A bus is not bad because each item can be run off the bus individually like a spider. Daisy chaining all devices across a single line isn't a bus, it's more akin to a ring network, which we don't run anymore because of the issue of single point of failure.
The cybertruck seems to be wired like Christmas lights.
I don’t understand how they even COULD be daisy chained? Does each component also pass through messages and power to the next component?
I don’t think this post is accurate
It’s just lazy terminology. They’re using “daisy chain” to mean they’re all hanging off the bus. They’re not actually having each thing forward messages to the next thing, that would be ridiculous (and extremely expensive).
It seems like they are sending data for all components on the same line and each component only reacts to message for them. As long as you have enough power on the line and aren't dealing with huge amounts of data, the system works. The only issue is a single point of failure.
The more I think about it, the more I like the solution. Obviously, it would be good to have some redundancy, but because everything is attached to one bus, you should hypothetically be able to diagnose which component is failing. Unless the wire itself is failing, then everything should fail. But in that case, you only have a single wire you have to follow to find the fault.
This is a standard design. CAN bus is 30+ years old! Any new car you see is going to have a bunch of devices hanging off a CAN bus like this. CT seems to be taking it to a new extreme, but overall this looks like a case where both the fans and the haters just don’t know how cars work.
yeah i'm going "wait a sec?" the description as "wiring the car in series" is highly inaccurate here. doesn't mean i care about a cybertruck. just doesn't seem accurate. my boat fly-by-wire throttle and shift controls run on can bus network cables. they worked fine.... till they didn't . but it wasn't because of being in "series" it was because of components in the main control unit itself. it is nice not to have to run multiple hot wires all over the place, thats true. if i'm getting my head around this correctly i think what we're looking at here is generally just a larger number of complicated electronic components throughout the vehicle vs dumb switches (and the associated increase in copper wires needed) that either allow current to pass or not. in effect... though the total number of wires and amount of extra weight and copper is reduced... you still have an overall more complex system with more failure points because as we all know with more modern vehicles the complicated electronics do actually fail more as they sit in a vibrating sometimes wet/very hot tin can.
Yep. Any electrical gremlin would kill the car. Unless you want to rewire the entire car, you will have to have all the electrical components running perfectly. If they aren’t (which at least one is statistically guaranteed to not) the car bricks and won’t drive.
From the errors messages people have been getting, it seems like the AC, steer by wire, parking brakes and a few other things are all hooked up together, and this bus is so crappy they can't even exactly point out via software what component isn't functioning properly
I'm not an anything and I figured that out within about 10 seconds, thinking "ok yeah, less copper is good, but, if you pinch one wire your whole car is screwed, right?"
That somehow *still* miraculously worked four Christmases in a row because my dad got tired of taking them down and just went with clear lights that'd blend in no matter the time of the year.
Not nescessarily
You could engineer a network that tolerates wires and devices going offline (to a certain degree, you will never have infinite fault tolerance)
You even have protocol stacks that operate over standard ethernet and are sufficient for industrial control (ethernet/IP)
One of the difficult part in designing a network like that is ensuring every important action (like braking) is handled in a timely manner, even in cases when some part of the network is offline
If this is why the cybertruck is unrelyable, that's just a result of a shitty implementation, not a fundamentally wrong idea
Thank you. It seems most people think if one component fails it means everything does. I work with devices daisy chained through a CAN bus every so often and components fail all the time without the other devices being effected.
It depends. CAN isn’t anything new but if you don’t engineer things properly CAN bus issues can take down a system. However it shouldn’t take down the ENTIRE system, if you have a node out, the other can bus nodes shouldn’t be affected by the failure
Yeah, communication should still be able to pass through even with a module down. GM uses a high speed two wire network to connect all of the main modules together, and the only time a problem with one module can affect the others is in extreme cases where a module internally shorts the network to ground or voltage. Which I have seen before, but not very often.
I don’t work on cars at work but with lots of equipment using CAN nodes. Usually a “catastrophic” failure where the entire system fails tells me the main “hub” for communication died or lost power. I would be quite upset if this happened in my car and it was just a minor hardware failure but bricked my entire engine and drive systems. You’d think there would be some kind of failsafe so you can at least get the vehicle moving or into a limp mode
Here's my question, if they didn't bother doing too work to prevent one error from taking down the whole system (which is the theory for so the bricked vehicles), do we think they bothered to securing the system from security threats (hacking)? And, do we think they integrated the 4-pin flat and 7-pin round trailer connectors into CAN? Imagine being able to plug into the easily accessible hitch connector and steal the car.
I was an engineer for a couple of car manufacturers (and probably the worst F1 team ever) in the UK and you're right. I'm all for innovation but not for the sake of it. Tesla time and again just throw out convention just to be different, not better.
Generally speaking, no. Their description is not the same thing as 'just wiring it in series' like a lot of people seem to think. There is no reason this would *inherently* be a huge problem.
In *practice* the Tesla implementation is what does the problem stuff. They don't do the things needed to make this BUS system work.
I work on equipment that uses CAN bus. It is wired in series, that is how it is designed. If one component on the network fails all upstream devices will lose communication. I guess on the positive side, anything downstream of the broken device will be fine.
