» SPECIAL REPORT
£ The use of robots now accelerates testing of Ford’s Transit van chassis, which will be available for school-bus bodies by next year. An unlimited number of repeats are possible until company engineers are satisfied with the results. Robots also allow Ford to develop even more challenging durability tests to build tougher vehicles.
GETTING TESTY WRITTEN BY JULIE METEA D
ue to its valued cargo, a school bus has more safety regulation and testing requirements than other niche vehicles. Bringing a bus to market involves long testing and verification processes for both the component sys-
tems, as well as the whole vehicle before it ever hits the road. All manufacturers need to make school buses that both match
transforming technology standards and meet evolving government safety standards. Additionally, the product needs to stand up to normal use, while incurring minimal warranty claims, and hitting the ROI point between customer satisfaction and profitability. “It’s one thing to comply, but it’s better to exceed those stan-
dards,” said Steve Girardin, president and CEO of Micro Bird, Inc. “Ten we have to make sure that we have the consistency and repeatability in the assembly of buses for each customer.” Trough years of vehicle regulation, manufacturing best practices and the cause-and-effects of real driving, vehicle testing has evolved into an intricate network of check points at many levels, where com- ponents and the final assembly are verified for a particular reason.
A PLETHORA OF TESTING Engineers make verifications through multi-year vehicle testing
programs. Some test findings need only a fix on the spot. Others may 48 School Transportation News August 2013
require an extensive rethinking of how a part or set of parts function. Common vehicle testing categories, for both OEs and system supliers, fall within the verticals of safety, performance, maintainability and reli- ability, fuel economy and emissions, and structural integrity and noise. While safety is the number one test category, manufacturers are
increasingly testing for total cost of vehicle ownership. For example, Tomas Built Buses uses both internal and independent laboratory testing for ownership value in fuel efficiency (traditional and alter- native), durability, maintenance, and low repair costs. “Tere is so much that goes into total cost of ownership. Luckily
we can use many different aspects of our vehicle testing to continu- ously improve our buses to ensure the lowest total cost of ownership and the highest quality product for our customers,” said Paul Start, market growth development manager for Tomas Built.
INNOVATION IN VEHICLE TESTING Vehicle testing methods continually incorporate more innovation
and technology. For example, Ford’s all-new full-size Transit van chassis, which launches for the school bus industry next year, is currently the guinea pig in the industry’s first robotic test-driving program for durability and driver comfort. “Some of the tests we do on our commercial trucks are so stren-
SCHOOL-BUS MANUFACTURERS UNDERGO RIGOROUS SAFETY TESTING AND CERTIFICATIONS TO ENSURE THEIR VEHICLES MEET THE REPUTATION OF YELLOW-BUS STRONG
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76