Dumb safety devices

nocones wrote:

DrBoost wrote: I'm not an engineer but I've worked with them all my working life and I am continually astounded by the lack of common sense that SEEMS so prevalent.

I'm an Engineer and I've worked with normal people all my working life and I am continually astounded by the lack of intelligence that IS so prevalent.

Fixed that for you.

Unfortunately, I'm an engineer and a lawyer, so I can't win.

As bad as that stuff seems its way better than the piano wire neck belt restraining system I came up with to keep my wife safe in the passenger seat. That was a real disaster.

oooh so screwed.

I think that society as a whole enjoys seeing when people who are well educated and "smart" screw up. Scientists, Engineers, Lawyers, Doctors, etc. all seem to incur the wrath of people in "normal" professions. I'm guilty of blaming lawyers for things, however I am also smart enough to realize that although there are some real overpaid sleazebags, the justice system, patent system, insurance system, and pretty much any contract based activity that our country has REQUIRES lawyers. And if my theory holds about 20-30% of people being bad at their job.. That a TON of bad lawyers.

DrBoost wrote: Eric, I mean no disrepect but I can see how it was inferred. I'm not an engineer but I've worked with them all my working life and I am continually astounded by the lack of common sense that SEEMS so prevalent. When I was writing service manuals for Ford I had to go back like 10 years and change EVERY manual for EVERY v-engined car to show a picture of the motor and the dist. cap to show the firing order (most had the 1-5-3-6-4-2 style [extra credit, what motor has that firing order?]) because an engineer took the plug wires from his 5.0L can after 3 days couldn't figure it out. Do you know just how big a undertaking that is? And how much it cost Ford because this guy didn't know how to figure it out? Then there was the engineer that told me and told me that in order to remove the oil pan on the 2.3L DOHC motor in the ranger you had to lower the front cross member. I told her every way I could that the cross member was welded in, not bolted in. She simply couldn't grasp the difference between a threaded fastener and a weld. She finally agreed to look at the truck when I told her I'd need some time with a torch to lower that cross member.

That, I can't deny happening. The CORE problem with that is the service engineers don't work closely enough with the design/development engineers. I wish so much that we would work closer together, but for some reason, it just isn't as smooth as it should be.

And we wonder why cars are so troublesome. Why do you think 1st model year vehicles are so much more problematic than the next years? (think my focus). It's because most engineers don't have a grasp on how a vehicle actually works or what it takes to remove said part so that first year is trial and error. Now, not trying to stroke your ego Eric, but if every engineer (I don't even know what kind of engineer you are) had the automotive knowledge you have things would be different.

OTOH, I do see a lot of work to make sure this doesn't happen. Design and development engineers get a LOT of field data to understand actual usage, and do put that into a lot of tests- some seemingly extra ones that don't make a lot of sense. But even better is when a sign off test has to be completely thrown away for one that actually represents a customer usage pattern. And note A customer, not "average" customer. We try to find that singular user who does something completely odd- as it's pretty easy to make the average customer happy. It's the <1% that gets you a bad name.

Thankfully, I'm far from unique, as I see it.

(I'm a powertrain calibrator- the ultimate powertrains systems engineer- take everybody elses stuff and make it work)

E-

DrBoost wrote: Seriously, these things,especially the last one sound just plain stupid. Wouldn't it be cheaper to teach people how to drive a car so they can avoid most of the accidents that do happen? Makes me lose even more respect for engineers.

Some marketing guys and high level managers tell a group of safety engineers to make some far out airbags...and it makes you lose respect for ALL engineers?

Tough break for the other 99.999% of the engineers in the world!

Bryce

Easy there, Doc Boost. More'n once I have railed against the proliferation of balloons in cars as a substitute for proper reinforcement of the passenger compartment allied with effective driver training and got told what a big dumb stupidhead I are.

If we trained drivers with the aim of real competency, they'd just be overconfident behind the wheel.

Here are some safety innovations I'd like to see:

1. An airbag that inflates to prevent you getting in the car if the car detects that you are a. In a hurry b. Stressed about work or family issues c. Drunk d. Distracted e. On your way to a "liaison"

2. Windows that goes opaque when the car detects "danger," to keep the driver and passengers from panicking or dropping their texting devices prior to running over pedestrians and cyclists.

I hate engineers as much as the next guy, but what I really hate - people (engineers or not) who don't bother to educate themselves on the technology before bashing it and the makers.

