特斯拉日常4：特斯拉数据和edr数据存在矛盾

驾驶证证词[s:ac:喷]

[quote][pid=524099445,27185013,1]Reply[/pid] Post by [uid=60149362]暗步锁喉[/uid] (2021-06-13 08:55):

驾驶证证词[s:ac:喷][/quote]眼睛只能看一行？

特斯拉报告：制动踏板被踩下
EDR数据：制动踏板没有踩下

那个报告很专业，我以前看过。我第一感觉就是和宁波夫妇车库双双事故有很多相似点。

太专业了……

但是Ronald Belt 博士惨遭NHTSA 美国国家公路交通安全管理局打脸。 美国高速公路安全管理局(NHTSA)是美国政府部门汽车安全的最高主管机关。作为美国政府部门车辆安全监管的权威性机构，承担着确保各类车辆必须符合机动车安全法规要求的重要职责。

"As part of its evaluation of DP20-001, ODI reviewed two defect theories alleging vehicle-based causes of SUA in the subject vehicles. Both theories were developed by Dr. Ronald Belt, the first in 2018 and the second in 2020. A paper describing the most recent theory was submitted to NHTSA by the petitioner and is based upon Dr. Belt’s review of EDR data from the crash reported in VOQ 11206155. The other theory was referenced by the consumer who submitted VOQ 11206155 and is based upon Dr. Belt’s third-hand reconstruction of log data from an unknown SUA event. Both papers are based upon incorrect event data, incorrect reconstructions of event dynamics, and false assumptions regarding vehicle design factors."

[url]https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/inv/2020/INCLA-DP20001-6158.PDF[/url]

虽然专业的理论大家基本也看不懂，但是找新闻和文章还是要找新一点的。
这种快一年前的观点和分析。。。猜也猜得到，要么站不住脚，要么被证伪了。

[quote][pid=524108526,27185013,1]Reply[/pid] Post by [uid=63251281]bbbyyyddd[/uid] (2021-06-13 09:48):

虽然专业的理论大家基本也看不懂，但是找新闻和文章还是要找新一点的。
这种快一年前的观点和分析。。。猜也猜得到，要么站不住脚，要么被证伪了。[/quote]楼主这个贴的主题“特斯拉数据和edr数据存在矛盾”，你想讨论的另外有贴。

Reply to [pid=524110044,27185013,1]Reply[/pid] Post by [uid=63188427]玩票的菜鸟[/uid] (2021-06-13 09:56)

楼主贴的文章里面就是Ronald A. Belt的分析，有问题？

[quote][pid=524111071,27185013,1]Reply[/pid] Post by [uid=63251281]bbbyyyddd[/uid] (2021-06-13 10:02):

楼主贴的文章里面就是Ronald A. Belt的分析，有问题？[/quote]“与此同时，这一结论得到了特斯拉描述的高分辨率日志数据的支持——特斯拉的分析与驾驶员的证词一致，双方皆认为，制动踏板被踩下——虽然EDR数据与此矛盾。”

如果按特斯拉的诛心之论，特斯拉的edr数据记录的是真实的，特斯拉描述的高分辨率日志数据与此矛盾，是因为edr无法解释事实，用于掩盖问题，特斯拉描述的高分辨率日志数据是经过特斯拉篡改的数据。

Reply to [pid=524112294,27185013,1]Reply[/pid] Post by [uid=63188427]玩票的菜鸟[/uid] (2021-06-13 10:09)

楼主贴的这个分析源自一个叫Ronald A. Belt的，NHTSA的研究报告几经把Ronald A. Belt的结论都否定了。
跟你说话简直对牛弹琴，浪费时间……

[quote][pid=524117323,27185013,1]Reply[/pid] Post by [uid=63251281]bbbyyyddd[/uid] (2021-06-13 10:36):

楼主贴的这个分析源自一个叫Ronald A. Belt的，NHTSA的研究报告几经把Ronald A. Belt的两篇论文的结论都否定了。
跟你说话简直对牛弹琴，浪费时间……[/quote]NHTSA的研究报告否定的是belt博士的模型和结论，而不是说列举的事实是错误的。

belt博士列举了特斯拉报告和EDR数据矛盾的事实，如果是伪造事实，特斯拉没有任何反应？

[quote][pid=524118253,27185013,1]Reply[/pid] Post by [uid=103750]hulihutu[/uid] (2021-06-13 10:40):

NHTSA的研究报告否定的是belt博士的模型和结论，而不是说列举的事实是错误的。

belt博士列举了特斯拉报告和EDR数据矛盾的事实，如果是伪造事实，特斯拉没有任何反应？[/quote]Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition(地址：[url]https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/13/2021-00501/denial-of-motor-vehicle-defect-petition[/url] ) 3.3.5节 “ODI's reviews of EDR reports for this and several other Model 3 crash events noted that the polarity of the pre-crash longitudinal acceleration data appeared to be reversed in relation to vehicle speed data (i.e., negative acceleration displayed when the vehicle speed is increasing and positive acceleration displayed when vehicle speed is decreasing).[9] Tesla confirmed that the longitudinal acceleration data polarity was reversed in Model 3 EDR reports produced using EDR reporting services of v20.2.1 or earlier. Tesla advised ODI that the error has been corrected in EDR reporting service update v20.29.1.”

