Ever more electronics technology is being integrated into luxury automobiles such as automated parking, and soon pedestrian protection will be integrated based on a stereo video camera.
Other innovations are intelligent headlight control, integrated cruise assist, traffic jam assist, automatic park assist, and pedestrian protection, just to name a few safety solutions that are coming that will make roads safer with more integrated electronics.
One example of this is the Bosch Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC). A radar sensor monitors the road situations ahead of the vehicle. A radar transmitter sends out signals reflected by objects in front of the vehicle. The reflected signal is received by the auto and calculates the distance, direction, and relative speed of the vehicle ahead. ACC predicts the course of the vehicle in which it is installed and makes decisions on whether vehicles on the road ahead are relevant for distance control.
Bosch has also developed a Mid-Range Radar Sensor (MRR), which includes a rear-facing version as well as the front-facing sensor as a more cost-effective and scalable design. These designs use the approved worldwide automotive frequency of 76 GHz to 77 GHz. Its antenna is capable of ranges up to 160 meters (MRR) or 100 meters (MRR rear) with a field view of as much as 45 degrees (MRR) or 150 degrees (MRR rear).
We will soon be seeing features like night vision systems with thermal imaging, which will need sensor conditioning and CCD image processing integration; active cabin noise suppression with a system similar to noise-cancelling headphones; advanced battery power management systems; driver alertness monitoring systems that will look at eye movements and blinking rates of the driver, head movements like nods and tilt, facial expressions via non-invasive cameras — all of these and more will need more sophisticated sensor and analog integration with microcontroller and software.
The integration will be challenging in this relatively harsh environment of an automobile. What new innovations do you see coming in automobiles in the near future that will challenge integrated electronics?
In the meantime, check out some images from how systems like the ACC work. Please click the photo to start the image gallery.
(Source: US Dept. of Transportation)
@Steve great topic thanks for sharing it, every year traffic accidents kill about 37,000 people in US alone, with human error as the main contriburing factor, I believe a well-designed, more intelligent technology could be a big help for reducing traffic accidents. A technology that would help drivers navigate busy roads and complex highways intersections. We're entering a new age, today's vehicle is in great need of real-time information about road hazards and weather condition, by gathering and using this information we can able to boost fuel efficiency and make life less stressful for vehicle drivers- less stress better driving condition.
I think the future in car safety is vehicle to vehicle communication, the ability to communicate or talks with each others, using wireless technologies such as WiFi links vehicles can now form network to share real-time information about road conditions and weather.
The future vehicle has no crash protection sensor as V2V replaces all traditional sensor components. Communication is acting like sensor, when data includes all information of vehicle. But, in the sad part, all suppliers related to sensor need to get a different direction.
All main causes for car accidents come from one simple design flaw: cars need Car Drivers . LOL.
In my opinion putting too many sensors and “intelligence” inside a car could eventually contribute to what in many countries constitute the main car accidents cause: driver distraction. Drivers would get even more distracted by being too confident in the fact that all that onboard electronic will take care of any possible danger or menace to his/her safety.
I am for technology, but if only one small piece has an issue, the whole system can be a nightmare to diagnose – without having to go to the dealer. After 10 years of owning a car, problems can quickly develop that may not have to do with the sensors, but with the wiring connections – which a dealer would most likely interpret as sensor and go the expensive repair path.
Ahh, the days of the air-cooled engine where problems are simple as: too much gas or not enough, too much spark or not enough.
A few engineer retrofits bicycle and scooter into more power transportation for a short distance trip. In traditional way, bicycle might be changed to tricycle with motor with sensor. There is a less nightmare for maintenance.
What new innovations do you see coming in automobiles in the near future that will challenge integrated electronics?
My understanding is that most of the guys doing this are pure computer science geeks. They will most likely pursue the program from the lens of computer science. More codes, more FPGAs and more space to waste. It is not likely you will see ADI, TI, etc soon helping out. So, the integration paradigm may not be close. From Sebastim Thrum to others, it is programming and codes that will get these cars moving. The innovation we need is to have a microelectronics firm with cash to try some of these ideas. Too bad, our business does not generate free cash as you have in software to give room for some of these outlandish technical pursuits.