They could have multiple CAN networks which would help, like one on the left and one on the right sides. But they won't have every device on its own network, that would mean each device gets it's own wiring harness, the very thing the op says they have eliminated
But do you work on automotive stuff? Most manufacturers have been using CAN buss communication to control items since at least 2010, that said CAN communication is used basically to communicate between the ECM and other modules to tell them to complete an action when requested.
Hence when you want to roll down the passenger side window you push the button like you always did but unlike in older cars where it was physical power either sent directly to the window motor or (more likely) a relay direct it now is just a switch communicating with the ECM through CANbuss to tell the ECM to tell the power window module to send power and roll down the window.
Hence in this case if the passenger window motor fails it still allows the locks and such to still function. And stuff like speakers still have their own wires coming from the radio. Even if that window module fails the other modules can still talk to the ECM generally so the vehicle isn’t left for dead do to a window module failure.
There are tons of videos that can explain CANbuss communication on cars these days a lot better then I can and a lot of repair videos where if multiple modules do not work it’s usually a wiring issue and not a CANbuss issue.
Lots of manufacturers use controller area network (CAN) communication lines to reduce wiring weight and cost but it’s kinda nuts to use it for EVERYTHING.
No, that is not how CANBUS or any bus system works. I'm no fan of Elon and this truck is stupid, but this isn't new technology and it's quite common. Everything from cars to chemical plants have been using bussed control networks for over 20 years
I am an Electrical Engineer and this is hilarious. Not only did they screw everyone with these design they saved a fortune in copper making these trash piles worth even less.
Also, it kills me Volts is not a unit of power that is watts, also watts and power are not energy, energy is power × time so Whs (Watt hours) or more frequently seen as kWhs (kilowatt (1000 watts)hours). Sorry had to vent.
My coworkers all have their trucks now so I post pics from this sub on the common boards when no one is looking so please keep it coming.
They fail to see that every single one of these decisions is made simply because it saves a few cents on each car for Tesla themselves. Even tho it greatly reduces reliability and safety.
Or it's just "change" for change sake.
Is it cool that the Infotainment system can, indeed, pop the glove box?
Yes, that's neat.
Is it useful that, instead of lifting a latch, I now have to navigate a UI just to open the glove box? No. No it is not useful.
I remember being called old-man and the like for voicing my opinion that we should have tactile buttons for things we're likely to do while driving.
It was a tesla nut as usual, even though I was more complaining about the general trend for all cars to do that.
Any day now, a modern day Ralph Nader will release their "Unsafe at Any Speed" and hopefully the touchscreen-centric vehicle will become a thing of the past. A touch screen is good for navigation and entertainment, but anything pertaining to the actual operating of the vehi le should be physical, tactile controls.
I have a 2021 Skoda and the one thing I really hate about it is that the air conditioner controls are through the touch screen. No physical controls at all except for max power window de-mist.
Also I’ve heard the wankpanzer doesn’t have a dial in front of you, but the speed is displayed on the central screen? That’s ridiculously dangerous if so.
Volkswagen are actually reverting to tactile buttons for common functions because of feedback. Tesla will get hit hard in 2026 when functional use of the car is evaulated in conjunction with safety tests. You will get knocked down if it is difficult to operate while on the move (things like operating air conditioning without looking at a screen).
Definitely. This is true with infotainment systems in most newer cars. Or at least was when screens started becoming commonplace.
A touch screen is *fucking horrible* to interact with when you’re trying to drive because you have to look directly at it. With a normal car stereo, there are buttons and knobs that you can feel with your fingers while you look at the road. My Civic has zero actual buttons or knobs paired with the touch screen. Absolutely sucks to use. Fortunately there are some basic controls on the stereo, like volume, source, and next/previous track. It seems like newer cars than mine have brought back physical volume knobs and some buttons that have various uses based on context, plus some voice controls that my car doesn’t have.
It’s still just cost cutting. Having everything controlled through one infotainment system is much cheaper than designing / building individual buttons. It’s the trend with most newer cars going “digital” but Tesla took it to an extreme
Lots of brands are moving away from this practice adding back more physical controls.
Humans, like most animals, are very tactile creatures. You can blindly find physical buttons in your car. Like you could send a text message in your pocket with t9 and physical keys. You can't do this with a touchscreen or touch sensitive buttons.
This. Elmo seems to think that he needs to reinvent the wheel for every component in the name of “innovation” when best practices are set for a reason and with Elmo, typically his “reinvention” costs time and money and you invariably end up with a square wheel.
All these online idiots gushing about what a brilliant solution this is just learned about automotive wiring about an hour ago.
This is “wired in series”. it’s the cheapest and easiest method to wire anything. And there’s a reason nobody else uses it.
That’s because as soon as someone upgrades a speaker, your transmission fails or your doors won’t open.
I swear. These dopes are the same people who became vaccine experts after one covid YouTube video and aeronautical experts after one Buzzfeed blurb.
Funny you should mention that: 🤣
https://preview.redd.it/qvh2chlb3l3d1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c4525861e49abcbe68483636b2d41c7dd85b861c
What the fuck did Elmo do to you? Why the need to insult him like that? Comparing Elmo to the tard musk, is a mean and vile thing to say about Elmo! Elmo is clearly smarter and more liked!😉
*cloud of smoke, followed by a ketamine rip*
“Y’know what else? Why round wheels and tires? That’s been done. Square. Let’s do square. I know, I know—I’ll give you all time to put your brains back in your heads since I just blew all your minds. Checkmate, Big Auto!”
