CH657220A5 - DAMAGE DETECTION SHEET FOR DETERMINING THE REPAIR COSTS FOR BODY DAMAGE TO VEHICLES, ESPECIALLY AUTOMOTIVE. - Google Patents

Description

The invention relates to a damage registration sheet for determining the repair costs for body damage to vehicles, in particular automobiles.

Before starting the repair of a car damaged by a collision or otherwise, the damage to the vehicle is generally checked with the aim of making a decision about the repair work involved and the repair costs incurred. This is particularly the case if the repair costs are carried out by someone else, e.g. by the vehicle owner, e.g. an insurance company that must be paid. If e.g. A damage assessor should inspect every damaged car carefully, this is very expensive and time-consuming, which means that in practice only the damage is checked to a certain minimum, at the expense of serious damage and damage that is difficult to access.

A method is therefore required for a simplified determination of the repair costs for the simpler damages, i.e. for not too difficult body damage, which currently accounts for about 60% of the total damage, with this method it is not necessary to have the damaged vehicle checked by a qualified expert and only an external check is required, which provides check data that is simple and can be easily transferred to a location different from the inspection location and processed there.

It is therefore an object of the invention to provide a damage recording sheet for determining the repair costs for body damage to vehicles, in particular automobiles, which enables simple and quick operation.

This object is achieved according to the invention by the features in the characterizing part of claim 1.

Embodiments are described in the dependent claims.

This creates a tool for quickly determining the repair costs for individual body parts or surface parts on the basis of the visible, measurable extent of external damage, by determining the extent of the external damage, converting it into surface units and the number of surface units determined in this way with a predetermined cost factor per Area unit multiplied, the cost factor being derived from available data according to the area size of the outer damage of individual, damaged body parts or surface parts and the associated repair costs.

In particular, an aid for determining the repair costs of motor vehicles is created by (1) schematically processing the outer surface sections of a motor vehicle; one (2) divides the outer surface sections into predetermined zones of approximately the same area; (3) preselected zones of the outer surface sections are determined in which an external damage most likely also leads to an internal damage; one (4) measures the depth of the deepest bump in each of the damaged areas; (5) the repair costs for each damaged outer surface section are calculated by multiplying the number of damaged zones by a predetermined cost factor per zone, the predetermined cost factor being assigned by assigning existing repair cost data for the surface section containing the zones or by renewing costs of the surface section if the number of damaged zones exceed a maximum value, and the maximum value is determined by assigning existing repair data for the individual surface section to the damaged zone number for the individual surface section; (6) for each subsection of the surface with a selected damaged area, the product is formed from the depth and the number of damaged zones determined according to step (4) and this product is compared with at least a maximum value, which indicates an additional repair measure, whereby the Maximum value determined by assigning existing repair data for the individual surface section to such a product for the individual surface section,

if the product is not less than the maximum value product, the costs for the additional repair measure are added, taking into account the repair costs calculated according to step (5) for the individual surface section; and (7) determining an internal repair repair cost in each surface section with a preselected damaged area by multiplying the depth of the deepest dent in the preselected damaged area by a predetermined cost per unit depth for the surface section, by determining the predetermined cost Assignment of existing repair cost data for the individual surface section with a depth corresponding to the deepest dent in the individual surface section, and one usually adds up the repair costs of all damaged surface sections and this sum the repair or renewal costs for the repair or renewal of the body parts, such as, for example Bumper or headlights etc., added.

The invention is therefore based on the fact that a comparatively simple relationship has been found between the extent of the external damage and the depth of the deformation on the one hand and the true repair costs on the other. Surprisingly, it has been found that the repair costs, which are comparatively easy to calculate for an external damage (such as a damaged fender, a damaged door, a damaged front side, etc.) for an internal inspection, cannot be calculated by an external inspection detectable damage (such as a damaged inner front, an inner door sill part, a door handle, etc.) must be added to the above-mentioned largest dent depth for damage in certain selected body areas. It was found that it is sufficient for the front or the rear and the sides of the body, as far as the corresponding sides comprise one of the selected areas and such an area has been damaged, to determine the greatest bulge depth.

5

10th

15

20th

25th

30th

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

3rd

657 220

The additional repair costs occur in the form of extra costs and in the form of additional repair measures.

The pure extra costs occur for each specific greatest dent depth, it being found that it is possible to calculate the product as the product of the largest determined dent depth and a statistically found cost factor for the associated body part, e.g. the front, to get.