I agree to this blog and with same with same i guess Component and control illumination is one of the major factor before designing any vehicle with decent look. I recently visited Auto expo 2014 here in India which included display of automotive component and technology. Finally i was confused which one stands best.
@fasmicro you'rer right, its pure computer geeks with some extreme engineering, today's drivers are looking for more, new level of comfort, security, entertainment, safety and consumers features. Right now we're seeing a proliferation of sensors, motors and actuators in control applications, sensors measures gases, wheel speed, vibration and even torque. Actuators drive pumps, heating ventilations, windows roof and many more. These extra power and functionality fuel the need for more computing performance, memory capacity and power efficiency.
@Netcrawl: that's correct, the trend of automotive is in the direction of automation , I think that in the next few years the vehicles will be powered with more and more intelligence. I like that.
@etnapowers: Indeed and I too feel that there will be many new technologies coming in the favour of the automobiles. I feel Artificial Intelligence will play a major role very soon since we have been many sub functions of AI is being implemented currently. Many intelligent cars have been developed by many manufacturers.
I'm reminded of the (relatively simple) software already in play, and the hazards to car OEMs, drivers, and others. A good example is the Toyota unintended acceleration issue which has resulted in many lawsuits. It has come to pass that this was possibly a software issue, and then of course the quesiton of how this was (or even if it could be) validated? More sensors==more software as the others have already said.
I agree with the comments that engineers will view this as just a modeling and coding problem. The real problem is assuring fault tolerance, redundancy, and backup indicators. When the radar goes awry it will be really important that the driver knows it isn't working, and they need to pay attention.
@anthony: Yes I agree on automation solutions that are becoming more smart and more effective, however I think that a balance between automation and human direct control has to be guaranteed, expecially when we talk of safety.
@eafpres: I couldn't agree more with you. I think that not only “When the radar goes awry it will be really important that the driver knows it isn't working, and they need to pay attention” I would add that there must be a control that in case of malfunctioning of the automated control system, gives the direct control to the driver by switching off the safety automated system. The toyota case is a huge example of this fact.
“I would add that there must be a control that in case of malfunctioning of the automated control system, gives the direct control to the driver by switching off the safety automated system”
@etnapowers: I agree with this. Safety has to be a top priority no matter how sophisticated the technology gets. I think the issue here would be to ensure that the drivers don't become too reliant on the technology and are unable to handle a crisis situation when the technology fails.
“I recently visited Auto expo 2014 here in India which included display of automotive component and technology. Finally i was confused which one stands best.”
@samicksha: I think India is still far behind the latest technology in the area of automotive technology and I don't see it becoming common in India in the next few years. Primarily, the roads and infrastructure are also not ready to support the use of such sophisticated vehicle technologies.
I think vechicle-to-vehicle is the next great innovation in the area of automotive technology. However, it requires a great deal of support in terms of infrastructure development. Firstly, there has to be a technology present in the car that allows communication to take place – it can be 3G or WiFi. Secondly, there needs to be a central authority managing the communication and creating the network of cars. Ideally it has to come from the support of the city government.
“I would add that there must be a control that in case of malfunctioning of the automated control system, gives the direct control to the driver by switching off the safety automated system”
There are of course. You cannot have these systems without controls. The question is not if the engineering can be done, the big one is the legal system. If two automated vehicles have an accident, who is at fault? How do you ascertain that especially if they are made by the same company? Who will insure the cars??? There are many challenges associated with this but I do not see the engineering ones as the most difficult
“There are many challenges associated with this but I do not see the engineering ones as the most difficult”
@fasmicro: When it comes to safety, I think the external challenges are more important than the internal challenges like engineering. There will be lots of organizations involved that deal with passenger safety and compliance and it will be difficult to get clearance from them.
