Engine Safety Interlock for Motorcycles

[posplayr]

There have been various threads discussing various kinds of safety interlocks for clutch, kickstand and neutral.

http://www.thegsresources.com/_forum/showthread.php?t=143674&highlight=safety+interlock

While the GS Suzuki only have the aggravating clutch safety switch, most modern bikes have some combination of logic to protect you from your own harm. The usually thing that I see is that the safety logic is designed to be easy to implement even if it prevents you from doing something that you really want to.

For example on a GS forcing you to pull the clutch to start the bike even if you are in neutral.

On other bikes, not allowing the engine to run with the side stand down, even if you are in neutral.

There are probably other bike safety designs that are equally as frustrating but the truth be told no matter how silly you might think a safety interlock is there are absolutely certain conditions under which you don't want your bike to start or run. The problem is most designs don't just exclude these safety conditions , but because of overly simplified safety designs they also stop you from doing things that you really want to do. Like start a bike with the kick stand down and clutch engaged because you are in fact in neutral and there is no safety issue and you do this all the time while putting your helmet and gloves on.

So while you might only begrudgingly agree that maybe there are some benefits to an interlock, and even if it is only making you just a little bit safer I know that many will still want to opt out because they figure it is just something else to fail and leave you stranded. OK so the risk (of failed interlock) v.s. benefit (of safety) may be tilted more toward the risk of being stranded (because you are a really a good and experienced rider and you just never screw up ).

Well, you have to ask yourself a question; What is likely to happen first? Will the interlock fail and strand you before if keeps you from hurting yourself? Are you that good that you never make a mistake before a piece of gear fails. So this is really a personal decision and given and option of being stranded or of being safer it is kind of a toss up, and many will go for the added risk than to bother with an interlock.

But what if there is no way the interlock will strand you, and it will only "protect you " in the specific situations that you really want it to be there, excluding all the conditions when it would just be in the way. In addition if you are screwing up it will not just cut your engine or stop you from cranking, but it will also tell you why with a buzzer. Is that really that bad?

What if you were trying to install a motorcycle alarm, and there is this new option for remote start. Do you want to really install that without an effective way to prevent starts that will end up with the bike laying on the ground?

In addition, motorcycle alarms usually have a wire provided to immobilize your ignition when activated. When the wire goes to +12V the bike can't run. How do you disable your old UJM bike that doesn't have an ECU without running a relay that is going to draw a bunch of power. Well this is also something that the Engine Safety Interlock can easily provide.

So this thread is really a small market survey for what you think you would pay for such a device. Read the description below and pick a price that you think you would pay for something like this. I'll use the information to decide if I build any of these beyond a few prototypes.

[Steve]

Are you soliciting opinions for a new product?

I accept the attempt at "safety" interlocks when they make sense, but I also accept them only when they are already on the bike. I doubt that I would ever pay anything to add something like that to a bike that is already functioning rather well.

You want complexity in an interlock system? Take a look at all the interlocks on my Wing.
- No need to push or pull anything if the bike is in neutral, just push the starter button. If it is not in neutral, you have to pull the clutch.
- If it is in neutral, you can use the side stand. If you put it in gear with the side stand down or lower the stand while in gear, the engine dies.
- To engage Reverse (), the engine has to be running and the transmission in neutral, then pull the reverse lever and hit the starter button.
- Cruise contol is only available in fourth or fifth gears, and can be cancelled by hitting either brake, pulling the clutch, manually closing the throttle or turning the switch OFF.
- The on-board air compressor can only be used to fill the shocks when the bike is not moving. Can't even read the pressure if the bike is moving.

Yeah, most of these have nothing to do with a GS, but it does show how some of the different systems can interract.

.

[posplayr]

Are you soliciting opinions for a new product?

Yeah, most of these have nothing to do with a GS, but it does show how some of the different systems can interract.

.

Yes Steve, I was soliciting opinions, as I have a need and I think there is a general need if not a general want.

- No need to push or pull anything if the bike is in neutral, just push the starter button. If it is not in neutral, you have to pull the clutch.
- If it is in neutral, you can use the side stand. If you put it in gear with the side stand down or lower the stand while in gear, the engine dies.

If you notice that there is no need for your Wing to kill the engine if the side stand goes down while you are in gear and the clutch is in. However your Wings response to the other hazard condition is exactly as I describe. So I would differ with your characterization of complexity. The ESI would only operate in the two modes I describe and it would be even more specific than your Wing without causing a Hazard (excluding other uninstalled equipment interlocks). I did not worry about reverse of cruise control as few bikes are instrumented with those.