The additional repair measures are essentially divided into two types. In the first type, this means that a repair measure for an outer body part or surface part, such as an outer front, which results from the extent of damage to the individual part or the surface part, to an expensive alternative, e.g. from judging to exchanging. In the second type, this means that an inner body part, the damage of which cannot be determined by an external inspection, must be repaired by straightening or replacement. An example of such a single part is a door spar.

It was found that an additional repair measure is a function of the product of the determined or measured greatest dent depth and the extent of the damage associated or associated with it. For damage to the front side, according to the above-mentioned product, a repair measure, which includes the extent of the damage and which includes straightening the outer front side, can be replaced by a repair measure which involves exchanging the outer front side and straightening the inner front side or exchanging the outer and the inside front covers, change. For damage to one side, e.g. a fender and a door near the door spar, the product can, according to the above, result in a pure extra repair measure in the form of straightening or replacing the door spar, while the repair measures for the fender and the door remain unchanged.

It follows from this that the repair costs for a damaged body part or a surface part are calculated taking into account the specific extent of the damage to the body part or surface part and taking into account possible additional repair measures which concern the body part or surface part and which are obtained from the relationships described above .

According to the invention, it has also surprisingly been found that the repair costs (without taking into account possible additional repair costs) for a damaged body part or surface part can be calculated from the product of a cost factor and the extent of the damage to the individual part or surface part in question, the cost factor derived from stored values for repairs on passenger vehicles. This applies up to a maximum cost limit at which the change from straightening to replacing or reinstalling (i.e. re-welding a replacement body part) of the individual part or surface part occurs (which can also be obtained directly from a possible additional repair measure).

In order to calculate the repair costs of a damaged repair part or surface part that are not burdened with any additional repair measures, the outer extent of the damage is in this way set with limit or maximum values for the extent of damage for various possible repair alternatives, e.g. Straightening, exchanging and reinserting, which is derived from stored repairs, compared. The assigned repair alternative is selected based on the result of this comparison.

Since about 80% of the damage to passenger cars, e.g. when using the invention in Sweden, including damage to the front and / or rear sections of passenger vehicles with a front engine, it was found that according to an advantageous embodiment of the invention the greatest dent depth of the damage on the front and rear of the passenger car determines that for the damage on the front side a repair measure, such as Straightening and / or replacing the outer and / or the inner fronts, as a function of the product of the determined greatest depth of damage to the front and the extent of the damage to the front, the function determining the maximum values for the different repair measures, the product extent X Depth - by using existing, collected repair data for passenger cars it is assigned that one can calculate the cost of the damage according to its external extent taking into account the repair i5 measure for the damage to the front, as determined above, that the cost of the rear damage is determined by extent and depth, and that one adds extra costs for the depth of the damage to the front and extra costs for the damage to the rear, the extra costs for the damage to the front and the rear directly adding the greatest depth of damage to the correspond to the page in question nd are related to the relationships obtained from automobile repair costs. In this way, it was found that in the 25 cases here, the additional repair costs for deep damage to the rear section are pure extra costs (which are directly proportional to the measured largest dent depth), whereas deep damage to the front section includes additional repair costs, which one Combination of the costs of the additional repair measure and the pure extra costs are.

It should be emphasized that the relationships mentioned above, the cost factors and the limit or maximum values, e.g. can be obtained by checking the damage to a number of 35 motor vehicles in the customary manner and using the method according to the invention, the repair costs determined in the usual way then being statistically analyzed in relation to the extent of damage and the determined dent depth determined according to the invention. In this case, the multiple regression analysis known to the person skilled in the art is used in an advantageous manner, which therefore need not be discussed in more detail here.

Of course, one can determine the relationships, cost factors and limit or maximum values mentioned above for each passenger car model, but it has surprisingly been found that by determining and using the relationships, the cost factors and the limit or maximum values, the several different models of the same type, ie, which have essentially the same basic construction as, for example a normal two-door sedan achieves good accuracy.

The cost factors used are of course dependent on the ongoing hourly labor costs and the ongoing spare parts costs for the corresponding vehicle model. However, these 55 parameters can be taken into account in a simple and ordinary manner by a person skilled in the art by appropriately correcting the cost formula obtained from the above analysis.

