[Rehaan]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

We are closer to 2020 than 2000 and it's a known fact that Airbags can be dangerous for the small kids and infants especially if not belted and in the front seats.

My point here is that part of the reason airbags got "safer" is because along with advancements in technology, they also got smarter in knowing when they should NOT deploy.

[Turbanator]

Originally Posted by Rehaan

My point here is that part of the reason airbags got "safer" is because along with advancements in technology, they also got smarter in knowing when they should NOT deploy.

I will still stand with my earlier comments

"In Unknown conditions in an Accident, deployment of Airbags will be far useful then Non-Deployment."

Now, how manufacturers make them safer is there work, but programming them in such a way that they don't deploy when in doubt is not something we should like and if certain manufacturers want to carry on these lines, let them say boldly on their marketing material as well. Going through various manuals here as definitely made me wiser, and I can now expect what Toyota is producing in India.

Innova and Liva accident pictures on this thread will certainly keep some of the customers away surely. I probably don't need such SMART vehicles from TOYOTA India.

Just a noob Question to the Experts, since the Car is severely damaged, can OP/ Toyota try opening the Airbags by actually hitting the car more severely at some other place? Or perhaps, shorting out a sensor on one of the side Airbags and see if the Airbags on this particular car work? I mean there should be a way to check if the equipped Airbags work at first place or will Toyota India be afraid to do this excercise?

[VaidhiR]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

Just a noob Question to the Experts, since the Car is severely damaged, can OP/ Toyota try opening the Airbags by actually hitting the car more severely at some other place? Or perhaps, shorting out a sensor on one of the side Airbags and see if the Airbags on this particular car work? I mean there should be a way to check if the equipped Airbags work at first place or will Toyota India be afraid to do this excercise?

The tampering of airbags is a crime in certain parts of the world. Warranty limitation and/or model tampering and that kind of stuff. And, will not be covered by insurance. So, after the test, in case the airbag was indeed functioning, the cost of the new airbag, the fixing charges and other auxilliary costs will have to come from Toyota's pocket. Or OP. Whoever attempts such an attempt. Plus, on a side note, why would the OP want to find out if the other airbags are functioning or not? The ones that had to function did not.

And on a bigger picture, if Toyota attempts to try this on one car with the promise of replacement, then it will open the floodgates from the millions of other Toyotas on the road in case their airbags dont open in an accident. It will be an unmitigated PR disaster.

On a technical level, the "airbag malfunction" light that lights up on your dashboard is based on an open circuit model (Jugaad word play here. Not the actual technical jargon). If there is an error, then the circuit becomes incomplete. This lights up the dashboard. As long as the circuit is closed, the airbags work properly. And the lights stay off.

[giri1.8]

Grabbing these pics from our Kizashi thread:

Note that driver airbag didn't deploy, as it was unnecessary in this impact(proper deployment algorithm).



Argument of improper airbag inflation can be related to improper timing of trigger too, old cars might not have had good triggers, late deployment = our head already in the path of deployment, hence so many injuries.

Impact was to the right side of the car, but minimal damage to the body panel, no question of "you didn't crash the car the right way for it to deploy" Sensors probably measured the G-forces and deployed the curtains.

[Superleggera]

Originally Posted by kiku007

Here's a Toyota Prado that hit an animal.

I don't think Toyota or any other car maker follow international safety or build standards in India even for the same models unless its a CBU. 90% of the time the vehicle is written as a write off if airbags are deployed in other countries but in India its not and we tend to salvage them.

[Turbanator]

Originally Posted by VaidhiR

So, after the test, in case the airbag was indeed functioning, the cost of the new airbag, the fixing charges and other auxilliary costs will have to come from Toyota's pocket. Or OP.

Ideally, Toyota should pick the bill to see what went wrong. It should not be hard for them to do some non-destructive checks but knowing how they operate, it will be too much. Seeing some of the other pictures like of Kizashi, I don't know what sort of standards these manufacturers have.

Originally Posted by giri1.8

Grabbing these pics from our Kizashi thread:

Note that driver airbag didn't deploy, as it was unnecessary in this impact(proper deployment algorithm).

