework.
In an embodiment, the at least one electronic control unit 102 is configured to compute a communication latency for a predefined threshold between the low-frequency signal to the at least one key fob 104 and the radio frequency signal from the at least one key fob 104. Specifically, the communication module 110 within the electronic control unit 102 initiates the signal transmission at a predefined frequency, such as, but not limited to, 125 kHz, and records the timestamp T_{LF\_sent} at the moment of transmission. Upon reception of the radio frequency response at, for instance, 433 MHz from the key fob 104, the communication module 110 records the timestamp T_{RF\_received}. Further, the electronic control unit 102 utilizes the timestamps to compute the communication latency using the equation: Latency_{RF\_received}-T_{LF\_sent}. The computed latency is compared against a predefined threshold value, such as, but not limited to, 5 milliseconds, to assess signal integrity, ensuring that the interaction between the vehicle system and the key fob 104 remains within acceptable temporal parameters required for secure access validation. The electronic control unit 102 computes the difference between the timestamps to determine communication latency, subsequently comparing the computed value against the predefined threshold stored in memory. Additionally, the procedure ensures that only key fobs 104 within the defined proximity and exhibiting expected response timing gain access, thereby fortifying the vehicle security through real-time latency evaluation. Consequently, computing communication latency involves enhanced detection of unauthorized access attempts by validating temporal integrity between the electronic control unit 102 and the key fob 104. Subsequently, the latency computation introduces a layer of defense that prevents exploitation of communication delays, thereby strengthening access control. The system 100 offers advantages such as, but not limited to, improved accuracy in identifying proximity-based interactions, reduced false positives in authentication processes, increased robustness against relay attacks, and the ability to initiate rapid security responses when anomalies in communication latency are detected.
In an embodiment, the at least one electronic control unit 102 is configured to generate and send a first command signal to the at least one body control unit 106 based on the computed communication latency. Specifically, upon computation of the latency through the communication module 110, the electronic control unit 102 evaluates whether the latency falls within the predefined threshold value, such as, but not limited to, 5 milliseconds. Further, the first command signal transmits to the body control unit 106 through a dedicated communication bus or secure wireless link, ensuring encryption of signal data during transmission. The body control unit 106 receives the first command signal and processes the first command signal to trigger subsequent actions in the vehicle access mechanism. Furthermore, the process includes, but is not limited to, computing communication latency using the recorded timestamps T_{LF\_sent} and T_{RF\_received}, comparing the computed latency against the predefined threshold, and determining the authentication status of the key fob 104. The electronic control unit 102 encodes the authentication result, along with diagnostic information and the vehicle-specific identifiers, into the first command signal. Consequently, generating and sending the first command signal involves secure and verified access authorization based on validated communication latency. The electronic control unit 102 ensures that only the key fobs 104 exhibiting expected timing behavior gain access, thereby minimizing risks associated with unauthorized or spoofed signals. Subsequently, the body control unit 106 processes authenticated commands to execute vehicle access operations only after receiving verified signals, reducing the chances of security breaches. The system 100 offers advantages such as, but not limited to, enhanced protection against relay and spoofing attacks, improved synchronization between the vehicle systems, real-time access validation, and secure communication through encryption protocols.
In an embodiment, the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108 comprises at least one sensor module 112, and wherein the at least one sensor module 112 is configured to sense an actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108. Specifically, the sensor module 112 continuously monitors the position, movement, and engagement state of locking components such as, but not limited to, bolts, latches, or solenoids. The sensor module 112 comprises position sensors, such as, but not limited to, magnetic sensors or Hall-effect sensors, and movement sensors, such as, but not limited to, accelerometers, to detect unlocking or locking actions. Furthermore, the process includes, but is not limited to, detecting actuation status by the sensor module 112 integrated within the mechanical locking mechanism 108. Upon reception of the second command signal from the electronic control unit 102, the locking components move to unlock or lock the vehicle access point. Moreover, the sensor module 112 senses displacement by measuring changes in the magnetic field strength, angular orientation, or linear position, and records time-stamped signals T_{actuation} representing the moment of motion initiation. The process incorporates filtering algorithms to differentiate valid motion signals from mechanical noise, ensuring precise actuation detection and minimizing erroneous signals during transient movements or vibrations. The sensor module 112 ensures that only commanded movements trigger access changes, thereby safeguarding the vehicle against unauthorized attempts to manipulate the locking mechanism. Subsequently, the system 100 offers advantages such as, but not limited to, enhanced security through direct monitoring of mechanical components, improved reliability of the vehicle access functions by confirming actual actuation, increased fault detection by identifying discrepancies between the command signals and the mechanical response, and reduction of false alarms due to environmental noise.