Furthermore, a particularly advantageous way of determining the extent of the damage to predetermined outer body parts or surface parts and the bulge depth is possible. A schematic diagram of the vehicle is used, which has various suitable projections, e.g. a front view, a rear view, a 65 view of the two sides and a view from above. In the diagram, the outer surface of the passenger car is developed, i.e. the previously determined outer body parts or surface parts are marked and in

657 220

4th

divided a suitable number of zones of substantially the same size. The zones preferably consist of squares arranged in a network. The zones that form part of the selected areas mentioned above that cause internal damage to the body when deformed are specially marked, making them easy to find and accurately measure the dent depth required to determine additional repair costs.

To determine the extent of the external damage, the zones or squares that correspond to the actual extent of the damage are marked. The total number of these zones or squares in the diagram for each body part or surface part are noted and represent a measure of the extent of damage to the corresponding single part or unit.

Surprisingly, it was found that one and the same schematic diagram can be used for different vehicle models of the same basic construction. In this case, however, the number of damage zones marked during the inspection for a single part or surface part must be standardized as the actual size of the single part or surface part before using the diagram to calculate the repair costs for the single part or surface part in question differs significantly from the size of the corresponding number of zones or squares on the diagram in question.

The extent of the damage determined in this way by an expert (in the form of numerical values) and the measured bulge depth, possibly together with the repair measures recommended by the expert for each body part or surface part, can simply be reported or, e.g. be transmitted to central processing by telephone for very fast determination of the repair costs in accordance with the principles set out above. This determination can advantageously be carried out by means of an electronic computer in which all the necessary data for the various motor vehicle types or models calculated for the costs are stored. Thus, if the check is carried out in a repair workshop and the expert has made a request for the total repair costs (based on the recommended repair measures submitted), the present invention enables a very simple, but at the same time very precise check of the total repair costs according to the request and everyone recommended repair measures.

The damage registration sheet, combined with simple damage of ordinary difficulty, therefore offers the following advantages:

Faster, easier and cheaper damage inspection; easier handling of damage cases for repair shops and insurance companies;

more effective cost control;

the cases do not have to be checked by loss experts from the insurance companies, but can also be handled by other people; Cost developments and process developments can be taken into account on an ongoing basis; and it can be used in workshops for a quick and sufficient request from the vehicle owner.

In the following, the invention will be explained in detail using an exemplary embodiment with reference to the drawing, which shows a schematic diagram of a two-door sedan.

The diagram is a complete schematic illustration of the outer vehicle body and comprises five views: A view A of the vehicle from the front;

a view B of the vehicle from behind;

a view C of the vehicle from above;

a view D of the vehicle from the left; and a view E of the vehicle from the right.

In each view, a square network is placed over the individual parts or surface parts. The square network is applied in such a way that all outer sides of the body surfaces are divided into a suitable number of squares. The items for which the cost can be considered constant if they are damaged (and need to be replaced), such as Windows, headlights, bumpers and taillights, however, are identified as units and have one square per spare part detail.

View A, which relates to the front section or zone of the vehicle, is divided into the following individual parts or surface parts: front 1, right headlight 2 (one square), left headlight 3 (one square) and front bumper 4 (two squares) .

View B, which relates to the rear or zone of the vehicle, is divided into the following individual parts or surface parts: rear 5, right rear light 6 (a square), left rear light 7 (a square) and rear bumper 8 (two squares).

View C, which relates to the upward-facing body surfaces of the vehicle, is divided into the following individual parts or surface parts: front hood 9, front upper body section 10, windshield 11 (one square), roof 12, rear window 13 (one square), rear upper body section 14 and rear hood 15.

Views D and E relate to the left and right side surfaces of the vehicle and are divided into the following individual parts or surface parts: left and right front fenders 16 and 17, left and right doors 18 and 19, left and right rear Fenders 20 and 21, left and right threshold 22 and 23 and roof rails 24.

In each of views A, B, D and E, dots or other suitable symbols are used to mark the square areas in which a greatest dent depth has been measured for the front, the back and the two side sections if there is damage in these areas. The surfaces include body sections in which, due to experience, internal damage occurs when denting.

The diagram consisting of the figures is suitably part of a check form which also has a list of all the above mentioned parts or surface parts and preferably also certain additional parts or parts which, if damaged, have to be replaced, e.g. the grill or the bumper horns. The design of the list is such that both the number of damage squares for each individual part or unit, as well as a recommendation of the repair measure to be carried out, e.g. can contain an R (judge), a B (exchange) and an S (reinsert). The form also includes an arrangement for noting the greatest bump depth for the front, back, right, and left sides. The form is also divided up in a suitable manner for noting further essential vehicle data or other data related to the inspection or type of damage.

