TPMS as the basis for a business model

Tire pressure monitoring is going through an interesting transition. Over the last few months, it became clear that truck fleets are moving forward, and there is now a greater willingness among fleet managers to install tire pressure monitoring systems (TPMS).

The ostensible motivation is increased tire life and better fuel economy. Beyond that, however, there’s a sense among the people promoting these systems that the world is changing and fleets want to keep a much closer track on their vehicles and vehicle systems.

That comes partly from larger fleets who have installed such systems and word is getting around that it is an easy win for fleet managers.

Tire makers slow to understand this market

Tire makers and fleet maintenance providers have been relatively slow to pick up on this. Or maybe the change has happened so quickly that larger companies have been unable to keep track.

Whatever the reason, a series of a smaller companies – employing less than 50 people – have developed good solutions, and the tire makers and others are using that experience and expertise to offer their own TPMS systems, often under licence from these smaller companies.

What is fascinating about this process is the lessons that tire makers can learn about developing teams of software engineers to deliver solutions to their customers. The evidence so far seems to suggest that tire makers are not good at managing software projects.

The best-known of these– at least in the UK and probably worldwide – is TyreWatch.

TyreWatch is the brainchild of Glenn Sherwood and partner Mark Longden.

They set up the new company after their previous project – TrucTyre Fleet Management – was bought by Michelin in October 2017 and merged with Michelin’s TrucTyre business.

The new operation, TyreWatch, is working with Bridgestone’s Webfleet Solutions platform, and also Giti’s UK operation under the Fleet Smart branding.

However, there are others: PressurePro, based in the United States licences its system around the world, but also to a small UK company called ToughTech; WheelySafe in the UK, that has licensed its technology to Michelin and for consumer tires, Nonda in California selling after-market systems under the Zus brand, are examples.

All of these are relatively small companies employing a few tens of people.

Most of them have technologies based around valve-mounted sensors that can be fitted in a few seconds. These are small units weighing a few grams, powered by batteries, that transmit pressure and temperature data to a receiver mounted on or within the vehicle.

In the case of consumer solutions, the in-vehicle control unit is often a mobile phone, whereas in professional solutions, it is more likely to be a dedicated unit that communicates with cloud-based central servers over a cellular network.

The central servers then distribute live data to fleet managers systems – either at fleet headquarters, or maybe to a mobile phone for urgent notifications.

The backroom database might also include an alert system, sending alerts to the driver or fleet manager, in case of a rapid pressure loss.

Technology providers need partners

One of the challenges for these small companies has been to access the small and mid-sized fleets. Even though interest and awareness is growing among the fleet managers, these small TPMS providers simply don’t have the resources to prospect hundreds of fleets only to be rejected in 99 cases out of 100.

The names TyreWatch, Nonda, Wheelysafe or Tough Tech do not have the brand power of Bridgestone, Michelin or even Giti, and the technology providers have found it hard to get replies to their emails, let alone meetings with potential clients.

Meanwhile, the tire companies were slow to identify this need and have found it difficult to develop good solutions for reasons addressed below.

The solution is obvious. Technology companies need to partner with fleet service providers or tire makers, while tire makers need to leverage the technology of the smaller companies.

And this is precisely the outcome.

Sherwood and Longden sold the TrucTyre business to Michelin, and remained with the company for a few months, while Michelin absorbed it into the ATS business.

Now released from the Michelin organisation, Sherwood and Longden have worked with Bridgestone’s Webfleet unit in a new project and are simultaneously working with Truckfile, an independent truck data management and telematics system.

Earlier this year, Giti also revealed that it is launching a TPMS system based on TyreWatch technology.

TyreWatch is targeted at the commercial vehicle market.

Michelin has licensed its name and branding to the Wheelysafe system, which is aimed more at consumers with trailers, while Nonda developed its own system using crowd funding for a consumer-driven aftermarket system. Nonda is using internet marketing, rather than engaging with a tire maker or service provider.

Benefits of TPMS systems

There is a clear business case to install tire pressure monitoring systems – and especially to have the data transmitted to a central facility with low-pressure alerts sent to drivers and others as they occur.

Whether the tire activity is managed by a tire specialist or by the fleet manager, the business case is now well established for service providers who have taken on the risk of tire management.

First, maintaining correct tire pressure can reduce fuel costs and improve tire life. Good tire pressure management can routinely save 3% on fuel costs – and this is typically the entire tire budget for a fleet.

