From: jim beam on
On 03/06/2010 02:46 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote:
> "jim beam"<me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:ntSdnbrMg8YIRw_WnZ2dnUVZ_jEAAAAA(a)speakeasy.net...
>> On 03/06/2010 01:30 PM, Bob Cooper wrote:
>>> In article<hmuep4$qd2$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>,
>>> crwlrjeff(a)yahoo.com says...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is the most important part?
>>>>
>>>> It's nonsense! The gas pedal does two things, opens the throttle plate
>>>> and
>>>> closes the throttle plate. Period.
>>>>
>>>> You should ride the bus.
>>>
>>> Nonsense? Where have I heard that before?
>>> This is what you get if you're foolish enough to to let somebody who
>>> names himself after a whiskey, whose logic is limited to the HTML
>>> programming he's done for a Toyota fanboy website, and thinks EPS uses a
>>> pump - design automobile throttling.
>>> Don't worry, nobody in charge of such things is that foolish.
>>> Well, maybe Toyota was. And look where it got them.
>>
>> get some experience bob. some cars do use electric pumps for power
>> steering. toyota is one of them. not all models, but some.
>>
>
> Cite.
>
> Toyota's electric steering does not use an electric motor to drive a
> hydraulic pump. There are makes that use such a system, but Toyota isn't
> among them,

bullshit. mr2. look up your own cites.


> and certainly the Corolla does not use that system, which is the
> model that is having steering problems.

sure, i'll take the word of a guy that doesn't know what he's talking about!


--
nomina rutrum rutrum
From: clare on
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 12:20:36 -0800, "Jeff Strickland"
<crwlrjeff(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>"jim beam" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
>news:uqOdnfdrX4d5Lg_WnZ2dnUVZ_qKdnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net...
>>
>>> Fail safe and redundancy should be part of any
>>> throttle system, but even that can fail, as have the simplest of
>>> mechanical systems.
>>
>> indeed. statistically, mechanical throttles are much more unreliable.
>
>
>STATISTICALLY?
>
>I'd like to see any statistic you have ...
>
>The facts are that save a few notable examples -- Audi -- there have been
>virtually no known cases of unintended acceleration that involved vehicles
>on the highway. The only known instances of wrong-pedal acceleration involve
>vehicles in parking lots.
>
>To be sure, there are exceptions -- the guy that drove his Buick through the
>Farmer's Market in Los Angeles and ran over several people -- but the
>exception is just that. An exception.
>
>Statistically, the exception is not noteworthy. There is no statistic that
>says mechanical throttles less reliable. Indeed, statistically speaking,
>electronic throttle controls (fly-by-wire gas pedals) haven't been in use
>long enough to be a statistically large enough sample to compare against the
>decades of mechanical throttle mechanisms that have gone into millions upon
>millions of vehicles.

Over the years there have been MANY more failures of mechanical
throtles - both cable and linkage, than failures with drive by wire. A
large percentage resulted in NO throttle, but a still very appreciable
number resulted in throttles stuck open. Many hundreds of general
motors cars in particular when the engine mounts separated. And that
was when there were only a tenth as many cars on the road (more or
less)
The probability of failure with a mechanical system IS higher than
with electronics. Moving parts fail more often than non-moving parts.
Electronics do not "wear out".
And at this point, the only PROVEN problems with the Toyota system
HAVE been mechanical.
There is SPECULATION that there may be an electronic problem - but
nothing concrete ponting that direction yet.


From: clare on
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 12:43:14 -0800, jim beam <me(a)privacy.net> wrote:

>On 03/06/2010 09:41 AM, Jim Warman wrote:
>> The cross posting sucks.. but you guys seem to like it....
>>
>> Toyota is having trouble... Ford isn't (I'm reading this in a Ford NG and I
>> work at a Ford dealer).
>>
>> Drive by wire throttle is a natural progression (if you can't see where the
>> future of the automobile is going - I feel sorry for you). It allows for
>> precise (hopefully) control of any electronic stability features, It allows
>> for torque limiting when appropirate... reducing the need for other traction
>> control measures (such as active brake booster application) when
>> necessary...
>>
>> Fords system relies on redundancy... I'm not a Toyota tech so I can't tell
>> you what they do... Fords system has three inputs..(one of them is inversely
>> proportional). If the inputs aren't "coherent", the car will remain at
>> idle...
>
>three inputs from the throttle pedal position sensor?
>

