Breaking News
Comments
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
<<   <   Page 5 / 11   >   >>
junko.yoshida
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Barr Group report availability
junko.yoshida   10/28/2013 3:29:26 PM
NO RATINGS
The 800 page report, in redacted form, was filed in U.S . District Court in Santa Ana, CA in St. John v Toyota on April 12, 2013. I don't have it; I am contacting the court if this is available. Meanwhile, unredacted is only in the code room and in a few lawyers' hands, according to those involved in the investigation.

redlight
User Rank
Rookie
Re: Manual "Master Stop"
redlight   10/28/2013 3:19:08 PM
NO RATINGS
This may be ok in an automated or warehouse situation. In general, humans are not in the machines being stopped by hitting the E-STOP switch or you have people stand clear before you do it (like when administering a shock from a difibrillator).

However, in a car, that is highly dangerous. Take a drive by wire car. What happens were you do hit an E-Stop button that disengages everything? Physics isn't bound by the E-STOP. That car will continue traveling in the direction it is moving (likely now skidding or sliding and if you're lucky that road compliance doesn't cause the steering to move around) with no way for the driver to control it's motion. You can't steer out of trouble, you can modulate the brake, if the doors are locked or windows closed, can you then open them?

Without manual controls that can control some of these things or ejector seats that activate when you hit the E-STOP, doing so in a car is very likely more dangerous than having the car attempt to recover (or continue to malfunction in a particular way).

JCreasey
User Rank
Freelancer
Re: Toyota's culpability here is the tip of the iceberg for everyone
JCreasey   10/28/2013 2:25:01 PM
NO RATINGS
@Les...I think you are incorrect here:

"Even where the infrastructure mostly commands, or directs the vehicle, there will still be a need for someone, or something, to drive the car in case there is a communication failure."

This goes to the very root of Toyota's current problems.  It is very difficult to ensure that the firmware running the car is totally safe, and in a drive by wire system a breakdown in communications within the system may render it undrivable by a human. The computer(s) is in control, you may have no direct human control ability at all.

Unless the Throttle, brakes, steering, and engine control have mechanical linkages, there is no reliable possibility of human as intervention or backup control for failures. You either automate or stay manual.

In the case of failure in the V2I, an automated vehicle would slow down and stop using local sensors. The infrastructure knows it just lost communications with a client (hearbeat) and can move surrounding traffic out of the way (slow down and move aside). 

Les_Slater
User Rank
CEO
Re: Toyota's culpability here is the tip of the iceberg for everyone
Les_Slater   10/28/2013 2:10:18 PM
NO RATINGS
JCreasey, this whole thing is complicated in that the cost of vehicle controls, infrastructure and public acceptance are all huge issues. It won't all happen at once. There will be a mix of vehicles with various capabilities and drivers with varying responsibilities, skills and alertness. However, I am confident that the more automation here, the safer the roads will be.

Even where the infrastructure mostly commands, or directs the vehicle, there will still be a need for someone, or something, to drive the car in case there is a communication failure.

Robotics Developer
User Rank
Rookie
Re: Black box?
Robotics Developer   10/28/2013 1:30:13 PM
NO RATINGS
Rich Pell, I agree fully with your assesment!  The likelyhood of a car vs driver mistake is widely different.  On both ends of the spectrum: very old and very young drivers can make mistakes.  I would like to see more cars with the collision avoidance electronics as a means of preventing some crashes.  I know that these cost money but I wonder if insurance company discounts would help offset the additional cost for these features?

Robotics Developer
User Rank
Rookie
Re: Who tested this thing?
Robotics Developer   10/28/2013 1:26:35 PM
NO RATINGS
Les Slater, I am not sure how an autonomous driven car makes the problem less difficult.  Given all the variables with roads (conditions, car state of operation, other vehicles, etc.) there is just so many complications to account for that I would be very surprised if they covered all the bases.  Given the huge task and the possible failures of systems/subsystems what is the fallback for the "passengers"?  How/when would they be able or know to take over?  It sort of bogles the mind - all the possibilities.  I have driven robots both with drive assist and with full manual - drive assist really helps but if there is a sensor fault it does not take long to get into trouble even at 15 ft/sec, I can't imagine what would happen at highway speeds.   I am sure that the technical challenges can be solved but would really want to see a lot more testing, standards, and safety features before I would "get behind the wheel" of an autonomous car.

