Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The big automotive semiconductor problem

asianometry.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 107 posts

Re: The big automotive semiconductor problem

#11

Post by Retric »

dylan604 wrote: post #10
geocrasher wrote: post #6

This article does a good job outlining why these systems can't just be replaced with a Raspberry Pi or an Arduino: Durability. At one point I was interested in replacing the ECU in my old '88 Suburban. The ECU is probably the only "real" bit of electronics in the whole vehicle. And yet after almost 35 years it's still doing fine. The Arduino based ECU I was looking into, as it turns out, is a great hobby project, but…

The space shuttle used a hardened 386 (or something similar) that cost a bazillion dollars. The drone currently on Mars used commidity off the shelf chips (snapdragon IIRC). The harsh conditions thing is not something to laugh at, but I also think we might have over-engineered somethings a bit.

The surface of Mars being further from the sun and inside an atmosphere has vastly fewer issues with radiation.

Re: The big automotive semiconductor problem

#12

Post by chmod600 »

What devices are left that are fairly normal (that normal people might interact with in a given week), mechanical or electromechanical, have at least modest complexity, and have no microchips?

Locks? Guns? What else?

EDIT: perhaps an extra requirement that it's fairly durable, i.e. easily lasts ten years of normal use.

EDIT2: maybe it should also fit the requirement that it's a current model in production and that you don't have to go out of your way to find a non-semiconductor version.

Re: The big automotive semiconductor problem

#13

Post by geerlingguy »

Retric wrote: post #11
dylan604 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The space shuttle used a hardened 386 (or something similar) that cost a bazillion dollars. The drone currently on Mars used commidity off the shelf chips (snapdragon IIRC). The harsh conditions thing is not something to laugh at, but I also think we might have over-engineered somethings a bit.

The surface of Mars being further from the sun and inside an atmosphere has vastly fewer issues with radiation.

But more issues with temperature swings—ideally radiation wouldn't be the main concern here in Earth's atmosphere.

Re: The big automotive semiconductor problem

#14

Post by Isinlor »

bayindirh wrote: post #7
turbinerneiter wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does functional integration interfere with robustness?

The discrete components are designed, tested and verified after a long stint and their specs are frozen. It's a bit like space hardware. You verify an older CPU design can work reliably in space, and certify that processor. Then, you use the same foundation for a decade or so. It's same with automotive industry. You have a well defined and certified stack from Delco, Bosch, Delphi, etc. and you can trust that hardwar…

SpaceX works around that by using consumer grade stuff and just replicating it 3 times. Tesla also managed to handle issues with supply shortages very well.

The old practices are just not good enough.

Re: The big automotive semiconductor problem

#15

Post by Isinlor »

dylan604 wrote: post #10
geocrasher wrote: post #6

This article does a good job outlining why these systems can't just be replaced with a Raspberry Pi or an Arduino: Durability. At one point I was interested in replacing the ECU in my old '88 Suburban. The ECU is probably the only "real" bit of electronics in the whole vehicle. And yet after almost 35 years it's still doing fine. The Arduino based ECU I was looking into, as it turns out, is a great hobby project, but…

The space shuttle used a hardened 386 (or something similar) that cost a bazillion dollars. The drone currently on Mars used commidity off the shelf chips (snapdragon IIRC). The harsh conditions thing is not something to laugh at, but I also think we might have over-engineered somethings a bit.

SpaceX is also using commodity hardware, but they duplicate it 3x with majority vote for error correction.

Re: The big automotive semiconductor problem

#16

Post by Symmetry »

Retric wrote: post #11
dylan604 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The space shuttle used a hardened 386 (or something similar) that cost a bazillion dollars. The drone currently on Mars used commidity off the shelf chips (snapdragon IIRC). The harsh conditions thing is not something to laugh at, but I also think we might have over-engineered somethings a bit.

The surface of Mars being further from the sun and inside an atmosphere has vastly fewer issues with radiation.

In both cases you're well protected against the solar wind by distance and atmosphere in the case of the Mars rover and by the Van Allen belts in the case of the Space Shuttle. But both still have to worry about cosmic rays. Mars's thin atmosphere helps a bit with that but not nearly as much as you'd like.

EDIT: I suspect a lot of what lets you use Snapdragons in the rover is the idea of making error resistant systems rather than error resistent devices. The same thing that let us replace a single $10,000 hard driver with ten $100 hard drives in a RAID with the same performance and reliability despite the individual drives being much worse.

Re: The big automotive semiconductor problem

#17

Post by Retric »

geerlingguy wrote: post #13
Retric wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The surface of Mars being further from the sun and inside an atmosphere has vastly fewer issues with radiation.

But more issues with temperature swings—ideally radiation wouldn't be the main concern here in Earth's atmosphere.

Rovers regulate internal temperatures to keep electronics happy. Ex: https://mars.nasa.gov/mer/mission/rover/temperature/

Re: The big automotive semiconductor problem

#18

Post by stevenwoo »

chmod600 wrote: post #12

What devices are left that are fairly normal (that normal people might interact with in a given week), mechanical or electromechanical, have at least modest complexity, and have no microchips? Locks? Guns? What else? EDIT: perhaps an extra requirement that it's fairly durable, i.e. easily lasts ten years of normal use. EDIT2: maybe it should also fit the requirement that it's a current model in production and that yo…

Is gas water heater complex enough?

Re: The big automotive semiconductor problem

#19

Post by addingnumbers »

Retric wrote: post #11
dylan604 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The space shuttle used a hardened 386 (or something similar) that cost a bazillion dollars. The drone currently on Mars used commidity off the shelf chips (snapdragon IIRC). The harsh conditions thing is not something to laugh at, but I also think we might have over-engineered somethings a bit.

The surface of Mars being further from the sun and inside an atmosphere has vastly fewer issues with radiation.

We can't teleport something from one atmosphere to another, though. It's a long trip.

Re: The big automotive semiconductor problem

#20

Post by JumpCrisscross »

Isinlor wrote: post #14
bayindirh wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The discrete components are designed, tested and verified after a long stint and their specs are frozen. It's a bit like space hardware. You verify an older CPU design can work reliably in space, and certify that processor. Then, you use the same foundation for a decade or so. It's same with automotive industry. You have a well defined and certified stack from Delco, Bosch, Delphi, etc. and you can trust that hardwar…

SpaceX works around that by using consumer grade stuff and just replicating it 3 times. Tesla also managed to handle issues with supply shortages very well. The old practices are just not good enough.

> SpaceX works around that by using consumer grade stuff and just replicating it 3 times

Falcons get refurbished after short flights. That reduces the emphasis on durability. Redundancy defends against random errors, reducing the need for radiation hardening. It does less against wear and tear.

Post reply on HN