The floor air bag is going to go off only if a crash is detected to be unavoidable. I am not sure what that totally means, but probably only a second away at that point at speed. But guess what, you are not going steer out of it at that point, so don’t worry about the loss of steering due to the upward force of the airbag. Also, ever hear of suspension sag?? The thing is only going to lift the front of the car 8 cm. It is not going to lift the wheels off the ground. The airbag is also going to have a high friction surface, slowing the car more than if it only used the front tires . And all the swept braking area in the world isn't going to help if you are at the limits of the tires ability to use it.

As far as the seatbelts burning your torso, come on. Did you think that no one else considered this before investing millions into research? From a quick google search:

“Each belt’s tubular air bag inflates with cold compressed gas, which flows through a specially designed buckle from a cylinder housed below the seat.

The inflatable belt’s accordion-folded bag breaks through the belt fabric as it fills with air, expanding sideways across the occupant’s body in about the same amount of time it takes a car traveling at highway speed to cover a yard of distance.

The use of cold compressed gas instead of a heat-generating chemical reaction – which is typical of traditional air bag systems – means the inflated belts feel no warmer on the wearer’s body than the ambient temperature. The inflatable belts also fill at a lower pressure and a slower rate than traditional air bags, because the device does not need to close a gap between the belt and the occupant.”

Jensenman wrote: Easy there, Doc Boost. More'n once I have railed against the proliferation of balloons in cars as a substitute for proper reinforcement of the passenger compartment allied with effective driver training and got told what a big dumb stupidhead I are.

I imagine that I'd be ostracized if people knew that I was driving around in a car that purposefully removed them from. Tread lightly.

To show you how dumb people can be, a couple of years ago Readers' Digest (okay, I was bored sitting in the doctor's office) had a HUGE expose' on the latest in automotive dangers. Take a wild guess.

Loose items flying around in the car when you slam on brakes. They had the de rigeur testimonials from people who had gotten hit with loose items like cans of veggies, etc. and it was written as if there should be some big safety recall or ?? to prevent further injuries to unsuspecting mouth breathers. I fear for the future of humanity at times; 'The Marching Morons' is literally coming true.

I would like to point out that probably why so many engineers don't understand common sense things is due to the fact that they are not exposed to it during their schooling. I feel like schools should try to stress activities that get engineering students into machine shops more so they actually understand what is going. You should lump all engineers into one group because of a few that lack common sense. This is coming from an engineering student that left the machine shop about 30 minutes ago.

The reason any one group lacks common sense is because common sense isn't common to all groups.

A famous example of this is the original design for the wing sweep on the F-111. To the engineers it was "common sense" that the sweep control lever would be moved rearward to increase the sweep, and forward to decrease it. (Lever back = Wings back). However, to the pilots, it was "common sense" that the lever should be consistent with the throttle. That is, forward to go faster (more sweep), rearward to go slower (less sweep); the exact opposite of what the engineers initially thought.

Of course, good engineering takes the end user(s) into account, which might explain why my Toyota's wiper switch is oriented as down = on.

Jensenman wrote: Loose items flying around in the car when you slam on brakes.

James Dean anyone...

I still say this is the future of automotive safety: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnyhkBU1yaw

Sounds like we're a lot closer to this than I thought.

Rusnak_322 wrote: The floor air bag is going to go off only if a crash is detected to be unavoidable. I am not sure what that totally means, but probably only a second away at that point at speed. But guess what, you are not going steer out of it at that point, so don’t worry about the loss of steering due to the upward force of the airbag. Also, ever hear of suspension sag?? The thing is only going to lift the front of the car 8 cm. It is not going to lift the wheels off the ground. The airbag is also going to have a high friction surface, slowing the car more than if it only used the front tires . And all the swept braking area in the world isn't going to help if you are at the limits of the tires ability to use it.

I don't want to rely on a computer to detect an unavoidable impact and take control away from me. Again, I NEVER said it will lift the wheels off the ground, read my posts. I said it will reduce the pressure on those contact patches, thus making them less effective. AFTER a crash I still want to have control so I can avoid secondary impacts it at all possible (i.e. if steering and braking systems are still intact).

Rusnak_322 wrote: Did you think that no one else considered this before investing millions into research?

