If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
color of spring
On Fri, 20 May 2016 09:48:23 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: They do have a parking brake otherwise known as an emergency brake, and it works reasonably well if the main brakes have failed. been there, done that. You should compare stopping distances, especially if you take into account the extra reaction time required to recognise that you have to use the secondary braking system. That's without the complication of a foot-operated parking brake. the stopping distances of a brake that works is always going to be better than a brake that does not work. as for reaction time, that adds maybe a half-second. Not so. SAE allows at least 2 seconds for perception/reaction time. Stretching it to 2.5 seconds may be accepted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braking_distance says "A perception-reaction time of 1.5 seconds ... for the purpose of determining a bare baseline for accident reconstruction". Using the brake pedal is a trained reaction. The emergency use of a hand brake is not and will take longer. unfortunately, most drivers, when they realize their brakes failed, will just panic and not do anything, ultimately slamming into whatever is in front of them. they'll even call it an accident, despite it being their own fault for not knowing how to handle emergency situations as well as not maintaining their vehicle such that there isn't a brake failure. which is a very weak reed to lean on. it's weaker than the main brakes when the main brakes work and stronger than the main brakes when they have failed. Duh! Anything is better than nothing but for many years main braking systems have been duplex and cannot fail entirely unless the pedal snaps off or similar. nonsense. Forget the standard diagram of braking systems. For a good many years now braking systems have been split as in http://vwts.ru/vw_doc/eva2/SU02/i23997.gif Front-left and back-right are on one system while front-right and back-left are on another. Failure in one system does not disable the other. There other systems but complete brake failure is most unlikely in a modern vehicle. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
color of spring
On Sat, 21 May 2016 12:46:14 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote: On Fri, 20 May 2016 09:48:23 -0400, nospam wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: They do have a parking brake otherwise known as an emergency brake, and it works reasonably well if the main brakes have failed. been there, done that. You should compare stopping distances, especially if you take into account the extra reaction time required to recognise that you have to use the secondary braking system. That's without the complication of a foot-operated parking brake. the stopping distances of a brake that works is always going to be better than a brake that does not work. as for reaction time, that adds maybe a half-second. Not so. SAE allows at least 2 seconds for perception/reaction time. Stretching it to 2.5 seconds may be accepted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braking_distance says "A perception-reaction time of 1.5 seconds ... for the purpose of determining a bare baseline for accident reconstruction". Using the brake pedal is a trained reaction. The emergency use of a hand brake is not and will take longer. unfortunately, most drivers, when they realize their brakes failed, will just panic and not do anything, ultimately slamming into whatever is in front of them. they'll even call it an accident, despite it being their own fault for not knowing how to handle emergency situations as well as not maintaining their vehicle such that there isn't a brake failure. which is a very weak reed to lean on. it's weaker than the main brakes when the main brakes work and stronger than the main brakes when they have failed. Duh! Anything is better than nothing but for many years main braking systems have been duplex and cannot fail entirely unless the pedal snaps off or similar. nonsense. Forget the standard diagram of braking systems. For a good many years now braking systems have been split as in http://vwts.ru/vw_doc/eva2/SU02/i23997.gif Front-left and back-right are on one system while front-right and back-left are on another. Failure in one system does not disable the other. There other systems but complete brake failure is most unlikely in a modern vehicle. That diagonal configuration is mainly to make sure you don't have to stop with the rear brakes only. Front only will work just fine, but rears only is like trying to stop with the park brake. Anyway, you should always have at least one front brake, or no brakes at all. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
color of spring
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: They do have a parking brake otherwise known as an emergency brake, and it works reasonably well if the main brakes have failed. been there, done that. You should compare stopping distances, especially if you take into account the extra reaction time required to recognise that you have to use the secondary braking system. That's without the complication of a foot-operated parking brake. the stopping distances of a brake that works is always going to be better than a brake that does not work. as for reaction time, that adds maybe a half-second. Not so. yes so. SAE allows at least 2 seconds for perception/reaction time. Stretching it to 2.5 seconds may be accepted. then they need to update their numbers. http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/statistics Since this site was created, it's