In an embodiment, the at least one electronic control unit 102 is configured to send a second command signal to the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108 and receive the actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108. Specifically, upon determining authentication through computed communication latency and validation of the key fob 104, the electronic control unit 102 generates the second command signal containing actuation instructions, such as, but not limited to, “lock” or “unlock.” The sensor module 112 transmits the recorded status back to the electronic control unit 102, establishing the closed-loop interaction between the command initiation and the mechanical execution, ensuring synchronization and verification of physical locking operations. Further, the process includes, but is not limited to, generating the second command signal within the electronic control unit 102 after validating the signal authenticity with the key fob 104. The second command signal encodes the specific instructions for mechanical actuation, such as, but not limited to, unlocking door latches or locking access points, along with the authentication data and timing information. Moreover, the feedback signals are transmitted to the electronic control unit 102 through the communication link, which processes the signals to confirm the locking mechanism’s response. The process incorporates noise filtering, signal validation, and error-checking algorithms to ensure accurate detection of mechanical states and prevent false readings caused by environmental disturbances or mechanical wear. Additionally, the feedback loop between the electronic control unit 102 and the mechanical locking mechanism 108 reinforces the system integrity by cross-validating physical movements against control signals. The system 100 offers advantages such as, but not limited to, enhanced security through real-time mechanical monitoring, improved reliability of the locking functions, reduction of false positives due to the mechanical noise, increased fault detection by identifying discrepancies between commanded actions and actual responses, and the ability to initiate corrective actions in case of abnormal operation.
In an embodiment, the at least one electronic control unit 102 is configured to periodically compare temporal and positional correlation between the second command signal and the received actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108. Specifically, upon generating the second command signal instructing the mechanical locking mechanism 108 to lock or unlock, the electronic control unit 102 records a timestamp T_{command} and transmits the command to the mechanical locking mechanism 108. The sensor module 112 senses the actuation status, records the timestamp T_{status}, and transmits the data back to the electronic control unit 102. Further, the electronic control unit 102 then evaluates the correlation by calculating the difference between T_{status} and T_{command} using the equation: \Delta T = |T_{status} - T_{command}|. Furthermore, the process includes, but is not limited to, periodic generation of the second command signal within the electronic control unit 102 following successful authentication through latency computation and validation of the key fob 104. The second command signal encodes actuation instructions for the mechanical locking mechanism 108, which executes movement based on received commands. Moreover, the sensor module 112 records actuation feedback in real time, capturing parameters such as, but not limited to, door lock position, bolt engagement, and movement duration. Additionally, positional correlation includes, but is not limited to, verifying mechanical engagement by comparing sensor-reported positions with expected locking positions, using algorithms to match movement patterns and detect anomalies. The periodic comparison process repeats at defined intervals, such as, but not limited to, every 50 milliseconds, ensuring continuous validation of mechanical operations and immediate identification of discrepancies. The system 100 offers advantages such as, but not limited to, real-time fault detection, improved reliability in the locking and unlocking operations, increased resistance to tampering and spoofing attacks, and enhanced safety by preventing unauthorized access attempts. Ultimately, the integration of temporal and positional correlation within the electronic control unit 102 ensures that mechanical operations align strictly with authorized commands, providing robust, secure, and fault-tolerant vehicle access control.
In an embodiment, the at least one electronic control unit 102 is configured to generate and send a control signal to the at least one body control unit 106 based on the periodic comparison between the second command signal and the received actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108. Upon identifying whether correlation metrics fall within predefined thresholds, such as, but not limited to, a time difference of less than 10 milliseconds and positional deviation within 2 degrees or 5 millimeters, the electronic control unit 102 formulates a control signal containing authentication results, diagnostic data, and status flags. The control signal transmits to the body control unit 106 through an automotive communication network, such as, but not limited to, the Controller Area Network (CAN), with added encryption layers and integrity checks ensuring error-free data reception. Additionally, the body control unit 106 processes the control signal to determine whether further action, such as, but not limited to, granting vehicle access or triggering alerts, aligns with validated mechanical operations. Consequently, generating and sending the control signal based on correlation analysis involves accurate verification of mechanical actuation, ensuring that only validated locking or unlocking actions proceed within the vehicle system. By establishing a feedback loop where actuation responses undergo rigorous comparison against expected outcomes, the system 100 mitigates risks associated with mechanical failures, tampering, and signal manipulation. Subsequently, the process enforces strict adherence to predefined operational thresholds, enabling fault detection and real-time correction. The system 100 offers advantages such as, but not limited to, increased reliability in locking operations, improved vehicle security by preventing unauthorized access through manipulated signals, rapid identification of mechanical anomalies, and enhanced system resilience through continuous monitoring.
