Looking for the Ghosts in Toyota’s Machines
On the first day of the congressional hearings on Toyota, one of the few witnesses called was Dave Gilbert, a professor of automotive technology at Southern Illinois University. Gilbert claims that he has been able to get Toyotas to accelerate in an uncontrolled manner, that he can reproduce the error, and that it doesn’t generate any fault codes in the car’s diagnostic system.
In advance of his testimony, ABC News ran a story showing Gilbert reproducing his tests, accompanied by video of Toyotas accelerating out of control.
People took notice. Reproducible results from a professor sounds a lot more like solid evidence than loose floor mats and shims in acceleration pedals.
Gilbert introduced electrical faults into the cars’ control systems that he said duplicated real world corrosion, moisture, and manufacturing defects. The shorts caused the Toyotas to accelerate without triggering any error codes in the main engine control unit — which would have put the car into fail-safe limp home mode. The fact that no error codes were generated would also explain why Toyota has had a hard time putting its finger on the problem.
It sounds very scientific and reliable — a professor with repeatable results in four different Toyota models, results he claims he cannot reproduce in General Motors products.
“This is a dangerous condition, it is not fail-safe,” said Gilbert on ABC’s World News Tonight.
Still, there was something in the back of my mind that made me a little bit skeptical. In 1992, Dateline NBC got caught rigging GM pickup trucks with model rocket engines when they couldn’t get the supposedly defective gas tanks to explode and provide them with the dramatic fiery footage they needed.
Who is Dave Gilbert, and how did he come to be an “expert” witness before Congress? All due respect to Gilbert — after all, he’s got a PhD — but he’s not an automotive engineer. I have all the regard in the world for capable mechanics, troubleshooters, and technicians, but Southern Illinois University at Carbondale’s automotive technology program is a glorified auto shop program that I’d expect at a vocational high school or a community college. Frankly, I’m a bit shocked that a four-year college offers a BS in automotive technology.
My skepticism increased when I found out who was hyping Prof. Gilbert’s findings: Sean Kane, whom ABC described as a “safety advocate” from Safety Research & Strategies. Kane, who claims to have been the first to spot the trend of owner complaints about unintended acceleration in Toyotas, testified with Gilbert.
“This is clearly an electronic problem,” Kane told ABC News before his testimony.
Who is Sean Kane?
Well, trial lawyers engaged in litigation with Toyota fund his “research.” That fact came out in the hearings, as Kane sparred with Rep. Steve Buyer (R-IN), who represents a district with a Toyota facility. Kane admitted that he’d received money from five attorneys with cases pending against Toyota.
It also came out that Kane funded Gilbert’s research.
Trouble is that this “ghost in the machine” is killing people !
Color me skeptical of this entire sideshow. No doubt that there exists a strong possibility that there is a mechanical defect that needs to be addressed, but consider the plain fact that the government that owns two of the nations three automakers (along with their lackeys the labor unions) is also the regulatory body charged with consumer safety. An obvious conflict of interest on the part of government. With a press that is still, inexplicably, rooting for the Obami leading the drumbeat of outrage against Toyota, it would seem to me that the allied forces are working in concert to belittle their surging competitor.
Reason #34,876 why government should be expressly forbidden by Constitutional amendment under any circumstance from owning even one cent of stock in a private corporation. The role of the government should be that of referee, not that of a participant.
Anybody remember Audi, 60 Minutes and “unintended acceleration”? The funny thing was these incidents happened almost exclusively here in the States . . . Now part of that could be because Americans almost exclusively drive automatics . . . but still it does not explain the why’s.
With Audi, once the rumor (and then 60 Minutes) started their sales went through the floor. Attempting to “re-engineer” the automatics they first spread the peddles further apart, changed the way the floor mats were installed, and then installed a new device the “shift lock”. This seemed to answer the problem and sales of the 5000 continued (crippled) until the model change in 92′.
Deja vue?
When 60 Minutes did a demonstration of Audi runaway their “expert” drilled a hole in the transmission and used a compressed air cylinder to cause a malfunction. This “malfunction” is impossible in the real world. It’s like that.