Will like to hear from experts on how this collision triggered Airbags and what were the risks to the occupants

Originally Posted by Superleggera

I don't think Toyota or any other car maker follow international safety or build standards in India even for the same models unless its a CBU..

+ 1, on almost all the brands including premium like BMW, have found small features or specifications altered.

[VaidhiR]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

Ideally, Toyota should pick the bill to see what went wrong. It should not be hard for them to do some non-destructive checks but knowing how they operate, it will be too much. Seeing some of the other pictures like of Kizashi, I don't know what sort of standards these manufacturers have.

There is a small flaw in the logic that the OEM has to pick up the bill.

This is how a modern OEM (BMW, Daimler, Porsche, VW, Audi etc..) operate. They dont develop anything inside a car. They merely give their requirements to the supplier. The supplier develops it for the OEM.

- Seats come from seat supplier. And there are separate suppliers for front row seats, second row seats and third row seats.
- Dashboard come from dashboard supplier. And depending on the model and version, there could be multiple suppliers.
- Cables come from cable supplier.
- Airbags come from airbag supplier. Front airbags from a supplier, curtain airbags from another supplier.
- Seat belts come from seat belt supplier.
- Carpets come from carpets supplier.
and so on..

And this doesnt count the suppliers that supply to these suppliers.
And all the OEM does is, integrates them in their car.

If I am am OEM, I contact the suppliers and tell them my requirements. If I want seats, I tell the supplier how I want my seats and what features it must have. The seat supplier works in tandem with my design department and develops a seat that fits the specification that I lay down. The same for airbags. I tell the supplier what I want out of the airbag. The supplier develops the airbag and gives me a component that fits my specification. He will coordinate with my design department. But he is going to be doing what I say, what I want and how I want. This is how it is for every subsystem.

I will test the car for every subsystem there is in the car. Right from the body to the smallest nut and bolt to ensure that they meet my specification. Engine, suspension, bumper fixation clips, light switches, indicator switches, accelerator pedal. Every physical part of the car. If you can physically see something in a car, it will be tested to its absolute limit. But if anything goes wrong, I wont take up the responsibility as its not my development. I will pass it on to the supplier and say "Hey man. Your subsystem failed my tests. Rectify it and give it back." The onus is then on the supplier to rectify.

There are internal tests, assessment tests and regulatory tests of varying demands and requirements. And a serial design car has to pass every hurdle thats thrown in its path. If anything goes wrong, the OEMs don't rectify it themselves. Because its not their development. They merely pass it to the supplier for them to rectify. And if everything is alright, they stick a couple of badges around the car. And sell them as their own.

Against this backdrop, If I drive a car, and during an accident, the airbags dont deploy when they should probably have. Who would be blamed? The OEM, the airbag supplier, sensor supplier, cable supplier or the programming guys?

- The OEM is merely integrating the airbags and have released the car in the market after the serial design of the car passes the internal tests, assessment tests and regulatory tests. He will raise his hands up and say "Our cars have been road worthy. If it still fails, maybe the regulation isnt strong enough." This shifts the blame on the government.
- The Airbag supplier and sensor supplier are merely acting on the OEMs demands. He will raise his hand and say, "our airbags and sensors have passed the stringent tests."
- Same for cable supplier and programming guys. They merely act on what the OEM say. But the OEM releases the car only after it passes all tests - internal, assessment and regulatory.

On whom would the actual blame be?

Originally Posted by Turbanator

Will like to hear from experts on how this collision triggered Airbags and what were the risks to the occupants

In tests and simulation, the driver dummy is seated with its arm on the 10-2 position on the steering wheel. All other dummies are seated with their arms on the thighs. And all dummies are belted. And we simulate about 51 different loadcases where we test and simulate front crash, side crash, roll over crash, luggage retention, strength of seats and seat belts, airbag deployment and other accident scenarios amongst the big group. And in all the scenarios, the dummy positions are predefined, as mentioned in the starting of the paragraph.