@tzubair: I am little skeptical about your comment, i would not say too far but yes i admit updated automobile still need to touch Indian base. One reason i would blame is traffic management and we prefer hatchback car with economic budget, which resists putting all automated and safety measures in vehicle.
Steve: Thanks for the blog post. The car2car communication is one area that has been in talking since a long time.
You mentioned about the Bosch ACC, “Its antenna is capable of ranges up to 160 meters (MRR) or 100 meters…” , Is there any information about the response time of this device?
Say if a car is moving at 100km/hr which is approx 27mts/sec. At this speed the car electronics has to respond atleast in 3.6 sec if there is a sudden accient 100mts ahead of it.
Tzubair: “central authority managing the communication and creating the network of cars”.
Atleast the Europe has a consortium, car-to-car.org, wherein the protocols are defined for car2car communication. Once the protocols are in place the techonology will be evolved around it.
@Tzubair:
You may want to check the latest developments at CES 2014. A few heading in the direction of driveless cars and communication. Check out these BMW Driveless cars, BMW iRemote app, Ford's brake detection.
@amrulah: So the ear of the robots have started isn't it? I think this is a very testing but a dangerous era. A very close observation will have to be made here to make sure that things will not run out of hand
@samicksha: I wouldn't blame the automobiles here for a lack of traffic innovation in India. The vechicles being used are mostly the leading models and equipped with facilities to support the modern C2C communication. It's the road and other related infrastructure that hasn't kept up with it.
“Atleast the Europe has a consortium, car-to-car.org, wherein the protocols are defined for car2car communication. Once the protocols are in place the techonology will be evolved around it. “
@Amrutah: Is this consortium a private initiative or a public project? I find it a little odd if it's a private initiative because there are issues if that's the case. The system has to cater to all cars who come into contact with it regardless of whether they pay for the service or not. The reason behind this is the fact that the system needs to create a network effect where the more the users are the better the service will be. I wonder then how a private company will be able to make money in it.
@amrutah: Thanks for the links. I find the iRemote app to be exceptionally cool. The other day a friend of mine was also bragging about how his BMW now supports an app where he can virtually do anything (but drive!) from the app while sitting on his couch.
I am little skeptical about comment, yes infrastructure is one reason but apart from this you wont find every car equipped with motion sensor or airbag.
Yet the app is really cool but does it consume a lot of battery ? I think it does. If so it will drain the device a lot and might not suit the device in the longer run
@samicksha: Motion Sensor might be true but Air Bags are there in every vehicle. Its illegal to produce a vehicle without an air bag
@amruth: Well that is some news to me and surely to most of us in Asia I guess. Im not sure how practical it will be in Asia mostly in Sri Lanka and India since the distance within the vehicles are very minimal and also with security concerns this might not work in favour
@amrutah: Good to see many developments in the field of automobiles but I feel this might create some problems in the road. There are vehicles driven by humans so how does the robot based vehicles collaborate with human driven vehicles ?
chirshadblog:“There are vehicles driven by humans so how does the robot based vehicles collaborate with human driven vehicles ?”
Well that's the role of the consortium of framing the protocols/algorithms for the car2car communication. Whether the cars on road are driveless cars or driven by humans, the cars can still communicate, like the one mentioned in this blog (the cruise speed is adjusted by monitoring the appraoching vehicles/ vechicles ahead).
May be a separate lanes will be defined for driverless cars, but just think of the possibility, that even physically disabled people can drive on their own.
What new innovations do you see coming in automobiles in the near future that will challenge integrated electronics?
I think 'Auto-pilot' cars will be the next big thing. Companies like Google and Tesla are already planning to launch 'Auto-pilot' cars in near future.
@Victor, I agree with your opinion that Cars need car drivers. I think more research need to be done to check whether technology helps the driver or it acts as a disturbance.
Whether the cars on road are driveless cars or driven by humans, the cars can still communicate
@amrutah, good point. I agree with your point that irrespective of whether car is driven by driver or not they can communicate and can issue inputs to the driver or the system which is controlling the car.
