Talk:Electronic stability control

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NPOV?[edit]

So where is the discussion about NPOV on this page? It seems fairly well known that Mercedes and the Bosch company did almost all of the early research on ESC. Is someone bothered by the Asian manufacturers not getting enough of a mention for their research as well? The best course of action would probably be to find some research about their involvement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.7.109.4 (talk) 05:13, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I haven't seen it written in the rules and guidelines, but if someone slaps a tag on and can't be bothered to explain why then it seems fair enough to remove it. As I remember this tag was more likely some sort of anti Bosch/pro Mercedes malarkey than anything to do with Asians. I could be wrong. Greglocock (talk) 05:44, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In is quite clear that this article is USA centered since some acronyms are even clarified and they give figures about accidents without mentioning in which country.

Contributions by japanese companies, contribution by french ones as well. This article does not portray everything that is now happening in the auto industry of the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.122.156.61 (talk) 18:22, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The statement "The latest major effort from an OEM would be Ford's AdvanceTrac® with Roll Stability Control™" has not been true in quite a while. There has been much more development since adding RSC to Stability Control. The most sophisticated system I am aware is the VDIM (Vehicle Dynamics Integration Management) system on the Lexus hybrids, which combine Electronically Controlled Brakes (ECB), suspension control, front/rear power split (on AWD models), Electric Powering Steering, Variable Gear Ration Steering, and on the Japanese LS, foward looking stereo vision. GM's Stabilitrak 3, while not a sophisticated at VDIM, does have Active Front Steering (i.e. VGRS). I imagine that the Germans also have something newer than AdvanceTrac. Show we try to iterate all the latest and greatest or should we drop "The latest major effort"? --Warpshock (talk) 20:01, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

blow it away, unless there are RS that says it is a major step forward. Incidentally a recent Lexus car I drove had terrible ESC, please don't hold them up as examples- yes lots of features, but plain nasty to use.Greglocock (talk) 01:14, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
RSC was a notable advance, but not the latest. I think the wording is a little more accurate now. As for the Lexus ESC, Toyota has two systems, VDIM which is tied to the hybrid variants of their vehicles (i.e. GS-450h) and the low-end commidity system which they just buy pretty much off-the-shelf for their non-hybrid vehicles. The hybrids get the better system because they already have a rather pricey linear control electronic braking system (known as ECB). --192.172.14.99 (talk) 22:11, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See my section below, I removed the Mitsubishi paragraph because while it does detail Mitsubishi's own history of the product, it adds nothing to the value of the history of the technology across all companies, and at that point reads as an advertisement for Mitsubishi who didn't actually innovate or develop the technology itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Varkstuff (talk • contribs) 18:50, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

25 times per second?[edit]

The statement regarding a specific data processing rate in a general description of the technology seems rather suspect to me. I would have thought that this specific rate would depend on the car. Does anybody have a citation that might justify this or have knowledge of why this might be standardized (i.e. is there a standard clock speed for the ECU or some other component that might enforce this).

Bdentremont (talk) 07:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Quote: The principal course of vehicle control is done by scanning certain measuring data by sensors, converting this information in a control computer into positioning quantities and transferring these quantities to different actuators. In case of an Antilock Brake System (ABS) for example, all four wheel speeds are measured and thereby a reference velocity determined as well as the actual slip values and wheel decelerations calculated. Then, the ABS algorithm decides, whether the braking pressure has to be increased, to be kept or to be reduced. This is being achieved by opening and closing of the single in- or out valves. The schematic course of this control process, in general being run through by a control frequency of 100 Hz, can be seen in the following Fig. 1. Unquote


I also think 25Hz is no general rule. I found this article stating 100 Hz, is already an indication in this direction. Regardless of what freqency was achieved at some point in time, I think it is continuously increasing anaway and would therefore propose to delete the 25 Hz. Better even would be a reference of and example frequency with a timing attached to it Robkraai (talk) 13:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lateral acceleration = hall effect?[edit]

Don't think hall effect measures acceleration, can someone justify or fix this? 92.3.113.174 (talk) 23:31, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Wikipedia article on Hall effect, it would rather be used in wheel spin sensing than in sensing of lateral acceleration. Fox260 06:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A hall effect sensor is used to tell how fast a wheel is spinning using purely magnetic properties. It is how essentially all wheel speed sensing systems that get input from all four wheels work.Varkstuff (talk) 18:38, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"hinders"[edit]

While I'm no huge fan of ESC it seems to me that they woudn't have banned it from F1 if it slowed the car down. Greglocock (talk) 03:43, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have clarified the statement and removed the citation needed mark. You make a great point!Varkstuff (talk) 19:09, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mitsubishi History[edit]