In an embodiment, the at least one body control unit 106 is configured to transmit a diagnostic signal to the least one mechanical locking mechanism 108 based on the received control signal from the at least one electronic control unit 102. Specifically, the body control unit 106 receives the control signal containing the authentication results, temporal and positional correlation outcomes, and diagnostic information from the electronic control unit 102 through the secure communication channel. Upon analyzing the control signal, the body control unit 106 formulates a diagnostic signal containing instructions to perform self-checks, error logging, or status reporting within the mechanical locking mechanism 108. Further, the diagnostic signal transmits through the dedicated communication interface to the mechanical locking mechanism 108, instructing the sensor module 112 to evaluate operational parameters such as, but not limited to, lock engagement force, actuator current consumption, or sensor integrity. The diagnostic signal initiates the predefined diagnostic routine within the mechanical locking mechanism 108, ensuring that locking components operate within expected performance parameters. Moreover, the diagnostic signal includes, but is not limited to, instructions for conducting checks such as, but is not limited to, measuring voltage drop across actuators, evaluating sensor drift, and confirming mechanical alignment. The diagnostic signal transmits to the mechanical locking mechanism 108, prompting the sensor module 112 to initiate data acquisition routines. Additionally, the sensor module 112 records the operational parameters, such as, but not limited to, torque applied during locking, time to engage bolts, and current consumption profiles, and transmits diagnostic feedback to the body control unit 106. The body control unit 106 processes the feedback to determine anomalies or confirm operational integrity, storing diagnostic codes and timestamps for traceability. By instructing the mechanical locking mechanism 108 to perform diagnostic checks based on validated correlation data, the system 100 ensures that mechanical components operate reliably and respond accurately to control signals. The system 100 offers advantages such as increased safety through proactive diagnostics, improved reliability of locking operations, reduced downtime through timely fault detection, and enhanced resilience against tampering or mechanical failure. Ultimately, the integration of diagnostic signaling between the body control unit 106 and the mechanical locking mechanism 108 ensures that the Passive Keyless Entry monitoring system maintains consistent, secure, and fault-tolerant operation throughout vehicle usage.
In an exemplary embodiment, the system 100 for monitoring the Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of the vehicle includes, but is not limited to, the electronic control unit 102, the body control unit 106, the mechanical locking mechanism 108, the at least one key fob 104, and a sensor module 112. The electronic control unit 102 incorporates a communication module 110 that transmits the low-frequency signal at 125 kHz to the key fob 104 and receives the radio frequency signal at 433 MHz from the key fob 104. The electronic control unit 102 computes communication latency using the equation:
Latency = T_{RF\_received} - T_{LF\_sent}
For instance, if T_{LF\_sent} = 12.500 seconds and T_{RF\_received} = 12.503 seconds:
Latency = 12.503 - 12.500 = 0.003 \text{seconds (3 ms)}
Furthermore, the predefined threshold for the acceptable latency equals 5 milliseconds. Since the computed latency of 3 milliseconds falls below the threshold, the electronic control unit 102 generates the first command signal containing authentication data and sends the first command signal to the body control unit 106 for further processing. Moreover, the body control unit 106 decrypts and verifies the first command signal, confirming the presence of the authorized key fob 104. Upon authentication, the electronic control unit 102 sends the second command signal to the mechanical locking mechanism 108, instructing an unlock action. Additionally, the sensor module 112 integrated within the mechanical locking mechanism 108 records the actuation status and generates a signal confirming the unlocking process. The sensor module 112 records a timestamp T_{status} = 12.504 seconds. Subsequently, the electronic control unit 102 compares T_{command}=12.503 seconds and T_{status}=12.504 seconds by calculating:
\Delta T = |T_{status} - T_{command}| = |12.504 - 12.503| = 0.001 \text{ seconds (1 ms)}
Since \Delta T equals 1 millisecond, the correlation between the second command signal and the actuation status falls within the predefined acceptable limit of 10 milliseconds. Additionally, the positional correlation confirms alignment between the commanded unlocking movement and actual bolt displacement, where the displacement recorded by the sensor module 112 matches an expected value of 5 millimeters within a tolerance of ±1 millimeter. The sensor module 112 transmits diagnostic feedback indicating current consumption at 2.1 A and locking force at 50 N, both within predefined thresholds of 2.5 A and 60 N, respectively. Furthermore, the body control unit 106 processes the feedback, confirming the proper functioning of the mechanical locking mechanism 108.
In accordance with a second aspect, there is described a method for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle, the method comprising:
- transmitting a low-frequency signal to at least one key fob and receiving a radio frequency signal from the at least one key fob, via a communication module;
- computing a communication latency for a predefined threshold between the low-frequency signal sent to the at least one key fob and the radio frequency signal received from the at least one key fob, via at least one electronic control unit;
- generating and sending a first command signal to the at least one body control unit based on the computed communication latency, via the at least one electronic control module;
- sending a second command signal to the at least one mechanical locking mechanism and receiving the actuation status of the least one mechanical locking mechanism, via the at least one electronic control module; and
- comparing periodically a temporal and positional correlation between the second command signal and the received actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism, via the at least one electronic control module.