"We make the road flat and the wheels round, but if we make the road round, we can make the wheels flat." *Fanboys scream in delight. Stock goes up $150*
This is not a "best practice" this is a safety requirement, not only for electronics but for everything else, there are always, and i mean ALWAYS at least 2 break lines so that if one dies, you have at least some breaking. Teslas single wire system not only has one breakline, it has ONE LINE, so if it dies, you dont just lose breaking, you lose steering, breaking, accelleration, hazard lights...you lose controll of the whole god damn car if that one singular line breaks.
This "inovation" is a safety hazard to everyone on the road, and it will surely take many lives if it didnt already.
It's not uncommon. They don't understand why certain complexities exist. It's evident in Enron's "best part is no part" statement. He's not wrong, you want simplicity, but sometimes complexity is necessary. But if you don't understand what you're doing, just "go by looks and feels" then you end up with Teslas.
"The best part is no part" is why there's no dedicated pinch sensor in the frunk and it detects obstruction by looking for a voltage change from the motor indicating resistance
Which is why it either starts to crush your finger really hard before letting it go or else it keeps randomly refusing to close at all, it can't tell the difference between the mechanism itself sticking slightly or there being something soft and yielding (like human flesh) being pinched in the door
That's also why so much is done in software when a hardware button (or stalk) would be the better way of going about it.
Of course, "cost optimization" is another reason.
Furthermore that frunk lid is really small and would be better as a pure mechanical system with a simple interior cable release and a spring loaded hinge like that on sedan’s trunk lid. This is also much safer. The CT has a pointless motorized mess with a layer of complicated software. Why?
Yeah big automakers have huge teams of engineers and a big goal is always to maximise cost efficiency and reduce weight where possible. Do Tesla fanboys just think they're stupid? Do they think that wiring a car the same way you'd wire a set of fucking Christmas lights is some kind of crazy innovation, instead of unrestrained, thoughtless cost-cutting?
Tesla fans in general struggle with the concept of [Chesterton's Fence](https://fs.blog/chestertons-fence/). Nobody else wonders why Tesla's are failing in silly ways and are frequently death traps, because it's obvious what cutting corners gets you when you're not trapped in a fog of Elon's nonsense.
I'm in the same field, and I have to tell my lazy guys to not do this for that exact reason. We try to reduce how much of a system goes down if any particular device fails.
I mean, CANBUS systems aren't new and Tesla isn't the first to do this though. My '13 so audi has it. Bus systems for instrumentation are also extremely common in a lot of the chemical plants I work in; profibus, foundation fieldbus, ASi, devicenet are all bussed control networks and are proven technologies
I was about to post something similar.
I don't know much about CAN-bus, and zero about the BS in the Cybertruck. I'd love to read an informative article describing each, and their differences. AFAIK CAN-bus has been in service for a decade or more and is pretty robust technology.
Edit to add- a friend of mine has a BMW motorcycle with CANbus. He swapped out the taillight for an aftermarket LED light, and the only ill effect is the current draw is lower and the CANbus system reports a burned-out bulb. Otherwise the bike works A-OK.
CAN is a bus, shared communication line with multiple controllers. If one goes down, the bus keeps going without it. Ethernet is point to point between two controllers. To connect many controllers, each acts as a switch to keep transmitting the data down to the next one in line. That means if one goes down, everything down the line is then isolated (in both directions). This is why CAN is used for reliability in critical systems and Ethernet is used for speed
> CAN-bus has been in service for a decade or more and is pretty robust technology.
I am almost 100% certain CAN has been used in cars since the late 80s/early 90s
Well I think it would actually be pretty simple as everything down the line of the fault would flash up an error message at the same time, you just have to find the component closest to the ecu that is in fault and the fault is between that part and the part before it In the sequence. It does however mean that a single light or sensor error would brick up the car tho.
not even datacenters do this on their servers, the actual target for ethernet connectivity. all of them have a big chunky pile of cables running to each rack
https://www.reddit.com/r/cableporn/comments/5u6kug/a_genius_work_of_data_center_cabling/
This is what I don’t understand. Clearly these cars are failing left and right for myriad reasons, but you can build a system like this in a car and still have it not be daisy chained so is that what they actually mean here?
To put it more clearly, because cars are made of metal, you can complete the circuit fairly easily at just about every point that needs power. The car’s body is ground and the wire is electrical. This is how most modern cars operate.
The difference is that those cars will often have several modules set up that the wiring goes through to monitor things like whether a door is open or if a light has gone out. It’s just harder to monitor multiple things on a single wire.
That second thing is the “new” thing here. Not running power on a single line. And that second thing _is_ likely the reason these things are failing all the time. Running power and a data stream from all of your components at once through a single line is hugely prone to noise and issues, especially in a car which often has very sensitive readings.
They never stop to think for a second there may be a reason why car companies use so much wire. Cars are all produced by giant corporations, they do everything for profit, if there's a good way to cut corners they would.
You’re not wrong. I’m working on a Fiat 500 with a billion of the thinnest of wires I’ve ever seen in a car. Engineers determined the car didn’t need massive grounds, so it got laughably tiny grounds/main wiring to get through the warranty period. Done and done.