Reply to [pid=524117323,27185013,1]Reply[/pid] Post by [uid=63251281]bbbyyyddd[/uid] (2021-06-13 10:36) NHTSA的研究报告还有人信，算了吧。等特斯拉汽车杀人了，NHTSA还是没有证据

Reply to [pid=524103509,27185013,1]Reply[/pid] Post by [uid=63251281]bbbyyyddd[/uid] (2021-06-13 09:19)截至到3月13日，43国下达了对波音737Max飞机的停飞令，但美国联邦航空管理局(FAA)不仅没有宣布停飞，还站出来波音737Max，其代理局长丹尼尔·K·埃尔维尔(Daniel· K· Elwell)还在公众上发表声明称，目前我们并没有审查到该飞机有系统性能问题，因此无理由宣布停飞该飞机。

Reply to [pid=524117323,27185013,1]Reply[/pid] Post by [uid=63251281]bbbyyyddd[/uid] (2021-06-13 10:36)美国政府目前已收到超过3000例涉及丰田汽车会突然加速的投诉，但是NHTSA只获得58个可供研究的汽车行驶记录仪。颇具讽刺意味的是，在对58个事故车辆的“黑盒子”的调查中，有35例都没有显示踩过刹车数据记录，这意味着这些驾驶员在车祸发生时并未及时使用刹车制动装置。NHTSA故障调查办公室代理负责人理查德?博艾德对此现象的解释是：很可能是由于驾驶员在想要刹车时无意识地踩了油门。

Reply to [pid=524118253,27185013,1]Reply[/pid] Post by [uid=103750]hulihutu[/uid] (2021-06-13 10:40)

你看下原文报告的3.3.5节 和 3.6.2节。

[quote][pid=524121317,27185013,1]Reply[/pid] Post by [uid=11739860]shianker[/uid] (2021-06-13 10:56):

Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition(地址：[url]https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/13/2021-00501/denial-of-motor-vehicle-defect-petition[/url] ) 3.3.5节 “ODI's reviews of EDR reports for this and several other Model 3 crash events note[/quote]你看懂你发的没？那是加速度的问题

我们讨论的是：
特斯拉报告刹车踏板踩下
EDR数据显示刹车踏板未踩下

[quote][pid=524121317,27185013,1]Reply[/pid] Post by [uid=11739860]shianker[/uid] (2021-06-13 10:56):

Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition(地址：[url]https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/13/2021-00501/denial-of-motor-vehicle-defect-petition[/url] ) 3.3.5节 “ODI's reviews of EDR reports for this and several other Model 3 crash events note[/quote]3.6.2?2018 THEORY (UNKNOWN SUA EVENT)
ODI also reviewed an earlier paper by Dr. Belt suggesting a different theory for a vehicle-based cause of SUA in Tesla vehicles.[15] This paper, dated May 1, 2018, was referenced in a supplemental submission from the consumer who submitted VOQ 11206155.[16] The SUA theory proposed by Dr. Belt in the May 2018 paper originated from his reconstruction of accelerator position log data from an unknown SUA incident that was described to him over the phone.[17] Based on this reconstruction, Dr. Belt concluded that the APPS signal could not have been produced by the driver's application of the accelerator pedal, as summarized below from the paper's abstract:?[18]

“Examination of the data shows that the accelerator pedal sensor output increased to cause the sudden acceleration. But the increase in the accelerator pedal sensor output could not have been caused by the driver. Instead, the increase in the accelerator pedal sensor output appears to have been caused by a fault in the motor speed sensor, with which it shares a common +5V power and ground.”

Like his June 2020 paper, the theory proposed by Dr. Belt in the May 2018 paper is based upon inaccurate event data and false assumptions about system design. The APPS data is not recorded in Tesla's log data in the manner claimed in the paper (see section 3.3.5 ODI Analysis of EDR Data).[19] In addition, circuit design information provided to ODI by Tesla shows that Dr. Belt's assumption that “[t]he two accelerator pedal sensors and the motor speed sensor share the same +5V regulator and ground,” is incorrect. Tesla uses two distinct regulators with different voltage outputs to supply power to the APPS and motor speed sensors. Thus, the May 2018 paper does not provide a valid explanation for a fault-based cause of SUA in the subject vehicles. Based upon the reported increase in accelerator pedal position to 97 percent shortly before collision, the most likely cause of the incident described in the May 2018 Belt paper is pedal misapplication by the driver.