Active safety will continue to drive the need for faster processors and more affordable memories, Delphi Automotive chief technology officer Jeff Owens told Design News Radio recently.
Owens, an auto industry veteran who heads a staff of 17,000 technologists at Delphi, said the automotive industry is looking to a new generation of electronic components to meet the needs of so-called active safety systems, which can prevent accidents. "The cost-benefit to this technology is significant," Owens said. "We think it's the next big step to having that curve of fatalities drop downhill."
Active safety systems, which can take control of a vehicle's brakes or steering, are built atop many of the same processing innovations (microcontrollers and memories) that have served as the foundation of the passive safety revolution. "That's been the breakthrough that has allowed many new safety loops in the vehicle, for driver and passenger bags, as well as for rollover, side curtain bags, knee bolsters, and rear bags," Owens said. "It's all been enabled by the capabilities of electronics and faster processing technologies."
However, he also said the annual fatality figure of 33,000 may be reaching a plateau. That's why the industry needs to begin the transition from passive to active safety.
"We need the ability to see the accident before it occurs and have the vehicle take some kind of mitigating action," he said. "Putting on the brakes, maybe even going into a full panic stop -- those are the kinds of things that would eliminate or at least reduce the impact of a collision."
Fuel efficiency laws, such as the 54.5mpg Corporate Average Fuel Economy mandate, will also have a profound effect on the automotive semiconductor market, according to Owens. Technologies such as gasoline direct injection, turbocharging, and nine-speed transmission designs will also drive the need for automotive electronics. Such systems need better electronics to run the software algorithms, sense important events, and meet tighter time constraints.
"Faster processors and more affordable memories open up many doors and windows into automotive electronics," he said. "When the processing power is available, it will be used."
I personally like Anti Lock brakes, and traction control, which both somewhat fall under the category of "black boxes" taking control. I think the actuarial data on antilock brakes would prove that the average driver is better of with them than without. If you drive on snow and ice you come to befriend traction control if you use it. I feel much safer on ice with traction control and antilocks. I attempt to drive in a way that doesn't cause them to work, but I take comfort in the fact that when I push a little too hard, the electronics kick in and correct.
Allison makes automatic transmissions for trucks now, and I'm sure that most "skilled" drivers would bad mouth the automatic over the "control" that a clutch (supposedly) gives them. Allison does pull-offs with experienced drivers using manual transmissions, pulling against inexperienced drivers with automatic transmissions, and the experienced driver with a clutch never wins against the automatic.
I understand the reservations about the black box thing, but in time the technology usually proves itself worthwhile.
Another example is the "launch" electronics in formula cars. Drivers first resisted it, but relented when the guys using the launch control were driving up their tailpipes on every start.
As for enabling idiots to get behind the wheel, we already do that. So you might as well make the car smart enough to drive, because many of the people we give licences to aren't.
It is an interesting assertion that somehow cars are becoming safer because of all of those unreliable electronic systems being added. They are unreliable because the primary design target is minimum cost to produce them, all other considerations are secondary. Even worse, the systems all are set up to protect the very most unskilled and ill-prepared drivers, which means that they will be constantly fighting against the experienced drivers, who probably are at least half of all drivers. On top of that problem, none of the vehicle safety features that I have come across is able to handle exceptions. The ABS system assures excessive stopping distance on loose gravel and when there are leaves or sand blown onto the road surface, and the stability control system assures that a very quick swerve to avoid something will not be done the way the driver intends it to be done. They will probably protect a 17 year old beginner driver, and possibly the 90 year old grandmother, that is true. BUT most drivers are not in either one of those groups.
UNFORTUNATELY we are no longer allowed any choice about which systems we will have operating in our cars. So a whole lot of us will be fighting with systems designed soley to protect that portion of folks who perhaps should not be driving at all. Is this a benefit for society?
You know, there is a slippery slope on this topic. While there's no argument that electronics advancements have increased safety in vehicles over the years, (airbags & curtains, proximity sensors, back-up cameras and Bluetooth hands-free audio as a few examples) there are other electronic innovations that I simply just do not support; such as automatic braking in high end sedans currently. This type of "Safety" feature I think is more of a problem than a solution, lulling the distracted driver into a sense of security. And the Ford Focus that can parallel-park all by itself-? Fantastic technology, but it allows the incapable operator to climb behind the wheel. I can't support it.
Meanwhile, it was refreshing to see that the Delphi CTO had a short list of electronics advancement being developed that sounded more valuable to safety and performance than these two marketing gimmicks of auto-brake and auto-park.
Ghost in the Machine? Self realization of the machines?
I like the last line, "open up many doors and windows", does this imply that the car will 'sense' the owner and open the door. Open the windows as the occupant approaches drive-thru venues. Or is this just a play on words? Funny either way!
TJ McDermott, I agree. When it comes to vehicle safety, I like to be in control as to some software running on a black box. I believe one key to vehicle safety is to pay attention to the road while driving.
I'm not ready to let a programmer decide what course of action to decide vehicle safety. The operator in charge should always have the final decision.
The Airbus crash at the 1988 Paris airshow makes this point clearly. The pilot and flight control computer got into disagreement as to what the plane should do:
I wonder if they will also start to use artificial intelligent software that will start to learn different drivers and how they drive and where their weaknesses are. It's all very exciting. Good article.
Andrew Morris designed a circuit that could detect a stroke victim's groan and convert the sound into a signal so caregivers would know when help was needed.
New disc magnet motors fit into the design trend of stepping up to closed loop performance while maintaining the cost advantage of stepper motor technology.
At the Design News webinar on June 27, learn all about aluminum extrusion: designing the right shape so it costs the least, is simplest to manufacture, and best fits the application's structural requirements.
On April 21, NASA launched a novel project, putting into orbit three satellites that employ an off-the-shelf commercial smartphone as the control system.
From Dell / Intel® New Paradigms in Design Work Scott Hamilton, vertical market strategist for Dell Precision workstations, 5/2/2013 5
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 ...
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This radio show will show what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.
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
0 