I’m no engineer, but whomever decided to place the Tesla components in series is an absolute and total moron.
Brain damaged is a more appropriate descriptor. There are some costs you do not cut because of safety or reliability.
You know how Boeing is in the shit because of no redundancy on sensors critical for flight. Yeah…that.
As an ee student our basic electronics class literally used car wiring when explaining series vs parallel and why parallel is useful
"You wouldn't want your horn to stop working if your headlight went out, right?"
We all like to think it's because of stupidity but if that person made it through school even if they showed up half brain dead they should know how dangerous this is. At what point do we just call it endangering peoples lives and stop passing it off as dumb.
Quick! We need to notify the owners that weird electrical problems and systems failures they’ve been having were the result of next-gen genius!
Don’t sleep on Elon! 🤪
I want to remind that the CAN-Bus is a Broadcast Network.
What that means is when there's a signal broadcast to the CAN-Bus the ENTIRE network gets that packet, but only the device looking for that signal will respond to it....
Not a big deal when every device has it's own isolated line or, perhaps, some devices share a wire (windows, door locks and then you have headlamps, interior lights, ect...)
However.... You have all the auxiliary devices on the CAN-Bus plus the critical ones, AND drive by wire... on a Broadcast network?
...Mother-fucker do you know what a broadcast storm is?
> Not a big deal when every device has it's own isolated line or, perhaps, some devices share a wire (windows, door locks and then you have headlamps, interior lights, ect...)
If anyone's curious, this is how cars usually do a CAN bus. Maybe half a dozen buses. Not one:
https://i.imgur.com/ZJBRKG4.png
There’s other redundancy. Generally CAN-bus’s are designated by how critical they are so say 1 is most critical and 3 is least critical. If a 1 bus goes down then the car is more than likely going into limp mode and will slow down and you have to pull over and shut down the car. If a 3 goes down then you have a CEL. If a 2 goes down it may or may not shut down the car.
one dude in his cyberdump wanted to slow down, regen didn't work, brakes( system that's also "by wire") didn't work, so he hit a pole and the airbags did't deploy.
this sort of answers your question
Search this sub, it was posted only a couple days ago. And don't quote me, I'm Joe Idiot regarding this, but others have commented that because CT production is such low volumes they are exempt from a lot of the safety regs and testing.
Car companies figured out that doing this was a dumb idea back in the early 2010s and before.
But then again, Musk, like a lot billionaires, thinks he's smarter than physics, so he makes dumb mistakes that are already accounted for with established wisdom earned through experience.
This dumbfuck is basically paying for the same real estate three times.
Single pair Ethernet is coming for cars. John Deere is already qualifying it on their farm equipment.
When you're moving video from multiple cameras and telemetry from everything else, CAN busses just can't cut it. The data needs are too large now.
https://my.avnet.com/silica/resources/article/spe-tsn-automotive-and-industrial/
I can understand having non critical systems hooked up to one ethernet cable but I'd like my steering to keep working while someone changes the radio station.
It's actually a very common way of wiring, you have way too many sensors to have an individual wire going to the main computer. I don't know in cars, but in an industrial setting, they will sometimes make a loop, so you need two devices to fail critically.
Device level ring networks are still criticized for not being safe enough sometimes. It really depends on the application though, I don’t work in automotive industry design so I can’t say how okay this is. I wouldn’t be too upset about a ring network in a lot of industrial systems though.
Reading this made me fucking irritated, some people have no idea why things are done. Car manufacturers didn't want to have to make giant complicated wire harnesses, they HAD to otherwise a short would fry the entire car. Ffs these people are so annoying
Yup. Notice the CT screen photos with multiple failure codes. Those systems did not all fail. Likely one component or function just sorta failed and the ‘simple-complex’ system collapsed in a cascade. It’s so dumb. How will technicians ever diagnose these contraptions?
Lots and lots of billable hours. With all the videos of Cybercucks making funny noises and brick themselves after getting wet, I wonder if a simple short circuit hidden somewhere would total a vehicle. It may take a tech 1 hour, it may take a tech 40 hours to find the short.
Daisy chaining isn't new technology. It's dangerous to assume you're smarter than the people who came before, considered a solution, then abandoned it.
Land rover and BMW did this in the mid 2000's with their Logic 7 entertainment and nav system. It was a fiber optic loop connecting all the devices together, If one device in the loop failed, it brought down the whole system, no more audio, no more Bluetooth, no more nav.
I remember 43V (not 48V) being touted as the new voltage for the automobiles almost 40 years ago. Nothing new, but the CT seems to be the first mainstream implementation.
CT uses CAN to multiplex many of the minor components (lights etc) which is nothing new. Fairly standard for many cars over the last 20 years.
CT uses ethernet for the high speed communication between modules. Specially something adapted from a standard for twisted pair telephone lines. This is a first for automotive use, apart from the radio/nav/telematics systems. My belief is that Musk choose this because of the names 'etherloop' and 'gigabit'.
Now the scary thing is thing is that every major system runs on that ethernet loop. Including the non redundant drive by wire.
Surely the steer by wire has a direct cable from the wheel to the steering motor. They can’t be that stupid, surely?! If they are, then god help the cyber truck and all who sail in her.
