Motion Control Components Blog

Motion Control Components

The Motion Control Components Blog is the place for conversation and discussion about positioning and sensing, motion system hardware, motion controllers and drives and actuators. Here, you'll find everything from application ideas, to news and industry trends, to hot topics and cutting edge innovations.

Previous in Blog: Teaching Tech: Quality or Quantity?   Next in Blog: Information Sources
Close
Close
Close
9 comments
Rate Comments: Nested

Wreck Avoidance Technology

Posted October 24, 2010 7:53 AM

Motion and speed sensors and vision systems have been used for several years now to put collision-avoidance technologies in some cars. The technologies are getting better as well as cheaper. Do you have a favorite driving safety tech, or one you'd like to see in development? Like other safety equipment, should they be required in all cars, not just as options in luxury vehicles?

The preceding article is a "sneak peek" from Motion Control Components, a newsletter from GlobalSpec. To stay up-to-date and informed on industry trends, products, and technologies, subscribe to Motion Control Components today.

Reply

Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.

"Almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, vote them!
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Tamilnadu, India
Posts: 836
Good Answers: 42
#1

Re: Wreck Avoidance Technology

10/26/2010 11:38 AM

Collision safety is not a luxury, rather it is as essential as the brakes of the vehicle. Safety becomes top priority meant for the riders, people on the roads.

It makes sense for value addition, customer service features and technology supremacy

__________________
Nature is so graceful and naked. Human possession is ridiculous.
Reply
Anonymous Poster
#2

Re: Wreck Avoidance Technology

10/26/2010 4:25 PM

I rather think that all vehicles should be be required to have safety equipment. Nothing is more inconvenient than to have to fill out the annoying accident reports when you have dented your Rolls with some member of the "Unwashed".

Thurston Howell III

Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru
Technical Fields - Technical Writing - New Member Engineering Fields - Marine Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Vancleave, Ms about 30 miles inland from Biloxi and the coast
Posts: 3197
Good Answers: 106
#3

Re: Wreck Avoidance Technology

10/26/2010 6:43 PM

Wreck avoidance technology may not necessarily be limited to onboard vehicles only. One of the classic collision senarios is driving on an interstate and entering a fog bank. At this point, the driver doesn't know what action to take; slow down or maintain speed. This is what causes the chain reaction collisions that are common on California freeways. If you slow down, someone will rear-end you and if you maintain speed, you rear-end the vehicle ahead of you. In such a situation, in-vehicle avoidance technology can work only as long as everyone has it installed. This will not be the case for many years to come, so another method to avoid collisions needs to be addressed. It will need to be incorporated into the roadway itself. That technology would most likely be a system that detects the fog hazard and alerts the public via roadway signals to pull over and stop (not just slow down, but STOP) until the hazard has passed. Smart vehicles are great, but unless everyone has them, they are pretty much useless. There are cars that are available now that will apply your brakes automatically if a collision is imminent, but what happens when the vehicle following you doesn't have the auto stop technology?

__________________
Mr.Ron from South Ms.
Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK S.Northants
Posts: 485
Good Answers: 19
#4

Re: Wreck Avoidance Technology

10/27/2010 5:09 AM

the fact that someone would consider not slowing down when entering a fog bank because ther person behind them might not slow down indicates to me that no amount of technology will account for some humans in the loop. I came across this:

"the modern automobile has become so easy to drive, that people operate a vehicle as if they are sitting on their living room sofa. There has to be a change in attitude, that it is not okay to be eating, drinking coffee, applying makeup, or using some electronic device while driving.

Let's start by removing airbags and other safety restraints from the inside of cars, and spend the money saved on driver education. Start holding people accountable for their actions; if you kill someone, you lose the privilege to drive".

Collision avoidance will most likely give a driver false confidence, which could increase collisions or translate their occurrence from fog banks to some other situation. I'm not saying don't use it "after all in 2001, the number of people who died every 26 days on U.S. roads equaled the number of victims in the 9/11 terrorist attacks, approximately 3,000 individuals" so something should be done, but that might be as simple as slowing down.

Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member United Kingdom - Member - New Member

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Harlow England
Posts: 16512
Good Answers: 670
#5

Re: Wreck Avoidance Technology

10/27/2010 6:13 AM

The biggest single problem has got to be people driving too close for the speed they are doing. (especially the know it all lorry drivers, who think, because they do it for a living they are perfect drivers).
Doppler radar which cuts/reduces power if you are too close for the speed would make a huge difference even without linking it to the brakes for the 'fog bank scenario'.
Instead of something simple like this compulsary on all vehicles we'll probably get an over complicated over expensive half arsed system which only applies to a few top end cars.
Think of the (UK) jobs that could be created by making it a legal requirement in the UK. (the rest of the world can tailgate themselves into oblivion...) But oh no we'll create a few more Quangos and layers of beurocracy to administer the latest cuts whilst the people at the top shed crocodile tears and stuff their pockets with taxpayers money. The PM was blethering on about investing in infrastructure having just announced the vital road improvements to East Anglia were shelved again.
Save money scrap 50% of the MPs councilors, beurocrats and people not actually involved in making or doing stuff...
Del
<click, rant mode off>

__________________
health warning: These posts may contain traces of nut.
Reply
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Large hole formally occupied by furry woodland creature.
Posts: 3385
Good Answers: 97
#6
In reply to #5

Re: Wreck Avoidance Technology

10/27/2010 9:41 AM

Del,

It is amazing how you can give the effect of a voice issuing from a megaphone in your rant mode!

Live from Hyde Park.

__________________
CRTL-Z
Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member United Kingdom - Member - New Member

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Harlow England
Posts: 16512
Good Answers: 670
#7
In reply to #6

Re: Wreck Avoidance Technology

10/27/2010 9:49 AM

Thanks very much, drop a few coins in the hat guv' ?
Del

__________________
health warning: These posts may contain traces of nut.
Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Large hole formally occupied by furry woodland creature.
Posts: 3385
Good Answers: 97
#8
In reply to #7

Re: Wreck Avoidance Technology

10/27/2010 9:56 AM

Between speakers corner, girls in mini skirts and asking people on the street in front of Big Ben for the time, London is a place I will never forget!

__________________
CRTL-Z
Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 2142
Good Answers: 31
#9

Re: Wreck Avoidance Technology

10/27/2010 2:21 PM

I understand that Toyota is leading the charge on this tech - just as soon as they can figure out how to get their cars to stop rather than run away and brush up on PR tactics.

Reply
Reply to Blog Entry 9 comments

"Almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, vote them!
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Anonymous Poster (1); HUX (1); ronseto (1); russ123 (1); s.udhayamarthandan (1); Unredundant (2); user-deleted-1105 (2)

Previous in Blog: Teaching Tech: Quality or Quantity?   Next in Blog: Information Sources

Advertisement