The airbag and/or seatbelts have a set of predefined algorithm that have been coded based on the requirements of the OEM. For example, the front airbags will not be triggered in relative speeds less than 18 kmph. The seat belts and/or bumpers are sufficient for this. But if the relative speed of the cars are more than 18 kmph, then the sensoric data analyses the algorithm and decides when its most opportune to be deployed. And it analyses a lot of factors than just relative speed. The sensors behind the front bumpers analyse the force of intrusion, the displacement of the bumpers during a crash and only after they cross a predefined threshold, they trigger the sensors that inflate the airbag at more than 320 kph.

What happens when the occupant gets hit on their face with a woven nylon fabric at 320 kph?

During a crash (of upto 64 kph), all components in a car are tested. Airbags included. The regulation mandates 64 kph. Those are the rules. If you are injured by your airbag travelling at 120 kph, you cant blame anyone because thats almost twice the tested speed. Sounds dumb. But you cant design a car thats safe at all speeds. The best thing we can do, is drive defensive and safe and do our bit. And hope that the fellow road user has a brain that sees things the same way.

[landcruiser123]

@OP: Please don't remove this thread. And push Toyota for an explanation.
I'm glad the children are okay and I hope the driver recovers soon.

Originally Posted by Rehaan

^ This is absolutely untrue...

I agree. The first world has been improving infrastructure (diverging diamond interchange, better walls on freeways etc) and reducing conflict points so that types of accidents are those which have direct frontal impact and protection from the crumple zone.

And this brings me to the question of whether COST OF REPLACEMENT is in any way factored into these algorithms.

I think this is only factored in when there is no passenger in the front seat. At least I'm told that is the case.

This is the tricky part.....If the algorithm leans one way, it fractures someones neck, if it leans the other way, customers feel cheated because the airbags didn't deploy.

I think this is where infrastructure standardization plays a role.

Please do also consider looking at it from another point of view: The safety systems that they've built into their car (eg. structural soundness)

This is what matters the most. Airbags are only designed to reduce the impact of crashes.

Originally Posted by dark.knight

1) It is firstly the fault of advertising.....
2) The company instead of advertising 2/4/6/100 airbags.....

I think the onus for this is on the consumer. And some data is there in the user manual. With crash test data, I hope they give ratings for Adult, child and infant protection. Just like how people do research on whether the AVN system will work with their iPhone, they should check when and whether airbags will protect them.
I've seen manuals describe what are the potential scenarios the airbags will deploy in my 2007 Innova.

The company is here to make money and salesman jargon has made people believe that airbags are like magical pillows which appear in the event of a crash.

And yes, if you want protection in every type of accident, please drive a military tank.

[fiat_tarun]

Originally Posted by VaidhiR

There is a small flaw in the logic that the OEM has to pick up the bill.

This is how a modern OEM (BMW, Daimler, Porsche, VW, Audi etc..) operate. They dont develop anything inside a car. They merely give their requirements to the supplier. The supplier develops it for the OEM.

....

Well, while the suppliers do develop the components, the onus and responsibility will always lie with the OEM. The OEM in their purchase agreements with suppliers will have terms where liability clauses are covered and will pass on such claims internally.

For a vehicle owner, the OEM is responsible, irrespective of who supplied the part.

[Turbohead]

Check out this video!

https://youtu.be/iUXl2vo0z6I

Looks like tests are being done on cars to ensure airbags deploy only when necessary. Is Toyota overdoing it? Maybe.

[atlantis0965]

Hello

Kudos to you or whoever instilled the habit of wearing the seat belts to the kids and well done on the part of the kids to have diligently followed it even when travelling without an adult !

As for the intention of Toyota owning up to faulty airbags ; the case would not really hold up simply because of the technicalities involved.
Of course if you still do pursue the case you might win it courtesy a judgement made based on emotions .
Yet one could also say that the overall safety features of the car did save the lives of the occupants !

Good Luck !

[neil.jericho]

Originally Posted by VaidhiR

Against this backdrop, If I drive a car, and during an accident, the airbags dont deploy when they should probably have. Who would be blamed? The OEM, the airbag supplier, sensor supplier, cable supplier or the programming guys?

Its simple. The car is purchased from the manufacturer. Its the manufacturer's responsibility to ensure every part, whether it is the drive train or the airbags or a simple nut and bolt, works.

