Data processing: measuring – calibrating – or testing – Measurement system
Reexamination Certificate
2001-09-11
2003-12-30
Barlow, John (Department: 2863)
Data processing: measuring, calibrating, or testing
Measurement system
Reexamination Certificate
active
06671646
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention generally provides evidence that a person was physically at a designated position adjacent to a component of a machine or apparatus, and more specifically, provides an electronic record indicating when the person was physically disposed to carryout a safety inspection and to indicate a safety related operating condition of the component.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
A recent network television news program reported that nearly 40 percent of big rig tractor-trailers were so dangerous that they would be ordered off the road if inspected. While not all accidents involving commercial trucks and trailers are the result of defective equipment that could be identified in a safety inspection, a significant reduction in accidents is likely to be achieved by taking steps to ensure that key components of such equipment are inspected.
In response to the public's concern for the increase in large vehicle traffic on our nation's highways and the increased frequency of reported accidents involving commercial vehicles, Congress adopted the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999 (PL 106-159). Pursuant to this Act, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) was created within the U.S. Department of Transportation (DoT). Part of the mission of this new agency is to develop a long-term strategy to “improve commercial motor vehicle, operator, and carrier safety.” It is expected that by successfully addressing these issues, the incidence of accidents by commercial carriers will be reduced.
In furtherance of its mission, the FMCSA convened a series of meetings and planning sessions with representatives from other federal agencies, the states, and the transportation industry. Through that process, FMCSA developed a policy entitled: “2010 Strategy—Saving Lives Through Safety, Innovation, and Performance.” The primary goal of this policy is to improve transportation safety through the implementation of 31 strategic initiatives, which run the gamut from improved highway construction to better screening of drivers and equipment to detect potential equipment safety problems before they result in accidents.
The FMCSA's intention is to enhance motor carrier safety management practices through improved vehicle inspection, repair, and maintenance procedures. As acknowledged in the 2010 Strategy, “[I] f these functions are not conducted properly, driver and vehicle deficiencies can increase the potential for a crash.” Among the nine separate strategies contemplated by FMCSA to achieve this important objective is “the introduction of new technology to improve safety performance.” In stating its highest priorities, the 2010 Strategy further distills its 31 initiatives down to 13 “highest priority” strategies. Significantly, four of these highest priority strategies can be directly promoted with appropriate technology that will provide an electronic record of vehicle safety inspections and will tend to encourage such inspections. Specifically, it will be important to promote and encourage: (a) vehicle inspections with a focus on technology improvements; (b) improved safety management practices; (c) greater emphasis on technology transfer and deployment to achieve safe operating equipment; and (d) improved safety data collection and analysis.
To avoid accidents caused by defective equipment, Federal law presently requires that commercial drivers make a visual inspection of specific components on a truck (i.e., tractor and trailer), such as the brake system, fuel system, warning lights, tires, etc., performing pre- and post-trip inspections of these basic, but critical components. An exemplary vehicle inspection report listing the components and systems that must be inspected by a driver to satisfy the DoT regulations is illustrated in FIG.
7
. However, under the current system, a driver is only required to fill out a paper log and keep it on file for 90 days. Many experts report that less than half of the drivers ever perform the check; instead, many drivers simply fill out the report while seated in the cab of the truck or in a coffee shop. The report is meaningless unless the listed components and systems have actually been inspected. For example, a driver who fails to actually inspect components on his vehicle will not notice that brake fluid is leaking from a hydraulic master brake cylinder. As a result, the brakes on the driver's truck may fail, potentially causing a serious accident.
A signed inspection report does not provide any assurance that a driver actually inspected the components included on the report. However, technology might provide a way to at least ensure that a driver (or other person doing a safety inspection) was physically present in the vicinity of each component requiring inspection, even if the driver is not compelled to affirmatively inspect all of the components. Most people, if required to actually walk to a component such as a tire of a truck, will then be more willing to at least look at the condition of the component, particularly if the task of indicating the condition of the component if there is a problem, is made relatively simple and efficient.
An analogous approach is employed to ensure that a night watchman visits different locations in a building. To provide evidence that he has made his rounds, the night watchman must use a key contained in a lock box at each different location to activate a handheld timekeeping device, making a record of the time that the location was visited. The night watchman thus provides proof of having visited each location for purposes of performing a security check at specified times. However, a night watchman cannot record a security violation with the handheld device, and a security check by a night watchman does not relate to making a safety inspection of a component at a specific location on a truck. Also, requiring that a key be stored in a lock box on a truck or other system that is being inspected is not practical, and it is not efficient to require a driver or other person doing a safety inspection to manually use a key or other physical object to provide proof that the person physically visited the location during the safety inspection tour.
It would be desirable for a person making a safety inspection to carry a handheld device that automatically detects when the person is in the proximity of a component included on an inspection list and enters a record of the results of the inspection in a non-volatile memory. A sensor in the handheld device should respond to a tag or transponder associated with a component being inspected when the sensor is within a predetermined distance from the tag, by recording the event and displaying a menu that prompts the operator to enter data related to a safety condition of the component. For example, once the operator is within a range appropriate to permit inspection of the tires on a truck, the handheld device should enable the person inspecting the tires to indicate: (a) that the tires appear safe; (b) that the tires need servicing but are still usable; or, (c) that the tires are too unsafe to be driven. If the component needs servicing or is unsafe to use, the operator should be able to record a reason for that determination. Since proof that an inspection was made prior to driving a vehicle and the conditions of the components that were inspected may have an important bearing on any insurance claims and/or liability in the event of an accident with the vehicle, it would also be desirable to enable the data from the handheld device to be uploaded to a geographically separate central data storage facility after the inspection is completed.
Encouraging safety inspections of other types of equipment by creating a record providing evidence that a person doing the inspection actually visited each component that must be inspected has utility in many other applications other than the transportation industry. The concept is also useful in confirming the safe operating condition of machinery and components in other sy
Brinton Brett A.
Brinton, Jr. William
Lugash Richard
Manegold Eric S.
Mayer Daniel R.
Anderson Ronald M.
Barlow John
Lau Tung
Zonar Compliance Systems, LLC
LandOfFree
System and process to ensure performance of mandated safety... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with System and process to ensure performance of mandated safety..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and System and process to ensure performance of mandated safety... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3124498