In views A, C and D, an example of a damaged car due to an external inspection of a repair shop check is checked. From view A it can be seen that the front damage comprises a front bumper 4 (a square), a left headlight (a square) and the front (six squares). From view C one can see that the damage to the front hood 9 also comprises six squares and from view D one can see that the damage to the left front fender 16 comprises eleven squares. Taking into account the front sections can

5

10th

15

20th

25th

30th

35

• 10th

45

50

55

60

65

5

657 220

the greatest bulge depth at the marked point 25 below the headlight 3 in the area marked by a point, it being assumed that it should be 5 cm here. This value is recorded in the damage form, which is then to be sent to an insurance company, possibly together with the proposed repair measures. These proposed repair measures can e.g. B (i.e. exchange) for the bumper unit; the left headlight 3, the outer front side and the left front fender 16 and R (straightening) for the front hood 9.

Based on the above data, the insurance company can now calculate the repair costs as follows (assuming that it is not necessary to standardize the squares).

The cost of replacing the front bumper unit and front headlamp is obtained directly from the price lists.

Taking into account the front side 1 with a damage dimension of six squares, it is first checked which repair measure is necessary. The number of squares in the present case is believed to be below the maximum number of squares of damage that require the front to be replaced instead of the front being straightened. However, any internal damage that may be present must also be taken into account. For this purpose, the product of the number of damage squares (six) and the greatest dent depth of the front (5 cm) is formed. The result of the product 5x6 = 30, whereby it should be assumed that this value is above the limit value, which indicates additional costs - higher repair measures in the form of replacement of the front, but is below the maximum value, the additional costs - higher repair measures in the form of replacement of the outer and inner front displays. In this case, it is concluded that the repair costs of the front side 1 result from the replacement costs of the outer front side, plus the additional costs for the depth of the damage, which are 5 times the cost factor (costs per cm of dent depth) for the front section.

In the case of the front fender 16, it is similarly first examined which repair measure is necessary due to the extent of the damage to eleven squares. In the present case, it is believed that the number of squares is above the maximum number of damage squares that indicate replacement of the front fender instead of alignment. The cost of repairing the front fender 16 thus corresponds to the replacement costs, which can be found directly in the price list.

Finally, it is examined which repair measure is necessary due to the extent of damage of six squares of the front hood 9. It is believed that in the present case, this number of squares is below the number of damage squares that indicate replacement of the front hood instead of straightening. The repair costs for the front hood are accordingly 6 times the cost factor applicable for the front hood (cost per square to be aligned). The costs can now be determined by adding the individually calculated costs.

It can be seen that the method described above can be used to simply check every repair measure proposed by the repair shop, as well as to check a repair offer submitted by a repair shop. It should be noted that a damage inspection form according to the present invention may be further supplemented by a number of photographs of the damage taken in the repair shop, the photographs providing a good check of the extent and depth of the damage values as shown on the Form have been made possible, thereby avoiding exaggeration or other incorrectness.

example

Actual reference values should be given based on the damage shown in the diagram, which was generally explained above. The values refer to a two-door Opel Rekord sedan, year of construction 1976, model 031176 taking into account the cost situation in Sweden Nov. 1976. The values refer to various damaged vehicle parts.

15 1.) Front bumper: replacement costs skr 135

2.) Left headlight: replacement costs skr 284

3.) Front: Cost factor for straightening skr 27.75 per square. The maximum value for replacing the outer front is nine (9). The maximum exchange value

20 of the outer and inner front is eighty (80). The replacement costs for the outer front face are skr 845. The replacement costs for the inner and outer front faces are skr 994. The cost factor for the depth of the damage is skr 38.68 per cm of dent depth. 25 A degree of damage of six (6) would in itself indicate a repair measure in the form of straightening or aligning, since six (6) is less than the limit value nine (9). Together with the measured front depth of five (5) cm, however, the product is 6 X 5 = 30. This value 30 is higher than the above-mentioned first limit value nine (9), which indicates that the front outside has been replaced, instead of being aligned. Also, since the product is less than the second limit of eighty (80) mentioned above, the product indicates that the inner front 35 need not be replaced. Correspondingly, the repair costs for the damage to the front are the sum of the replacement costs for the front of skr 845 and the extra costs for the depth of damage of skr 5 x 38.68, i.e. skr 845+ 193 = 1038.

40 4.) Left front fender: The cost factor for straightening is skr 27.75 per square. The maximum exchange value is six (6). The replacement costs are skr 421. A predetermined value for the extent of damage of eleven (11) indicates the replacement, since eleven (11) is not less than 45 six (6). The calculated repair costs for the left front fender are therefore the replacement costs, i.e. they amount to skr 421.