Motion Sensor might be true but Air Bags are there in every vehicle. Its illegal to produce a vehicle without an air bag
@chirshadblog, air bags are not compulsory in countries like India.
Atleast the Europe has a consortium, car-to-car.org, wherein the protocols are defined for car2car communication.
@amrutah, thanks for sharing the link. I am curious to know if these protocols applies only to Europe ? Do we have different protocols being followed in different regions ?
It's the road and other related infrastructure that hasn't kept up with it.
@tzubair, totally agree with you. I think government needs to give more importance to building infrastructure. But many governments ignore developing infrastructure because of which growth reduces.
Check out these BMW Driveless cars, BMW iRemote app, Ford's brake detection.
@amrutah, thanks for sharing the links. I just watched iRemove app video and it definitely looks very interesting. Such apps definitely helps us to monitor our cars easily.
Is this consortium a private initiative or a public project?
@tzubair, good question. When I see the website it lists very few car makers which means its a private initiative. I am not sure why other car makers have not joined this initiative.
@SunitaT: The same link has many other innovation stuff by Audi, Ford etc. These innovative products will be soon to market but the real question is how relaible is the technology, I am not doubting the security aspects of it, but what if technology chrases while on road.
there has to be a technology present in the car that allows communication to take place – it can be 3G or WiFi
@tzubair, good point. I think we also need to test what happens when there is congestion and vehicle to vehicle communication is not possible.
I am not doubting the security aspects of it
@amrutah, I think security aspect is also crucial. Lets not forget operating systems like Android has many security loopholes.
Sunita T as I know for the legal requirement there should be a driver for vehicles. Isn't it?
True Sunita T It is same for the Sri Lanka and Maldives also they still use some old vehicles.
Very true Sunita T, only the government can take the initiative to change the infrastructure. it will be a one stream of a development.
@SunitaT: I understand your concern, but when a technology is released and that too in medical or automotive field, security and reliability is to be checked at 6σ to 9σ sigma levels much like space related electronics. It is upto to the consortium to define strict protocols before any car maker launches a technology.
chirshadblog:”There are vehicles driven by humans so how does the robot based vehicles collaborate with human driven vehicles ?”
Make the robots to act as humans. Google has demonstrated with advanced sensory devices, that is possible. Yet, there are many areas that must be worked out before this goes to primetime. The legal issues are the key challenges and not the technologies
I think 'Auto-pilot' cars will be the next big thing. Companies like Google and Tesla are already planning to launch 'Auto-pilot' cars in near future.
Cars that can be driven for one month non-stop with no need for charging or fuel because batteries have gotten better in technology. I see the existence of most oil companies to be imperiled.
>> I think more research need to be done to check whether technology helps the driver or it acts as a disturbance.
They already have enough evidence that cars can be wholly autonomous with no need of a driver. The problem at the moment is if we have to have these types of cars, maybe we need to redesign cities, roads, homes etc. There are many things that must change in our lives.
These innovative products will be soon to market but the real question is how relaible is the technology, I am not doubting the security aspects of it, but what if technology chrases while on road.
We can see it as the way we see it when people have seizures when driving. I am confident that companies can build reliable technologies that work. This is not aeroplane, this is a car on a road.
@amrutah, I think security aspect is also crucial. Lets not forget operating systems like Android has many security loopholes.
Today, Audi launched a secured version of Android to drive their car mobility systems. Companies can make great OS that will not be susceptible to security challenges of the typical Android OS.
@tzubair: you're correct, I think that the safety automated equipment, for example ESP, is really useful, because it acts only when the car is in a dangerous situation, and the driver is able to act simultaneusly. I think that the situations of conflict between the driver and the safety automated system have to be absolutely avoided.
Yes, this is the future of transportation , some countries have adeguate infrastructures, to support this feature, some others have to work on it but this idea has a lot of potential.
@fasmicro: your questions make sense to me, I think that the automated cars have to be a part of a net of cars, communicating effectively one to each other. This would avoid, for example, accidents, provided that the system works.
