Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    EEE369_Mid

    Uploaded by

    sleepyheadv01

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    EEE369_Mid

    Uploaded by

    sleepyheadv01
    8 views12 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    8 views12 pages

    EEE369_Mid

    Uploaded by

    sleepyheadv01

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 12

    Toyota Unintended

    Acceleration Case
    Study
    Agenda
    ● Introduction to Unintended Acceleration
    ● Accident Records
    ● Recalls and Public Discussions
    ● Investigations and Findings
    ● Technical Analysis
    ● Ethical Analysis
    ● Toyota's Response
    ● Regulatory Changes and Industry Impact
    ● Lessons Learned
    ● Q&A Session
    Introduction to
    Unintended Acceleration
    1. A significant safety issue where vehicles
    experienced uncontrolled acceleration.
    2. First reports surfaced in the early 2000s; escalated
    in 2009-2010.
    3. Incident linked to Toyota’s Electronic Throttle
    Control System (ETCS-i).
    Aug. 28, 2009, San Diego CA, USA
    Toyota Lexus ES 350 sedan
    • UA Reached 100 mph+
    • 911 Emergency Phone Call from passenger during
    event
    • All 4 occupants killed in crash
    • Driver:
    Mark Saylor, 45 year old male.
    Off-duty California Highway Patrol Officer; vehicle
    inspector.
    • Crash was blamed on wrong floor mats causing
    pedal entrapment
    • Brake rotor damage indicated “endured braking”
    • This event triggered escalation of investigations
    dating back to 2002 MY
    Recalls & Public Discussion

    Floor mat recalls


    • Sept. 2007 recall to fasten floor mats
    • Wider recall Oct./Nov. 2009 after Saylor mishap

    Sticky gas pedal recall


    • Jan. 2010 and onward

    Congressional investigation
    • Toyota President testifies to US Congress, Feb.
    2010
    • April 2010: Economic loss class action venue
    selected
    Investigations and
    Findings
    .
    NHTSA and NASA Reports: Found no direct
    evidence of electronic flaws.
    Root causes identified:
    ● Misplaced floor mats.
    ● Sticky accelerator pedals.
    Public skepticism remained despite findings.
    Technical Analysis

    ETCS Design Issues:


    ● Single-point failure in signal processing.
    ● Ineffective watchdog timer.
    ● High cyclomatic complexity in software.
    System vulnerabilities posed safety risks.
    Ethical Analysis

    Key Issues Identified:


    ● Delayed reporting of safety defects to regulators.
    ● Prioritization of profits over consumer safety.
    ● Lack of transparency and accountability in
    addressing the issue.
    Impact:
    ● Consumers were left vulnerable to accidents and
    fatalities.
    ● Loss of trust among customers and stakeholders.
    ● Significant financial and reputational damage to
    Toyota.
    Toyota's Response
    1. Initiated recalls for mechanical fixes (floor
    mats, pedals).
    2. Introduced “smart pedal” technology in newer
    models.
    3. Paid $1.2B settlement for concealing safety
    issues.
    4. Expanded safety monitoring and quality
    control.
    Regulatory Changes and
    Industry Impact
    1. Strengthened NHTSA oversight.
    2. Heightened awareness of electronic system
    vulnerabilities.
    3. Industry-wide emphasis on early defect
    detection and transparent reporting.
    Lessons Learned
    1. Proactive risk management is
    critical.
    2. Transparency builds trust with
    stakeholders.
    3. Ethical corporate culture must
    prioritize safety.
    4. Delayed actions increase financial
    and reputational damage.
    5. Compliance with regulations is
    non-negotiable.
    Q&A Session

    You might also like