Yeah, there have been millions of dollars invested in many automotive blunders. Like side-saddle fuel tanks, firestone tires, Toyota throttle pedals, aluminum wiring for brake lights, GM's 350 c.i.d. diesels and the list goes on. No, I'm not ripping on engineers. What I typed was, uh typing finger-in-cheek. To be honest, there has been an alarmingly high number of auto engineers that didn't know a lug nut from a piston ring. I once spent almost 30 minutes trying to convince an engineer that, when discussing a metric sized tire that the first number was the section width, the second number was the aspect ratio and the third was the wheel diameter. He was SURE the second number was the width. I'll admit I'm jaded. As a mechanic I've spent too many hours cursing engineers. Replace front rotors on a 1995 or 2005 (can't remember which) Accord, or mess with rear brakes on a 2000 focus, or remove the front motor mount on a GM car just to replace the serp belt. But, there are plenty in my profession that are morons as well, I could be one of them.

I'd rather hit an exploding bag than eat steering wheel.

I saw this, http://www.iihs.org/50th/default.html a few months back. The guy in the new Malibu would have a sore knee where as the guy in the Bel Air died instantly. Progress?

Sides why get all worked up about a concept? Yes there are people who are bad at their jobs and there are people who are great at them. I'm an engineering student and I can see why all the engineers here are taking offence. When you think about it, it is a fairly unappreciated profession and when people go trashing it people take offence. I mean if someone took their car in to a shop and the mechanic screwed up you wouldn't appreciate that person coming on here putting the hate on everyone in your profession. You're points are valid for discussion but that last sentiment was unnecessary.

rogerbvonceg wrote: If we trained drivers with the aim of real competency, they'd just be overconfident behind the wheel.

I strongly disagree with this!!! To me, a driver with "real competency" behind the wheel understands not only how to control a vehicle in differing road conditions, but also has a strong understanding of what can happen when a fast-moving 3500lb.-plus vehicle collides with other objects.

As it is now, we have a large population of people who haven't been trained to be competent drivers, and don't care to be.

They assume that automotive engineers have done the impossible and covered their over-confident, untrained asses for whatever type of accident they will inevitably be in.

If not... Well, this is when they call their lawyer. And thru this step we get even more devices to add weight, cost, and complexity to the automobile.

EDIT--- Roger, after re-reading what I quoted from you, I think I picked up a little sarcasm... I hope.

in all this discussion I seem to see some of the same problem we have at the plant where I work... namely, the manufacturing engineers are pretty much on the ball. When the new ones come on board it takes them a while to learn their assigned systems ( we have over 750 different part numbers going through outline inspection) after that they tend to be somewhat helpful in solving problems.... design engineers on the other hand don't seem to have a clue (for the most part) even if the part is something they've been fooling with for several yrs ...

latest example: design engineer on one of the units I build had to come up with a new op sheet for tinning a part in prep for it being soldered in place... the spec from the customer called for Sn95Sb05 solder.... he couldn't seem to grasp that and insisted we use Sn95Pb05.... even when showed the print he wouldn't budge... took the plant manager to "make" him see the light... not the first time he's earned his 90k in this manner

You can have all the driver training in the world and still make a mistake, or be a part of someone elses mistake. I spite of siting through more driver education than any one person should be subjected to I still managed to total a car. When I did I was glad the seatbelt, airbag and crumple zones all worked the way they were supposed to. I would have liked the inflatable seatbelt as the little belt cracked several ribs and my sternum, but that was better than an unexpected audition for a human cannonball.

PaulY wrote: I'd rather hit an exploding bag than eat steering wheel.

Yes, but I'd rather have the option of being able to drive around a quick-happening incident rather than the computer deciding that I'm incompetent and applying brakes and popping "pre-collision" airbags and using the lane centering automatic correction to keep me from darting sideways into a rapidly shrinking hole in the next lane to get out of the situation entirely, like I had to do a couple months ago on I795.

I was in the left lane in a short group of cars passing a couple slower vehicles and as we had got past the cars in the right lane and I was waiting for one of the front cars in my lane to move over (since they had puled into this lane to go around the slower cars). One of those front cars slammed on their brakes for no apparent reason setting up an accordion effect. I was going to slam on the brakes as well, but i noticed a Navigator that had been coming up rapidly behind me and the driver was talking on the phone and coming up REALLY fast. Instead of slamming on the brakes and getting squished between the rapidly stopping cars ahead of me (tire squeal and tire smoke was evidence of how fast the ish was happening) I made the split second decision to get off the brakes, jog to the right and accelerate to miss both the cars ahead and the cars in the right lane that had just been passed but weren't slowing down. Due to the fact that I had no automatic braking and no "keep me in my lane" computer, I made it through without hitting anyone, getting hit by anyone, nor slowing down the cars on the right that within a fraction of a second were beside the cars that had been slamming their brakes in front of me (and also noticed the navigator tap the car that had been right ahead of me just after I got out of there).

