Chrysler: tire pressure sensors
-
Re: tire pressure sensors
Paul Oman wrote:
Sorry, can't help.
But I wonder why an alternate method of sensing tire under-inflation
wasn't used, such as comparing each wheel's RPM using feedback from
the ABS sensors. A tire with significantly lower air pressure than
the other 3 would register a higher RMP compared to the other 3, and
this would serve as useful warning to check the tire. No sensors
inside the wheel is needed - infact no additional parts needed (just a
few extra lines of software code in the car's computer).
-
Re: tire pressure sensors
"MoPar Man" <com> wrote in message
news:com...
Because this is more complicated than it seems. For starters unless the air
pressure is really low, the RPM difference isn't as much as you think.
Second,
during a turn, the outside tires turn at a higher RPM. SO now the car
computer
needs to know when the vehicle is turning and then ignore the rpm difference
during
a turn. So then what do you do if a tire picks up a nail on one of those
windy roads
that the car commercials all seem to think that are the cat's meow to drive
on?
Ted
-
Re: tire pressure sensors
"Ted Mittelstaedt" <placo.com> wrote in message
news:newscache$e3qalh$7wa$ipinc.net...
air
difference
drive
The DOT regulations do allow this alternative method. The Federal Court of
Appeals has just thrown out that portion that allowed the ABS sensor method
because it was irrational. 1. It would not detect the fact that all 4 tires
were significantly underinflated. 2. It had a very high failure rate at
detecting in a timely manner the situation when just one tire was
underinflated. The regulation reflects the impact of special interest money
on our regulatory system and not a regulatory system working in the public
interest.
Richard.
-
Re: tire pressure sensors
"MoPar Man" <com> wrote in message
news:com...
Good questions: 1. The federal government mandated the inclusion of tire
pressure sensors. 2. Although judged less effective, anti-lock related
sensors were authorized for the first few years of the requirement because
the industry pressured for this method because it was significantly less
expensive to implement. 3. Safety groups challenged this regulation in
Federal Court because it argued that only individual pressure sensors
worked. 4. The Court judged the phase-in part of the regulation that
permitted anti-lock related sensors invalid because it was irrational
because the data used to set the regulation proved that such sensors were
not reliable enough to meet the requirements of the regulation.
Richard.
-
Re: tire pressure sensors
"Richard" <rr.com> wrote in message news:<APzab.119983
Richard, don't waste your time arguing with MoPar man anymore. He quite
obviously believes his "theory" of how ABS sensing is supposed to work
is better than the reality of actual field test data.
Ted
-
Re: tire pressure sensors
Ted Mittelstaedt spewed:
Why is Richard supposed to listen to you?
1) I put forward a logical argument backed up by a little math as to
why RPM counting should be able to detect tire pressure imbalances. I
know it was employed by at least one car maker in a rental car I drove
a few years ago (I think it was GM).
2) You in your wisdom haven't even tried to counter that argument on
technical or theoretical grounds.
3) Richard has claimed that court documents presented by special
interests show that RPM counting doesn't work, but gives no details of
the tests performed, the results, or how the conculsions were
reached. (One would think that special interest groups interested in
automotive safety would have bigger fish to fry than
low-tire-pressure-sensing using RPM counting. If that was such a
hot-button topic for them they why not mandate the use of run-flat or
self-sealing tires, or outlaw the use of aluminum rims that are prone
to leaks which lead to low tire pressure).
4) This thread was at an end with Richard's last response until you
butted your nose in with your post that added nothing to the thread
(Richard had responded, I posted no further rebuttle, but you just had
to stick your nose in and tell him not to respond. What was the point
of that?). IF you don't like this thread (or my posts) then you don't
have to read them. Your post was nothing more than a transparent
attempt to marginalize me by telling people not to carry out a dialog
with me. Does this make you feel important, or wise, or intelligent?
I've got news for you. You're none of the above.
-
Re: tire pressure sensors
MoPar Man <com> wrote in message news:<com>...
My wife's 2000 Buick has this feature which uses the ABS sensors etc.
I don't think it has ever indicated a true low tire. But it has given
some false indications and I think it has to be "reset" after tire
rotation
-
Re: tire pressure sensors
Calm down guys. As a regulatory attorney of sorts I am interested in
regulatory actions like this. I have not reviewed the technical file before
the court (it would be an interesting read). I have merely tried to convey
the standard used by the court in rejecting that portion of the regulation.
This is not the place to discuss the merits of the Court's decision
(although that too would be an interesting discussion). In the end the Court
agreed with the petitioners that the agency's action was not supported by
the data and was therefore irrational.
Richard.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
Forum Rules