`trunk`?

 

Uh, yeah - trunk,boot,cargo area? different words for different worlds

`trunk`?

trunk aka boot in UK ;-)

Looking at the car in the dealers ( we will get ours ,one day........... ) and it seemed strange --- the car made warning noises going up but nowt coming down. So if you are reaching into the boot and -er- little ( or not so little ) fingers push the button ........................

Hi all,

 

I have followed this thread for a while and tried to keep low profile. It is quite interesting how speculation to logical thinking is discussed. The same with some moral aspects. It is like popcorn time for me. Why? Because I have worked in the automobile industry as verification manager having a total system responsibility.

 

I don't want to be rude about how my information may approach your way of think.  I apologize if you do feel so.

Saying that, one think you need to understand. Moral aspects are subjective and almost not considered. You follow the system requirements based on the stakeholder analysis e,g. marketing, technology departments, etc. On top of that you have global and local regulations that are a must. What does it mean? Well, we sell machines with high pollution rate to e.g. China. Why? Because their regulations does not demand cleaner engines. They are also cheaper for the company compared to engines developed to Europe/US/Australia. The market does not demand it and will not pay more for a cleaner engine. Is this moral right? Some may say no and others yes and accept this reality. The same approach it is for every function or sub-system of the automobile e.g. electric tailgate.

 

I will explain a simple scenario how this kind of function is implemented. The steps does not necessary have to be continuous. They can be iterative. 

1. There is market demand to electric tailgate for a specific market. It may be local or totally global. The marketing department usually decides how this new feature will be branded and advertised.

2. Stakeholder analysis starts e.g. which models will have this feature, kind of technology, cost limits, etc

3. Design draft ready.

4. Now the important step that you may find interesting. A mechanical/functional FMEA is performed in sub-system level and in a system level. Usually in a system level you describe the effect of failure from a customer point of view. This means that every failure mode that has a potential risk to lethal or high injury of a person gets top scores. A requirement e.g.company policy, regulation, etc demands risk mitigation activities for such failure mode. Please google "FMEA" for more information,

5. Design and functions are updated to mitigate risks and comply with the sub-system/system requirements

6. Verification activities identified, executed and analyzed

7. Iterate to steps above

 

What happens in case of a lethal accident connected to a specific feature/function? Local regulations will drive this. In e.g. US the government will for sure require evidence that company has follow regulative standards and what kind of measures have been taken to prevent any potential injuries. They will require FMEA analysis and implemented mitigation tasks and so on... 

 

Now to my personal opinion based on more than 13 years working as a systems engineer specialized with verification and validation methodology and performed several FMEA session. I had to write this to create some kind of credibility  

 

What is my opinion of the electric tailgate which I have in my car?

There are warnings all over the manual. Some may think that doing that the company is safe of responsibility for any injury like the parent did not see the kid trying to take the football when the tail gate was closing. If you think like that you will have to think different because it does not work like that. I will not elaborate more about this neither so please respect me by not asking moral aspects.

Skoda did implement a safety mechanism. For sure as an output from a FMEA. However, reading how this safety mechanism behaves does not seem to be very consistent and reliable. The unclear reliable level will be much harder to understand for a person with lower thinking capacity like very sick person or well... a kid.

Here is a very simple FMEA analysis. One failure mode of hundreds identified in such sessions:

Effect mode: Tailgate safety mechanism fails

Cause of failure: 1. Force sensor malfunction, 2, Minimum force requirement excided but no reaction 3.etc, n etc...

Effect of failure: Injury or lethal outcome

Risk mitigation activities: Tailgate close function must follow the implementation standard xxx of critical functions (It is an implementation that a function will take over in case of the primary function fails). Force sensor shall have HW implemented safety function beside the SW safety function.

 

I will say that the Skoda safety function is faulty and creates false safety “feeling” to the end customer. I will call my dealer explaining the problem and it case of rejection I will ask if they mind of doing an experiment with watermelon with my kind face printed on it, engage the tailgate and understand if it explodes then share it among Skoda Facebook group. This was irony, okey but I will call

 

Best Regards,

A systems engineer with 2 fantastic small girls

Hi all,

I have followed this thread for a while and tried to keep low profile. It is quite interesting how speculation to logical thinking is discussed. The same with some moral aspects. It is like popcorn time for me. Why? Because I have worked in the automobile industry as verification manager having a total system responsibility.

