Vehicle Simulators with respect to Verification and Validation

Overview About Drew Technologies Current IM Solutions – Where are we now? – New Solution? Key Component Missing Solution – Testing Your Application – Auditing Existing Systems. Summary Questions and Answers

About Drew Technologies Founded in 1995 Largest Market is OEMs – New Vehicle Development – Validation and Service OEM Tier 1 Supplier of Vehicle Communication Devices Track Record for delivering high performance devices with a low warranty fail rate: – Less than 0.01% with a sample size of > 10,000 units

Current Solutions Where are we now? – Tail pipe testing is greatly effective on cars manufactured pre-2000, but due to cleaner fuels and the development of more efficient emission reduction technologies, tail pipe testing is being phased out in areas.

Current Solutions New Solution – Movement to OBD2 Hybrid Systems OBD2 For Newer Vehicles Tail Pipe Testing For Vehicles Older Than a Threshold - or - – Movement to OBD2 Only Systems

Key Components Missing With the Implementation of OBD2 based systems of Testing we receive: – Simplified Testing – Faster Turnaround – More Automated – Better customer (driver) satisfaction So What could go wrong?

Key Components Missing Concepts in Action – Rough inception Certain switchovers exhibited a high number of failures that were due to circumstances that were not vehicle emission failures.

Key Components Missing So what could’ve prevented this? – Testing the system on every car So what could’ve realistically prevented this? – Testing the system on every car…

Solution Use a Vehicle Simulator (Leverage the Evil) to Validate your IM Software. It can provide: – Verbose Response – Multiple ECU Testing – Customizable Response Granularity – DTCs

Verbose Responses Vehicles are known for sending more data than generally needed. Sometimes its invalid.

Multiple ECU Response Testing ODB2 Specifications allow a number of ECUs to communicate at once. Recent vehicles have complex systems which communicate concurrently. A Vehicle Simulator can validate if having multiple responding ODB2 controllers will break your software.

Multiple ECU Response Testing

Response Granularity Current systems need more than an inline PID adjuster. To fully test and validate an application you must send it: – False information – Incorrect timings – Dynamically changing PID data – Sequentially arranged PID data

Multiple ECU Response Testing

DTCs Validate whether your system supports all of the Emissions related PIDS is also possible. Even new DTC’s added into J1979 recently.

Where does this lead? Validating software is difficult. Testing every vehicle permutation is daunting. Setting up a profile for each vehicle is work. How can we translate this to something feasible?

Vehicle Profiling Profiling Create a snapshot of the current vehicle data Save and store snapshots for post analysis Edit and fine tune snapshots

Vehicle Profiles

Defending Against Fraud Vehicle Simulators do not have to be the enemy. Vehicle Simulators Can: – Validate units in the field – Determine whether a IM Tester has been modified – Help debug issues that occur with trouble vehicles – Provide a framework for Auditors.

Defending Against Fraud

And before I summarize… I can hear you asking…. Yes, we’ll tell you how to tell it’s our simulator.

Summary The IM Testing Field is Complex – OBD2 Systems focus on vehicle communication – “No Coms” Inconvenience everyone – Requiring every car to test on is costly – Requires constant auditing

Summary Testing your application with timing and responses from existing vehicles may: Save your company money Provide an ample test bench for development Provide a way to validate that your system works with multiple functioning OBD2 modules. Provide a way to audit IM shop test stations.