recorded 31,003,876 reaction time clicks. The median reaction time is 265 milliseconds. The average reaction time is 275 milliseconds. note that the chart only goes up to 500ms, as anything beyond that would be negligible. anyone who has a 2 second reaction time should *not* be driving under any circumstances. at 60 mph, they'll cover nearly a football field in those 2 seconds. they're much worse than a drunk driver. they're a disaster waiting to happen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braking_distance says "A perception-reaction time of 1.5 seconds ... for the purpose of determining a bare baseline for accident reconstruction". they're reconstructing a crash *because* the driver took that long to react. even a drunk will react in less than 1.5 seconds. a texting driver is also less, although not by much. http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-...ers-Have-Slowe r-Reaction-Times-than-Drunk-Drivers-131627 At 70 mph, Alterman's baseline reaction time was 0.56 of a second. Calculating that a vehicle moving at 70 mph travels 103 feet every second, while driving under the influence, Alterman's reaction time slowed to 0.60 of a second, or an extra 4 feet traveled. While reading a text, his reaction time slowed to 0.91 seconds, or a distance of 36 extra feet traveled, and while texting and driving his reaction time was 1.24 seconds-a difference of 70 extra feet. Using the brake pedal is a trained reaction. The emergency use of a hand brake is not and will take longer. exactly why practicing evasive maneuvers in a safe environment (e.g., an empty parking lot) so that it becomes instinctive is vital. then when it happens for real, the reaction is automatic, without any unnecessary delay. which is a very weak reed to lean on. it's weaker than the main brakes when the main brakes work and stronger than the main brakes when they have failed. Duh! Anything is better than nothing but for many years main braking systems have been duplex and cannot fail entirely unless the pedal snaps off or similar. nonsense. Forget the standard diagram of braking systems. For a good many years now braking systems have been split as in http://vwts.ru/vw_doc/eva2/SU02/i23997.gif Front-left and back-right are on one system while front-right and back-left are on another. Failure in one system does not disable the other. There other systems but complete brake failure is most unlikely in a modern vehicle. unlikely or not, it still can happen. pretending that it won't happen just means that if it does, you'll crash instead of safely stopping. you remind me of al haynes, the pilot on ua232 which crashed in sioux city iowa in 1989 after losing all hydraulics. i heard him speak, and one of the things that stuck with me was when he contacted atc to declare an emergency, atc didn't believe that he lost *all* systems, saying that was 1 in 100 million chance (or whatever number it was). he said, well, i'm *that* one. fortunately for all involved, he handled it exceptionally well. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
color of spring
On Fri, 20 May 2016 17:57:24 -0700, Bill W
wrote: On Sat, 21 May 2016 12:46:14 +1200, Eric Stevens wrote: On Fri, 20 May 2016 09:48:23 -0400, nospam wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: They do have a parking brake otherwise known as an emergency brake, and it works reasonably well if the main brakes have failed. been there, done that. You should compare stopping distances, especially if you take into account the extra reaction time required to recognise that you have to use the secondary braking system. That's without the complication of a foot-operated parking brake. the stopping distances of a brake that works is always going to be better than a brake that does not work. as for reaction time, that adds maybe a half-second. Not so. SAE allows at least 2 seconds for perception/reaction time. Stretching it to 2.5 seconds may be accepted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braking_distance says "A perception-reaction time of 1.5 seconds ... for the purpose of determining a bare baseline for accident reconstruction". Using the brake pedal is a trained reaction. The emergency use of a hand brake is not and will take longer. unfortunately, most drivers, when they realize their brakes failed, will just panic and not do anything, ultimately slamming into whatever is in front of them. they'll even call it an accident, despite it being their own fault for not knowing how to handle emergency situations as well as not maintaining their vehicle such that there isn't a brake failure. which is a very weak reed to lean on. it's weaker than the main brakes when the main brakes work and stronger than the main brakes when they have failed. Duh! Anything is better than nothing but for many years main braking systems have been duplex and cannot fail entirely unless the pedal snaps off or similar. nonsense. Forget the standard diagram of braking systems. For a good many years now braking systems have been split as in http://vwts.ru/vw_doc/eva2/SU02/i23997.gif Front-left and back-right are on one system while front-right and back-left are on another. Failure in one system does not disable the other. There other systems but complete brake failure is most unlikely in a modern vehicle. That diagonal configuration is mainly to make sure you don't have to stop with the rear brakes only. Front only will work just fine, but rears only is like trying to stop with the park brake. Anyway, you should always have at least one front brake, or no brakes at all. You are correct but the idea is that if you have to lose half your brakes in a failure it's better not to lose both your front brakes or all your brakes one side. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
