Видео

They don't necessarily need their own ethernet protocol for priority as each controller will have 2 or more etherloop connections that are all direct connections to the other controllers. There will always be at least two paths from one controller to the rest of the controllers on the car and it means that they can all operate at full speed. When a controller has two packets going out at the same time it will send them in priority order. Each unboxed part has at least 1 controller and at least 2 etherloop connections.

Anyone out there know if the higher voltage limits data rate?

having critical vehicle systems living in the same controllers as any other system terrifies me

Etherloop is baby of EtherCat. Why not 24v system to prevent electric shock

Wow, everyone gets so caught up in “how cool” the cars look when the really impressive stuff is unseen. Cheers to all the amazing engineers pushing car design forward

So, replacing a real time networking system with a shared network? That could be bad, very bad. Imagine a streaming signal hogging the pipe, resulting in signals not reaching your brakes. Real-time networking is no joke, and is not optional when it comes to safety.

The problem with merging all your control units into a smaller group means if you merge the headlights controller and the windshield wiper controller , your headlights go out when your wipers die? The question that came up in a discussion with my son about this. He is smart, I am not so much.

decent content, the voice sounds like it's going through puberty tho.

Can't understand number of positive comments. Why you mix together CAN+12v/ethernet+48v? CAN is not single wire system as you mentioned, some misleading comments on can bus "drawbacks" as well...

Then there's Rivian that just abandoned ethernet they were using instead of can bus due to the vampire drain. I'm curious about this because they weren't able to shut down modules on the ethernet bus.

Perfect!!!

Great video!! Brilliant Tesla!

Kiss goodbye to DIY repairs and independent mechanics! 😢

Brilliant! Thank you!

If I designed a car, it would be using ether loop just like Tesla.

How is that true? ALL the car manufacturers had to go begging to Tesla to used their EV Superchargers! No prices were disclosed but Tesla is rumored to have made billions from the deals! Tesla CLEARLY has patents.

If they really wanted to reduce wieght why not simplyfy the car and get rid of countless processors and sensors all with wires and connectors mainly there to enable Teslas wast information gathering of the way YOU drive and what not.

to be honest i think they would need a GPU to hook to each 1 of those controllers plus the loop between each adjacent controller to shorten the time(lag) similar to a star network but with redundant connection to each controller in a full duplex mode

So, with steer by wire and brake by wire tesla needs some redundancy (for example 3x controllers). With this setup and general-purpose controllers, is there the possibility that when a controller fails the other ones can "take over" its function, thus reducing the need of redundancy?

Excellent, thanks

Merging the controllers at 4:20 (less controllers is a benefit) Is in contrast of what’s implied at 10:48 (more controllers is better)

In bicycle riding most riders prefer carbon over magnesium not because it is much lighter but also because it is much stiffer. Magnesium dampens and that loses energy in Parts that need to be stiff. So I dont know if this applies to car wheels but its probably different.

Great video!!!

Is Tesla going to open-source Etherloop?

ETER LOOP is a nifty name change for something that already has been going on in auto mfr for about or more than 25 year (by wire throttle controls GM 98’) this is an expansion on that if I understand you right. At about that time it was announced that in 3-4 yrs things at Ford would be shifting to single wire 36-42 volt systems, which fizzled. But from the perspective of “electric drive”. any voltage would be feasible/doable, and the higher the voltage always means -the less wire, -the end goal, and the separate controllers will get it there no doubt. I would imagine that NTSB will have a “say so” on by-wire (Ethernet) control of subsystems like brakes, steering, exterior lighting, and is most likely why crossbody wiring on braking will remain. Your comments on the impossibility of CAN on subassemblies is not so however because in cases like that a bulkhead or “Cannonplugs” are. And have been utilized in just such situations since that very issue arose on high volume assembly lines for offplant subassemblies in aircraft at the beginning of WWII. Each sub assembly comes pre-wired with a multi pinned connector. A bulkhead connector. And at some point, if not already Tesla will do the same thing just with 42 volt instead of 12.

One of the other reasons to move to 48v would be prep for moving to ethernet, as they can then easily use POE to deliver power to the controllers.

I''m sure they created etherloop because CANBUS doesn't have enough bandwidth to integrate AI and video demands the controllers need to do their work.

Excellent video. I'm writing a report on that topic and 100% agree with everything said. I know some Chinese OEMs are also deploying zonal architecture, but I'm not sure if those are interconnected via an Ethernet backbone. By the way, you forgot to mention "TSN" (Time Sensitive Networking), a key technology to make Automotive ethernet deterministic and suitable for safety-critical applications

The best part is no part. The future of vehicle wiring harnesses is... wireless. I've worked on the concept.

It does not really matter since Tesla will be out of business in about two years.