The engineering challenges are still present I guess, think for example to theToyota crash accident, that is an example of failure of the switch off system.
@goatfrit2: I agree on that, the key factor for the success of this idea is the improvement that it might represent for people, if the advantages are quite enough , the modifications to our cities will be realized.
I wonder if a dedicated OS will let the automated cars free to communicate when the net of interconnected cars will be realized.
@Goafrit2: I agree and confident that companies can build reliable technologies but with a disclaimer “do not rely on this device 100%, please be aware of road conditions”.
“This is not aeroplane, this is a car on a road.”
A car on road at 100mph with traffic, can creat havoc in 2secs and can be very dangerous
@goafrit2
>> “This is not aeroplane, this is a car on a road “
I had understood that with the exception of cross wind landing and take off from short runways where a human pilot is strictly required, most autopilot and cruise control functions for air planes are less complex to implement.
I guess more 80% vehicles on road in India are running without Air Bags. So this policy i dont think really exist in my Country.
>> I think that the safety automated equipment, for example ESP, is really useful, because it acts only when the car is in a dangerous situation, and the driver is able to act simultaneusly
That is not always the case unfortunately. There are cases when we climb a stone or materials because making a cut could cause an accident. Some of these automated systems do not have that capability. It is like trying to avoid a pot hole and taking one into a ditch.
>> , some countries have adeguate infrastructures, to support this feature,
Technically, it does not need to be complicated. Just have a mandate that all new cars meet those requirements. Even a poor country can accomplish that. That a car needs an airbag should not be a developing/developed country thing.
>> I think that the automated cars have to be a part of a net of cars, communicating effectively
That would be the perfect system except that some people will not like to use the automated cars and still drive “manually”. If that is the case, you have that opportunity to make rules that will guide the interractions when the car trying to overtake you does not have a driver in it and may not care if there is an oncoming truck. The legal system is the weakest link of this business.
>> I agree and confident that companies can build reliable technologies but with a disclaimer “do not rely on this device 100%, please be aware of road conditions”.
Mercedes has a disclaimer for their auto-parking pilot. It has the disclaimer that though the car can park itself, it does not mean if it messes up, you are not liable. But of course that is a small issue when you compare the level of having self-driving cars on the roads.
>> I guess more 80% vehicles on road in India are running without Air Bags. So this policy i dont think really exist in my Country.
India like most developing countries import used cars from the West. That does not mean government cannot pass a law that requires all new cars to be air-bag complaint.
Even U.S. has many cars with no air-bags. The effort is geared towards new production and not going into towns changing old cars. That is not the point. I have read that India now requires at least one airbag in all new cars including the Tata Nano. So, the policy is there and as time goes, the old cars will be displaced.
India like most developing countries import used cars from the West. That does not mean government cannot pass a law that requires all new cars to be air-bag complaint.
I agree you goafrit, of-course govt can pass this law but again doing this will increase cost and tax on vehicles, which i dont will taken as appreciated step by consumers.
@fasmicro: I doubt if we have any such policy in place as if now. Tata Nano is pretty small car and not recommendable for long drive or highway drive, you can utilize this type of car in busy city roads where parking and driving freely is problem.
It depends on the added new technology on cars, the airbags are quite diffused, new communication technologies between car and car requires for example a wireless smart net that is really demanding for the hosting country.
Agreed, the technology has to be further developed, but I think that many accidents due to the distracted driving, for example, may be avoided in the future.
can pass this law but again doing this will increase cost and tax on vehicles, which i dont will taken as appreciated step by consumers.
We must not associate life with money/tax. Airbags can add $200 to the cost of a car. I do not see the burden on someone that already wants to buy a car. The point that it increases cost or puts burden on tax is shallow. For all the money India will save, a life saved is worth the money. That must drive how developing world makes decisions.
the airbags are quite diffused, new communication technologies between car and car requires for example a wireless smart net that is really demanding for the hosting country.