color of spring
On Sat, 21 May 2016 15:30:19 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote: On Fri, 20 May 2016 17:57:24 -0700, Bill W wrote: On Sat, 21 May 2016 12:46:14 +1200, Eric Stevens wrote: On Fri, 20 May 2016 09:48:23 -0400, nospam wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: They do have a parking brake otherwise known as an emergency brake, and it works reasonably well if the main brakes have failed. been there, done that. You should compare stopping distances, especially if you take into account the extra reaction time required to recognise that you have to use the secondary braking system. That's without the complication of a foot-operated parking brake. the stopping distances of a brake that works is always going to be better than a brake that does not work. as for reaction time, that adds maybe a half-second. Not so. SAE allows at least 2 seconds for perception/reaction time. Stretching it to 2.5 seconds may be accepted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braking_distance says "A perception-reaction time of 1.5 seconds ... for the purpose of determining a bare baseline for accident reconstruction". Using the brake pedal is a trained reaction. The emergency use of a hand brake is not and will take longer. unfortunately, most drivers, when they realize their brakes failed, will just panic and not do anything, ultimately slamming into whatever is in front of them. they'll even call it an accident, despite it being their own fault for not knowing how to handle emergency situations as well as not maintaining their vehicle such that there isn't a brake failure. which is a very weak reed to lean on. it's weaker than the main brakes when the main brakes work and stronger than the main brakes when they have failed. Duh! Anything is better than nothing but for many years main braking systems have been duplex and cannot fail entirely unless the pedal snaps off or similar. nonsense. Forget the standard diagram of braking systems. For a good many years now braking systems have been split as in http://vwts.ru/vw_doc/eva2/SU02/i23997.gif Front-left and back-right are on one system while front-right and back-left are on another. Failure in one system does not disable the other. There other systems but complete brake failure is most unlikely in a modern vehicle. That diagonal configuration is mainly to make sure you don't have to stop with the rear brakes only. Front only will work just fine, but rears only is like trying to stop with the park brake. Anyway, you should always have at least one front brake, or no brakes at all. You are correct but the idea is that if you have to lose half your brakes in a failure it's better not to lose both your front brakes or all your brakes one side. Yep - I omitted that second part. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
color of spring
On Fri, 20 May 2016 22:05:43 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: They do have a parking brake otherwise known as an emergency brake, and it works reasonably well if the main brakes have failed. been there, done that. You should compare stopping distances, especially if you take into account the extra reaction time required to recognise that you have to use the secondary braking system. That's without the complication of a foot-operated parking brake. the stopping distances of a brake that works is always going to be better than a brake that does not work. as for reaction time, that adds maybe a half-second. Not so. yes so. SAE allows at least 2 seconds for perception/reaction time. Stretching it to 2.5 seconds may be accepted. then they need to update their numbers. http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/statistics Since this site was created, it's recorded 31,003,876 reaction time clicks. The median reaction time is 265 milliseconds. The average reaction time is 275 milliseconds. note that the chart only goes up to 500ms, as anything beyond that would be negligible. That's for someone expecting something to happen and mentally prepared to react as soon as it does. The SAE figures are based on John Doe trundling down the highway and having a dangerous situation suddenly presented to him without warning. The first thing John Doe has to do is to recognise that he is being presented with a situation to which he has to react. Only after that does the reaction time start running. That's why I referred to it as 'perception/reaction' time. If you are driving down the road and have cause to brake and then, in the midst of braking you have your brake system fail, you first have to perceive that you have a situation to react to. You then have to work out what to do about it and react. I would expect that it would take you at least 2 seconds from brake failure to you applying the parking brake. anyone who has a 2 second reaction time should *not* be driving under any circumstances. at 60 mph, they'll cover nearly a football field in those 2 seconds. they're much worse than a drunk driver. they're a disaster waiting to happen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braking_distance says "A perception-reaction time of 1.5 seconds ... for the purpose of determining a bare baseline for accident reconstruction". That's a simplistic analysis. 