Redundancy Device for Distributed Nodes via Dynamic Value Exchange
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional redundancy systems for distributed systems, such as vehicle-mounted systems, face high costs due to the requirement of multiple hardware units for error detection and fault redundancy, making it challenging to implement redundancy at a low cost, especially in systems like electric vehicles with multiple battery cells and ECUs.
Innovation Solution
A redundancy device that groups ECUs connected via a network, allowing nodes to exchange input and output data, with each node having a computing unit for computation, a comparing unit for value matching, and a transferring unit to add values when mismatches occur, ensuring redundancy while reducing costs by minimizing hardware requirements.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If a dual comparison system is used for redundancy, then the cost is reduced compared to triple majority decision, but the system cannot determine which hardware is faulty when outputs do not match
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the redundancy verification process into multiple stages: first comparing outputs from two ECUs, then involving a third ECU only when mismatch is detected. This segmentation allows the system to achieve triple-comparison-level fault detection without always requiring three active comparators, thus reducing hardware complexity while maintaining reliability.
Solution Approach 2:
The system dynamically adjusts the redundancy verification process based on comparison results. When outputs match, the system operates in a simple dual-comparison mode. When mismatches occur, it dynamically activates additional verification steps involving other ECUs in the group, transitioning to a more complex verification mode only when necessary.
2Reliability
If a triple majority decision system is used for redundancy, then the system can determine faulty hardware and mask faults, but the cost increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent makes ECUs multi-functional by allowing them to serve both as computation units and as verification units. Each ECU in the group can perform the same function (computation) and also participate in verifying others' outputs. This universality allows the system to achieve triple-majority fault masking capability without dedicating separate hardware solely for verification, thus reducing the total quantity of hardware units needed.
Solution Approach 2:
The ECUs perform self-verification and mutual verification of each other's outputs. Instead of requiring external verification hardware, the system uses the ECUs themselves to verify each other's computation results through output comparison. This self-service approach reduces the need for additional dedicated verification hardware while maintaining fault detection and masking capabilities.
3Reliability
If conventional redundancy methods requiring multiple H/W units are used, then error detection and fault redundancy are achieved, but the cost becomes too high for systems like electric vehicles
Solution Approach 1:
The patent merges the computation function and verification function into the same ECU units. Instead of having separate computation ECUs and verification ECUs, the system combines both functions within the same group of ECUs. Each ECU both computes its own output and verifies other ECUs' outputs, thereby reducing the total hardware quantity while maintaining redundancy and fault detection capabilities.
Solution Approach 2:
The system uses software-based verification processes that copy the computation logic across multiple ECUs. Instead of requiring duplicate hardware for verification, the same computation algorithm is copied and executed by different ECUs, and their outputs are compared. This software copying approach achieves redundancy with minimal additional hardware.
Data Source
AI summary
A computing unit computes a computed value for input data. A comparing unit compares the computed value of the computing unit with a computed value of another node which is included in an input/output set. An output unit outputs the computed value as output data of a node itself when the result of the comparison by the comparing unit shows that the computed value matches either one of computed values. When the computed value does not match any one of the computed values of other nodes, a transferring unit adds the computed value of the node itself to the input/output set, and transfers the input/output set to another node.