Slashdot Mirror


Toyota's Engineering Process and the General Public

Doofus writes "The Washington Post has published in today's paper an article titled 'Why it's so hard for Toyota to find out what's wrong' by Frank Ahrens on the Toyota situation and the difficulties of adequately conveying to Senators and Representatives — most of whom are non-technical — the debugging process. Ahrens interviews Giorgio Rizzoni, an 'expert in failure analysis' at Ohio State, who describes the iterations of testing that NHTSA will likely inflict on the Toyota sample cars they have purchased, and then moves into the realm of software and systems verification: 'He explained that each vehicle contains "layers of computer code that may be added from one model year to next" that control nearly every system, from acceleration to braking to stability. Rizzoni said this software is rigorously tested, but he added: "It is well-known in our community that there is no scientific, firm way of actually completely verifying and validating software."' Ahrens ends the piece with a quote from a 2009 LA Times interview with former UCLA psychology professor Richard Schmidt about how user reports are often unreliable: 'When the driver says they have their foot on the brake, they are just plain wrong. The human motor system is not perfect, and it doesn't always do what it is told.'" Toyota is currently planning an event to challenge evidence presented by professor David W. Gilbert that called into question Toyota's electronic throttle system.

20 of 345 comments (clear)

  1. "An event to challenge Evidence" by Oxford_Comma_Lover · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > Toyota is currently planning an event to challenge evidence ...

    Macroscopic events generally don't challenge evidence. They challenge the politics of evidence.

    One challenges evidence with small, discrete, verifiable events.

    --
    -- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
    1. Re:"An event to challenge Evidence" by digitalunity · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't be stupid. Toyota is marginally more foreign than GM. They both buy parts heavily from foreign manufacturers. Toyota itself, although based in Japan, has been assembling cars right here in the US for over 30 years.

      I'd rather buy Toyota than shop at WalMart.

      GM isn't forgotten. I'm just hoping they complete this death spiral to its finality. They've been producing a glut of crappy cars(and a few great ones) for a very long time. I blame the auto unions as much as the workers for this - they resisted automation and the end result was a heavily debt saddled company with too many workers and low value products.

      I'm ashamed that my government felt compelled to save a company that should have seen its own demise 20 years ago and refused to make the difficult decisions needed to stay competitive.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    2. Re:"An event to challenge Evidence" by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 4, Insightful
      While your post is offtopic to the comment you're replying to, I agree it was an interesting read. However, the entire testimony has one fundamental flaw: it assumes that because a situation can be induced in which no error code is set, that that exact same situation can occur in the absence of being induced.

      The entire testimony is built on that unproven assumption, without venturing to explain how it could occur in normal operations.

    3. Re:"An event to challenge Evidence" by blincoln · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Of course if someone goes in with a debugger and forces x == y, then the code will fail. However, that doesn't mean the scenario is plausible or even possible to begin with.

      Working with electronic and/or mechanical systems is a lot different than working with pure software code. Read up on switch debouncing to start with, and you may begin to understand. Designers of those systems - especially ones that can kill people when they malfunction - must take into account things like what will happen if there's an electrical short or some other unexpected deviation from the intended design.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    4. Re:"An event to challenge Evidence" by haruharaharu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's why you do things like lock the input/output to sane values and have a default failure mode for just about everything. The thing that bothers me is the idea of a wholly electronic gearshift; I love my manual cars for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is that, with runaway throttle, I can clutch in any time I want to.

      --
      Reboot macht Frei.
    5. Re:"An event to challenge Evidence" by Lehk228 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      but if you sent x and y to a remote system (which a sensor is) then just assumed that when you asked that remote system for x and y that the answer is safe and sane without bothering to check, you are negligent.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  2. Why? by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why exactly is there a congressional case going on about this? It becomes even more worrying when you realize that the US government has a controlling interest in most of Toyota's competitors in the USA. In short, why, in a country where states are going bankrupt, privacy is an illusion, healthcare reform has boiled down to if you are pro or anti Obama, rampant spending and tax increases. In short, why do I care about this? File a class action lawsuit and let the courts settle it. Nothing is worse then a bunch of politicians knowing nothing about engineering, with stock in competitor's companies and large problems they haven't solved wasting their time with this crap.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  3. Good time to buy a Toyota by DogDude · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course Toyota is right. The most likely cause of these "sudden acceleration" problems is humans with their foot on the gas pedal. I've owned plenty of Toyotas, and I wish that my current Toyota was in need of replacing right now, because now is a great time to buy one. Unfortunately, my current Toyota only has 150K miles, meaning that I have a good 5-10 years of life in my vehicle. After that... I'll buy another Toyota.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  4. Software has no business by n6kuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... being in control of braking and acceleration.

    --
    If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
    1. Re:Software has no business by megla · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you believe that then man, I hope you never find out how an Airplane works!

    2. Re:Software has no business by raddan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Given the proportion of software-caused car accidents to human-caused accidents, I think we can more reasonably state that humans have no business being in control of braking and acceleration.

    3. Re:Software has no business by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ``Software has no business ... being in control of braking and acceleration.''

      I used to think so, as well. But I've come to realize that it's not software or no software that matters. It's the result. If the result is that I'm safer, I'll take the software. So the real question then is: has the transition to software-controlled braking and acceleration improved or deteriorated safety/reliability/energy efficiency/cost-effectiveness/whatever other metrics are important?