Ok, at first I was willing to give the Automotive Technology degree the benefit of the doubt. After all, my own degree (Virginia Tech’s BS in Building Construction) often gets the same rap. This is despite the fact that we take math through Multivariable Calculus (which differs from the engineers only in that we don’t have to take Differential Equations, though we can count it as a technical elective if we do), and take the same Calculus-based Physics, Statics, and Deforms as “real” engineering disciplines, as well as taking Geotech, Structures, Concrete, and Steel (the civil capstone course) right along side our Civil Engineering counterparts.
So I did a little bit of research to see if the degree is being unfairly maligned.
Math is the best indicator for how a curriculum will proceed. They are required to take three math classes. None of them are calculus (though they’re not prohibited) Their suggested class is “Introduction to Contemporary Mathematics.” This means that the Physics 101 they take is not calculus-based (101-3 Physics that Changed the World). Alternately, they can take a Plant Biology or Zoology class.
This is clearly not an engineering degree, but rather a technical certification with some unrelated courses thrown in. This is a shame, because it clearly could be a specialized subset of ME, much the way VT’s BC degree is almost welded to the CEE curriculum. Taking the three math classes and requiring them to be Differential, Integral, and Vector calculus, and making the science classes be calculus-based physics would be transformative for the degree.
So Ronnie’s criticism of the degree stands.
None the less, a deeper look does suggest that Dr. Gilbert WAS, in fact, speaking in his area of competence. Thus, while he’s hardly an ME, he is knowledgeable in automotive design (just not designing automobiles).
That doesn’t mean his research doesn’t warrant close scrutiny. However, it does suggest that it can’t be discarded on the basis of his degree not being a rigorous ME degree.
Power not greed may be the motivation behind these attacks. I would begin by researching Toyota’s relationship with unions.
Really good article, thank you.
Keep in mind we are dealing with incredibly rare occurrences–this makes analysis quite challenging and makes for counterintuitive situations. Circumstances that cause one electronic default make a second far, far more likely to also occur (the likelihoods are not independent). The article seemed to say that if the ‘watcher’ is compromised the default is to say everything is ok…. this is an obvious system engineering bad design. If my checksum returns NO value… that shouldn’t be read as a match/correct/ok.
The larger context is whether the acceleration error is falsifiable, and if the system is designed to fail well vs fail badly. On an individual car/bridge/airplane failure, you can make valid, falsifiable, post-hoc conclusions thru the use of modeling.
What I don’t get is the lack of discussion about what to do when this sort of thing happens. Years ago when my Volkswagen accelerated out of control (due to a frayed cable)I avoided crashing into a truck by putting the car in neutral. Seems to me that besides fixing the cars this would be a good time to brush up on our driving skills.
As long as they (any automaker) do not welcome the UAW, there will be trouble..just
sayin’
For a clue as to what’s happening, here’s a group that bills itself as Safety Research and Strategies, at this site:
http://www.safetyresearch.net/2009/07/20/sudden-acceleration/
…and the lead sentence gives the game away:
> “Sudden Unintended Acceleration can be rooted in a variety of vehicle defects including ergonomic design flaws, mechanical or electro-mechanical failures, or electronic failures.”
“Ergonomic design flaws.” The first “defect” they list. Think for a second: what are the ergonomic variables for accelerators and brakes? There aren’t many. Pedal placement. Pedal size. Pedal resistance. What does “ergonomic” mean in terms of accelerators and brakes? Not much. Easy to push. Easy to distinguish one pedal from the other.
I think we have an explanation. It’s an ergonomic problem. In moments of stress, is it possible that people are intending to slam on the brakes, but are slamming on the accelerators instead?
What are the odds that an electronic glitch can make the accelerator stick on, and the brakes stick off (inoperably so)? It would have to happen simultaneously because, in the war between brakes and accelerators, brakes win. It wouldn’t be enough to cause unintended acceleration, there would also have to be unintended brake failure.
But if the pedals are too close to each other, one could hit the accelerator accidentally. It isn’t hard at all to believe in driver malfunction. Happens all the time. Especially when they’re distracted by car phones and text messaging.
My recommendation to Toyota would be to move the brake and accelerator pedals further apart, and make the brake pedal nice and big, like older American land yachts. Find a way to delicately suggest that the problem is “user error” (it’s hard to insult your client base delicately). And mention ever so diplomatically that the U.S. government has a conflict of interest, since it now owns a couple of car companies whose products nobody wants to buy. There are two ways to make a bad product marketable. One way is to improve it and lower the price. Ooops, we’re talking about Detroit and Washington, sorry, my bad. The other way is to drag down the competition.