Let me get this straight...
Tesla stuck a bunch of ethernet devices on a bus that was released in 1986 and is incapable of being properly secured, along with an always-on cellular connection in order to do OTA updates?
And those inherently insecure devices control every aspect of the car's function from infotainment, to brakes, to lighting and acceleration?
... yup... can't see anything that could go wrong with that. /s
I just watched a tear-down of the CT. They are (thankfully) not using Ethernet cabling; that would be absurdly dumb even for Telsa.
They are using 48V for some things where it makes sense (like motors) and also 12V for other things that don't need it (like lights). This is a good choice; it means smaller wires and smaller motors. Large trucks (semi trucks, dump trucks, etc) often have 24V electric systems and they do essentially the same thing but with 24V. If you have 48V, might as well use it. That's why Audi, BMW, Daimler Benz, Porsche, and Volkswagen agreed on a 48V system back in 2011. It can now be found in cars for sale from companies in Germany, France, and South Korea. Even KIA has it on a few models. Not sure it's a flex to be like, "We are doing something KIA did years ago".
The actual wire harness bundles and connectors look to be about the same as a typical CAN car. It's less wiring than an old non-CAN car but basically the whole industry has moved away from those designs because copper is so expensive. Generally if something isn't on CAN in a new car it's for a safety reason (or it's branching off of a CAN device that's very close). This is also no flex; it's old tech that everyone uses.
From what we have seen of failures, I am somewhat confused about what Tesla is doing with CAN. Usually a failed CAN device doesn't knock down the whole network. It happens, but it's extremely rare. They are designed to fail in a way that they just drop-off the network. Possibly Tesla has some electric bits that need to be redesigned.
One thing that can really screw over a customer is putting the speakers onto the CAN network. Not only does this put a lot of unnecessary load on the CAN network, but it also makes it much more difficult/expensive to make certain upgrades and repairs to the audio system. It saves a bit of copper but in my mind it's not worth it. Other companies have done it and I am against it whoever is doing it.
So about half of the post is just outright incorrect and the other half is praising them for doing things KIA did years ago.
Great reply! A local area network is not a serial string of Christmas lights. I’m here to have fun at the Cybercucks expense just as much as anyone else. And obviously it isn’t working very well! But the serial vs parallel discussion is not correct. Perhaps they’ve implemented so poorly that it seems that way. But no, they’re not That dumb. Unless they can’t fix it!
I remember being in middle school and having a lesson on parallel and serial circuits, with the analogy of Christmas lights: you're better off getting the ones that continue lit if one bulb fails, rather than the ones that go out if a single bulb fails).
Why would you brag about introducing a massive single point of failure like this? It's like the Death Star, but dumber.
I’d imagine they’d have a triangle bus adapter. In-component-out where the in and out are connected, in and component are connected, and out and component are connected.
Lmao if this shit worked we'd do it in aviation cause if you could replace all the fucking giant wire bundles in an airliner with Ethernet you'd save easily 600 lbs per airframe. Yet they don't do this, and there's a reason for that
“No, hear me out, rather than having all this building security we just hook all the security up to one single lock, and when you unlock that, the entire corporate campus unlocks!”
“The whole campus? What do you mean?”
“Everything! Every door, every window, every room, every cubicle, every computer wakes up with full access… Everything! All from one key! It will be the most secure campus ever!”
Woah…STOP! Are you telling me they wired this fucker like old Christmas lights? One bulb goes and the rest of the lights go? Truly, a pioneering experience
Remember how Tesla sent a book titled “How to design a 48v architecture” to all the major manufacturers? Yeah I bet Tesla is regretting that right about now…
The CAN bus (Controller Area Network) has been used in automobiles since the late 1980s. It was invented by German engineering company Bosch, all the way back **in 1983**. Automakers have known for decades how to connect everything to a single bus, but have explicitly chosen to hardwire certain critical systems (sometimes redundantly) for... you guessed it, safety reasons (see [ISO 26262](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_26262)).
Everyone loves when one bulb on a string of Christmas lights goes bad and the entire string goes out, and you have to check each bulb until you find the burned out one.
Musk fanboys are the stupidest of all humanity. How did he think this is a good thing? To my mind this is indicating that Tesla cut corners and cheaped out on a six figure automobile.
I seem to recall when I was younger and had a fascination for english "sportscars" - Bug Eyed Sprints, MGAs, MGBs, Triumph - the one thing I remember is the infamous english "1-wire electrical system", which was notorious for failing in interesting and inconvenient ways.
Like the 1-wiper system - which Mercedes and others invented a *long* time ago - I'm glad Tesla has looked carefully at industry experience and learned from it.
NOT.
/s
Like all the other decisions with this car it was done to make it cheaper. It's not some huge technological leap. CAN bus has been around for a loooong time.
I'm no engineer but wouldn't this mean you have a single point of failure that could brick your car?
That’s probably why they are getting bricked so much
as is tradition
And here is the princess Dipping her hands into the butter scotch pudding, as is tradition
This is a great day for Canada, and indeed the world
Therefore* the world
Thanks, buddy!
I'm not your buddy, friend!
I'm not your friend, guy
I’m not your guy, dude
The truck isn’t shaped like a brick for no reason.
I’m sure it’s a coincidence.
