Oakes: How human element impacts alignment, ADAS

I was teaching a class on emerging technologies when the topic of advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) popped up.

A technician told everyone how he recently recalibrated a LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) unit on a Honda. The tech went on to say that he purchased stands and targets from a well-known distributor and that his business increased ten-fold.

That's great! When all is said and done — and there is a reboot from electrified to hydrogen fuel to whatever — there will always be ADAS to autonomy.

About another 30 minutes deeper into the class, the technician told everyone how static ADAS calibration/recalibration can be performed — anywhere. Then, went on to say how he recalibrated the LiDAR unit in the shop's parking lot.

WAIT A MINUTE! The parking lot?!

That's when I had to ask all about their ADAS setup:

• "Was the stand level?"
• "Was the ground level?"
• "Was the vehicle level?"
• "How could you tell?"

Of course, the stand was leveled to the ground via the bubble levels on the unit, but what about the Honda?

(Crickets heard in the background.)

And it's not the technician's fault in entirety. Many companies that manufacture the equipment employ other technicians-turned-trainers — who have not been exposed to the elements of ADAS and the one-degree rule as I like to call it — and pass the word to the new equipment owner (not necessarily an automotive technician) and relay their interpretation of the rules of engagement.

And what's more about this ADAS training? It's usually a one-day event.

This included the technician's recalibrating the LiDAR. He was under the impression that the cone-reflector was the key "level" component. The vehicle was secondary. And in this case, the triangulation was close enough — within specifications — to reset.

So how do recently introduced technicians receive the proper training when it comes to ADAS calibration/recalibration?

Like all things automotive: training through education. You don't need to take every class online or in-person, but you need to keep up with the ever-changing technology by reading, listening and watching presentations — especially regarding your equipment. Keep up with ADAS updates by qualified sources, only.

Another issue that's showing up more and more is alignment triangulation inaccuracies.

The alignment technician "skipping" the preliminary inspection — no test drive, just driving onto the rack — no "shake-down" and setting the angles, then letting it go.

We need to re-educate our service advisers on the importance of adding time for these processes to happen for a successful alignment calibration/recalibration.

And why are we not checking the ride-height? In days gone by, we had to look-up the specs. Today, the aligner gives us the data and tells us where to measure. (Talk about handing us the data on a silver platter.)

These specs need to be checked — and if necessary — corrected before proceeding. Technicians need to remember that when it comes to either dynamic or static calibration/recalibration, the triangulation point of the vehicle is programmed finitely.

A car or light truck that has the incorrect ride height will be looking for an alternative spot on the road ahead; equipment may/may not function properly per OE.

Why would it work? While this is all within millimeters, there's the human element. The adjustment angle may just be on the cusp of the values.

Or then again, I have heard — we've all heard — the horror stories where an individual has "altered" the adjustment (more/less distance) and tricked the ADAS sensor into calibration/recalibration, "clean" post-scan.

How can the going-forward professional account for the previous person "fudging the numbers?"

It goes back to every time an ADAS calibration/recalibration is performed, an alignment — in its entirety — is performed: pre-post test drive, pre-post scan, "shake-down" ride height, SAI/IA, camber/caster/toe corrections, center SAS, etc.

Then: document, document, document. It's the right thing to do.