#6
I think it was “Car and Driver”, but anyway I read just yesterday or the day before of a car publication that proved that hard breaking will stop any car on the market in full throttle. You could look it up.
Toyota is direct competition with the government owned GM. That gives the government a vested interest in seeing Toyota hurt. Oh and unions.
“There is still a very large bull’s-eye pinned to Toyota right now,” said Aaron Bragman, an auto industry analyst with IHS Global Insight.
And it’s been pinned on by the corrupt Obama administration, aided by a relentless MSM campaign which has pounded Toyota with daily manufactured ‘concerns’ since the end of January.
In an absolutely magnificent conflict of interest, the owner of General Motors and partner of the UAW, to which it owes a mighty payback for its 2008 votes (that’s the Obama administration, folks) is presuming to indict, take to trial and convict its competitor Toyota for political and financial gain. Of the House Democrats who are bullying Toyota in their political theater of corruption, thirty-one of them received campaign contributions from the UAW.
This is the precise opposite of justice.
Tar and feathers.
Tracie, so far I’ve heard of only 2 fatalities from this “defect.”
To compare, on average, around 1,500 people die each year in America from anaphylaxis, which is a sudden and severe allergic reaction, sometimes from things as common as peanuts or bee stings.
In short, I really don’t think that “Toyota” is going to be one of the leading causes of death in America for 2010.
No one has adequately explained why the individuals involved in these accidents don’t shut off the motor or shift the car into neutral. They have time to find their phone and dial 911 but can’t move a lever?
Mark, I was wondering about that myself. Thanks for putting it into words.
Ken Miller,
I was reluctant to criticize the professor’s credentials because I genuinely respect good mechanics. My criticism was more directed at our therapeutic educational system that thinks a “degree” is more important than knowing the field. Believe me, a good troubleshooter is a good troubleshooter regardless if he or she has a BS in automotive technology or ASE certification.
Also, I think that Kane and ABC News hyped Gilbert’s credentials just a bit.
I feel the same way about IT, btw. Back when I was a LAN mgr etc I took a bunch of courses on supporting this or that OS or software from companies like New Horizons. While there’s some overlap between a MIS degree and the stuff you need to know to get certs from Microsoft or Cisco, all the MIS (let alone CIS) degree programs I looked into were a bit more rigorous than a typical MCSE track at New Horizons.
I am of “mixed mind” on this one. Disclaimer – I am a former UAW Committeeman,
and seller of “Domestic” as well as “Foreign” (Toyota, Honda, Nisan, Mazda, Subaru, Isuzu) vehicles. With me:
Point 1 – Exploding Gas Tanks – a REAL Sore Point – I built Pintos. The Datsun subcompact (B-210) of the time, and the Toyota as well as I recall had the SAME LOUSY DESIGN. Back then FORD was a deep pocket – Toyota and Nisan/Datsun – not so much. GM had better lobbyists back then – the Vega-Astre (Ashtray?) was SUCH a disaster of a car in SO many ways – starting with the MELTING engine and RUST that the Gas Tank Design – same as FORD – never came into question. Could tell stories about both defects that are too long for this letter. Suffice it to say that the Vega killed Chevrolet in the entry level (first new car buyer) market for many years.
Point 2 – Lousy Tires and Batteries – Many 1970′s Japanese Imports came with undersized YUASA Batteries and sub-par TOYO Tires for the US Market. My Ex Wife’s B-210 was often jump-started by my much maligned Dodge Omni during the 1979-80 winter, and her tires WERE CRAP, mine were GOODYEAR. A trip to Sears solved BOTH Problems the following Spring – Die-Hard + Michelin as good a combination as Baseball + Ballentine for those who remember that far back. Yuasa and Toyo HAVE cleaned up their acts – they had to or would have been GONE in the US Market.
Point 3 – “Japanese” Manufacturers being allowed to “TSB” rather than RECALL as “Domestic” Manufacturers had to. “TSB” = Technical Service Bulletin – effectively, an “In-House” recall without negative press. Best example – the 1992 Toyota Electronically Controlled Automatic Transmission on the then “all-new” Camry. From what I understand, failure rates were on the order of Chrysler’s “UltraDrive” which was recalled, replaced and given 70/100 Coverage. The cure, same for both, IS STILL LAUGHABLE, Break it in Like Don Garlits – No Problem, break it in with kid gloves and it fails. Chrysler got the heat on this problem – Not Toyota!
