One of the greatest calibration myths is that there is an easy solution to finding all the calibrations needed to repair a vehicle, according to an Emerging Technologies Committee panel that spoke at a Collision Industry Conference (CIC) meeting held Wednesday in Richmond, Virginia. 

Dan Risley, CIC Chairman, said research has shown that 90% of all direct repair program (DRP) claims have at least one calibration scan but only 30% have at least one calibration. 

Scott VanHulle, I-CAR repairability technical support team and OEM relations manager, said a lot of people want to rely on “easy buttons” and when those buttons don’t show a calibration is needed, they decide they don’t have to do the calibration. 

“When it comes to ADAS or safety inspections, or anything, everyone is just going so fast that they miss a lot of different pieces that they shouldn’t be,” VanHulle said. 

When the CIC audience was asked how they identify calibrations, 41% said they rely on OEM service information only. 

“This group is probably ahead of the curve on OEM information,” VanHulle said.

He said it is important that the group educates the rest of the industry. 

“What are the pitfalls for using some of the easy buttons? It’s the information lag,” Van Hulle said.

VanHulle also said using build data as an accurate source is another big misnomer. 

“It varies widely between OEMs,” VanHulle said. 

Chris Chesney, Repairify vice president of industry training, said vehicles built during or immediately after the COVID-19 pandemic are one example of why build data can be inaccurate. He said some vehicles were shipped without modules because of a shortage. 

“That module may not have made it back onto the car,” Chesney said. 

Greg Peeters, Car ADAS Solutions CEO, said software can help identify calibrations during estimating. 

“There isn’t a perfect scrub tool and it’s not a repair tool,” Peeters said. “It is an estimating guide. If you don’t have anything in place, that’s the crux of why only 30% of repaired vehicles have a calibration on them. It can’t be a reactive thing on Friday afternoon or at the end of the month or whatever.” 

Chesney said the systems on the market are very good at identifying the vast majority of vehicles. 

“It’s a small percentage that don’t but it’s those small percentage that’ll catch you,” Chesney said. 

The service department for asTech’s adasThink works quickly to address calls or emails about issues found in the system, Chesney said. 

“The team researches the issue immediately the same day, if not the same hour, because we understand you’re at the point of attack and you’ve got to answer that question quickly so you can get the estimate updated or the calibration performed,” Chesney said. 

He said if the issue needs correcting, it is corrected immediately. 

Chesney also said repairers should always road test a vehicle after doing calibrations. He said it is no different than the mechanical space where a vehicle needs to be driven following repairs, such as after replacing brake pads. 

“When you think about this estimate or calibration identification software, it has two major functions,” Peeters said. “The first is to identify based off of what safety systems are on the car and what sensors are on the car. And then the second is to take that information and review the estimate for any interruption in the physical location of that sensor. In other words, was it moved or removed, or impacted in any way? And then look at the procedures of the manufacturer.

“All three of those things have to be physically confirmed by humans, and when you say ‘the easy button,’ it does do a good job. It just gives you that heads up, but it isn’t the final way you’re going to repair that car.” 

Chuck Olsen, AirPro Diagnostics founder and vice president of automotive technology solutions, said diagnostic tools are a nice addition to use and a good reminder of procedures that need to be completed. 

“But you need to take the steps to validate, because at the end of the day, you’ve got to be able to tell the customer or the billpayer, ‘Yes, this vehicle needed this, and these are the reasons why,’” Olsen said. 

Visual inspections are still needed, Olsen said.

He added that confidence levels in tools are rising and there will be fewer debates in the future. 

Peeters added that there are about seven software options on the market today, and each is getting better. 

Chesney said AI is helping advance the tools. 

“Because of the massive amounts of data that are generated by the process of working on these vehicles and calibrating these vehicles, et cetera, you can introduce AI to scrub that information and normalize the data to a point where you can have a higher level of confidence in the report coming back, and it results,” Chesney said. 

DEG Administrator Danny Gredinberg said he’s received questions about P-pages stating there’s a time published for aiming a distance sensor. 

“I think there’s terminology to clear up with aim versus calibrate,” Gredinberg said. “But also, can a shop really be expected to itemize all those not-included operations in an aiming procedure, such as verifying weight, checking levelness of the ground, verifying the distance around the car? Or is that something that should be just part of the process?” 

Chesney said if you are calibrating a forward-facing camera, you are going to hear the word “aiming” often. 

“There are some additional steps for physically aiming certain sensors that sometimes include access time as well,” Peeters said. 

He added that the misuse of words such as aim versus calibration or sensors versus modules can be “horrific” at times. 

“There can be additional labor operations that have to be done before the calibration on that specific sensor, on that specific car,” Peeters said.

IMAGE

Emerging Technologies panel speaks at Collision Industry Conference (CIC) meeting held April 30 in Richmond, Virginia. Teresa Moss/RDN