I have worked with large IT service companies for a decade and I have sold lots of solutions to customers that involved us taking a sub contractor (usually a local consulting firm or a small firm that is super specialized in a particular tool) to help win the deal. We used to sign water tight contracts with the sub contractors before the start of the project to ensure everything gets done perfectly. However, before agreeing to terms with the customer, we used to asses and see what was in our control and how much dependency was on the sub contractor. If things were too risky (due to penalty clauses, iffy sub contractors / sub vendors, chances of messing up the projects and losing the customer etc), we walked away. If and when things go wrong, the customer isnt going to ask, who made the mistake, us or our subcontractor? There is one neck on the line and that is the company that signs the deal with the customer.

[TB16]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

Ideally, Toyota should pick the bill to see what went wrong. It should not be hard for them to do some non-destructive checks but knowing how they operate, it will be too much. Seeing some of the other pictures like of Kizashi, I don't know what sort of standards these manufacturers have.

Will like to hear from experts on how this collision triggered Airbags and what were the risks to the occupants

I'm no expert here but just adding a few more points to this kizashi accident. (you can check the kizashi thread for more info) So my father was driving the car when the accident happened. The impact was so strong that the entire rear right suspension broke from the chassis (or from whatever bracket/frame the suspension is attached to). The entire car turned 90° upon the impact. Talking about the risk to occupants, my dad was very certain that the airbag saved him from a major injury. Had the curtain airbag not deployed his head would have gone through the driver side window. Attaching a couple more pics for reference.

[saur95]

I'm glad all the occupants made it through with minimal injury and I hope they find the strength to tackle the mental trauma inflicted during this accident.

I don't want to comment on whether the airbag deploying here would have caused more damage. But with the information provided, wanted to speculate as to why the airbags did not inflate.

Ideal conditions for an airbag to open is that the threshold deceleration or sufficient lateral acceleration (With side airbags) is achieved and detected by the sensors placed around the vehicle.

In this case, if we imagine the vehicles were travelling in the directions shown in drawing (Innova driver tries to avert accident and swerves), the deceleration faced would be negligible, if any, and magnitude of the lateral component is also subdued. The airbags, hence, have not inflated. The collision has gone on to destabilise the Innova, resulting in a rollover. The occupants have been saved by the body structure and primary restraints (seatbelts) in a satisfactory manner. Maybe more information will help us decipher the situation better.

I feel that the other Innova mentioned early on in this thread had its airbags deploy because of a head-on (with offset) collision which would have satisfied the deceleration requirement.

However, the OP deserves an answer from the manufacturer and it is his right to receive a satisfactory one. Please let us know if there is an update from them.

[VaidhiR]

Originally Posted by neil.jericho

Its simple. The car is purchased from the manufacturer. Its the manufacturer's responsibility to ensure every part, whether it is the drive train or the airbags or a simple nut and bolt, works.

Hello Neil. Just found time to reply to your post.

Every component/system/subsystem in a car undergoes rigorous tests so that they pass any internal tests, assessment tests and regulatory tests. Homologation tests if necessary. These tests are performed under controlled environment. For example, front crash assumes 64kph and 10-45% offset. And under the strong assumption that all component/system/subsystem also function normally. The dummies inside the car are either 5%, 50% or 95% and are all belted. The environment is "pre determined" and "controlled."

If any component/system/subsystem fails to function the way it should, then a cause-effect analysis is immediately done and the answers determine who is likely to be at fault. Dont get me wrong. But it is not always the manufacturer who will be in the wrong. The suppliers (to the OEM) and the suppliers (to these suppliers) also determine where the problems might happen in this complex supply chain ecosystem.

The driving conditions in India also play a very vital role in effective functioning of sensors in a car. The customers as well. I am sure you know by now that a dusty sensor will not trigger an airbag inflation. As will a bull bar. Or not wearing a seat belt. So the fault doesnt lie entirely with the OEM because the car will only be released on Indian roads if it passes the homologation and regulation tests.

Which is why an OEM will never voluntarily offer destructive validation and offer to pay for it. It will open the flood gates of hell where millions of customers will want a free replacement.