1.5 seconds is not unreasonable for but neither is 2 seconds. The SAE figures are based on actual tests with ordinary drivers. The model does not take into account that it takes several revolutions of the wheels for brakes to become fully applied. A coefficient of friction of 0.7 is low with actual tests on good road surfaces giving figures of 0.9 or higher. they're reconstructing a crash *because* the driver took that long to react. even a drunk will react in less than 1.5 seconds. a texting driver is also less, although not by much. http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-...ers-Have-Slowe r-Reaction-Times-than-Drunk-Drivers-131627 At 70 mph, Alterman's baseline reaction time was 0.56 of a second. Calculating that a vehicle moving at 70 mph travels 103 feet every second, while driving under the influence, Alterman's reaction time slowed to 0.60 of a second, or an extra 4 feet traveled. While reading a text, his reaction time slowed to 0.91 seconds, or a distance of 36 extra feet traveled, and while texting and driving his reaction time was 1.24 seconds-a difference of 70 extra feet. Using the brake pedal is a trained reaction. The emergency use of a hand brake is not and will take longer. exactly why practicing evasive maneuvers in a safe environment (e.g., an empty parking lot) so that it becomes instinctive is vital. then when it happens for real, the reaction is automatic, without any unnecessary delay. which is a very weak reed to lean on. it's weaker than the main brakes when the main brakes work and stronger than the main brakes when they have failed. Duh! Anything is better than nothing but for many years main braking systems have been duplex and cannot fail entirely unless the pedal snaps off or similar. nonsense. Forget the standard diagram of braking systems. For a good many years now braking systems have been split as in http://vwts.ru/vw_doc/eva2/SU02/i23997.gif Front-left and back-right are on one system while front-right and back-left are on another. Failure in one system does not disable the other. There other systems but complete brake failure is most unlikely in a modern vehicle. unlikely or not, it still can happen. pretending that it won't happen just means that if it does, you'll crash instead of safely stopping. you remind me of al haynes, the pilot on ua232 which crashed in sioux city iowa in 1989 after losing all hydraulics. i heard him speak, and one of the things that stuck with me was when he contacted atc to declare an emergency, atc didn't believe that he lost *all* systems, saying that was 1 in 100 million chance (or whatever number it was). he said, well, i'm *that* one. fortunately for all involved, he handled it exceptionally well. Fortunately for all involved, he had time to enable him to handle it exceptionally well. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
color of spring
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: SAE allows at least 2 seconds for perception/reaction time. Stretching it to 2.5 seconds may be accepted. then they need to update their numbers. http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/statistics Since this site was created, it's recorded 31,003,876 reaction time clicks. The median reaction time is 265 milliseconds. The average reaction time is 275 milliseconds. note that the chart only goes up to 500ms, as anything beyond that would be negligible. That's for someone expecting something to happen and mentally prepared to react as soon as it does. anyone who is driving should *always* be expecting something to happen and mentally prepared to react as soon as it does. and people wonder why there are so many collisions. **** happens when you least expect it, whether it's mechanical failure or a kid running into the street or an idiot running a red light. when it does, you don't have time to decide what to do. a split second can make all the difference and you don't get a second chance either. The SAE figures are based on John Doe trundling down the highway and having a dangerous situation suddenly presented to him without warning. The first thing John Doe has to do is to recognise that he is being presented with a situation to which he has to react. Only after that does the reaction time start running. john doe needs to stop driving, as he's putting everyone in danger. That's why I referred to it as 'perception/reaction' time. If you are driving down the road and have cause to brake and then, in the midst of braking you have your brake system fail, you first have to perceive that you have a situation to react to. You then have to work out what to do about it and react. I would expect that it would take you at least 2 seconds from brake failure to you applying the parking brake. not for me it won't. the moment i apply the brakes and nothing happens is the moment i engage the emergency brake and/or downshift in at most, a half-second. add that to the initial reaction time and the total is around 1 second or so. the whole reason i practice this stuff is so that i react *before* it's too late. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
color of spring
