The passenger warning light illuminates in my Toyota when someone is in the seat. It's very distracting when this dashboard warning light in on whenever I have a passenger. It's set so you can't dim it down with the rest of the lights on the dashboard, which makes it very distracting.
Like, what is someone supposed to do if you have a passenger and the light doesn't go on? Throw them out of the car?
But worst than that, when I go more than 5,000 miles on an oil change, an illuminated red triangle with an exclamation mark pops up on my dash. That signage is the ANSI Z535.6 "DANGER" warning which is defined as "hazardous situation which, if not avoided, will result in death or serious injury". When this warning sign popped up for the first time on an overnight cross-country trip, I totally panicked. I wonder what signage they use if a legitimatel dangerious condition occurs.
The intention of the requirement to disable the airbag is to protect small children from its potential fury while leaving it enabled for larger persons. The sad part of the story is that the writer and agency of the government specification failed to recognize that the key trigger should be the weight of the passenger, with specific pass/fail weight/mass values, independent of any seat position adjustments. And...to defend potential liability issues, the car maker went overboard to pass the exact test as specified rather than ask for clarification or recognize that it should also work at any seat position.
As the original writer of this story, I have to correct an error: the Sonata (at least in 2006 model) HAS NO WAY at all to reflash ANY micro, much less a simple and now universal solution as via OBD II. The recall involved REPLACING the seat controller completely! Apparently this is beyond the dealer's allowable service tasks. Now THAT is NOT due to any government regulation, just a total misunderstanding of the imperfectibility of firmware.
Yes, the issue is not design, but regulation. The point is : basic liability. lets say i drive and miss an exit. I would then look again at the screen to see where the next exit is. If I get in the accident, the car company will claim no responsibility as I was informed that it is dangerous to look at the screen during driving. That is it.
The funny thing on this story is that even after removing and reprogramming the seat for a recall repair the disabled light still came on 20% of the time. This is an improvement of the original 50%, but it is still not perfect.
Yes, Sensor Pro. I do think you're right. Whether it's your Nav telling you do something or the annoying light on my car reminding me I'm remiss with my service schedule, telling us once quickly when turn the car on is quite enough. So you're saying that's due to safety regulations, not sensor overkill or any other kind of design choice?
Nevertheless, these reminders are so so so out of place. The issue of liability just makes it sick. I dod not want to be reminded that it is dangerous to look at the screen of the NAV. Come on, once is enough.
I understand your frustration however it is the requirement of our "paper pushers" in govenment that feel that we do not have brains to make our own decisions.
I just purchased a new car andevery time I start the car, the NAV system comes up with a screen stating that it is dangerous to look at the screen while driving. I have every time to press some keys to start the NAV screen. I visited the dealer and he stated that it is the requirement of the screen must stay. They can not remove it.
Isn't is stupid. They make the navigation screen to look at and they tell you it is dangerous to look at.
A story we can all relate to. While I can appreciate all of the warning and reminder messages of this current generation of software-driven cars, there is something to be said about the annoyance of constantly having messages flash at you while you're trying to get from point A to point B.
I currently have been driving around for weeks with a message from my car, "a B12 service indicator." While I appreciate my vehicle's diligence in reminding me to get an oil change, brakes checked or whatever else this service constitutes, the fact that it's up there 24/7--not once every time I turn on the car--is a pain. The error message masks all the other good stuff my dashboard could tell me like outside temperature or mileage.
I realize that in this particular case, the "airbag disabled" sensor message is a safety issue, and perhaps it's important to flash that continuously when something is questionable. But when my 90-pound lab jumps in my front seat, that constant flashing and dinging and nagging can get old. There could be such a thing as sensor overload--just saying.
In a bid to boost the viability of lithium-based electric car batteries, a team at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory has developed a chemistry that could possibly double an EV’s driving range while cutting its battery cost in half.
Using Siemens NX software, a team of engineering students from the University of Michigan built an electric vehicle and raced in the 2013 Bridgestone World Solar Challenge. One of those students blogged for Design News throughout the race.
Robots that walk have come a long way from simple barebones walking machines or pairs of legs without an upper body and head. Much of the research these days focuses on making more humanoid robots. But they are not all created equal.
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 discussion will examine what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.