Referring to figure 2, in accordance with an embodiment, there is described a method 200 for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle. At step 202, the method 200 comprises transmitting a low-frequency signal to at least one key fob 104 and receiving a radio frequency signal from the at least one key fob 104, via a communication module 110. At step 204, the method 200 comprises computing a communication latency for a predefined threshold between the low-frequency signal sent to the at least one key fob 104 and the radio frequency signal received from the at least one key fob 104, via at least one electronic control unit 102. At step 206, the method 200 comprises generating and sending a first command signal to the at least one body control unit 106 based on the computed communication latency, via the at least one electronic control module 102. At step 208, the method 200 comprises sending a second command signal to the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108 and receiving the actuation status of the least one mechanical locking mechanism 108, via the at least one electronic control module 102. At step 210, the method 200 comprises comparing periodically a temporal and positional correlation between the second command signal and the received actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108, via the at least one electronic control module 102.
In an embodiment, the method 200 comprises sensing the actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108, via the at least one sensor module 112.
In an embodiment, the method 200 comprises generating and sending the control signal to the at least one body control unit 106 based on the periodic comparison between the second command signal and the received actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108, via the at least one electronic control unit 102.
In an embodiment, the method 200 comprises transmitting the diagnostic signal to the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108 based on the received control signal from the at least one electronic control unit, via the at least one body control unit 106.
In an embodiment, the method 200 comprises transmitting a low-frequency signal to at least one key fob 104 and receiving a radio frequency signal from the at least one key fob 104, via a communication module 110. Further, the method 200 comprises computing a communication latency for a predefined threshold between the low-frequency signal sent to the at least one key fob 104 and the radio frequency signal received from the at least one key fob 104, via at least one electronic control unit 102. Furthermore, the method 200 comprises generating and sending a first command signal to the at least one body control unit 106 based on the computed communication latency, via the at least one electronic control module 102. Moreover, the method 200 comprises sensing the actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108, via the at least one sensor module 112. Additionally, the method 200 comprises sending a second command signal to the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108 and receiving the actuation status of the least one mechanical locking mechanism 108, via the at least one electronic control module 102. Subsequently, the method 200 comprises comparing periodically a temporal and positional correlation between the second command signal and the received actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108, via the at least one electronic control module 102. Eventually, the method 200 comprises generating and sending the control signal to the at least one body control unit 106 based on the periodic comparison between the second command signal and the received actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108, via the at least one electronic control unit 102. Ultimately, the method 200 comprises transmitting the diagnostic signal to the at least one mechanical locking mechanism 108 based on the received control signal from the at least one electronic control unit, via the at least one body control unit 106.
The system for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle, as described in the present disclosure, is advantageous in terms of enhancing the vehicle security by ensuring authentication through periodic signal validation between the electronic control unit 102 and the key fob 104.
It would be appreciated that all the explanations and embodiments of the system 100 also apply mutatis-mutandis to the method 200.
In the description of the present disclosure, it is also to be noted that, unless otherwise explicitly specified or limited, the terms “disposed,” “mounted,” and “connected” are to be construed broadly, and may for example be fixedly connected, detachably connected, or integrally connected, either mechanically or electrically. They may be connected directly or indirectly through intervening media, or they may be interconnected between two elements. The specific meaning of the above terms in the present disclosure can be understood in specific cases to those skilled in the art.
Modifications to embodiments and combinations of different embodiments of the present disclosure described in the foregoing are possible without departing from the scope of the present disclosure as defined by the accompanying claims. Expressions such as “including”, “comprising”, “incorporating”, “have”, and “is” used to describe and claim the present disclosure are intended to be construed in a non-exclusive manner, namely allowing for items, components or elements not explicitly described also to be present. Reference to the singular is also to be construed to relate to the plural where appropriate.
Although embodiments have been described with reference to a number of illustrative embodiments thereof, it should be understood that numerous other modifications and embodiments can be devised by those skilled in the art that will fall within the scope of the principles of this disclosure. More particularly, various variations and modifications are possible in the component parts and/or arrangements of the subject combination arrangement within the scope of the present disclosure, the drawings, and the appended claims. In addition to variations and modifications in the component parts and/or arrangements, alternative uses will also be apparent to those skilled in the art.
,CLAIMS:WE CLAIM:
1. A system (100) for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle, the system (100) comprising:
- at least one electronic control unit (102) communicably coupled to at least one key fob (104);
- at least one body control unit (106) communicably coupled to the at least one electronic control unit (102); and
- at least one mechanical locking mechanism (108) communicably coupled to the at least one electronic control unit (102) and the at least one body control unit (106),
wherein the at least one electronic control unit (102) is configured to perform periodic signal validation with the at least one key fob (104) and actuation feedback validation from the at least one mechanical locking mechanism (108).