On Sat, 21 May 2016 00:40:49 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: SAE allows at least 2 seconds for perception/reaction time. Stretching it to 2.5 seconds may be accepted. then they need to update their numbers. http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/statistics Since this site was created, it's recorded 31,003,876 reaction time clicks. The median reaction time is 265 milliseconds. The average reaction time is 275 milliseconds. note that the chart only goes up to 500ms, as anything beyond that would be negligible. That's for someone expecting something to happen and mentally prepared to react as soon as it does. anyone who is driving should *always* be expecting something to happen and mentally prepared to react as soon as it does. So you drive around expecting your foot brake to fail. At the same time you are prepared for red light runners. How do you cope with that while watching for approaching traffic crossing over into your lane? Your nerves must be totally frazzled. and people wonder why there are so many collisions. **** happens when you least expect it, whether it's mechanical failure or a kid running into the street or an idiot running a red light. How do reconcile "least expect it" with "should *always* be expecting something to happen"? when it does, you don't have time to decide what to do. a split second can make all the difference and you don't get a second chance either. The SAE figures are based on John Doe trundling down the highway and having a dangerous situation suddenly presented to him without warning. The first thing John Doe has to do is to recognise that he is being presented with a situation to which he has to react. Only after that does the reaction time start running. john doe needs to stop driving, as he's putting everyone in danger. So you expect instaneous recognition of an unexpected hazard? That's why I referred to it as 'perception/reaction' time. If you are driving down the road and have cause to brake and then, in the midst of braking you have your brake system fail, you first have to perceive that you have a situation to react to. You then have to work out what to do about it and react. I would expect that it would take you at least 2 seconds from brake failure to you applying the parking brake. not for me it won't. the moment i apply the brakes and nothing happens is the moment i engage the emergency brake and/or downshift in at most, a half-second. How do you change gear and apply the parking brake simultaneously with the same hand? add that to the initial reaction time and the total is around 1 second or so. the whole reason i practice this stuff is so that i react *before* it's too late. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
color of spring
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: note that the chart only goes up to 500ms, as anything beyond that would be negligible. That's for someone expecting something to happen and mentally prepared to react as soon as it does. anyone who is driving should *always* be expecting something to happen and mentally prepared to react as soon as it does. So you drive around expecting your foot brake to fail. At the same time you are prepared for red light runners. How do you cope with that while watching for approaching traffic crossing over into your lane? i'm prepared for anything that might happen. Your nerves must be totally frazzled. not at all. and people wonder why there are so many collisions. **** happens when you least expect it, whether it's mechanical failure or a kid running into the street or an idiot running a red light. How do reconcile "least expect it" with "should *always* be expecting something to happen"? they're the same thing. when it does, you don't have time to decide what to do. a split second can make all the difference and you don't get a second chance either. The SAE figures are based on John Doe trundling down the highway and having a dangerous situation suddenly presented to him without warning. The first thing John Doe has to do is to recognise that he is being presented with a situation to which he has to react. Only after that does the reaction time start running. john doe needs to stop driving, as he's putting everyone in danger. So you expect instaneous recognition of an unexpected hazard? i'd like that to be the case, but realistically, i don't expect it from others. That's why I referred to it as 'perception/reaction' time. If you are driving down the road and have cause to brake and then, in the midst of braking you have your brake system fail, you first have to perceive that you have a situation to react to. You then have to work out what to do about it and react. I would expect that it would take you at least 2 seconds from brake failure to you applying the parking brake. not for me it won't. the moment i apply the brakes and nothing happens is the moment i engage the emergency brake and/or downshift in at most, a half-second. How do you change gear and apply the parking brake simultaneously with the same hand? who said simultaneously? obviously one will precede the other. the point is that there isn't a 2 second delay to figure out what to do and when. it's an automatic response. it's a reflex. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
color of spring
On 2016-05-23 02:21:12 +0000, nospam said:
In article , Eric Stevens wrote: note that the chart only goes up to 500ms, as anything beyond that would be negligible. That's for someone expecting something to happen and mentally prepared to react as soon as it does. anyone who is driving should *always* be expecting something to happen and mentally prepared to react as soon as it does. So you drive around expecting your foot brake to fail. At the same time you are prepared for red light runners. How do you cope with that while watching for approaching traffic crossing over into your lane? i'm prepared for anything that might happen. A Trump presidency? -- Regards, Savageduck |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
color of spring | nospam | Digital Photography | 10 | May 23rd 16 04:16 PM |
color of spring | PeterN[_6_] | Digital Photography | 12 | May 21st 16 03:16 PM |
color of spring | nospam | Digital Photography | 1 | May 21st 16 03:26 AM |
color of spring | Bill W | Digital Photography | 2 | May 21st 16 02:47 AM |
color of spring | nospam | Digital Photography | 0 | May 20th 16 10:54 PM |