Slashdot Mirror


Tesla: Model X Accident Caused By Driver Error, Not Autopilot (computerworld.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Tesla has responded to a recent report from a Model X owner claiming their vehicle suddenly accelerated at "maximum speed" by itself, jumped a curb and slammed into the side of a building while his wife was sitting behind the wheel. They said it analyzed vehicle logs, "which confirm that this Model X was operating correctly under manual control and was never in Autopilot or cruise control at the time of the incident or in the minutes before. Data shows that the vehicle was traveling at 6 mph when the accelerator pedal was abruptly increased to 100%. Consistent with the driver's action, the vehicle applied torque and accelerated as instructed. Safety is the top priority at Tesla and we engineer and build our cars with this foremost in mind. We are pleased that the driver is ok and ask our customers to exercise safe behavior when using our vehicles." When will people stop lying about Tesla's Autopilot mode crashing their cars? One Tesla owner recently filed a Lemon Law claim against the company over a high number of quality control issues.

31 of 596 comments (clear)

  1. No one hurt . by invictusvoyd · · Score: 4, Funny

    slammed into the side of a building while his wife was sitting behind the wheel.

    hmm ok . Happens.

    1. Re:No one hurt . by michelcolman · · Score: 5, Informative

      You may laugh, but, from the actual article:

      "researchers found that there were seven to 15 crashes per month in the U.S. caused by pedal application errors. Females were the drivers in nearly two-thirds of the pedal misapplication crashes identified in crash databases and in a media scan used in the study."

    2. Re:No one hurt . by prefect42 · · Score: 4, Informative

      This isn't something I can imagine doing anywhere near as badly in a manual. You panic, you stomp brake and clutch. Miss the brake and go for the accelerator, and you rev like crap but don't accelerate. You miss the clutch, you stall it. Seems like quite a challenge to miss the clutch and hit the foot rest, whilst simultaneously missing the brake and hitting the accelerator.

      http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfil...

      Researchers reviewed each crash narrative to determine whether the crash actually resulted
      from a pedal application error. Of the 2,930 crashes, 2,411 were caused by a driver applying the
      accelerator when he or she intended to apply the brake. Fifty-eight were the result of the driver’s
      foot slipping from the brake and pressing the accelerator, 47 were the result of the driver pressing
      the wrong pedal in a vehicle with manual transmission (either clutch or accelerator rather than the
      brake, or the brake rather than the clutch). Reviewers determined the remaining 414 crashes not to
      11 be the resultt of a pedal misapplication; these 519 incidents were therefore excluded from the present
      analyses.

      --

      jh

  2. Really? by ledow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not being funny...

    but if the logs show 100% acceleration, that just reflects the sensor value. Not that the user - or indeed anything else like a dropped handbag - actually pressed the pedal that far.

    Although I'm always the one to shout "user error" first, and that's quite likely in this case, the logs alone are not sufficient to prove fault. Only to act like a flight recorder and say what the sensors recorded and what the machine did in response to that input.

    How the sensor got that reading could still be manufacturing fault, cable fatigue, or a million and one other things not the fault of the driver.

    1. Re:Really? by invictusvoyd · · Score: 4, Funny

      How the sensor got that reading could still be manufacturing fault, cable fatigue, or a million and one other things not the fault of the driver.

      Your argument is valid but "his 45 year old wife behind the wheel" gets priority .

    2. Re:Really? by E-Rock · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the bigger point is that the car wasn't in autopilot mode at the time. I don't think the drivers are realizing that they can check and call them on their bullshit.

    3. Re: Really? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you're building a safety critical system, having two sensors won't do you much good. Even if they disagree, you have no way to know which is wrong, only that some fault exists. The best you can do in that situation is try to fail to safe, but in a vehicle where stopping suddenly at the wrong time or in the wrong place could be more dangerous than carrying on until it's safer, there is no perfect failsafe mode.

      Having three parallel systems, ideally made with different types components to guard against design defects, gets you something more useful, since you can at least take a majority vote if one of the sensors is out of sync with the other two. Obviously this is also more expensive to implement, though.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    4. Re:Really? by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's nothing preventing "45 year old wives" from knowing something about the machines they operate. Actually, I do expect people operating machinery that can lead to accidents that endanger the lives of others to know enough about them to operate them safely. Independent of gender, race, age... you get the idea.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re: Really? by michelcolman · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Majority voting with three systems has turned out to be dangerous on quite a few occasions. At least with two systems disagreeing, you can decide "I don't know which one is right, so I'll do the safe thing". With two out of three giving an incorrect value, it leads to misplaced confidence in this wrong value.