We need to get our priorities right on this earth. I do not understand why some advocates see airbags as being extra burden to families when there are radios in cars. Between radio and airbags, I go with airbags. You need these cheap cars, they still come with radios, yet, the makers think airbags are expensive. I do not get it.
The driverless cars and taxis that are already in active use within some parts of the United States have been praised and touted as the answer to the road accidents that claim millions of lives throughout the world every single year. However, even they do not have half of the sensors mentioned here and very limited use of integrated electronics. So it will be interesting to see how the picture will change once they start embracing the use of the same.
I think this is a good idea, but it does not mean that air-bag system is a problem; because you cannot tell me that the already existing cars with air-bags should be abandoned, that is obviously impossible. What should be done is that, since this effort is a new one, it should be channeled towards new production.
In future, maybe once the dream of IoT devices becomes realized, maybe the structures that support the IoT world such as the data centers can be leveraged and used as channels for vehicle to vehicle communication, allowing vehicles using the same road to exchange information. This would drastically reduce the number of sensors that integrated electronics relies on and have the added benefit of further reducing the chances of collisions between any two vehicles on the same road.
Between radio and airbags, I go with airbags.
@fasmicro, I totally agree with you. Saftey is very important and manufacturers should make sure that they price such safety features less so that many people can afford such features.
Audi is already working on self-driving car which is powered by Nvidia Tegra K1 processor and it hopes its finished self-driving car hits the road around 2020. Companies like NVIDIA are taking keen interest in building autonomous vehicles.
of-course govt can pass this law but again doing this will increase cost and tax on vehicles, which i dont will taken as appreciated step by consumers.
@samicksha, I agree with you. But if we inform the buyers about the importance of Car safety features I am sure many people wouldn't mind paying extra for such features.
The problem at the moment is if we have to have these types of cars, maybe we need to redesign cities, roads, homes etc.
@goafrit2, I agree with you. I think very few countries have the infrastructure needed for such autonomous cars. I am sure all the car manufacturers are hoping that infrastructure improves so that people can plan to buy autonomous cars.
@Yalanand: I agree you till some extent but what i judge is human mentality drags you to cost efficient or cheap products. We do have numbers of car models which are as per security merics but they weigh high in terms of cost and people still buy hatchback or sedan with okay cost and security gadgets.
@fasmicro: I think that safety is the primary goal for a car maker, and the first thing that should be present in a car is the airbag, the ESP, and an anticollision radar system. I hope this will be possible in the near future
>> United States have been praised and touted as the answer to the road accidents that claim millions of lives throughout the world every single year
There is a possibility that the driverless cars could add value in the ecosystem. But using the extremely controlled drives in Arizona and CA may not be enough to draw a lot of conclusions. Come to Pittsburgh with so many pot-holes. Let me see how those cars will perform. I predict some will be bumped out of the roads.
Sunita, every technology offers benefits with some risks. When the cost to beneft analysis looks good, it is adopted>> I think this is a good idea, but it does not mean that air-bag system is a problem; >> Airbags are generally positive to saving lives. It has some issues but everyone agrees its usage is largely seem in the good column.
>> IoT world such as the data centers can be leveraged and used as channels for vehicle to vehicle communication, allowing vehicles using the same road to exchange information.
There are lots of ideas over there on these autonomous cars. Yet, it is going to be a tough issue if one considers that hackers can cause problems as we link cars to Internet and other networks. The cybersecurity risk is enormous and we need to be prepared.
>> Saftey is very important and manufacturers should make sure that they price such safety features less so that many people can afford such features.
Airbag is cheap – it will not add more than $100 in a new car. It is powerred by affordable MEMS devices. The problem is that politicians in the developing world do not value the lives of their citizens that much. I do not see why adding extra $100 to a car of $5,000 will be an issue if that can save lives.
Companies like NVIDIA are taking keen interest in building autonomous vehicles
I hope the processor will not heatup and the car will reboot at the middle of a highway!
