Vehicle Controller Coding and Cross-Verification via Checksum Comparison
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing methods for coding and checking vehicle controllers are inefficient and prone to errors, particularly in ensuring safety levels as mandated by the ISO 26262 standard, due to the complexity and potential for bit-level errors over time.
Innovation Solution
A method where vehicle parameters, including checksums and function-specific parameters, are coded into a controller and another connected controller, allowing for easy verification and error detection across controllers, ensuring safety compliance by comparing sets of parameters and performing cyclic redundancy checks.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Adaptability or versatility
If vehicle parameters are coded into a controller during manufacture or maintenance, then the controller can be configured for specific vehicle characteristics, but errors may occur over time due to the lengthy coding process and bit-level vulnerabilities
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies preliminary action by pre-calculating and storing checksums alongside the vehicle parameters during the initial coding phase. This allows for immediate error detection without requiring lengthy re-verification processes later, thus maintaining reliability while preserving adaptability.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements feedback mechanisms by continuously monitoring the coded parameters against stored checksums and comparing parameter sets across different controllers. This feedback loop enables automatic detection and reporting of coding errors, ensuring reliability while maintaining the ability to reconfigure controllers as needed.
2Adaptability or versatility
If coding parameters are written to a controller module, then the controller can be customized, but the process is time-consuming and prone to bit-level errors
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies preliminary action by pre-calculating checksums and preparing parameter sets before actual coding operations. This reduces the time required during the coding process itself, as verification data is already available, thus reducing time loss while maintaining customization capabilities.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent replaces manual or sequential verification methods with automated checksum calculation and comparison systems. This substitution of mechanical/sequential processes with automated computational methods significantly reduces coding time while maintaining or improving accuracy.
3Device complexity
If a single controller stores all vehicle parameters, then the system is simple, but there is no independent verification capability
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies segmentation by dividing the verification function into separate components: one controller stores the parameters while another controller independently verifies them using stored checksums. This segmentation provides independent verification capability while maintaining relatively simple overall system structure.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces an intermediary verification mechanism where a second controller acts as an independent verifier. This intermediary compares the first controller's parameters against stored reference data and checksums, providing reliable verification without requiring complex reconfiguration of the primary controller.
4Reliability
If checksums and identification numbers are coded into the controller, then error detection capability is improved, but the coding process becomes more complex
Solution Approach 1:
The patent replaces complex manual error checking procedures with automated checksum calculation and comparison algorithms. This substitution increases reliability through systematic error detection while actually simplifying the coding process by providing automated verification rather than requiring complex manual procedures.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent transforms the error detection approach by changing from no verification or simple verification to systematic checksum-based verification. This parameter change in the verification methodology improves reliability while the automation of the process prevents significant increases in coding complexity.
Data Source
AI summary
Methods and devices for writing or for checking a controller of a vehicle are provided. A first set of vehicle parameters are written into the controller of the vehicle as coding parameters. A second set of vehicle parameters are written in another controller of the vehicle coupled to the controller via a vehicle bus of the vehicle. The first set of vehicle parameters are compared with the second set of vehicle parameters. An error is detected based on the comparing. The vehicle is not started in response to the detected error.