      Examples:

      - (human): Primary altimeters different between captain and F/O, standby altimeter agrees with captain, but F/O altimeter was correct. Don't remember the flight number or even the company, but they crashed into a mountain. If they hadn't had the standby altimeter, they would have gone with the lowest of the two indications until they could intercept a glide slope somewhere.

      - (automatic): The A320 has independent Angle Of Attack probes, but if you climb through heavy icing, it turns out two can freeze up at the same time. The system sees a confirmed stall (even though it should be impossible given the current speed, attitude and inertial measurements) because two systems agreeing can't ever be wrong, and it pushes the nose down. Even if both pilots pull back on the stick, the nose continues to drop. We now have an official procedure to shut off two of the Air Data Reference units, leaving only one remaining. That's the only way of shaking the absolute confidence of the system in two identical but false signals.

    6. Re: Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Almost all gas pedals in cars are implemented as potentiometers. (Not only Tesla. This is being done for years now.)

      A pot-meter has 3 legs and both resistor values are measured.
      If the measurements don't agree, an error is logged in hte on-board computer (and warning is generated) and the safest value is assumed.

      So in case of a 100% acceleration one measurement would be "low" and the other "high", the exact oposite of not touching the gas pedal.

      If you are wondering: The AD convertors are also separated in hardware.

      In other news: In electronically controlled cars, applying the gas pedal and the breaks at the same time, get you an error and only breaks...

    7. Re: Really? by Buchenskjoll · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yes, three sensors. Like The Minority Report.

      --
      -- Make America hate again!
    8. Re:Really? by grahamtriggs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Users are also capable of not telling the truth. The logs are almost certainly accurate.

      That doesn't entirely rule out a fault - if the system erroneously reads a 100% accelerator pedal depression, then it will record that and act on it; the error then being in the sensor, not the logging or action taken by the car.

      But when somebody is parking, they are going to press the brake to stop - and if they find they are not stopping, or accelerating, they'll press it harder. So a 100% depression is also consistent with someone mistakenly pressing the accelerator instead of the brake.

      When you make it possible to the blame the car, some people are going to do so instead of taking responsibility. On balance, I'm inclined to believe this was user error.

    9. Re:Really? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 4, Funny

      "...evaporate on their 44th birthday because God abhors an old, married, female engineer."

      Actually, management requires that all engineers evaporate on this date.

    10. Re:Really? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Technology is about to be mandated that will stop incidents like this; mandatory Automated Emergency Braking is coming in what, 2020? 2025? Real soon now, since all the major manufacturers and suppliers have an AEB solution available. And then "wrong pedal" collisions will be a thing of the past. The car simply won't let you do that.

      It's too bad enough of us couldn't be responsible for humans to be able to keep the responsibility of driving, but more and more of it is being taken away.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re: Really? by dcw3 · · Score: 4, Funny

      The Raman's always did things in threes

      That's really using your noodle.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    12. Re:Really? by beanpoppa · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I did have an issue with an Audi several years ago. My cruise control would periodically turn itself on. They checked the computer, and it was reading occasional faults in the cruise control switch, so they replaced it. The problem continued. Sometimes over bumps, but also sometimes when I would turn on my turn signal. The turn signal and cruise control switches were both stalks on the left side of the column. The dealer read the codes again, and again said the cruise control switch was reporting faults and wanted to change it again. When I protested, and pointed out that it would turn on when I turned on my turn signal, they assumed that I was mistaking the two stalks. (to which point I asked them to investigate why my turn signal was turning on when I activated my cruise control...) It was only after the service manager finally driving it around and being able to duplicate the issue that they believed me. They ultimately replaced the control module in the steering column, which contained both switches, which solved the problem. Not saying that the brakes and gas pedal go into the same control module, but I can certainly see a case where the control module has a fault which is reading the wrong input.