Having vented all of the above, stuff that has NEEDED venting for many years, I still think Toyota is getting a raw deal and is being set-up for a SHAKE-DOWN. Let me translate it this way so that Akio Toyoda might understand it in Japanese – Product Liability + Class Action (US Style) =
TSUNAMI!
-S-
Had the same thougnht when I heard about the Michigan lawmakers calling hearings about Toyota: witch hunt.
I had an old 86 Oldsmobile Cutlass Sierra and was driving down the road. I take full advantage of cruise control when I can and I was using it going 35 mph down the road. I was coming to a stop sign so I tapped my brakes. Nothing happened and the car kept moving. I tapped the brakes again, nothing happened and the car kept chugging along at 35 mph. I stomped on the brakes with all 250 lbs of me and even though the car revved and the accelorator was stuck at 35 mph, the car did stop. I shut it off and never experienced the problem again. As mentioned, if it comes to brakes vs. gas, brakes will win every time. Sounds like a bunch of hubbub and driver error to me.
I have had this happen with my Camry a few weeks after I bought it in ’08. There was no stuck accelerator pedal. There was no floor carpet sticking up under the pedal. There was no accidental pressing of the accelerator rather than the brake. What it WAS was downright scary. I was in heavy traffic, slowing down/coasting as I approached a traffic light that was changing red, and the damned car just … accelerated. On its own. And did so at a rapid- as opposed to gradual- rate. I slammed on the brakes and the car eventually slowed down and stopped. But, as I look back at that incident, I’m not sure if it was actually the brakes that slowed the car down or the fact that the acceleration finally stopped- on its own- a few excruciating seconds after it had started.
I’ve experienced sticky gas pedals before during the nearly 40 years of driving I’ve done. You just stick one foot under the pedal and the other on the brake. And I’ve done the “shift to neutral” game once or twice. But this Camry incident was different. Hard to explain. Just a weird feeling: slowing down, with foot taken off an (unstuck) pedal, and the car, a few seconds after taking the foot off the pedal and in the process of slowing down, suddenly and rapidly exploding forward.
Unlike a sticky pedal situation during which your brain automatically can register cause and effect and react accordingly with a solution such as those listed above, it’s not as easy to do so when something that doesn’t make sense happens (i.e., you’re doing all the things you’ve done a million times associated with “slowing down”, but you’re suddenly NOT slowing down any more).
Ladies and gents, this was electronic/computer generated acceleration. And, knowing what we know about the dependability and lifespan (and eventual glitches)of computers in general, I think we genuinely have the right to be concerned. Especially for folks like me who like to keep their cars for 10 plus years (as I have done with previous- and previously always reliable- Camrys and Accords). I’ve never owned a computer that lasted for 10 years.
I’m a conservative. I basically despise government, and particularly so the current one. But there’s no politics here. That freakin’ car shot itself out of a cannon! BTW- it has never happened since, and I thought nothing of it since until all the recent headlines. Knock on wood as I prepare to get to the dealer with my just-received recall notice.
My opinion? I think Toyota attempted a coverup of the problem by trying to explain the problem under different smokescreen recall titles: e.g., “floor mat sliding” and “sticking pedal”. It’s electronic and they know/knew it. Just because they are having difficulty duplicating the effect in their labs doesn’t mean it’s NOT happening. Rather, it means they are perplexed and clueless over how to evaluate the problem and what to do about it. So as an actual victim, I’ll let Gilbert have his say and keep an open mind over it.
Eric, really, you continued to a car that unexplainably and uncontrollably accelerated with no apparent cause, which you could not at all predict and were perhaps unable to do anything about, and as far as you knew could strike again at any moment? I find stories such as that so hard to believe, because your actions do not reflect the defect you propose. Perhaps you accidentally had you foot on the accelerator, started to accelerate, panicked, pushed down harder, and then switched over the brake, perhaps not even fully realizing what you had done? It’s just as likely. You wouldn’t be the first human to confuse the brake pedal and accelerator.