Why do we need all this crap in cars? I have an idea let’s build a normal car, like they used to make back in the 60s and early 70s. Oh yea that’s right our communist government won’t allow that. We have to put all this useless crap in a car or we can’t sell it anymore!

I can see with teslas software designing hardware approach can really make them apprehensive to show the design of their vehicle... Until the machines that build the car are designed in such a way to produce a car as cheaply as possible. It wouldn't be a good idea to show the shape of a 'model 2' until they know how to make it

Model railroads' DCC control system is the same as Tesla's Ether Loop System - identical in design and implementation. Neither requires a closed loop. Data is PULSED out to a train car, engine or trackside accessory. That device completes the operation and returns a "device mode changed" signal. Many trains and devices are controlled with one controller and TWO DC wires - INDIVIDUALLY - with variable pulses.

One benefit of the Etherloop that wasn't mentioned is it's a network which means the signal has more than one possible wiring route - If there's a problem with a specific cable there's a back-up route that'd still transmit the signal (there's no single point of failure (when it comes to wiring)

Origami stainless steel Cyber truck would make an excellent refuse collection/bin wagon. It looks stupid beyond belief. Stupid cars for stupid people.

Tesla probably take at least some inspirations from the very successful AFDX en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avionics_Full-Duplex_Switched_Ethernet

Just convincing supply chains to 48 volt components was tough

Many people buying tsunami of Chinese EV’s in Europe. Germany vehicle companies want tariffs as Europeans buying Chinese as cheaper, better batteries, and Chinese build better software platforms vs German autos. Yes, EV’s more a software platform which Big 3 in USA slowly starting to understand.

It’s all about production cost and speed

EV’s will be cheaper and faster to build. Many manufacturers will catch up to Tesla but they will be always ahead with speed of manufacturing. Their lines close to fully automated

Right now Cybertruck is a niche vehicle. Tesla can try new tech. Big 3 trucks are their primary movers. They must be really careful as already too many recalls work thousands of vehicles. Many time Tesla can fix things via software as they offer both FOTA and SOTA OTA updates. Most other car manufacturers still Dreaming of the above. Tesla/Space X have jumped started so many technologies. Thx Musk! It’s not quarterly earnings but thinking further down the road. Remember also Tesla is an energy company with battery storage for the grid and charging stations

I am sure Space X helps Tesla tech. NASA has stated space x really understands hardware/software. You would think an individual WiFi system in a car would eliminate wires. Maybe Starlink in the car would help

Aerospace has done critical Ethernet bases for a while (ARINC 664, AFDX, etc.). Tesla just needs to look at how it's been done there.

Thank you for making this video which is like a professional quality training material. One aspect you did not cover is the risk of making everything software-based. A failure or defect could have more far reaching consequences for safety.

Thanks Jordan. A next logical step would be to eliminate the network wiring completely. This can be done in at least two different ways: 1) Provide only a 'ring main' power loop and send and receive serial data down it at gigabit speeds. 2) Use the same main power loop and send only failsafe signals down it (emergency braking, steering, horn for example) but send all other data wirelessly. Alternatively to a ring main, which provides two routes for all currents, and perhaps at the expense of needing more wiring and having only one route for current, a main power bus plus spurs to each corner system could be used.

Awesome video Jordan. It just shows how Tesla is innovating ant non stop basis. It was very interesting to see how connectors were changed on 48V architectures. Much cheaper to make and easier to isolate from water ingress i believe.

We have a pair of LFP batteries from GivEnergy. Our software allows for a minimum SOC which can be as low as 4%, and adjusted up to 100%, but there is no direct way to change the top SOC from 100%. GivEnergy state that LFP cells should be recharged to 100% daily. The best which can be done is either to reduce recharging power or to reduce the recharging time.This leads to trying to juggle those parameters with varying daily battery use to give an approximation to ~ 75% maximum SOC. This is clearly not optimal. Furthermore, even when using the recommended recharging regime, our two batteries (on one inverter) sit at different indicated SOC throughout each day. One pack will reach 100% while the other might indicate 93% as they do right now. The difference in SOC between each pack can be more than 20% during discharge periods. There was a 15% difference last night, seconds before recharging began. GivEnergy are adamant that their regime is correct. They also told me that they have no way to use two separate inverters, one for each battery, without running into issues with hardware and software. So my questions are: That is the best way to use this software to try to prolong LFP battery life? What is the best way to persuade a manufacturer (or more likely their official outlet) to add an option to reduce maximum SOC for most of the time, using a simple slider or dial in the interface? How can I obtain a closer SOC balance between the two batteries with the inverter running on its default software? In other words, is there any better software for the job?

I wonder if it is using EtherCAT? en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EtherCAT

Thanks for the great video. One correction: modern cars, including Teslas, have multiple CAN busses.

The information about Ethernet network collisions at the 16min mark is not accurate. Modern Ethernet is a switched network and does not have collisions. It hasn't worked that way since the 1990s.