  3. With Experience of Similar Incidents... by ytene · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'd be inclined to agree with you but for one thing... A few years ago Tesla let BBC Top Gear test a Roadster, and Jeremy Clarkson lampooned the vehicle in a way that annoyed Elon Musk. Ever since then Tesla have put a *lot* of data capture capability and performance monitoring into all of their vehicles, specifically to stop these sorts of claims.

    If Tesla are saying that the telemetry from the black box shows 100% throttle, then at this juncture, I'd be inclined to believe them.

    Years ago I spent my spare time helping a friend run his garage business, which included running a contract with a local Police force to recover accident-damaged vehicles. I saw numerous examples of situations in which drivers of automatic cars [and all Teslas are automatic by default] encountered something unexpected on the road. Their first instinct was to slam down on the brake pedal, but you would be amazed at how many managed to hit the throttle by mistake. In the panic and shock of an event, the body can lock up involuntarily, especially, if you think about it, if your car suddenly shot forward under the full acceleration that a Tesla is capable of...

    It's way too early to say without more concrete data, but based on the above two points [knowledge of Tesla's extensive telemetry and personal experience of real-world examples like this] my "Occam's Razor" punt would suggest that something happened, the driver panicked, hit the wrong pedal, and the rest is history...

    1. Re:With Experience of Similar Incidents... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I did this a few weeks ago.... I was driving along a fairly empty road and had to go past a parked vehicle, so I tapped the brake and to my horror the car went faster! I realised afterwards that I'd been driving for a while and I wasn't sitting completely straight to the wheel, so my feet weren't aligned with the pedals. Then I moved my foot across, too far, and now I was punching between the clutch and the brake (pressing both pedals, but weirdly because they have different pressures) - nothing was working, total madness! It was dark and i couldn't see my feet, and I sailed past the parked car at speed before I finally realigned and got back in control.

      Whereupon I straightened myself up, slowed down, and spent the rest of the journey muttering shit...shit...! It'd never happened before, I didn't even consider it a risk. Scary.

    2. Re:With Experience of Similar Incidents... by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Good of you to admit it.

      I did it once on a rental car after driving for 12 hours... We were on loose gravel and only created a shower of dust. I caught the mistake instantly, but it was enough for my passenger to take over driving. If it were clean asphalt and I were in a sportscar, it would have been a wreck.

      FTA: "She knows the difference between brake and accelerator pedal. " - it's amazing how people attribute it to knowledge and discredit "not knowing" as a question of intelligence. The car was 5 days old, it takes more time than that to become intimately familiar with the car.

      The reflex reaction to the car lurching forward when you hit the brake is.... hit the brake harder...

      And it's ridiculous that the article is interviewing her husband.

    3. Re:With Experience of Similar Incidents... by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is a car, not a computer. There are dozens of separate processing units in a modern car. They're not all built into the system that does the logging, as if it could grab whatever data it wants from any of them. Each processing unit is compartmentalized to a specific task. And Tesla, like any other manufacture, does not design all of them.
      It's actually rather inefficient from a systems approach, but it's the way things are done in the auto industry, and it's not going to be easy to change that.

      Too bad you don't know how cars work. Each module does its own logging, and the accelerator pedal sensor is connected directly to the PCM. They're not all built into the system that does the logging, the logging is built into all of them. When you want powertrain codes, you have to scan both the PCM and TCM in a typical vehicle, and that's not even counting the ABS which also interacts with the traction control.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:With Experience of Similar Incidents... by benro03 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There was a study recently about going on "autopilot" while walking or driving (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mental-mishaps/201404/the-dangers-going-autopilot) and how people avoided obstacles, but didn't truly notice them. Part of the experiment was to bend a branch to head height and then place dollar bills on it. People avoided the branch, but didn't notice the money even when it was waving right in front of them. They even a large sign announcing that a psychological experiment that explained what was going on place in the middle of a path. When asked shortly afterwards about the obstacles, people didn't remember them. They just avoided them.
      People get into a car and automatically behave as if they've been driving that car or road regularly, even a new one. They zone out, react to a normal occurrence and because of their unfamiliarity with the vehicle/road do the wrong thing.

      --
      I am Homer of Borg, resistance is - Ooo Donuts!
    5. Re:With Experience of Similar Incidents... by barc0001 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > The car was 5 days old, it takes more time than that to become intimately familiar with the car.