I don't want to be rude about how my information may approach your way of think. I apologize if you do feel so.

Saying that, one think you need to understand. Moral aspects are subjective and almost not considered. You follow the system requirements based on the stakeholder analysis e,g. marketing, technology departments, etc. On top of that you have global and local regulations that are a must. What does it mean? Well, we sell machines with high pollution rate to e.g. China. Why? Because their regulations does not demand cleaner engines. They are also cheaper for the company compared to engines developed to Europe/US/Australia. The market does not demand it and will not pay more for a cleaner engine. Is this moral right? Some may say no and others yes and accept this reality. The same approach it is for every function or sub-system of the automobile e.g. electric tailgate.

I will explain a simple scenario how this kind of function is implemented. The steps does not necessary have to be continuous. They can be iterative.

1. There is market demand to electric tailgate for a specific market. It may be local or totally global. The marketing department usually decides how this new feature will be branded and advertised.

2. Stakeholder analysis starts e.g. which models will have this feature, kind of technology, cost limits, etc

3. Design draft ready.

4. Now the important step that you may find interesting. A mechanical/functional FMEA is performed in sub-system level and in a system level. Usually in a system level you describe the effect of failure from a customer point of view. This means that every failure mode that has a potential risk to lethal or high injury of a person gets top scores. A requirement e.g.company policy, regulation, etc demands risk mitigation activities for such failure mode. Please google "FMEA" for more information,

5. Design and functions are updated to mitigate risks and comply with the sub-system/system requirements

6. Verification activities identified, executed and analyzed

7. Iterate to steps above

What happens in case of a lethal accident connected to a specific feature/function? Local regulations will drive this. In e.g. US the government will for sure require evidence that company has follow regulative standards and what kind of measures have been taken to prevent any potential injuries. They will require FMEA analysis and implemented mitigation tasks and so on...

Now to my personal opinion based on more than 13 years working as a systems engineer specialized with verification and validation methodology and performed several FMEA session. I had to write this to create some kind of credibility

What is my opinion of the electric tailgate which I have in my car?

There are warnings all over the manual. Some may think that doing that the company is safe of responsibility for any injury like the parent did not see the kid trying to take the football when the tail gate was closing. If you think like that you will have to think different because it does not work like that. I will not elaborate more about this neither so please respect me by not asking moral aspects.

Skoda did implement a safety mechanism. For sure as an output from a FMEA. However, reading how this safety mechanism behaves does not seem to be very consistent and reliable. The unclear reliable level will be much harder to understand for a person with lower thinking capacity like very sick person or well... a kid.

Here is a very simple FMEA analysis. One failure mode of hundreds identified in such sessions:

Effect mode: Tailgate safety mechanism fails

Cause of failure: 1. Force sensor malfunction, 2, Minimum force requirement excided but no reaction 3.etc, n etc...

Effect of failure: Injury or lethal outcome

Risk mitigation activities: Tailgate close function must follow the implementation standard xxx of critical functions (It is an implementation that a function will take over in case of the primary function fails). Force sensor shall have HW implemented safety function beside the SW safety function.

I will say that the Skoda safety function is faulty and creates false safety “feeling” to the end customer. I will call my dealer explaining the problem and it case of rejection I will ask if they mind of doing an experiment with watermelon with my kind face printed on it, engage the tailgate and understand if it explodes then share it among Skoda Facebook group. This was irony, okey but I will call

Best Regards,

A systems engineer with 2 fantastic small girls

Thanks, great post from out of the shadows!

Tail Gate... 33 mins in the new Kodiaq does the same.... stops the first time and then forces close.... 

 

Edited 23 November, 20169 yr by RickTT

This whole `but kids might get serious damage` discussion reminds me of that dude who accidentally run over his toddler while parking. You should not let your kids near any car - cars are not toys.

 

That said, safety features are important, but what cars got it right? Look at Tesla:

Edited 23 November, 20169 yr by ionelmc

Wow that Tesla is scary!

That backs up my findings - it's basic mechanics really. Nearer the hinge will require less force to crush/chop than at the other end so whatever force they are calibrated to stop on won't trigger.

Think of how easy it is to cut with scissors at the base of the blades compared to the tip. Or getting your fingers stuck in the hinge side of your house door compared to the lock side.