This is only a preview of the June 2012 issue of Silicon Chip. You can view 28 of the 104 pages in the full issue, including the advertisments. For full access, purchase the issue for $10.00 or subscribe for access to the latest issues. Items relevant to "Crazy Cricket Or Freaky Frog":
Items relevant to "Wideband Oxygen Sensor Controller Mk.2, Pt.1":
Items relevant to "Mix-It: An Easy-To Build 4-Channel Mixer":
Items relevant to "PIC/AVR Programming Adaptor Board; Pt.2":
Purchase a printed copy of this issue for $10.00. |
SILICON
SILIC
CHIP
www.siliconchip.com.au
Publisher & Editor-in-Chief
Leo Simpson, B.Bus., FAICD
Production Manager
Greg Swain, B.Sc. (Hons.)
Technical Editor
John Clarke, B.E.(Elec.)
Technical Staff
Ross Tester
Jim Rowe, B.A., B.Sc
Nicholas Vinen
Photography
Ross Tester
Reader Services
Ann Morris
Advertising Enquiries
Glyn Smith
Phone (02) 9939 3295
Mobile 0431 792 293
glyn<at>siliconchip.com.au
Regular Contributors
Brendan Akhurst
Rodney Champness, VK3UG
Kevin Poulter
Stan Swan
Dave Thompson
SILICON CHIP is published 12 times
a year by Silicon Chip Publications
Pty Ltd. ACN 003 205 490. ABN 49
003 205 490. All material is copyright ©. No part of this publication
may be reproduced without the written consent of the publisher.
Printing: Hannanprint, Noble Park,
Victoria.
Distribution: Network Distribution
Company.
Subscription rates: $97.50 per year
in Australia. For overseas rates, see
the order form in this issue.
Editorial office:
Unit 1, 234 Harbord Rd,
Brookvale, NSW 2100.
Postal address: PO Box 139,
Collaroy Beach, NSW 2097.
Phone (02) 9939 3295.
Fax (02) 9939 2648.
E-mail: silicon<at>siliconchip.com.au
ISSN 1030-2662
Recommended and maximum price only.
2 Silicon Chip
Publisher’s Letter
What’s next on the automotive wish list?
Recent road trips have had me thinking about what
could be improved in modern cars, in terms of safety
and ease of driving. While features such as keyless entry
and starting, Bluetooth and USB connectivity and DVD
screens for the rear seat passengers undoubtedly have
their merits, they do little for road safety. Perhaps I
should qualify that; on a recent long trip with two rambunctious grandsons, I have to admit the DVDs were very
good for keeping them entertained (and blissfully quiet!).
Self-parking and adaptive cruise control, pedestrian
detect, collision avoidance and headlights which point around corners are all
good too, although most are rather expensive at the moment. They will undoubtedly become cheaper as they filter down to a wider range of cars. But none of
these really help with everyday ease of driving or road safety. Or if they do,
they are not along the lines that I am thinking.
What is the biggest problem with modern cars? All-round vision is the answer. All cars have their driver blind spots but modern cars seem to be getting
worse. The biggest offenders are so-called SUVs which seem to be very popular
with families; not because they can go off-road but because they are seen to be
rugged and supposedly offering greater safety in a collision. Well, if you equate
“heavy” with “rugged” then the bigger SUVs certainly fit into this category
but it does not necessarily mean greater safety in a collision, as evidenced by
ANSCAP ratings.
Paradoxically too, while SUVs are higher off the road than conventional
sedans, giving a better view of the road ahead, they are notoriously difficult
to see out of when parking. So much so that many SUVs now have optional
rear-view cameras – so that you can see what’s behind the vehicle! Part of this
problem though is because the rear window in so many of these vehicles is too
small. The stylists have sacrificed vision to styling. That complaint also applies
to many sedans and hatchbacks as well, with some having ludicrously small
rear windows and thick pillars. And of course, many cars also have heavily
tinted windows.
Which begs the question: if rear visibility on modern cars is so poor, why
aren’t rear-view cameras a standard feature? Taking the idea a bit further, why
not simply get rid of the rear view mirror altogether? They seldom give a full
view of the rear window which itself is often partly obscured by head rests
and assorted stuff on the parcel shelf. External rear view mirrors are also problematic, with those on the passenger’s side being convex and so giving a wider
but distorted view. And of course, external rear view mirrors must inevitably
increase the overall drag of the vehicle.
So why not dispense with rear view mirrors altogether and replace them with
three cameras? Carefully placed, they could eliminate all blind spots at the rear.
There would be other advantages as well. It would enable the rear window
and rear quarter windows to be eliminated. In hot climates like Australia this
would mean far less heat transmission (via glass). As well, since glass is heavy,
it could mean a reduction in weight while making the cabin stronger. Finally,
it would mean the end of that bane of night driving, being blasted by bright
headlights from the rear. I am assuming here that video processing of the camera
video signals would overcome overload problems.
In case the concept of a vehicle with no rear window seems too radical or
impractical, there are precedents. For a start, trucks don’t have rear windows
or if they do, they are obscured by the load. Second, some concept vehicles
have been produced with cameras and no rear window. While they may have
looked odd, the concept could certainly be made to work. What do you think?
Leo Simpson
siliconchip.com.au
|