The debate over unintended acceleration, having lingered around the periphery of the auto industry for more than two decades, may be about to receive a fatal blow.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has proposed inclusion of a system that would shut down the throttle in the event that the brake and accelerator pedal were depressed simultaneously, and most automakers appear to be squarely behind it. Known as a brake-throttle override (BTO), the system would minimize the risk that drivers would lose control of their vehicles due to a stuck accelerator or entrapped floormat.
"We support the idea of making it standard," Wade Newton, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, told Design News. "We've been behind it since it was first discussed in 2010." He said that the Alliance is now reviewing the proposal and will offer specific comments at a later date.
The Toyota Matrix was one of the vehicles that was recalled due to problems with unintended acceleration in 2010. (Source: Toyota)
The "unintended acceleration" debate goes back to the mid-1980s, when a class-action lawsuit was filed by a large group of Audi owners, stating that their vehicles experienced unexplained power surges. Audi argued that the surges were caused by drivers' misapplication of the pedals.
The debate was resurrected in 2009 and 2010, when some Toyota owners complained their vehicles accelerated unintentionally. In the Toyota case, however, a subsequent study by NHTSA revealed that there was no electronic cause for the phenomenon. The agency's conclusion was reached after hiring NASA engineers to examine the circuitry and comb through 280,000 lines of software code.
"We enlisted the best and the brightest engineers to study Toyota's electronics systems, and the verdict is in," US Transportation Secretary Raymond LaHood said in a 2011 news conference. "There is no electronic-based cause for unintended high-speed acceleration in Toyotas. Period."
Although the new proposal is still out for comment, auto industry experts said they expect the mandate to build atop the widespread availability of electronic throttle control (ETC) systems. ETC operates the throttle with a sensor and small electric motor, essentially eliminating the mechanical cable that would otherwise run from the accelerator to the throttle valve. Because such systems are essentially electronic, automakers could add the override capability with little or no additional hardware, simply by employing software that initiates a throttle cut-off if the accelerator is stuck and the brake is depressed.
This device could be hazardous for high performance track driving. It is standard practice to blip the throttle under braking to accomplish downshifting a couple of seconds before corner entry. A decisive turn in under braking rotates the car to quickly line up to the corner apex. Brake release and throttle application transfer weight to the rear wheels and stop the rotation. Without throttle response, a spinout is probable.
Hopefully, if this device is imposed upon us, it will be user selectable, like the ESP (electronic stability program) in my Audis. The ESP inhibits my inputs when going quickly; thankfully it can be turned off for track driving.
Reminds me of the old saying - Find a way to idiot proof it and all they will do is invent a better idiot...
Cars, and a lot of other stuff in life, are a potentially dangerous object that we have gotten used to and complacent with. And we live in a society where everything is someone elses fault. How long until one of these "throttle cutoff" devices fails on someone traveling on the expressway in high speed rush hour traffic and causes a multicar pile-up? All of these proposals need to be examened with a large dose of pessimism before they are foisted off as the next quick fix.
I still think the problem is there are too many loose nuts behind the wheel.
The NHTSA doesn't appear, to me, to be an unbiased organization. They did a sloppy job of investigating the possible electronic and firmware related fault conditions.
Even though further examination did find tin whiskers in some of the Toyota sub assemblies, the NHTSA is continuing to turn a blind eye.
I agree completely with William K. A start/stop button that flips a bit in a controller is NOT adequate to ensure operator control.
Automotive designers should be forced to study the THERAC case history and then defend why their operating environment is free from such safety concerns.
The very first thing that the NHTSA should do is forbid the sale of any car that does not have a positive means of shutting off the engine. That very specificly would not involve any computer in the shutoff process. I am talking about switching off the ignition power and probably the injector power as well.
The very stupidest thing ever done in a car was to have one button for both start and shutoff. IT may be OK for a light, but it is a very poor choice for a vehicle. I have had instances of throttle sticking wide open, and switching off the ignition saved my hide every time. But in a car where the only option was to task the computer to switch off the engine, and the computer deciding thatit had to keep the engine running because you were in motion, would be a disaster in progress.
So I must conclude that either the NHTSA is not thinking very well, or else they have been paid to ignore the situation. Either way, the lack of a positive engine shutoff means is an inherently unsafe condition.
For guys engaged in a stop light "grand prix," a brake-throttle interlock would prevent the ability to rev the engine up in its torque band while taking slack out of the drive train before launching. Yeah, I can already hear the comments of wasting gas, tires, stressing the car, etc., etc., but hey, it's fun and besides, I like to check my reflexes when the stop light changes. But, all kidding aside, all these fixes are crutches for incompetent drivers, and are subject to failures that may leave the hapless driver and car exposed to injury and damage because the expected safety feature (crutch) didn't function. As the old saying goes, you can make anything fool-proof, but not damnfool-proof.
I agree that the real usefulness of this systems is pretty negligible, ChasChas. I think the automakers like the idea because it gives them a legal leg to stand on in these cases. Unfortunately, the situation you describe -- wherein the driver stands on the accelerator while assuming he/she is on the brake pedal -- won't be remedied by this. The electronic control system can tell if you're pushing on the brake, but it has no way of knowing if you're just confused.
Kind of 37 seconds ago. Enthusiast cars are already chipped and or driven with the laptop hooked up to the car's computer. The rest drive Camry's and step on the gas when they need to employ the BRAKE. OBTW saw the Google autonomous Prius driving itself on public roads with humans on board, now that's cool.
The unintended acceleration accidents around here happened when the accelerator was depressed while thinking they were pressing the brake - a panic situation.
I remember watching a guy come shooting through a car wash door and down a ravine - wasn't hurt. He thought he was cramming the brake down - hard!
One snowmobile driver broke a throttle cable and temporarily hooked the brake cable to the throttle to get home (the cables were alike on these older machines). He didn't get out of the parking lot and he smashed into a car - he said it was impossible to prevent no matter how he tried to tell his brain to think differently - wasn't hurt.
So when your brain has it's mind made up, sometime you just have to ride it out.
Especially at local John Wayne Orange County Airport (SNA). The short 5600 foot runway and steep noise abatement climb makes SOP for airliners: Position and hold / Full power with brakes / Takeoff roll. Not an issue in my C150 but still have the runup and mag check, of course !!
From Dell / Intel® New Paradigms in Design Work Scott Hamilton, vertical market strategist for Dell Precision workstations, 5/2/2013 3
Early in my career, I worked as a draftsman and remember the days of drawing on vellum with numbered pencils and Mylar with plastic lead. This was a fun experience in the sense that I ...
I've been using workstations for more than 10 years and love finding ways to get more performance from my system. With demanding professional applications that require more power each ...
A lasting memory from my first job as an engineer in an auto assembly plant is standing on hard concrete at six in the morning, vending-machine coffee clutched in hand, listening to ...
A quick look into the merger of two powerhouse 3D printing OEMs and the new leader in rapid prototyping solutions, Stratasys. The industrial revolution is now led by 3D printing and engineers are given the opportunity to fully maximize their design capabilities, reduce their time-to-market and functionally test prototypes cheaper, faster and easier. Bruce Bradshaw, Director of Marketing in North America, will explore the large product offering and variety of materials that will help CAD designers articulate their product design with actual, physical prototypes. This broadcast will dive deep into technical information including application specific stories from real world customers and their experiences with 3D printing. 3D Printing is
To save this item to your list of favorite Design News content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This
6 