      This is a key piece. I was astonished when I bought a new car how different everything felt for a few weeks. I'd had the old car for 12 years and everything was second nature in it but it takes a while to get used to a new vehicle's layout and handling.

    6. Re:With Experience of Similar Incidents... by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not sure what happeend to my response, as I already replied to this :P

      Too bad you don't know how cars work

      No, too bad you don't know how Teslas work. Teslas actually contain a homebrew Linux box specifically for logging and systems management. When people speak of "the logs" in a Tesla, that is what they're referring to. You download them by plugging in a USB stick. Accelerator stats are are in field 10 (DR1S), offset 12. Value 0 is 0% throttle, value 255 is 100% throttle. It's logged once per second.

      I seriously doubt the accelerator itself actually records a constant, internal high-resolution reading of the outputs of each of its sensors. When Tesla wants to investigate a problem, they pull The Logs(TM) as described above. And that's clearly what they did here.

      --
      Maybe, but I can barely make out what you're saying because your horse is too high.
  4. Are the logs readable by anyone but Tesla? by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Serious question... is this open information that the driver or owner of the car can read, or is this super secret encoded info that only Tesla has access to?

    Do we simply take their word for what the logs say? Is there any way to check via 3rd party that this is in fact what happened and there is a secure means of ensuring the data isn't changed?

    This is important, sooner or later it'll end up in court and this will come up. "Trust us" is not an answer.

  5. Re:So Tesla tracks everything to do with your car. by stephanruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That was my question exactly.

    Why does no one object when I place a camera on the floor of a factory for safety reasons?

    But everybody gets hysterical when I place that same camera in the employee toilet looking directly at the employees taking a dump?

    What's up with that?

  6. Re:So Tesla tracks everything to do with your car. by Rei · · Score: 5, Funny

    I know, right? It's like when Miley Cyrus gets naked and licks a sledgehammer they call it "art" and she's an "artist", but when I do it, they're all like "We're going to have to ask you to leave the hardware store" and stuff. I just don't get some people.

    --
    Maybe, but I can barely make out what you're saying because your horse is too high.
  7. Its actually pretty easy to determine a fault by burtosis · · Score: 4, Informative

    Determining if it's a sensor problem is easy in the vast majority of cases with a single sensor. Sure a common sensor failure can register an end point value like 0 or 100%, as those are the most common failures. But most systems can set up where full pedal is only 90% throttle, full off is 10%, and that shows a failure right there. Similarly with good resolution a human in a bumpy vehicle cannot hold a sensor at an exact value for long either, again showing a failure (just like how force sticks in old keyboards rezero).

    Simply sampling the pedal 10k times a second is another way. A pedal is a physical device and as such probably cannot be moved through its travel much faster than in 0.1 seconds. You should have one thousand readings showing a smooth transition from unpressed to fully pressed. That is a world of difference from going from unpressed to pressed in 0.0001 seconds - a single sensor reading time sample

    Another common sensor fault is getting lots of jitter. Again you can see that the sensor can't be functioning realistically because real pedals cannot move that fast.

    Add in a bunch of very simple algorithms and it's pretty easy to approach 100% accuracy in determining if a sensor is feeding correct data or not. It's so trivial and sensor design 101 that I can't imagine all three of these are not already in the tesla.

  8. Re: Jeremy Clarkson lampooned the vehicle by topham · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Tesla lost because the judge determined the show was entertainment and not a documentary or news program and had no requirement to be factual.

    They lied and faked almost the entire thing.

  9. Re: Heals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    His suggestion was that *everyone* puts fashion before safety, and that the difference is primarily because social norms prevent males from wearing similar footwear. That you somehow interpreted it as "women are the only ones who put fashion before safety" is intriguing and rather telling.

  10. Re:Heals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    You can't wear heals; they can only be cast by a cleric.

  11. Re: Jeremy Clarkson lampooned the vehicle by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Informative

    No, they didn't lie or fake anything. If you go back and read the judgment you see that Top Gear was honest.

    They pushed a car claiming it had run out of power into the garage when it still had considerable charge left. They admitted this in court as showing an example of "what could happen" but omitting this on the show.

    If you don't consider that lying or faking that says a lot about you as a person.