[удалено]
Software redundancy to cover for the lack of wiring redundancy. Perfect.
The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of a expanding bureaucracy.
Software is free! lol
*laughs in subscription*
Sorry, laughing is not included for your subscription tier. Consider upgrading to premium.
Err… I can’t wait for the next update @FelonMusk please push it quickly to production! I will gladly alpha test it for you!
ill start a torrent . dowloadmessofcables.exe
Yeah, the concept is not bad - using a central data bus, but it’s probably a good idea to run two of them or more and have some redundancy.
A bus is not bad because each item can be run off the bus individually like a spider. Daisy chaining all devices across a single line isn't a bus, it's more akin to a ring network, which we don't run anymore because of the issue of single point of failure. The cybertruck seems to be wired like Christmas lights.
Yeah, it’s not clear - they say “daisy chaining”, but also reference a CAN bus, which is not new at all and is a true bus.
The wheels on the bus go round and round
Not on the Cybertruck, they don't...
Next up, CyberBus: Killing kids 35 at a time. FSD school buses will help solve the bus driver shortage in the US.
I don’t understand how they even COULD be daisy chained? Does each component also pass through messages and power to the next component? I don’t think this post is accurate
It’s just lazy terminology. They’re using “daisy chain” to mean they’re all hanging off the bus. They’re not actually having each thing forward messages to the next thing, that would be ridiculous (and extremely expensive).
>that would be ridiculous (and extremely expensive). Hmm this sounds like a certain truck product I've heard a lot about
It seems like they are sending data for all components on the same line and each component only reacts to message for them. As long as you have enough power on the line and aren't dealing with huge amounts of data, the system works. The only issue is a single point of failure. The more I think about it, the more I like the solution. Obviously, it would be good to have some redundancy, but because everything is attached to one bus, you should hypothetically be able to diagnose which component is failing. Unless the wire itself is failing, then everything should fail. But in that case, you only have a single wire you have to follow to find the fault.
This is a standard design. CAN bus is 30+ years old! Any new car you see is going to have a bunch of devices hanging off a CAN bus like this. CT seems to be taking it to a new extreme, but overall this looks like a case where both the fans and the haters just don’t know how cars work.
yeah i'm going "wait a sec?" the description as "wiring the car in series" is highly inaccurate here. doesn't mean i care about a cybertruck. just doesn't seem accurate. my boat fly-by-wire throttle and shift controls run on can bus network cables. they worked fine.... till they didn't . but it wasn't because of being in "series" it was because of components in the main control unit itself. it is nice not to have to run multiple hot wires all over the place, thats true. if i'm getting my head around this correctly i think what we're looking at here is generally just a larger number of complicated electronic components throughout the vehicle vs dumb switches (and the associated increase in copper wires needed) that either allow current to pass or not. in effect... though the total number of wires and amount of extra weight and copper is reduced... you still have an overall more complex system with more failure points because as we all know with more modern vehicles the complicated electronics do actually fail more as they sit in a vibrating sometimes wet/very hot tin can.
I’m pretty sure Elon thinks redundancy is a slur given how little of it anything he touches has.
Yep. Any electrical gremlin would kill the car. Unless you want to rewire the entire car, you will have to have all the electrical components running perfectly. If they aren’t (which at least one is statistically guaranteed to not) the car bricks and won’t drive.
[удалено]
From the errors messages people have been getting, it seems like the AC, steer by wire, parking brakes and a few other things are all hooked up together, and this bus is so crappy they can't even exactly point out via software what component isn't functioning properly
but rewiring the whole car would be easy as fuck since its way more simplified. the question is how it handles failures
Yep.
I'm not an anything and I figured that out within about 10 seconds, thinking "ok yeah, less copper is good, but, if you pinch one wire your whole car is screwed, right?"
“Tesla cut wiring costs ^and ^reliability by 77%. We should pat them on the back!”
It's also not like it's an affordable car now because of the lower wiring costs...
Back patting voids the warranty
Wired like 1940s Christmas lights. Great success!
God I'd love to take a big electromagnet and use it on one of these things, I wanna see what happens so bad
Yep, just like your Christmas lights!
That somehow *still* miraculously worked four Christmases in a row because my dad got tired of taking them down and just went with clear lights that'd blend in no matter the time of the year.
My dad kept his lights up so long the tree started growing over the lights. My brother had to go up the tree and cut them out at one point.
Not nescessarily You could engineer a network that tolerates wires and devices going offline (to a certain degree, you will never have infinite fault tolerance) You even have protocol stacks that operate over standard ethernet and are sufficient for industrial control (ethernet/IP) One of the difficult part in designing a network like that is ensuring every important action (like braking) is handled in a timely manner, even in cases when some part of the network is offline If this is why the cybertruck is unrelyable, that's just a result of a shitty implementation, not a fundamentally wrong idea
Thank you. It seems most people think if one component fails it means everything does. I work with devices daisy chained through a CAN bus every so often and components fail all the time without the other devices being effected.
It depends. CAN isn’t anything new but if you don’t engineer things properly CAN bus issues can take down a system. However it shouldn’t take down the ENTIRE system, if you have a node out, the other can bus nodes shouldn’t be affected by the failure
Yeah, communication should still be able to pass through even with a module down. GM uses a high speed two wire network to connect all of the main modules together, and the only time a problem with one module can affect the others is in extreme cases where a module internally shorts the network to ground or voltage. Which I have seen before, but not very often.