I removed the paragraph about Mitsubishi is the history section. It was never there before, and was dropped into the middle of the history section, disrupting the flow of progression from Mercedes and BMW. It seemed very clear to me that it was added by Mitsubishi, as the presentation made it seem like Mitsubishi had entirely developed the system and that Mitsubishi is still the owner of it. The history should be about the system across all automakers, and in that sense although Mitsubishi developed their own system, they are not the industry leader or innovator for it in any way. It adds absolutely nothing to the history of the development of the system across all automakers, and only details the different names that Mitsubishi gave their safety systems as they internally developed their own evolving systems.Varkstuff (talk) 18:47, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Out of date statistic[edit]

The introduction reads "one-third of fatal accidents could be prevented by the use of the technology." I suspect this statistic is outdated, as automotive technology has advanced significantly since the statistic was reported in 2006. 69.181.140.131 (talk) 01:34, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Electronic stability control. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:05, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Electronic stability control. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:02, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Electronic stability control. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:24, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Electronic stability control. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Electronic stability control. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on Electronic stability control. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:53, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Electronic stability control. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:27, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disabling ABS in low-traction situations?[edit]

I removed the following unsourced text from the article because I believe it's incorrect (and appears to be original research):

During off-road usage, it is paramount for safety that a vehicle's ESC disables anti-lock braking systems (ABS). While initially sounding counter-intuitive, the extremely slippery, low-traction situations encountered off-road can result in a vehicle runaway when climbing or descending in steep terrain. If the vehicle loses traction in steep terrain and the brakes are applied, the vehicle inertia continues the vehicle moving while some of the wheels lock up. The ABS system interprets this behaviour as a wheel-lock up during a "normal" braking, and rapidly releases and reapplies the brake on the locking wheel/s. This results in vastly reduced braking effectiveness as the vehicle attempts to avoid locking the wheels and instead keep them rotating constant to one another. If the reduced braking force is not sufficient to halt the vehicle (as is the case in even moderately steep terrain with low traction) the vehicle will continue to rapidly increase momentum down the hill without slowing. Such situations often result in severe rollover accidents when the vehicle veers off a perfectly straight descent.

I know that ABS can be exceptionally annoying in off-road driving when the driver intends to lock one or more wheels, and for that reason, many cars and motorcycles have a control to allow the driver/rider to temporarily disable the ABS. Making a blanket statement, though, that the action of an ABS "results in vastly reduced braking effectiveness as the vehicle attempts to avoid locking the wheels" is inaccurate, and could be dangerous if it encourages someone to disable their ABS before driving on ice/snow, or venturing off road. — UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 16:15, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, it is perfectly possible to calibrate around some of the conditions seen in off roading. For a start, there is a low speed cut off, and the cycle time is tunable, which has an enormous effect on braking on poor surfaces. An actual off road ABS also has several other features. So yes, it does appear as though some armchair warrior is recycling conventional wisdom rather than discussing current systems. Greglocock (talk) 21:48, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, SUVs with stability control are involved in 67% fewer accidents than SUVs without the system[edit]

That would suggest that almodt all accidents involve skidding. I doubt very much if that is true. Maybe 67% of some class of accidents? Anyway, the claim needs better justification/analysis. Tuntable (talk) 22:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, it doesn't. ESC does far more than stopping skidding. I suggest that if you have access to a search engine you do some work. Or at least come up with a critique that is not based on ignorance. Greglocock (talk) 00:54, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Having said that I think the original IIHS document (now unavailable) was a prediction which has been willfully misquoted. ie could replaced by would. Greglocock (talk) 07:41, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ESC Products issues ( many of those listed below are not ESC products! )[edit]

Many companies notoriously do not distinguish between traction control and YSC ( yaw control system, aka ESC ) in their marketing names. ( like containing Stabili in their terms ) But it would be difficult to know which really contains ESC ( unless digging out yaw sensor one by one? )--OrangeLark64 (talk) 17:45, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If there is no distinction in the marketing name, I assume ESC is available in countries were it is regulated (USA, Canada, Argentina, Chile, Australia, European Union, Russia, United Kingdom, etc.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8425:642:D701:BF55:9F65:2A1C:85EB (talk) 01:48, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The name ESC is not protected but the function of the system is legally required in many markets, specifically when it is enabled the pass speed in ISO B double lane change or whatever dynamic event the agency uses must increase. Therefore at least in those markets there is no confusion. Greglocock (talk) 07:54, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Electronic_stability_control&oldid=1201100114"