I've also swerved rapidly around a person backing out of a parking lot into the road directly in front of me (at a distance where maximum braking in the 911 I was in would not have stopped in time), and had to do it by accelerating so as not to hit a car coming at me in the oncoming lane. Would have hated to see what automatic braking, pre-collision airbags, and lane control computers would have done in that situation.

And I've seen the results of 10+ years of time and use on automotive computer systems, as well. No, I don't want them to try and out think me, or start to malfunction and fire up for no reason.

In reply to Chris_V:

How can you be sure that any of those drivers "aids" would have stopped you from doing those things. I'm not in the lets add every safety device in the world crowd, or the eliminate all safety devices crowd either.

I think the seat belt airbags are a great idea, and I'm sure that the people programming those pre-collision airbags, and lane deviation aids have put swerving out of the way in there somewhere, isn't that what ABS was for in the first place so you could steer and brake at the same time.

wherethefmi wrote: In reply to Chris_V: How can you be sure that any of those drivers "aids" would have stopped you from doing those things.

How can you be sure they wouldn't? Have you seen the auto braking features in action and the distances that they have to operate at in order to be effective at all? The automatic braking feature would have forced the car to use the brakes at the distances that ended up happening, whereas I wanted to accelerate. And some of the new automatic lane management devices being developed don't merely sound an alarm when you drift close to the edge of the lane, they actively steer the car. How does it know that I'm INTENDING to make a snap decision to lateral into the lane over? Mercedes is at least trying to say if you accellerate, then you must be changing lanes intentionally even if you don't have time to signal, but a quick lateral doesn't necessarily have to accelerate to get you out of harms way.

http://gizmodo.com/179961/volvos-fully-automatic-brakes

Note how early that takes effect. They don't say if it ALSO senses that there are obstacles in the next lane over. In my case, that particular system would have made the car hit the brakes hard, instead of allowing me to accelerate diagonally. It would have tried to avoid the car ahead, but I would have gotten hit from behind, and would not have been able to speed up to get in front of the car traveling behind and to the right of me.

And considering how far ahead it acted, in my other real world incident, it would have slammed the brakes on when the guy backed out in front of me, but wouldn't have been notified far enough in advance to come to a stop before colliding, and I also would not have had enough time to steer around him and make it before oncoming traffic arrived. I had to make an instinctive snap judgment that the computer would not have had enough information to process, nor would it have had the programming to process the fact that occasionally, acceleration can save you better than braking can (pretty much only those of us that have been on the track will understand that sometimes the throttle pedal is your friend).

Simply put, I want an off switch for Skynet. Especially when it gets to be 10 years old and the sensors start sending erroneous signals to the ECU. What's that? That never happens on European cars?

Chris, you've just summed up my point perfectly. Sure, these nanny systems for non-driving folks may work in most situations now, but 10+ years down the road who knows. Maybe it'll see the reflection of a hawk overhead and think it's a mac truck deploying the airbags and generally making for a bad day.
I just think driver training is the way to go. I'm a good driver, not the best but better than most, just like 99.999 percent of you here (if not 100%) and having umpteen air bags and automatic this and that doesn't make me feel as safe as knowing that every driver around has been trained well and knows how to handle a skid, how to aviod an accident, knows situational awareness and that phones belong in your pocket while you are driving. Do all of that and we'll see a reduction in accidents AS WELL AS unjuries, not just a reduction in injuries from the accidents that are so very avoidable.

I see the problem with these systems is complacency.

Cruising down the road with the CC on and spot a slower truck in your lane? Don't worry about, the CC will slow down the car for me... Kids in the back seat making noise... I can turn around and yell at them and the car can slow down AND keep me in the lane by itself.

the car of the future that Disney forsaw back in the 50s is upon us... All we need now are nuclear powered cars

But the logic of "train everybody awesomely" doesn't exactly hold. Look at Finland, they basically teach you how to be a pro rally driver when you're 16 cause that's what you need to survive the climate and roads. Does that mean no one ever crashes there?

Also, and I'm paraphrasing Clarkson here, but you can spot the bad drivers cause they drive terrible cars cause they simply aren't interesting in driving, and when you're not interested in something you're not going to be good at it.

I agree that people should be trained better and a system that can't be shut off that thinks for you could be potentially dangerous but you don't have to buy those cars.

Personally I'll take all the driver training I can get, I've had Young Drivers and a performance driving school and both were great. But I'll take all the soft squishy pillows I can get when I eventually go hunting for a family hauler or car for the wife.