Safe Speed Forums

this is a pretty interesting list..

http://www.esafetysupport.org/en/esafet ... _projects/

Cheers G I think that's why I need to find out more.
Perhaps I haven't experienced skidding as often as others, but I'm left with the impression that it's not that frequent a thing for a lot of drivers. If that's a reasonable assumption, then a lot of drivers have taken their cars across lowered-friction roadsurfaces but not fallen foul. Ergo, there are non-skid, but reduced-friction conditions to which ABS responds and which may be useful as an alert.
I think I recall someone saying, in this debate, that one way to proceed more safely along potentially icy roads was to occasionally and cautiously apply the brakes. So, to test from response if the road was slippery? If car designers are now at a point of relieving drivers of some of the decision-making (keep-your-distance sensors), then perhaps an auto-electronic braking test for slipperiness?
Lot's of ifs and buts and maybees, but I feel the equestion worth asking.

Cheers ed. Had a quick look, particularly for British participants @ their meetings...........didn't find any!!?

However, see ESC @ the same site , although I think ESC is well developed for vehicles now, isn't it?
http://www.esafetysupport.org/download/ ... 0FINAL.pdf

That would be me then!
Yes, I think tipping the brakes (on straight, level or uphill bits with nobody behind you) is a good way to assess the level of grip available. Same with accelerating harshly in low gears (again, not something you'd do with a rear-wheel drive car or on a bend, etc). Both will give you some feedback as to how easy it is to break traction. Obviously by no means fool proof - the next 50 yards could be very different!

Interesting what you say about developing something that monitors grip via the ABS system. For some time now, I've been advocating (and waiting for someone to develop it and then pay me off handsomely! ) a variation to the ABS / ESC system whereby the brake on one, undriven wheel is gently applied periodically and the reduction in speed compared to the other three noted. I think modern ABS systems can pretty easily detect levels of individual wheel slip well below the threshold where lockup occurs. My guess is that the driver might not even notice it happening. By doing this, (the system would only be active when the exterior air temperature sensor sensed air temperatures below "x" degrees) I think it could then give the driver some sort of warning of potential slippy conditions depending on how easy it was to lock the wheel compared to a pre-programmed "map" of grip levels that the system would consider "normal". Again, by no means fool proof but every little helps! Such a system would only have helped your daughter if she'd unknowingly driven over a few slippy patches (perhaps on the straights) before her accident. I accept that if she'd enjoyed good grip right up until that bend, it wouldn't have helped. That said, it might help in some circumstances!

If you think the idea has any merit, feel free to bring it up with your TRL chap!

not sure about the esafety bunch but alot of the research projects are collaborative and include a number of uk companies & academia.

ESC / ESP / VSC is i beleive to be mandatory on new cars over a certain production volume from 2011 (oh wikipedia says 2012 ).

sorry.. random browsing now... found this..

http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/ope ... sultation/

As an aside, does anyone know if SafeSpeed will be submitting a response? It's a hell of a big task, I appreciate that, but probably worth the effort. Probably material for a seaprate thread (in fact I think there already is one on this) but is there a way of sharing the task out amongst ourselves?

Did you mean submitting a response to the DofT proposal, M?

Mole 'That would be me then!'
...........For some time now, I've been advocating ..........
..........the system would only be active when the exterior air temperature sensor sensed air temperatures below "x" degrees) ..............
..........I accept that if she'd enjoyed good grip right up until that bend, it wouldn't have helped.
Cheers Mole.
To whom have you been advocating the idea, please?
Fairly sure that roadpavement temperature is the essential factor. Vaisala Road sensor Ltd's award winning meteorologist, Dr Jiamin Shao, integrates that temperature into the math equation which is used for his Ice Prediction model. I'm reasonably convinced that, at the crash-site, roadpavement was between 2 and 3C lower than air temp (probably as low as -5C) due to micro-environmental influences. Also, aren't there Infra-Red thermometers which can read temps from such surfaces?

Sorry for not responding before now but, reviewing the debate, yes informing drivers of the conditions in a much better, coordinated and uprated way than currently. How??????

Guys and Gals, I'm a bu****r for confusing things. Above quote from Steve is from the early days of this debate........bet you wondered where that came from

Missing you, Guys & Gals.

Is this debate in a cul-de-sac now?

OK, now I think I might be ready.

Your question could be rephrased a number of ways ...

"What sort of duty of care does the state have regarding driver safety?"

Most of this forum started right at the beginning - education/training/testing, which is backsliding. That backsliding is a symptom of the state's priorities shifting towards profit and away from safety-first-mobility-second, which the members of this website are crying out against.

By educating/training/testing the driver to higher standards, you increase the likelihood of both drivers predicting and avoiding dangerous conditions, and negating or mitigating their dangers when 'surprised' by them.

I generally feel irked by the idea that the state send some sort of yearly warning in the mail with the same mechanism as a website checkbox - "By checking agree, we can hold you responsible for what you probably didn't read anyway." That is tantamount to using human nature against the constituency for profit - again, another raison d'etre for SafeSpeed.

The sea change in attitude and culture of the DfT and the state didn't happen in a day, and couldn't possibly be corrected that fast; a definitive turn back in the right direction is what we are working for.

However, none of these solutions would show results as quickly as you'd like to see ...

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

The quality of drivers' attitudes about their responsibilities, and in fact their abilities, have also increased the likelihood of drivers being unaware of changing weather conditions and the potential nasty surprises as a result.

I found the entire diversion regarding allowing the ABS/Trac Control/ESP to do its own testing of the available friction unnerving - nearly tantamount to the car driving for you without your knowledge or permission.

