NASTF Meeting November 7, 2002

1
NASTF MeetingNovember 7, 2002

• Equipment/Tool Committee Report

2
What is ETIs Involvement

• ETI was asked to help identify 3rd party service
  provider information gaps
• OBD protocol information
• Reprogramming information
• ETI is helping as an advisor and recorder, . . .
  not as a policeman or enforcer
• This is an OEM initiated program designed to
  mitigate the need for future information access
  legislation.

3
Sample Matrix Headings
4
OBD Capabilities and Information Availability
Assessment Matrices

• Matrix process began 2/25/02
• OEMs Included
• US Domestic GM, Ford, Chrysler/Jeep
• Asian Daewoo, Honda/Acura, Hyundai, Isuzu, Kia,
  Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan/Infinity, Subaru,
  Suzuki and Toyota/Lexus
• European BMW, Jaguar, Land Rover, Mercedes-Benz,
  Porsche, Saab, VW, Volvo, Aston Martin
• OEMs Not Included
• Alfa Romeo, Am General, Avanti, Bentley, Bertone,
  Checker, Daihatsu, Delorean, Ferrari, Fiat,
  International, Lamborghini, Lancia, Lotus,
  Maserati, MG, Peugeot, Renault, Rolls Royce,
  Shelby, Sterling, Triumph, Yugo

5
OBD Capabilities and Information Availability
Assessment Matrices

• Two Approaches Taken, For
• OEMs Providing OBD Information to ETI on Regular
  Basis
• Identify holes in capabilities, rather than
  identifying all systems for which information is
  already complete
• Opportunity to go beyond 6 initial systems (Eng,
  Trans, etc.), when other system capabilities were
  already provided
• OEMs Not Providing OBD Information Regularly
• Furnished examples of various systems, and
  system capabilities (not definitive)
• Need OEMs to flesh-out system variations

6
Overview Of Program Phases

• Phase 1 Identify Systems Capabilities
  (Completed)
• Phase 2 Identify Information Availability
  (Completed)
• Phase 3 OEM Input (on-going)
• Review Systems System Capabilities
• Review Information Availability Add Target
  Dates
• Phase 4 Publish Results

7
Good News Results

• There are 23 targeted Engineering groups
• Information required to build aftermarket scan
  tool solutions is provided for a large portion of
  the American Fleet
• 19 or 83 of the groups provided feedback to our
  requests
• 16 or 70 of the groups updated the systems
  capability portion of our request

8
Bad News Results

• 14 or 61 of the groups have not set target dates
  for filling known information gaps.
• Only 2 companies have provided information that
  have not done so in the past.

9
Lets look at a Summary by Company

• The Status update page can be found at,
• http//etools.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid1876
  

10
Work to be done

• Phase 5 Work on Reprogramming Column
• J2534 requirement not in place until 2004
• Column must allow for 96-03 retro J2534
• Many OEMs not sure what technique will be used
  and for what systems
• Involve whole equipment subcommittee, not just
  scan tool companies
• Continuous Matrix Updates
• As new Model Year information is added
• As overlooked systems or OEMs are discovered
• As missing documentation is delivered
• Expand beyond Engine, Trans, ABS, Airbag, HVAC,
  Cruise,. . . Body systems for example
• A copy of a sample database written by Ford can
  be found at http//etools.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?
  pageid1874

11
Some OEMS have asked Why should we provide
information if scan tool manufacturers do not use
it in their tools?

• Aftermarket scan tools attempt to reach many
  market segments and many price points, not just
  one. (business case must be made)
• It would be impossible to include absolutely
  everything even if everything were available.
  (moving target)

12
Business Case Implementation Factors
13
Benefits of Common Format

• Advantages Include
• Reduced Implementation Errors Higher Quality
• Ability to Assess Completeness
• Faster Time to Market
• More Complete Systems Coverage
• Less Complaints from Service Industry
• Less Legislation