5.) Front hood: The cost factor for straightening is skr 27.75 per square. The limit for the exchange is eight (8). A certain damage level of six (6) indicates judging because six (6) is less than eight (8). The calculated repair costs for the front hood are therefore eight (8) times the target costs per square, i.e. skr 8x27.75 = skr 222.

55 The repair costs thus result from the sum of the five individual costs, namely 135 + 284 + 1038 + 421 + 222 = skr 2100, plus the initial examination costs for this passenger car, which amount to skr 189. The total repair costs are 2100 + 189 = skr 2289. 60 It should be noted that these total costs do not include the spraying costs. However, since the spraying costs do not depend on the possible depth of damage, but only on the extent of each damaged individual part, regardless of whether it was straightened or replaced, these costs can easily be obtained from the list of spraying costs. In the present example, the spraying costs are skr 450, which means that the total repair costs amount to 2289 + 450 = skr 2739.

657 220

6

It should also be noted that a maximum value indicating replacement of a damaged item in lieu of alignment may be significantly below a value or number of damaged squares, which means that the item alignment cost is substantially the same as the replacement cost. This is because, depending on the circumstances and the nature of the damage, the alignment and skill, etc., an exchange is usually performed with a smaller number of damaged squares. I.e. however, also that a workshop may recommend alignment, for example, although the calculation according to the invention indicates an exchange, and if alignment is cheaper than the exchange, the workshop recommendation should of course be followed.

If you want to at least partially enter the method according to the invention into an electronic computer, it is recommended to observe the following points in the normal course of the system:

1.) The first input value of the system is a code number that indicates the model of the passenger car that is the subject of a cost estimate. If after checking the model memory it turns out that the model is not included in the system, the calculation is interrupted.

2.) From the form on which the extent of the damage and the deformation is marked, the number of damaged squares (ie zones) per partial area and the proposed measure (see point 4 below)) according to the conditions described as also entered the depth of the deepest bump on the marked areas of the front and back, as well as on the sides if there are any bumps on these sides.

The system checks the given data for acceptability within the given limits and, in the event of an inequality, the calculation is interrupted.

3.) If one and the same form is used for the input values for different vehicle models that have outer body parts with different surfaces, the

Standardization of the number of squares (or other zones) per part performed at this stage.

4.) For each body part with different alternative repair measures (alignment, replacement, reinstallation

5 etc.) a limit value is specified.

This limit determines the number of squares (or other shaped zones) where a particular repair measure is statistically the most likely.

These limit values were determined on the basis of statistical values io collected by body repair workshops.

In other words, the limit values indicate the point at which the cheaper repair measure compared to a more expensive alternative has to withdraw due to the extent of the damage.

5.) After the limit value check has taken place, the necessary repair measure is carried out according to the principle of the cheapest possible alternative, as indicated by the limit value check and by means of input data.

20 was determined.

NOTE: The system accordingly agrees to a proposed repair measure regardless of the threshold if the proposed repair measure is feasible at a lower cost.

25 6.) Finally, a cost calculation is carried out using the cost formula, the repair measures are determined and the costs for spraying are determined.

The estimated total repair cost can then be used for the review or as an offer for the work in question 3o.

The same steps can, of course, be carried out with or without mechanical, electrical or electronic equipment, but usually time and labor costs can be reduced considerably if one or more steps of the process which are not manual or procedural, i.e. pure calculations, require to be reduced by means of machines and / or memories and stored programs, so that each calculation or relationship does not have to be repeated every time by hand.

v

1 sheet of drawings

Claims (3)

657 220 1. Damage registration sheet for determining the repair costs for body damage to vehicles, characterized in that it has a front view (A), rear view (B), side view (D, E) and top view (C) of the vehicle surface, at least part of which in each View (A, B, C, D, E) of the visible vehicle surface is divided into a plurality of unit areas by means of a regular grid and at least one zone of the vehicle surface is marked in at least one of the views in order to indicate unit areas of the grid corresponding to this zone of the vehicle surface, in which normally occurs when the outer surface of the vehicle is deformed in this zone. 2. Damage registration sheet according to claim 1, characterized in that the different views are orthogonal views of the vehicle. 2nd PATENT CLAIMS 3. Damage registration sheet according to one of claims 1 or 2, characterized in that the surface units are squares of the grid superimposed on the vehicle surfaces.