Second, modern logistics businesses expect drivers and tractor units to have maximum uptime within the law. Customers also increasingly expect deliveries to be made within a specified time slot. If a truck suffers unexpected tire problems, this can cost money in terms of time when the truck is off the road, but also more penalties if the delivery is not made according to the contractual time slots.

Even if a tire specialist has a contract to check tire pressures, that takes a non-negligible amount of time. Each vehicle has a number of tires. For each tire, the technician has to locate the valve; remove the cap; attach a pressure gauge; note the result and then remove the gauge and replace the cap. One can estimate that the whole process takes a couple of minutes per tire. On a trailer with three axles and super-single tires, that’s around 15 minutes.

On a tractor unit with two steer- and four drive-tires, it’s another 15 minutes. That’s half an hour per vehicle, even when using super-singles. When the fleet still has double tires on each axle, it could be nearly an hour per vehicle. That is a lot of time, and one technician has no chance of monitoring a 20-vehicle fleet in a single day’s visit.

Even if all tires were measured, visits take place typically every six- to eight-weeks to meet legal requirements.

A tire can sustain a lot of damage and lose a lot of pressure over that time. Once these numbers are presented to fleet managers, the use of an on-line TPMS system becomes something of a no-brainer. Add in the extra benefits of modern intelligent systems and the argument is very clear.

The latest generation of TPMS systems include predictive maintenance functions. That is to say, the sensors measure temperature and pressure every few seconds, automatically. If the sensors detect an unexpected increase in temperature, or loss of pressure, an algorithm can estimate the time until the tire fails. The most advanced systems can calculate whether the next delivery can be achieved before the tire becomes dangerous and also identify a tire service location and automatically book a time slot to repair or replace the tire before it becomes a critical problem.

The savings in fuel economy and tire life will easily pay for the full TPMS system. The extra savings from minimising damage to the vehicle, or other road users due to a tire failure and improved driver uptime and eliminating lost delivery slots make the business case even stronger.

Comparing tires, drivers and vehicles

Possibly the greatest benefit of these big data systems, however, is the capability of comparing many thousands of vehicles, routes, tires and drivers.

Depending on the agreements made with the fleets who operate the vehicles, TyreWatch and its partners have access to considerable amounts of data about fuel efficiency, wear rates, failure rates and other aspects of tire performance.

Among consumers, there is constant demand for good data about which tires last longest. Not only is it expensive to test; no test has yet been devised that can accurately compare wear rates of one tire against another. The prospect of ‘big data’ opens the possibility of gaining meaningful comparisons of tire life data across thousands of different vehicles and drivers.

In the commercial vehicle world, tire lifetimes are even more important, as are tire failure rates. The prospect of online TPMS systems building these databases and permitting meaningful comparisons will further reduce the power of brands when purchasing tires and tire maintenance systems.

Historically, only the most advanced fleets have tracked this data. With these automated systems, however, the databases are automatically populated and updated every second of every day across many thousands of vehicles, routes, drivers and tires.

TyreWatch said it can look at all vehicles of a certain make and model, and compare the fuel efficiency of those fitted with tyre brand A against tire brand B.

Not only that, but it can also look at the lifetime of different tires and furthermore look at the damage rate, or puncture rate of those tires.

Accumulating that kind of data across different vehicles, routes, loading conditions and different climates will be a huge help for tire makers to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of their products under all real-world driving conditions.

Proof of concept

One of the challenges around this process is that none of the business models is tried and tested in the marketplace.

The tire makers and their sub-suppliers are therefore developing new business models and must to prove them in the market place.

This takes time, as the fleets to whom they are selling need time to approve the concept, and if new hardware needs to be developed, that also takes time and money.

Historically, we have seen that one or more companies will develop a concept that can deliver results to clients in the fleet business, and this would then be copied by other tire makers, as they work out what works and what does not.

We don’t expect this to happen in the TPMS/service sector, as much of the profit is in acquiring large amounts of data and in the software to make the information easily accessible and consistent across the various devises and platforms used to access the data.

At the IQPC conference on Intelligent Tire Technology, I’ll be expanding on this article, looking at how TPMS can contribute to new business models as well as TPMS developments in China.

IQPC Intelligent Tire Technology takes place in Leipzig from 26-28 November this year.

https://www.automotive-iq.com/events-automotive-tires

Download the agenda here

 —————-

Disclaimer: this is part of a promotional programme for the IQPC Intelligent tires event, but the organisers have not seen this article prior to publication, and they had no say in the content; nor did they try to influence my views in any way.

This is a cut-down and edited version of an article that first appeared in the June issue of our Global Tire Intelligence newsletter