3 inputs are an absolute necessity for true"fail-safe" systems. If 2
inputs dissagree, what do you know, other than that you have a
problem. With 3 inputs, if 2 agree and one dissagrees, you have a
pretty good idea which input is wrong.
>
>
>>
>> Have we seen problems with Fords drive by wire? A very few, but yes.... No
>> unintended accelerations have been (AFAIK) documented.
>>
>>
>> "Jeff Strickland"<crwlrjeff(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:hmu1u8$uus$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
>>>
>>> "jim beam"<me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
>>> news:fvudnV-hwr-Z6A_WnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d(a)speakeasy.net...
>>>> if you buy all this fear-mongering idiocy that electronic throttle is a
>>>> problem, and that brakes, transmissions and ignition kill switches can
>>>> all simultaneously fail causing a driver to lose control, it might be
>>>> worth auto manufacturers of all stripes to adopt a slightly different
>>>> implementation of electronic throttle [e.t.] - if not for mechanical
>>>> reasons, but to shut the idiots up.
>>>>
>>>> first, lets understand e.t. functionality:
>>>>
>>>> 1. open the throttle when demanded
>>>> 2. close throttle when demanded
>>>> 3. allow "demand" to account for additional requirements like
>>>> a. de-throttle on shifting for automatics,
>>>> b. throttle appropriate to load at high demand [eg. full throttle at low
>>>> rpms can choke an engine and significantly reduce output - thus
>>>> de-throttle until revs support full open]
>>>
>>>
>>> The functionality is even easier than that -- open the throttle plate when
>>> the gas pedal is pressed and close the throttle plate when the gas pedal
>>> is released. You can get bogged down in semantics if you want, but the
>>> functiionality is really that simple Go when the pedal is pressed and stop
>>> going when the pedal is released. At the end of the day, anything else is
>>> a variation on pushing the pedal down or releasing the pedal so that it
>>> comes back up.
>>>
>>> When or why one might press or release the pedal has no bearing on the
>>> discussion. The only thing that matters is the expecation that the car
>>> goes faster when the pedal is pressed and stops going faster when the
>>> pedal is held at a mid-point, and slows when the pedal is released.
>>>
>>> When the throttle control system does those things, then it is doing its
>>> job.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>

From: jim beam on
On 03/06/2010 04:59 PM, clare(a)snyder.on.ca wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 12:43:14 -0800, jim beam<me(a)privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> On 03/06/2010 09:41 AM, Jim Warman wrote:
>>> The cross posting sucks.. but you guys seem to like it....
>>>
>>> Toyota is having trouble... Ford isn't (I'm reading this in a Ford NG and I
>>> work at a Ford dealer).
>>>
>>> Drive by wire throttle is a natural progression (if you can't see where the
>>> future of the automobile is going - I feel sorry for you). It allows for
>>> precise (hopefully) control of any electronic stability features, It allows
>>> for torque limiting when appropirate... reducing the need for other traction
>>> control measures (such as active brake booster application) when
>>> necessary...
>>>
>>> Fords system relies on redundancy... I'm not a Toyota tech so I can't tell
>>> you what they do... Fords system has three inputs..(one of them is inversely
>>> proportional). If the inputs aren't "coherent", the car will remain at
>>> idle...
>>
>> three inputs from the throttle pedal position sensor?
>>
>
> 3 inputs are an absolute necessity for true"fail-safe" systems. If 2
> inputs dissagree, what do you know, other than that you have a
> problem. With 3 inputs, if 2 agree and one dissagrees, you have a
> pretty good idea which input is wrong.

yeah, i get that, but where are the three inputs? does any vehicle have
more than one pedal position sensor?