I will agree that your Wing is more of a car than a motorcycle when it comes to electronics and interlocks. Most motorcycles manufacturers can't get the interlocks correct without having owners want to disable them. This ESI is a straight forward approach to interlock implementation for only those conditions that are actual hazards.

Here is another barbaric implementation of a neutral/side stand/clutch safety interlock that probably doesn't work reliably or doesn't work as desired.

[simon kuether]

The only safety device on my bike is inside my helmet .
What more do you need ????

Cheers , Simon .

[posplayr]

The only safety device on my bike is inside my helmet .
What more do you need ????

Cheers , Simon .

I drink occasionally; like now

[simon kuether]

I drink occasionally; like now

Bugger .
I'm at work . Not drinking .

Cheers , Simon .

[Dogma]

I think I would be a lot more likely to leave the interlocks in place if the switches were more reliable. I've never heard of safety interlocks failing because of the logic circuitry, but I think the issue is whether they are intrusive or not.

Even implemented well, it would have to be mighty cheap, I think. What are the odds of adding an engine kill for when the bike is not upright (dropped or crashed)? What's can be done about switches that are unreliable or not present from the factory?

[tkent02]

The ony one that makes sense to me is having the engine not run with the sidestand down. The F800GS is like that. Makes perfect sense, you don't want an engine to idle at an angle due to oiling reasons, you can't ride off with the stand down, good idea. It's not like you need to warm it up or anything, you can ride it normally the instant it starts, the FI is great for that. Still it would suck if the sidestand switch broke leaving you stuck out in the boonies someplace, especially if you didn't know how to bypass it.
I would prefer to have the little rubber foot on the sidestand like the old Hondas, so if you go into corner with the stand down it just folds up harmlessly.

All the start interlock crap is useless, if you hit the starter with the bike in gear inadvertently it kicks forward an inch, no big deal. It's not like a car which can maim a pedestrian if it does that. Not being able to start the engine NOW, in gear if necessary can be a serious safety hazard. Being able to start it in gear is great if you have a broken clutch cable, or a broken left hand.

[posplayr]

I think I would be a lot more likely to leave the interlocks in place if the switches were more reliable. I've never heard of safety interlocks failing because of the logic circuitry, but I think the issue is whether they are intrusive or not.

Even implemented well, it would have to be mighty cheap, I think. What are the odds of adding an engine kill for when the bike is not upright (dropped or crashed)? What's can be done about switches that are unreliable or not present from the factory?

Yes the principle reason for an add-on ESI is because the factor ones are usually intrusive. To detect the more specific Hazard conditions requires more sensing. All the inputs shown as simple switches to ground other than the engine immobilize from an alarm system.

As an aftermarket add-on this is really only feasible if the user takes the time to insure their switches are in proper order. A little spray of detOxit or perhaps dielectric grease to insure movement should be all that is needed. All the switch inputs are switch to ground that carry essentially zero currents. Of course if you are piggy backing off of a side stand switch that activates a light there is more sensitivity.

But if you are concerned enough about safety to install a ESI then you will have to go the extra mile and make sure that you spray a little DeOxit into your existing switches every 10 years. Other than 30 years of neglect, I can't really really see switches being the issue. A bigger burden might be to install a switch where one doesn't already exist.

The UPRIGHT enable is a good idea. The device would use an electronic inclinometer (i.e. MEMS accelerometer) but would require that the device be installed up right or in some specific orientation. It would probably need some logic conditioning so that your bike doesn't cut out if you hit a bump in the road which is going to increase the cost and or perhaps force a CPU solution.

[posplayr]

The ony one that makes sense to me is having the engine not run with the sidestand down. The F800GS is like that. Makes perfect sense, you don't want an engine to idle at an angle due to oiling reasons, you can't ride off with the stand down, good idea. It's not like you need to warm it up or anything, you can ride it normally the instant it starts, the FI is great for that. Still it would suck if the sidestand switch broke leaving you stuck out in the boonies someplace, especially if you didn't know how to bypass it.
I would prefer to have the little rubber foot on the sidestand like the old Hondas, so if you go into corner with the stand down it just folds up harmlessly.