But if we inform the buyers about the importance of Car safety features I am sure many people wouldn't mind paying extra for such features.
Notice that car companies protested over seatbelts as they felt it was going to be burdensome regulation. But today, the most important thing that reduced fatalities in car has been identified to be seat belts. People wearing belts are more likely to survive accidents than others. We must hide under the constructs that buyers must approve safety issues before we enact them in laws
I am sure all the car manufacturers are hoping that infrastructure improves so that people can plan to buy autonomous cars.
That may be the weakest point of the revolution. I can assure everyone here that most cities may not see that as a priority when unions and taxi drivers pump high vollage lobby on governmets. Do you know we will not have taxi drivers as only cars will come to airports to pick people?
I think that safety is the primary goal for a car maker, and the first thing that should be present in a car is the airbag, the ESP, and an anticollision radar system.
I hope GM is reading this comment with their latest episode! Wish they saw “safety” and not “finances” as the main goal.
@fasmicro, Not just taking some interest Nvidia is a key member of Open Automotive Alliance, a global of technology and automotive companies, OAA is aimed at bring the Android platform to car and create new oportunities for third party devlopers to deliver powerful experience and make technology in car much safer.
Nvidia's Tegra processor already power a huge variety of Android devices including infotainment and navigation systems.
@goafrit2, Its a serious problem, it could compromise car safety, its that combination of connectivity and automation thats make car hacking possible, using BlueTooth and cellular networks via software bugs in firmware.
I think that V2V is still far way from public vehicle on road. A different OEM has their own system, even though they designed it on standard requirement. There is no way for 100 % safety guarantee on road. Instead of V2V, OEM might design a advanced collision sensor which detects surrounding area with a far distance.
@goafrit2, To minimize the risk I think we need to separate critical car control systems from infotainment functionality and connectivity using firewall systems and applications. Software updates should be code-signed and recognised as come from manufacturer and cryptography to control and restrict unwanted updates.
@Daej I believe car manufacturers and researchers have been working on this, the hadware and software plaftrom for V2V comjmunication networks is nearly ready for mass deployment but automakers and regulators face tough challenges- establishing a huge network of equipped cars for the system to work. And then some concerns about privacy and security, automakers are concerned about possible backlash from consumers worried about their privacy will be compromised by a systems that broadcast their location. And then there's also some problem about access on telecommunication spectrum required for V2V communication network, a tough fight that could involve FCC or even Congress. Its a long journey with some tough fight @Daej.
The safety is becoming one of the criteria for car drivers when choosing a car to buy.
The car crash test results are a good example of such criteria.
>> Nvidia's Tegra processor already power a huge variety of Android devices including infotainment and navigation systems.
The point is that while Tegra has been used in infotainment and navigation systems, none of these cases denote an imminent danger to life if it fails. This is unlike using same in cars. The point is that we may need a new standard for processors that work in cars especially when they are part of the motion technology.
>> Its a serious problem, it could compromise car safety, its that combination of connectivity and automation thats make car hacking possible, using BlueTooth and cellular networks via software bugs in firmware.
With all the scary issues in the latest recall of GM, I am not sure any regulator will dance to adoption immediately. Yes, at the end , we are going to use these technologies. But they need to be hardened better to avoid dangers on the wheels.
>> Instead of V2V, OEM might design a advanced collision sensor which detects surrounding area with a far distance.
Even that is not a guarantee. I was part of a team that tested a car equipped with inertial sensors. A small paper on the road nearly took the driver off road. A human system would know that was a paper and just climb through it without the risk of swaving off the road. Robots do not have that capability.
>> Software updates should be code-signed and recognised as come from manufacturer and cryptography to control and restrict unwanted updates.
Technically, they may not even be necessary unless there is a critical problem that must be fixed. I will not like to have a scenario where my car “reboots” because someone is sending an update. They need to have a closed system with no access for these updates.
>> And then there's also some problem about access on telecommunication spectrum required for V2V communication network
I think the biggest one is the one you did not mention – government may be unable to fund roads such cars can ply. I am not sure we can do any major infrastructure project in this age as Congress goes risk-averse and no spending under any condition.
