The Effectiveness of Sensors On Vehicles.

Jul 19, 2009 17 Replies

I worked in a factory where a system of small automatic trucks navigated themselves around the place, picking up stuff from the stores and delivering it where required.



The staff were sceptical, but the obvious safety worries were dismissed by demonstrating that the sensors stopped the trucks instantly when a yuman bean walked in front of them. Fairy nuff.



One day, an electrician had been working on a large stepladder just outside our office, and had left the aluminium ladders for a while. I happened to glance out as one of the trucks approached, and when it reached the ladders it just kept going! I saw that the ladders were being pushed along, and I dashed out of the door and managed to hit the stop button before they became wedged against the office. No damage done...



But what if the electrician had been on the ladders?



If sensors can see through step ladders, can they not occasionally see round posts? And would you trust them on the back of your car?



I don't think so!


and people driving cars don't also crash into things and people?

The system you describe above is quite clearly flawed and you should get a refund for it.

They an aid to driving, not a complete replacement for the Mk I eyeball.

In the case of the electrician and his steps - would it be sensible for him to work up a pair of steps at all, relying entirely on these trucks stopping if they notice him?

I didn't pay for it, and I retired 18 years ago. ;-)

That was my point. I regularly park at a supermarket where there are posts protecting a walkway, and the posts are hardly tall enough to be seen through the rear view mirror of my car, but at least I can see them in the centre. A reversing sensor would have to cover the whole width of the car and detect a 5" diameter post. I doubt that they would do that reliably, BICBW.

We/he probably didn't realise their fallibility, I would have guessed that a chunk of aluminium would have been visible to their sensors. The guide wires which guided the trucks were buried under the surface, and the trucks did not appear regularly. I never liked the idea, but I wasn't the manager!

Mine does. It's far more likely to give a false reading of an obstacle than miss one.

Gordon H explained on 20/07/2009 :

So.... a large, empty carboard box would have stopped it.

Gordon H was thinking very hard :

As already said, mine has four sensor heads and it would easily and with absolute reliability pick up something that large.

Assuming in the centre..... A 2" or even smaller post would be easily 'seen' all the way back, to the point where my tow ball hid it. I can reverse up to my drive gates, which are the usual 1/2" metal rod and it manages to 'see' them.

It's main problem is false triggering - a pebble or pot hole on the road is enough to trigger it.

Same here. Its particularly good at detecting tall grass round the edge of poorly maintained car parks.

Conor brought next idea :

After all that argument about him not needing them and being able to back 43' trailer within 2" of a loading bay, he confesses to having them fitted lol

I bought the car as a 4 year old one. I didn't have them fitted, the previous owner did.

In message , Harry Bloomfield writes

Yes.

In message , Harry Bloomfield writes

You've convinced me, I don't want one. :-)

Please tell me how to switch off OEM parking sensors on a MK3 Mondeo.

Conor gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Reverse into a brick wall? ;-)

They'll be fed from the reversing light circuit. Remove the connection at the pickup point.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required