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  5. Re:Anyone else think it odd? by sciguy125 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why does the vehicle ABS (from what I know from the news) get tripped up on instant breaking?

    You're confusing two different issues. Some (many) models have having an accelerator problem. Supposedly, the car takes off and there's no way to stop it.

    Then, there's the brake issue with the Prius. If you press on the brake lightly, it only uses the regenerative braking (electric). If you hit a pothole, the ABS kicks in and there's a switchover to the friction brakes. You temporarily lose some braking force and it feels like the car is floating or (as some have reported) accelerating.

    I own the affected Prius model. I've experienced the issue and I don't think it's a problem. It was a little unnerving until I realized what it was. If I really need to stop sooner when the brakes "fail", all I have to do is hit the pedal harder and it does what I expect.

    --
    GE/S/P a- e++ y-- r-- s:++ d+ h! X+++ t++ C+ P+ L++ E W++ w M-- V? PS+ P+
  6. Re:dismissing user reports? by Rich0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Humans are fallible. You can't dismiss user reports. You can review them skeptically, or examine them for trends.

    EVERYBODY knows that cell phones cause cancer. So, why hasn't somebody fixed that?

    EVERYBODY knows that vaccines cause autism. So, why hasn't somebody fixed that?

    EVERYBODY knows that they're smarter than average. So, how did the last few presidents get elected? :)

  7. Little attention was given. Read Consumer Reports. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    General Motors has been making cars with poor reliability literally since I was a child. Read your library's old copies of Consumer Reports for verification.

    Insufficient attention was given to the poor reliability of G.M. cars, in my opinion.

    As long as G.M. cars could continue to be sold, making unreliable cars was more profitable. That's similar to making a sloppy computer operating system that is vulnerable to attacks. The sloppiness helps sell new versions.

  8. Re:Can't be verified as safe? by ediron2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Erroneus wrote:

    (mumble mumble) created a system (mumble) threaten lives (mumble) cannot be tested or verified adequately (mumble) sounds like cause to deny sales

    Wow. Just wow. Never has a nick been so apt.

    This isn't a Toyota thing. It isn't even exclusive to the auto industry. System complexity was where so many cliches like "Fast, complete, cheap: pick any two" come from.

    Sure, we can put missile-guidance software protocols into all sorts of software development; If I remember the metric, every line of code costs 10x as much as in general industry.

    Another thought: Airbags took 15 years to get acceptance from their 1970's invention -- the industry quickly realized their safety value, but nobody wanted to pony up $800 (1980 estimated per-car cost) or increase the cost of a car to eat that cost.

    And don't even get me started on FAA vs. adequate safety. Or Seldane and the FDA.

    tl;dr: Toyota *DOES* test extensively. Shit happens.

  9. Really? by Kupfernigk · · Score: 3, Insightful
    You do know modern jet fighters are dynamically unstable and can't be flown mechanically, they must use fly by wire? You do know that if the Airbus that came down in the Hudson had been a previous generation aircraft most of the people on board would probably have died, because the Airbus computer is able to support landing on water and most aircraft aren't?

    The simple fact is that overall a Prius with its minor brake transfer problem is far safer than any pre-ABS/traction control car. The fault is far less serious than, say, brake fade in drum brakes. And I don't even own a Toyota. You don't need any kind of tinfoil hat to think this is about bashing the part of the motor industry that is not US-owned.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  10. Re:Little attention was given. Read Consumer Repor by ircmaxell · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The thing you're missing, is the level of those defects. The problems that GM had with quality were almost never safety related (And when they were, they weren't major and were fixed rapidly). Say what you want that their cars sucked, but in the 100 years they have been selling cars in the USA, they have never had as major of an issue such as this. Ford has (Remember the exploding gas tanks?). Chrysler has (They had an issue with cruise control that caused some accidents). I'm not saying that GM is good (I got rid of my last GM car 2 years ago, and I don't know if I will buy another one). What I am saying is that comparing quality by shear number of defects (As consumer reports does) is ignoring the much more important bigger picture...

    --
    If a man isn't willing to take some risk for his opinions, either his opinions are no good or he's no good
  11. Black Box Info by hduff · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Toyota should be more forthcoming with the black box info on these cars to validate exactly what the driver was doing at the time of the accident. But they won't because lawyers would be all over that data to file lawsuits. still, knowing the truth is best for all involved. Far less finger pointing; far better remediation of the problem.

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  12. 70s nostalgia by sjbe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The real problem is people who think that not having any sort of actual linkage is a good idea.

    A mechanical linkage is not necessarily more reliable or safer. The fact that you can put your hands on it doesn't by itself make it better or worse. You are making an assumption based on your intuition that you cannot back up with data.

    Vehicles have only become more and more problematic since the late 70s due to increased reliance on electronics in place of actual mechanical parts.

    Nice sound bite but problematic in what way? Cars today are in general demonstrably more reliable, last longer, rust less, are (generally) safer in crashes, more powerful, and emit less pollution. At one point I made my living selling classic cars from the 70s and earlier. I'm very familiar with them first hand. You might like the styling better but performance-wise they are inferior to modern cars in almost every way I can think of.