>> The car crash test results are a good example of such criteria.
For autonomous vehicles though, the test will not be coming from crash. There are tests which must look at hardened nature to resist cyberthreats. Imagine another country hacking into the vehicle network to cause accidents on large scale in the nation.
@goafrit2: the car crash is performed to verify the overall security of a car in case of accident, I agree with you on the protection of the driver from the hacking: a malicious remote control of a net of cars may really create disasters.
thanks for that @goafrit2, there a number of cars that offer systems that can detect impending collision but those “detection stuffs” can add a thousand dollar ormore to the overall cost of car. And these cars are getting much more sophisticated, able to detect in the situations that are outside the driver's view and alert the driver, tightening its selt belt if potential risk is detected. Other systems can stiffens the front suspension to prevent a nose dive from a sudden brake.
@etnapowers we need to draft new standrads to provide greater security, cybersecurity is a serious industry issue and a top priority. Hacked passwords can enable remote unlocking and tracking, a good example of this is Tesla, Tesla accounts are protected only by simple password with low-complexity requirements, and in case of compromised Tesla acount hackers could simply reset the account's password and take control.
http://www.dhanjani.com/blog/2014/03/curosry-evaluation-of-the-tesla-model-s-we-cant-protect-our-cars-like-we-protect-our-workstations.html
I believe Tesla should do more to protect Tesla accounts beyond using simple password, its not enough they need a second authentication factor. And manufacturers need to take a secure approach in designing IoT devices, the problem here is most of the engineering works focus on car functionality and battery performance, not security.
@Netcrawl: the prevention systems have to become not at optional of all the car , this will increase dramatically the safety of the drivers, provided that the human control has to be prioritary respect to the automated system, in case of emergency the driver has to be totally in control of the car.
>> I agree with you on the protection of the driver from the hacking: a malicious remote control of a net of cars may really create disasters.
Who do you think the lawyers will send the bill if the hacking causes one car to hit another car? The owner or the manufacturer?
>> And these cars are getting much more sophisticated, able to detect in the situations that are outside the driver's view and alert the driver, tightening its selt belt if potential risk is detected
You are correct but I have noticed that most times these innovations are never available in the mass produced cars. I am yet to read serious recall in some of the luxury brands. That calls to question if the need to reduce costs makes these makers to product lesser-standard products. Some of the points you noted will largely be for the high-end cars.
>> I believe Tesla should do more to protect Tesla accounts beyond using simple password, its not enough they need a second authentication factor.
I do not understand the case with Tesla but Tesla is a car. Even if you go to the web and sees the track of the car by hacking the account, that is often risky (privacy) for the driver,but it does not cause immediate harm to the driver. The main issue here is hacking the IoT within a car to cause the car to have an accident in realtime.
@etnapowers, the best system will be building a new protocol that gives these cars a new network, not the Internet of today.That network will be built with security in mind. I cannot imagine driving a car with most of the nodes linked to this hack-easy Internet. If there is an option, I will turn all web access OFF before my key enters the car.
@fasmicro, I agree with you: the net has to be a dedicated net, the first requirement is the safety of the data, otherwise an easy hack might be a really big concern.
>> the net has to be a dedicated net, the first requirement is the safety of the data, otherwise an easy hack might be a really big concern.
It is going to be hugely expensive if we have to build a dedicated net across the globe. The beauty of connecting to the Internet is that nothing more needs to be done than having an IP. When that is not the case, it increases the complexity of the business to connect vehicles.
I am yet to read serious recall in some of the luxury brands. That calls to question if the need to reduce costs makes these makers to product lesser-standard products
It is not innovation that drives the sector, it is cost reduction. That translates to the appetite for consumers to demand more for less. For luxuty cars, the market is different. The goal is to create exclusivity. The cost of production does not affect the final cost. Provided there is exclusivity either by high cost or limited production, you have a market.