How did a single part made by a single supplier screw the world's biggest automaker?

[Turboo934]

Originally Posted by 1990C4S

Elaboration requested....given that even the almighty google seems to be unaware of this term.

Electronics are soldered with tin which in time causes a hair to grow causing failure or glitches. Lead is no longer allowed in large scale manufacturing of electronics, in the USA or its products made for here.

[1990C4S]

Toyota has been vague about the fix but it appears that the body is too tight on the centre pivoting arm. I think they disassemble the pedal and ad the stainless shims to allow more slop.

Does anyone know for sure?

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

The aerospace industry controls supplier parts VERY tightly because of FAA certification, but this still happens all the time. Why? Because some moron at a supplier doesn't know the rules and thinks that their "minor" change is minor to everyone. My guess is that it happens even more often in the automotive industry.

In theory, yes.

When I was the Chief Pilot at the Sikorsky factory in the '90's we had a crash that killed my roommate (I was commuting to Bridgeport during the week, returning to Maryland on the weekends) where the failure mode was directly contributory to a supplier of bearings.

Amazingly, Sikorsky did not have this part on their critical flight parts list even though the part (a swash plate bearing race) is clearly critical to maintaining flight and control of the helicopter, in this case a CH-53E.

During the accident investigation (I was a co-president with a Sikorsky rep) it became clear that the supplier had not followed the critical dimensions in the bearing race designs and, since the part was not on the critical components list, QA was not required.

We checked all bearing races in the parts chain and over 1/3 did not meet the critical call outs.

We had to ground the entire CH-53E fleet. It is a miracle more folks didn't die.

[M.D. Holloway]

Now they are saying that the acceleration issues are EMI related and not a mechanical issue to wit Toyota's Product Quality Manager for North America stated that they could not make the accelerator fail in their tests and analysis. Me thinks they are not testing proper. Any product development work I ever did I tried to discover all failure opportunities - forcing failure at every turn in order to understand what the chances and reasons could be for a field failure.

Something here is fundamentally wrong.

[HarryD]

The rest of the story?

Agency Takes a ‘Fresh Look’ at Electronics in Toyota Recall - Wheels Blog - NYTimes.com

February 2, 2010, 9:54 pm
Agency Takes a ‘Fresh Look’ at Electronics in Toyota Recall
By JIM MOTAVALLI AND CHRISTOPHER JENSEN
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has begun what it calls a “fresh look” at electromagnetic interference in modern auto throttle systems as a possible cause of the unintended acceleration problem that promoted the recall of millions of Toyotas.

As Micheline Maynard of The Times reported, Representatives Henry A. Waxman and Bart Stupak, members of a House committee that will hold hearings Feb. 25 on unintended acceleration, are seeking assurances that the problem is caused by sticking pedals and floor mats (the subject of the recalls) and not by the cars’ computer systems. In a letter, they asked that any relevant analyses and documents be provided to the committee by this Friday.

N.H.T.S.A., which along with Toyota has been skeptical about electronic interference as a cause of runaway cars, described its new investigation in a statement as “a background examination of the underlying technological issues.” It said it would meet with manufacturers and suppliers to “gain an even fuller understanding” of their electronic throttle control systems.

The new query will include a look both at the control systems in general and the effect of electronic interference. According to the agency, “This is not a defect investigation, because the agency has no reason at this point to believe there are safety defects in these systems or in their ability to function when exposed to electromagnetic interference.”


In opening its new inquiry, the agency said its earlier and “very limited” testing had not shown a link between the acceleration cases and electronic interference. But it said that if its conversations with automakers and independent experts revealed the need, it would introduce a test that included subjecting a variety of vehicles to electromagnetic exposure. “If extensive testing becomes necessary, this examination could take at least several months,” the statement said.

In 2008, N.H.T.S.A. issued a memorandum following an investigation that included testing a 2007 Lexus ES 350 for unintended acceleration. After subjecting the car to multiple electrical signals, the agency concluded, “The system proved to have multiple redundancies and showed no vulnerabilities to electrical signal activities.”

But the report also said that magnetic fields “were introduced in proximity to the throttle body and accelerator pedal potentiometers and did result in an increase in engine revolutions per minute of up to approximately 1,000 revolutions per minute, similar to a cold-idle engine r.p.m. level.”

As Ms. Maynard reported, “Toyota has insisted numerous times that the computer was not the reason for consumers’ complaints that their cars speed up unexpectedly. But lawyers, safety advocates and industry analysts continue to raise questions about the cars’ electronic systems.” The Toyota Motor Sales president, James Lentz, reiterated in several television appearances this week that he does not believe that electronics are an issue.

One safety advocate, Clarence Ditlow, executive director of the Center for Auto Safety, said in an interview that it is difficult for investigators to identify electronic interference as a cause of a vehicle failure “because when one examines the vehicle there is no failed part — such as a stuck accelerator — to find.”