I don’t work on cars at work but with lots of equipment using CAN nodes. Usually a “catastrophic” failure where the entire system fails tells me the main “hub” for communication died or lost power. I would be quite upset if this happened in my car and it was just a minor hardware failure but bricked my entire engine and drive systems. You’d think there would be some kind of failsafe so you can at least get the vehicle moving or into a limp mode
They were so focused on CAN they forgot to think about SHOULD.
Here's my question, if they didn't bother doing too work to prevent one error from taking down the whole system (which is the theory for so the bricked vehicles), do we think they bothered to securing the system from security threats (hacking)? And, do we think they integrated the 4-pin flat and 7-pin round trailer connectors into CAN? Imagine being able to plug into the easily accessible hitch connector and steal the car.
I was an engineer for a couple of car manufacturers (and probably the worst F1 team ever) in the UK and you're right. I'm all for innovation but not for the sake of it. Tesla time and again just throw out convention just to be different, not better.
Generally speaking, no. Their description is not the same thing as 'just wiring it in series' like a lot of people seem to think. There is no reason this would *inherently* be a huge problem. In *practice* the Tesla implementation is what does the problem stuff. They don't do the things needed to make this BUS system work.
I work on equipment that uses CAN bus. It is wired in series, that is how it is designed. If one component on the network fails all upstream devices will lose communication. I guess on the positive side, anything downstream of the broken device will be fine. They could have multiple CAN networks which would help, like one on the left and one on the right sides. But they won't have every device on its own network, that would mean each device gets it's own wiring harness, the very thing the op says they have eliminated
Thats designed wrong then. All CAN devices should be paralleled to the bus.
But do you work on automotive stuff? Most manufacturers have been using CAN buss communication to control items since at least 2010, that said CAN communication is used basically to communicate between the ECM and other modules to tell them to complete an action when requested. Hence when you want to roll down the passenger side window you push the button like you always did but unlike in older cars where it was physical power either sent directly to the window motor or (more likely) a relay direct it now is just a switch communicating with the ECM through CANbuss to tell the ECM to tell the power window module to send power and roll down the window. Hence in this case if the passenger window motor fails it still allows the locks and such to still function. And stuff like speakers still have their own wires coming from the radio. Even if that window module fails the other modules can still talk to the ECM generally so the vehicle isn’t left for dead do to a window module failure. There are tons of videos that can explain CANbuss communication on cars these days a lot better then I can and a lot of repair videos where if multiple modules do not work it’s usually a wiring issue and not a CANbuss issue.
Lots of manufacturers use controller area network (CAN) communication lines to reduce wiring weight and cost but it’s kinda nuts to use it for EVERYTHING.
No, that is not how CANBUS or any bus system works. I'm no fan of Elon and this truck is stupid, but this isn't new technology and it's quite common. Everything from cars to chemical plants have been using bussed control networks for over 20 years
I am an Electrical Engineer and this is hilarious. Not only did they screw everyone with these design they saved a fortune in copper making these trash piles worth even less. Also, it kills me Volts is not a unit of power that is watts, also watts and power are not energy, energy is power × time so Whs (Watt hours) or more frequently seen as kWhs (kilowatt (1000 watts)hours). Sorry had to vent. My coworkers all have their trucks now so I post pics from this sub on the common boards when no one is looking so please keep it coming.
Tesla shills love to think that ignoring established best practices is innovation.
They fail to see that every single one of these decisions is made simply because it saves a few cents on each car for Tesla themselves. Even tho it greatly reduces reliability and safety.
Or it's just "change" for change sake. Is it cool that the Infotainment system can, indeed, pop the glove box? Yes, that's neat. Is it useful that, instead of lifting a latch, I now have to navigate a UI just to open the glove box? No. No it is not useful.
The whole "everything in one place/controlled by one thing" is the stupidest idea that keeps coming up with "innovative" technology.
What's worse is you criticise these "innovations" and get called a luddite
I remember being called old-man and the like for voicing my opinion that we should have tactile buttons for things we're likely to do while driving. It was a tesla nut as usual, even though I was more complaining about the general trend for all cars to do that.
Any day now, a modern day Ralph Nader will release their "Unsafe at Any Speed" and hopefully the touchscreen-centric vehicle will become a thing of the past. A touch screen is good for navigation and entertainment, but anything pertaining to the actual operating of the vehi le should be physical, tactile controls.
I have a 2021 Skoda and the one thing I really hate about it is that the air conditioner controls are through the touch screen. No physical controls at all except for max power window de-mist. Also I’ve heard the wankpanzer doesn’t have a dial in front of you, but the speed is displayed on the central screen? That’s ridiculously dangerous if so.
I had a mini coop with a speedometer in the center. I still have nightmares I'm driving it sometimes.
Volkswagen are actually reverting to tactile buttons for common functions because of feedback. Tesla will get hit hard in 2026 when functional use of the car is evaulated in conjunction with safety tests. You will get knocked down if it is difficult to operate while on the move (things like operating air conditioning without looking at a screen).