All the start interlock crap is useless, if you hit the starter with the bike in gear inadvertently it kicks forward an inch, no big deal. It's not like a car which can maim a pedestrian if it does that. Not being able to start the engine NOW, in gear if necessary can be a serious safety hazard. Being able to start it in gear is great if you have a broken clutch cable, or a broken left hand.

Making custom universal kickstands like an old Hondas is probably never going to happen So yes I see even a staunch minimalist can be convinced there are some reasons to have hazard detection

I guess there are some reasons for wanting to start a motorcycle in gear, but typically this would only be in a situation where you are wrecked or stranded and you have time to pull the seat off and disable the ESI. If you cant get the seat off, then maybe as a mater of safety you also should not be riding.

I really don't see much need to be sitting in traffic and want to start your bike while the transmission is coupled to the rear tire. (i.e. clutch engaged and in gear). Yes it is possible for a switch to fail while you are in traffic, making the box think your your clutch is out but with any amount of maintenance on the switch there are far more things that can occur to immobilize your bike in traffic.

It is possible to modify the disable jumper concept so that the two safety functions can be independently disabled; I think this would closer meet your requirements.

[posplayr]

This a post from over at the XS650 forum; Probably something to add into the mix. A lot of the Electrosport stators seem to be coming out with extra wires on the stator. I'm guessing that is to support this run detect feature.

Not an expert on this, but I believe some earlier models used a 4th (yellow) wire off the stator to sense if the engine is running, to disengage the starter before it can be hurt, faster than the typical rider's reaction time...

Yes I forgot about the "running detect" off of the stator. It would be pretty easy to detect the stator voltage but the timing of how fast to do this might be a little tricky.

On the other hand a typical stator (for any PMA bike) has to be able to put out 15V at idle so that with a couple volts of R/R drops it can still charge at 12.8V. So the stator output will pretty much rise linearly from 0 volts when the engine is not rotating to 15V at what ever the idle is.

Just thinking this through it is probably sufficient to detect about 7.5V as that is going to correspond to 1/2 of idle speed which is likely well above the starter speed. I might be possible to just set the voltage to some fixed level and it would essentially work for any bike with a +12V system. Once detected (engine at 1/2 idle speed), it would be straightforward to cutout the START signal.

Thanks I'll add that "feature". It would certainly be of value if you were doing a remote start (assuming it is not already there):thumbsup:

[tkent02]

Making custom universal kickstands like an old Hondas is probably never going to happen So yes I see even a staunch minimalist can be convinced there are some reasons to have hazard detection

I guess there are some reasons for wanting to start a motorcycle in gear, but typically this would only be in a situation where you are wrecked or stranded and you have time to pull the seat off and disable the ESI. If you cant get the seat off, then maybe as a mater of safety you also should not be riding.

I really don't see much need to be sitting in traffic and want to start your bike while the transmission is coupled to the rear tire. (i.e. clutch engaged and in gear). Yes it is possible for a switch to fail while you are in traffic, making the box think your your clutch is out but with any amount of maintenance on the switch there are far more things that can occur to immobilize your bike in traffic.

It is possible to modify the disable jumper concept so that the two safety functions can be independently disabled; I think this would closer meet your requirements.

I have done the Honda rubber foot thing on a few bikes with a chunk of tire rubber and a hose clamp. Tested it by going into left turns with the stand down. It works.

I'm all in favor of your SSPB, but for liability reasons I wouldn't touch this with someone else's ten foot pole. Think of how many ways a sleazy lawyer could blame an accident on you, even if your stuff worked perfectly.

[posplayr]

I have done the Honda rubber foot thing on a few bikes with a chunk of tire rubber and a hose clamp. Tested it by going into left turns with the stand down. It works.

I'm all in favor of your SSPB, but for liability reasons I wouldn't touch this with someone else's ten foot pole. Think of how many ways a sleazy lawyer could blame an accident on you, even if your stuff worked perfectly.

The only way there woudl be sleazy lawyers is if there was any momey and a ESI will never be an big seller. This is strickly very limited production to a few interest parties.

BTW this has helped me brainstorm and I'm working on other related stuff now.

[850GT_Rider]

I think the biggest obstacles would be mounting switches where none exist now, or might be unreliable to begin with.

My '80 GS850G has no side stand switch. Creating a mount for one, then running wiring etc, would be a beech. My clutch interlock switch was disabled long ago. Got tired of mucking with it.

The logic is only as good as the I/O

[tkent02]

BTW this has helped me brainstorm and I'm working on other related stuff now.

Can't wait….