2. The system (100) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one electronic control unit (102) comprises a communication module (110), and wherein the communication module (110) is configured to transmit a low-frequency signal to the at least one key fob (104) and receive a radio frequency signal from the at least one key fob (104).

3. The system (100) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one electronic control unit (102) is configured to compute a communication latency for a predefined threshold between the low-frequency signal to the at least one key fob (104) and the radio frequency signal from the at least one key fob (104).

4. The system (100) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one electronic control unit (102) is configured to generate and send a first command signal to the at least one body control unit (106) based on the computed communication latency.

5. The system (100) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one mechanical locking mechanism (108) comprises at least one sensor module (112), and wherein the at least one sensor module (112) is configured to sense an actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism (108).

6. The system (100) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one electronic control unit (102) is configured to send a second command signal to the at least one mechanical locking mechanism (108) and receive the actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism (108).

7. The system (100) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one electronic control unit (102) is configured to periodically compare temporal and positional correlation between the second command signal and the received actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism (108).

8. The system (100) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one electronic control unit (102) is configured to generate and send a control signal to the at least one body control unit (106) based on the periodic comparison between the second command signal and the received actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism (108).

9. The system (100) according to claim 8, wherein the at least one body control unit (106) is configured to transmit a diagnostic signal to the least one mechanical locking mechanism (108) based on the received control signal from the at least one electronic control unit (102).

10. The method (200) for monitoring a Passive Keyless Entry (PKE) of a vehicle, the method (200) comprising:
- transmitting a low-frequency signal to at least one key fob (104) and receiving a radio frequency signal from the at least one key fob (104), via a communication module (110);
- computing a communication latency for a predefined threshold between the low-frequency signal sent to the at least one key fob (104) and the radio frequency signal received from the at least one key fob (104), via at least one electronic control unit (102);
- generating and sending a first command signal to the at least one body control unit (106) based on the computed communication latency, via the at least one electronic control module (102);
- sending a second command signal to the at least one mechanical locking mechanism (108) and receiving the actuation status of the least one mechanical locking mechanism (108), via the at least one electronic control module (102); and
- comparing periodically a temporal and positional correlation between the second command signal and the received actuation status of the at least one mechanical locking mechanism (108), via the at least one electronic control module (102).