 

But to the Toyota case I was troubled by the lack of driver control over the electronics given the systems set up as they were.  I would not want any system to override a desire to stop.  There should have been a means to prevent runaway situations if nothing else but to stop motion if there is a difference between gas and brake..  just a thought.. Intent is hard to know for sure I agree, but if the black box was able to robustly determine if the gas was pressed and/or the brake then maybe intent would have been easier to determine.

Robotics Developer
User Rank
Rookie
Re: Who tested this thing?
Robotics Developer   10/28/2013 1:15:35 PM
NO RATINGS
Back@ MeasurementBlues, I can only imagine the lawsuits, the costs, the huge money (for the lawyers!) given the fact that it will be companies being targeted for the fault. What about the car service people? If they did not "properly" check out the operation of the vehicles electronics at the last service then they could be liable as well.  Just think what that would cost everyone if all the service folks needed insurance to protect themselves from lawsuits and the added cost of new tests/equipement..

 

rich.pell
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Black box?
rich.pell   10/28/2013 12:58:04 PM
"I wonder how many drivers have been wrongly accused of being the cause when the Blackbox data is used and treated like it is an impartial data collection means???"

This is why having some idea of the probability of such errors is so important.  Here it seems that the jury concluded that not only did a throttle fail-safe error occur but that also the car's EDR failed to record events properly.  What is the likelihood of this scenario compared to that of a human error-caused unintended acceleration - an event that is known to be not uncommon, especially among older drivers?   

JCreasey
User Rank
Freelancer
Re: Toyota's culpability here is the tip of the iceberg for everyone
JCreasey   10/28/2013 12:17:32 PM
NO RATINGS
I totally agree with you Les. My point was that any system where the human is in the loop as an arbiter or safety responder is problematic not that automation would not work.

If totally autonomous vehicles are the solution, then IMO there should be a central automation system with the cars as clients to it (V2I), not millions of standalone compute islands and certainly not island to island (V2V mesh). 

With today's drive by wire we have the technology in place in many vehicles to centralize control instead of the island based designs like the Google car. It would be cheaper and IMO more reliable to enlist in a central controller than try to be standalone or co-operative with island neighbors.

While lots of work (compute island) tackles the problem of seeing the defined for a human driver environment (lanes, signs, other vehicles etc), a central system infrastructure (viewed from the static road sensor positions) has that knowledge inbuilt (programmed). There is no need for lanes, signs, traffic lights etc. 

.

Les_Slater
User Rank
CEO
Re: Who tested this thing?
Les_Slater   10/28/2013 11:40:52 AM
NO RATINGS
Robotics Developer, Autonomous vehicles can actually make the problem less difficult, not in overall complexity, but oversight of the situation, situational awareness. In the Toyota scenario that we're discussing there is no way to independently judge intent, or consequences.

<<   <   Page 5 / 11   >   >>


Flash Poll
EE Life
Frankenstein's Fix, Teardowns, Sideshows, Design Contests, Reader Content & More
Engineer's Bookshelf
Caleb Kraft

The Martian: A Delightful Exploration of Math, Mars & Feces
Caleb Kraft
6 comments
To say that Andy Weir's The Martian is an exploration of math, Mars, and feces is a slight simplification. I doubt that the author would have any complaints, though.

The Engineering Life - Around the Web
Caleb Kraft

Surprise TOQ Teardown at EELive!
Caleb Kraft
Post a comment
This year, for EELive! I had a little surprise that I was quite eager to share. Qualcomm had given us a TOQ smart watch in order to award someone a prize. We were given complete freedom to ...

Design Contests & Competitions
Caleb Kraft

Join The Balancing Act With April's Caption Contest
Caleb Kraft
58 comments
Sometimes it can feel like you're really performing in the big tent when presenting your hardware. This month's caption contest exemplifies this wonderfully.

Engineering Investigations
Caleb Kraft

Frankenstein's Fix: The Winners Announced!
Caleb Kraft
8 comments
The Frankenstein's Fix contest for the Tektronix Scope has finally officially come to an end. We had an incredibly amusing live chat earlier today to announce the winners. However, we ...

Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)