>>
>>
>>>
>>> Have we seen problems with Fords drive by wire? A very few, but yes.... No
>>> unintended accelerations have been (AFAIK) documented.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Jeff Strickland"<crwlrjeff(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:hmu1u8$uus$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>
>>>> "jim beam"<me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:fvudnV-hwr-Z6A_WnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d(a)speakeasy.net...
>>>>> if you buy all this fear-mongering idiocy that electronic throttle is a
>>>>> problem, and that brakes, transmissions and ignition kill switches can
>>>>> all simultaneously fail causing a driver to lose control, it might be
>>>>> worth auto manufacturers of all stripes to adopt a slightly different
>>>>> implementation of electronic throttle [e.t.] - if not for mechanical
>>>>> reasons, but to shut the idiots up.
>>>>>
>>>>> first, lets understand e.t. functionality:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. open the throttle when demanded
>>>>> 2. close throttle when demanded
>>>>> 3. allow "demand" to account for additional requirements like
>>>>> a. de-throttle on shifting for automatics,
>>>>> b. throttle appropriate to load at high demand [eg. full throttle at low
>>>>> rpms can choke an engine and significantly reduce output - thus
>>>>> de-throttle until revs support full open]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The functionality is even easier than that -- open the throttle plate when
>>>> the gas pedal is pressed and close the throttle plate when the gas pedal
>>>> is released. You can get bogged down in semantics if you want, but the
>>>> functiionality is really that simple Go when the pedal is pressed and stop
>>>> going when the pedal is released. At the end of the day, anything else is
>>>> a variation on pushing the pedal down or releasing the pedal so that it
>>>> comes back up.
>>>>
>>>> When or why one might press or release the pedal has no bearing on the
>>>> discussion. The only thing that matters is the expecation that the car
>>>> goes faster when the pedal is pressed and stops going faster when the
>>>> pedal is held at a mid-point, and slows when the pedal is released.
>>>>
>>>> When the throttle control system does those things, then it is doing its
>>>> job.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>


--
nomina rutrum rutrum
From: jim beam on
On 03/06/2010 04:56 PM, clare(a)snyder.on.ca wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 12:20:36 -0800, "Jeff Strickland"
> <crwlrjeff(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> "jim beam"<me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:uqOdnfdrX4d5Lg_WnZ2dnUVZ_qKdnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net...
>>>
>>>> Fail safe and redundancy should be part of any
>>>> throttle system, but even that can fail, as have the simplest of
>>>> mechanical systems.
>>>
>>> indeed. statistically, mechanical throttles are much more unreliable.
>>
>>
>> STATISTICALLY?
>>
>> I'd like to see any statistic you have ...
>>
>> The facts are that save a few notable examples -- Audi -- there have been
>> virtually no known cases of unintended acceleration that involved vehicles
>> on the highway. The only known instances of wrong-pedal acceleration involve
>> vehicles in parking lots.
>>
>> To be sure, there are exceptions -- the guy that drove his Buick through the
>> Farmer's Market in Los Angeles and ran over several people -- but the
>> exception is just that. An exception.
>>
>> Statistically, the exception is not noteworthy. There is no statistic that
>> says mechanical throttles less reliable. Indeed, statistically speaking,
>> electronic throttle controls (fly-by-wire gas pedals) haven't been in use
>> long enough to be a statistically large enough sample to compare against the
>> decades of mechanical throttle mechanisms that have gone into millions upon
>> millions of vehicles.
>
> Over the years there have been MANY more failures of mechanical
> throtles - both cable and linkage, than failures with drive by wire. A
> large percentage resulted in NO throttle, but a still very appreciable
> number resulted in throttles stuck open. Many hundreds of general
> motors cars in particular when the engine mounts separated. And that
> was when there were only a tenth as many cars on the road (more or
> less)
> The probability of failure with a mechanical system IS higher than
> with electronics. Moving parts fail more often than non-moving parts.
> Electronics do not "wear out".
> And at this point, the only PROVEN problems with the Toyota system
> HAVE been mechanical.
> There is SPECULATION that there may be an electronic problem - but
> nothing concrete ponting that direction yet.

indeed.


--
nomina rutrum rutrum