Far better would be externalizing the Mass AirFlow, Manifold Absolute Pressure (barometer), and Air Temp sensors, as well as maybe coming up with some new type[s] of sensor[s] for the purpose of noting the character of the weather - moisture, temp, sunlight, air pressure, winds - the more sensitive, the better.
Mercedes-Benz and BMW, among other makes, detect the presence of rain by noting the changes in how light passes through the windshield. BMW's M cars change their fuel trims and spark curves based on comparing external airflow expectations vs reality to the vehicle speed sensor.

Based on the vehicles data regarding ambient weather conditions - if that data is sensitive enough in realtime - it can ask the driver if it should lessen the attack rate of the throttle and brakes to minimize gratuitous wheelspin and lockup, perhaps even advise a temporarily limited top speed, among a myriad other things it can do without the driver knowing or even noticing (I've always thought it was quite clever to keep the pads invisibly spaced away from the rotors to wipe them dry without actually touching pads on rotors.)

As long as the driver is kept in the loop, they can opt out of that loop if they so choose, but I still urge that the driver should be given enough info to intelligently participate in how much of a decision they wish to make. Even if you prefer Lexus' approach to making the decisions without the driver involved, the driver should still be informed, just in case.

Even knowing which tires are on the car might be worthwhile info, at least to the car; since it definitely has implications on the traction limits, how it approaches those limits, and how it behaves beyond them. Either that, or make tires better suited to the area and the conditions. (I mention this because here in Amerika, tires that probably wouldn't even pass muster in Europe are the predominant replacement choice.)

Here's a strange idea: you guys might not like Tyre Grip, but it's gotten me up a few snowy and icy hills on which I previously was backsliding. How opposed would you be to bad weather chemical traction enhancement by the car? A one gallon tank of this stuff might be useful if its efficacy could be improved, and dedicated spray mechanisms would certainly provide a more consistent coverage pattern than human hands.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Aye, I reckon they're all fair points. I definitely agree that every "driver aid" ought to be capable of being turned off, should the driver wish it. Whether or not the current increasingly litigious climate would ever make that possible without them getting their butts sued into oblivion is a different question though!

Not sure any measurement of airflow could help much with the determnation of tarmac temperature / condition though. Most cars already have external air temperature sensors these days anyway.

What's "Tyre Grip"? I've never heard of that!

YES!

Oh, only on here! If I had a contact at Bosch, I might tell them about it, but I have no idea if that idea "has legs" or, indeed, if it hasn't already been thought of!

The current litigious climate, coupled with the backsliding of driver ET&T, has largely resulted in more and more so-called driver aids, which actually demand less and less of the driver. I doubt the pendulum will swing back the other way, because electronic add-ons generate lots of profit and create jobs for car companies. As long as I can shut them off, I'm happy.The condition of the tarmac can very easily change faster than any sort of tactile sensor could detect and meaningfully adjust.

A Mass AirFlow sensor, an Air Temp sensor, a Manifold Absolute Pressure sensor, a humidity sensor, and a sunlight sensor dedicated to external conditions might not detect tarmac conditions, but they'd provide excellent warnings regarding the probability of conditions which tend to breed ice patches, and the ABS/Trac/Stability Control would be forewarned and forearmed.

I personally deactivate Traction & Stability Controls unless the weather might be affecting road conditions.It's a resin you spray onto your tires. Wait five minutes, and off ya go.

It works surprisingly well in a pinch, especially on ice, and it doesn't get consumed by unaffected roads.
Tire Socks work better in snow than TyreGrip, but they get consumed by unaffected roads.

Where's the next breakthrough in tire grip technology?

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Really.......thank you for bringing your expertise to this debate

Although just one part of the safety-equation, statutory duties about highway-condition are essential IMHO, and particularly that part most recently amended to deal with winter-conditions. I have received negative-backlash from experts who work in the participating-industries , mainly because they've sniffed out what they suspected was litigation-motivated questions from yours truly. I'm left with the impression, from those forums, that there is a 'shrug-of-the-shoulders' attitude towards the latest speight of winter smashes. As if it's a fact of life, and somehow acceptable, that people are killed and injured because they've driven on winter-roads. I fully understand the view that if you drive you are responsible for maximising personal safety, at least.
Back to statutory duties. It's currently not acceptable to me to presume that the experts are fulfilling those duties, and that's nothing to do with limits to available expertise and technology. It's to do with confirming, without defensiveness or confusion, that the duties were followed. If profit motive is the root of this, then the balance of profit and performance needs to be challenged. And what better focus can you have than a specific like winter roadsafety?
Sure, let the experts do the job that we pay them to do. But don't accept that, for example, because micro-climates represent a wintertime challenge at the boundary of that expertise, this somehow relieves local-government of part of their wintertime-duties. Or that drivers should, therefore, take a greater share of responsibility for wintertime-safety. Unless a challenge is made to confirm that the duties were followed then, IMVHO, we get the roads we deserve.
I've heard the ..........state's priorities shifting towards profit and away from safety-first......view before, thank you for that, and it's from a much revered source (the uk's senior traffic-accident investigator). I am hearing enough to start to agree.

I understand that you're no ordinary 'taxi-driver' and, because of contributions to another pert of Safespeed Foums, you may be involved in air-transport. So, I applaud what you've said above, as I believe it to be based upon expertise from a much more educated industry. I really don't mind what technologies are used to help to detect hidden-ice on roads, as long as they are strongly considered as a means to reduce the current lottery-type approach. Also, I agree wtih not letting the technology take over from the driver (if I understand your point correctly)