But one thing Mr. Ditlow finds extremely troubling about that test of the Lexus’s computers is how the safety agency conducted it? He requested the test protocols from the agency under the Freedom of Information Act.

Late last month the agency responded, saying it could find no records of such test protocols. The protocols would show precisely how the tests were conducted. Mr. Ditlow says that without them it is impossible to gauge the quality of the research. That, he says, leaves open the question of whether electronic malfunctions are a problem.

An agency spokesman did not have an immediate response.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Paul, I wish I could say that's a surprise. I wish........

[M.D. Holloway]

Harry - good note. A product is only as good as the tests run...that is if there are tests run.

[strupgolf]

Wow, what a difference a year makes. Toyota could have really used one of the devices on their F1 cars, making them really fast when it was needed.

[jyl]

Defective parts should be fixed, definitely, but I have a hard time getting excited about unintended acceleration claims. Someone show me where stepping on the brake doesn't stop the car, and I'll get alarmed.

I still recall the unintended acceleration claims that nearly drove Audi from the US market back in the 1980s. Same cast of characters (including Ditlow who makes his living as a highly-paid expert witness in product liability lawsuits) said the sinister electronics were seizing control of the cars and accelerating them into houses, trees, family members, what have you, even though the helpless drivers were standing on the brakes with all their strength. Bullcrap. There was a micro-switch under the throttle pedal, investigations showed those switches were usually smashed flat. Meaning that the idiot drivers were standing on the throttle pedal with all their strength, as they blasted through their garage walls with husbands plastered to the grille.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Anybody have a new Toyota? We need a PPOT engineering test! Straight road, floor the gas, stomp the brakes, see what happens.

[kaisen]

Originally Posted by 1990C4S

Toyota has been vague about the fix but it appears that the body is too tight on the centre pivoting arm. I think they disassemble the pedal and ad the stainless shims to allow more slop.

Does anyone know for sure?

[M.D. Holloway]

needs more lube...

[911pcars]

Originally Posted by kaisen

Thanks for posting the image. When I saw this illustration in my morning paper, I couldn't make heads or tails of it even though I knew it was a spacer. Even in color, I still think the comparison images at the bottom suck.

If I interpret the drawings correctly, the cover has a tapered opening that captures and matches the end of the pivot shaft. What happened to the "round shaft goes into a round hole" concept or was this Toyota's attempt at controlling end play? With a more stable material, like metal or metal and plastic, this probably would have worked forever.

The detail bubbles show how the shim (spacer) provides more clearance for the pedal pivot to rotate. I can understand how a plastic housing and cover could distort and bind the pivoting action, even with a metal pivot bushing as is the case with the CTS version.

When you're talking about a few million vehicles, I guess the engineers and accountants had to have time to sort out the simplest, lowest cost repair method that would effect the desired result.

(2.3M vehicles X cost of custom shim) + installation + PR damage - loss of sales = big numbers.

Sherwood

[herr_oberst]

It'll be interesting if that's all it is, just a mechanical issue, but I've been hearing too many stories about this being a black box issue. Time will tell.

[HarryD]

Reduce Surface tension?

What kind of BS explaination is that! Metals (or any solid for that matter) do not exhibit Surface Tension.

From Wikipedia: "Surface tension is a property of the surface of a liquid. It is what causes the surface portion of liquid to be attracted to another surface, such as that of another portion of liquid"

They speak with forked tounge.

They just need to update the dilithium crystals and replace the blinker fuild.

[legion]

Well, if you make a visible, physical fix, no one has to know that a software change went with it...

[HarryD]

Originally Posted by legion

Well, if you make a visible, physical fix, no one has to know that a software change went with it...

BINGO!

Is that why they need to "train" the technicians to R&R the pedal? After all, I'll bet the repair manual already has that in there.

[Jim Richards]

Oh c'mon guys, it's so simple, maybe you need a refresher course. It's all ball bearings these days.

Also the blinker fluid. Thanks HarryD.

[ckissick]

None other than Steve Wozniak claims it's a software issue, not mechanical.

[1990C4S]

Originally Posted by 911pcars

....I couldn't make heads or tails of it even though I knew it was a spacer. Even in color, I still think the comparison images at the bottom suck....

It still eludes me. And I've back to the other link you posted and looked at the real part. I doubt this is by accident. It is designed to 'supply information' but not tell us much.

Originally Posted by ckissick

None other than Steve Wozniak claims it's a software issue, not mechanical.

I believe his problem is different, I thought he said he has a problem with his Prius (not subject to recall) and he can cause the problem to occur any time he wants. But Toyota is ignoring him. Allegedly.

Originally Posted by HarryD

Is that why they need to "train" the technicians to R&R the pedal? After all, I'll bet the repair manual already has that in there.

I can't imagine that measuring the clearance and installing the appropriate shim for a new 'field fix' is in the manual. If it is someone just won the clairvoyant award.

Does anyone know for sure if there is a software update?