Next generation wired intra-vehicle networks, a review

Tuohy, Shane; Glavin, Martin; Jones, Edward; Trivedi, Mohan M.; Kilmartin, Liam

doi:10.1109/ivs.2013.6629561

Cited by 23 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nowadays, both protocols are deemed as very promising contenders for the future in-vehicle network Ethernet standard, although some are more favor for AVB than TTEthernet [24], [45].…”

Section: B Automotive Ethernet Fault Detection Capabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

A qualitative comparison of FlexRay and Ethernet in vehicle networks

Zeng

Khalid

Chowdhury

2015

2015 IEEE 28th Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering (CCECE)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a qualitative study of FlexRay and Ethernet in in-vehicle communication networks. Although both protocols have experienced fast growth in the past years, they still have some important deficiencies that deserve attention. This qualitative study has not only outlined the important shortcomings of in-vehicle FlexRay and Ethernet, but also identified their unique competitive edges, respectively. Intensive analyses of both protocols are carried out from three key perspectives: system cost, data transmission capacity and fault detection capability. Some improving approaches have also been pointed out. It is revealed that at the current stage FlexRay is better than Ethernet in transmitting time critical signals deterministically, but has higher cost and complexity. Ethernet, though less deterministic than FlexRay, possesses much greater bandwidth and can transmit data at quite small latency and jitter. This qualitative study has indicated that both protocols need further improvement to meet the requirements of future in-vehicle networks, yet Ethernet may lead the development and expand faster. I. INTRODUCTIONEncoded communication channels have long been used to transmit signals among different controllers in in-vehicle networks. The typical motivations for this fact are: 1) To reduce cable cost. Since wire harness subsystem is the third most expensive and heaviest subsystem after engine and chassis [1], adopting coded communication is obviously a wise strategy to follow. 2) To save package space. As vehicles are built smaller in size but more enriched in functions, routing of wire harness has become increasingly challenging. 3) To cater the demands for higher bandwidth. Nowadays some luxury cars, even not fully featured, already have more than 70 ECUs and 2500 signals to transmit [2], letting alone accommodating the rising demands from ADAS and infotainment systems. 4) To enhance communication safety. Digital transmission has unparalleled advantages in resisting external disturbance over traditional point-to-point analog wires. Moreover, digital signals can be encrypted to further enhance data security in transmission.After LIN (Local Interconnect Network) and CAN (Controller Area Network), FlexRay and Ethernet are two most recently developed wired in-vehicle communication networks. FlexRay was firstly public released in 2004 and has gradually become an ISO standard after 2009. FlexRay is commonly understood as the protocol for X-by-Wire applications, and can provide deterministic communication for chassis and vehicle dynamic controls. BMW is the first

show abstract

“…Nowadays, both protocols are deemed as very promising contenders for the future in-vehicle network Ethernet standard, although some are more favor for AVB than TTEthernet [24], [45].…”

Section: B Automotive Ethernet Fault Detection Capabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

A qualitative comparison of FlexRay and Ethernet in vehicle networks

Zeng

Khalid

Chowdhury

2015

2015 IEEE 28th Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering (CCECE)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To do so, an intra-vehicle communication network should be carefully designed. Wired solutions [16], [17], such as controller area network (CAN) protocol, FlexRay, and TTEthernet, require cable connections between ECU and sensors. Cables and other accessories nowadays can add significant weight (up to 50 kg) to the vehicle mass [12].…”

Section: Intra-vehicle Connectivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Connected Vehicles: Solutions and Challenges

Liu

Cheng

Zhang

et al. 2014

IEEE Internet Things J.

1,086

443

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Providing various wireless connectivities for vehicles enables the communication between vehicles and their internal and external environments. Such a connected vehicle solution is expected to be the next frontier for automotive revolution and the key to the evolution to next generation intelligent transportation systems (ITSs). Moreover, connected vehicles are also the building blocks of emerging Internet of Vehicles (IoV). Extensive research activities and numerous industrial initiatives have paved the way for the coming era of connected vehicles. In this paper, we focus on wireless technologies and potential challenges to provide vehicle-to-x connectivity. In particular, we discuss the challenges and review the state-of-the-art wireless solutions for vehicle-to-sensor, vehicleto-vehicle, vehicle-to-Internet, and vehicle-to-road infrastructure connectivities. We also identify future research issues for building connected vehicles.

show abstract

“…At the time of writing, the question is not if, but when Ethernet will become a standard technology in cars [101,28,96]. For instance, Continental expects to start series production of Ethernet-capable control units as soon as in 2015 [12].…”

Section: Automotive Ethernetmentioning

confidence: 99%

In-Vehicle Communication Networks: A Historical Perspective and Review

deLong¹

2017

Industrial Communication Technology Handbook

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of networks for communications between the Electronic Control Units (ECU) of a vehicle in production cars dates from the beginning of the 90s. The specic requirements of the dierent car domains have led to the development of a large number of automotive networks such as LIN, CAN, CAN FD, FlexRay, MOST, automotive Ethernet AVB, etc.. This report rst introduces the context of in-vehicle embedded systems and, in particular, the requirements imposed on the communication systems. Then, a review of the most widely used, as well as the emerging automotive networks is given. Next, the current eorts of the automotive industry on middleware technologies which may be of great help in mastering the heterogeneity, are reviewed, with a special focus on the proposals of the AUTOSAR consortium. Finally, we highlight future trends in the development of automotive communication systems. * This technical report is an updated version of two earlier review papers on automotive networks: N.

show abstract

Next generation wired intra-vehicle networks, a review

Cited by 23 publications

References 38 publications

A qualitative comparison of FlexRay and Ethernet in vehicle networks

A qualitative comparison of FlexRay and Ethernet in vehicle networks

Connected Vehicles: Solutions and Challenges

In-Vehicle Communication Networks: A Historical Perspective and Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About