No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

I.  INTRODUCTIONToday's high end cars contain more than ten distributed audio and video ECUs such as visual sensors driver assistance cameras, DVD player, and audio sources such as FM and HD-radio systems. These in-vehicle devices are currently interconnected by different automotive specific network technologies such as Media Oriented System Transport (MOST), Controller Area Network (CAN), and Local Interconnect Network (LIN) [1] that provide limited transmission capacities. Point-to-point links realized by analogue Color Video Blanking Signal (CVBS) cables and Low-Voltage Differential Signaling (LVDS) wires are additionally used to transmit real-time video streams from driver assistance camera systems. The application of different network technologies and point-to-point links leads to an inflexible network architecture and a complex cable harness in the car which is expensive and requires a high validation and management effort. Due to the growing demand for new applications in the driver assistance and multimedia fields, the in-vehicle network will become even more complex and costly in the near future. Thus, traditional automotive network technologies are no longer suitable [1].Network systems in vehicles represent very high complex systems. Hence, topologies typically become very complex and the layout criticality is a major topic to be considered. Analysis of almost one hundred different topologies of vehicle manufactures worldwide led to the conclusion that less than 50 % of these layouts had been non-critical, if tolerances of all the parameters involved had been considered in their realistic worst-case scenario. Current vehicle network systems consist of various communication protocol networks such as CAN high speed, CAN low speed, LIN, FlexRay, MOST and others. The major challenge that network developers, dealing with the physical layer implementation, are facing is related to the signal integrity of the communication system. Meaning even if the logical set up and evaluation of the network is fine, the physics can make enormous problems and destroy the complete communication. Since each protocol has its own specification with respect to the physical layer implementation, all of them have their individual issues that the developer must take care of when creating the network.[2]. The paper is organized as follows. Section II gives an insight into the In-Vehicle Network. Section III explains the vehicle communication system. Section IV explains the different types of network topologies. Section V explains the CANoe tool. Section VI explains the CAPL language. Section VII explains the implementation. The paper is concluded in section VIII. II. IN-VEHICLE NETWORKAs automakers are incorporating more and more advanced features into vehicles, there is a growing need for enhanced processing power. S. Channon and P. Miller [3] estimate that the number of microprocessors per vehicle will increase exponentially and by the end of year 2010, the number of microprocessors in any high end vehicle will be 250 [4]. As...

LTE, an acronym for Long Term Evolution is a standard developed by the 3 rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) for high peak data rates with a downlink speed of up to 150 megabits per second (Mbps) and an uplink speed of up to 50 Mbps. LTE is a way for cellular communications to operate at that high data rate. Routing is an important operation performed to route the data packets from the source node to destination node in any network. Hence there is a need for a protocol/algorithm to determine the best way to transfer the data. Routing protocols determine the best route to transfer data from one node to another. In this paper, a comparative study of the routing protocols for the application layer of LTE network is done. The protocols analyzed are Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR) and Routing Information Protocol (RIP). A study and comparison of the parameters are done based on the simulation results. The different performance metrics analyzed are Packet delivery ratio, Throughput, Average end-to-end delay and Jitter. The simulation results show that the best routing protocol w.r.t all the parameters analyzed is RIP.