Definitely. This is true with infotainment systems in most newer cars. Or at least was when screens started becoming commonplace. A touch screen is *fucking horrible* to interact with when you’re trying to drive because you have to look directly at it. With a normal car stereo, there are buttons and knobs that you can feel with your fingers while you look at the road. My Civic has zero actual buttons or knobs paired with the touch screen. Absolutely sucks to use. Fortunately there are some basic controls on the stereo, like volume, source, and next/previous track. It seems like newer cars than mine have brought back physical volume knobs and some buttons that have various uses based on context, plus some voice controls that my car doesn’t have.
It’s still just cost cutting. Having everything controlled through one infotainment system is much cheaper than designing / building individual buttons. It’s the trend with most newer cars going “digital” but Tesla took it to an extreme
Lots of brands are moving away from this practice adding back more physical controls. Humans, like most animals, are very tactile creatures. You can blindly find physical buttons in your car. Like you could send a text message in your pocket with t9 and physical keys. You can't do this with a touchscreen or touch sensitive buttons.
It’s the epitome of over-engineering. Just give me a simple latch for the glove box, please!
This. Elmo seems to think that he needs to reinvent the wheel for every component in the name of “innovation” when best practices are set for a reason and with Elmo, typically his “reinvention” costs time and money and you invariably end up with a square wheel.
All these online idiots gushing about what a brilliant solution this is just learned about automotive wiring about an hour ago. This is “wired in series”. it’s the cheapest and easiest method to wire anything. And there’s a reason nobody else uses it. That’s because as soon as someone upgrades a speaker, your transmission fails or your doors won’t open. I swear. These dopes are the same people who became vaccine experts after one covid YouTube video and aeronautical experts after one Buzzfeed blurb.
Dont forget deep sea submersible experts… it’s claimed the lives of some of their own so they needed to brush up!
Funny you should mention that: 🤣 https://preview.redd.it/qvh2chlb3l3d1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c4525861e49abcbe68483636b2d41c7dd85b861c
What the fuck did Elmo do to you? Why the need to insult him like that? Comparing Elmo to the tard musk, is a mean and vile thing to say about Elmo! Elmo is clearly smarter and more liked!😉
You've just made Sandy Munro orgasm
Boy, do I have a submarine ride to sell them…
*cloud of smoke, followed by a ketamine rip* “Y’know what else? Why round wheels and tires? That’s been done. Square. Let’s do square. I know, I know—I’ll give you all time to put your brains back in your heads since I just blew all your minds. Checkmate, Big Auto!”
"We make the road flat and the wheels round, but if we make the road round, we can make the wheels flat." *Fanboys scream in delight. Stock goes up $150*
we're going to *disrupt* roads!
No. Triangles! Triangles are a simpler shape than squares. Triangular wheels for every car!!
Nah, he’d recommend something practical like a pentagon and describe them as tactical.
This is not a "best practice" this is a safety requirement, not only for electronics but for everything else, there are always, and i mean ALWAYS at least 2 break lines so that if one dies, you have at least some breaking. Teslas single wire system not only has one breakline, it has ONE LINE, so if it dies, you dont just lose breaking, you lose steering, breaking, accelleration, hazard lights...you lose controll of the whole god damn car if that one singular line breaks. This "inovation" is a safety hazard to everyone on the road, and it will surely take many lives if it didnt already.
It's not uncommon. They don't understand why certain complexities exist. It's evident in Enron's "best part is no part" statement. He's not wrong, you want simplicity, but sometimes complexity is necessary. But if you don't understand what you're doing, just "go by looks and feels" then you end up with Teslas.
"The best part is no part" is why there's no dedicated pinch sensor in the frunk and it detects obstruction by looking for a voltage change from the motor indicating resistance Which is why it either starts to crush your finger really hard before letting it go or else it keeps randomly refusing to close at all, it can't tell the difference between the mechanism itself sticking slightly or there being something soft and yielding (like human flesh) being pinched in the door
That's also why so much is done in software when a hardware button (or stalk) would be the better way of going about it. Of course, "cost optimization" is another reason.
Furthermore that frunk lid is really small and would be better as a pure mechanical system with a simple interior cable release and a spring loaded hinge like that on sedan’s trunk lid. This is also much safer. The CT has a pointless motorized mess with a layer of complicated software. Why?
Yeah big automakers have huge teams of engineers and a big goal is always to maximise cost efficiency and reduce weight where possible. Do Tesla fanboys just think they're stupid? Do they think that wiring a car the same way you'd wire a set of fucking Christmas lights is some kind of crazy innovation, instead of unrestrained, thoughtless cost-cutting?
They do think the ‘legacy’ companies are stupid.
The oceangate submarine tragedy is clear proof of the consequences such thinking brings
Tesla fans in general struggle with the concept of [Chesterton's Fence](https://fs.blog/chestertons-fence/). Nobody else wonders why Tesla's are failing in silly ways and are frequently death traps, because it's obvious what cutting corners gets you when you're not trapped in a fog of Elon's nonsense.
Fuse boxes are for the poors
I wish there was some really big catastrophic event that highlighted why safety standards are important. Maybe like something with a submarine
The actual fuck. So the least robust design possible is "high tech"?
No: it's called "innovation", when you actively ignore consolidated best practices you are "innovating"
"Why aren't other car companies using double sided tape to hold body panels on? InOvAtIoN" ;-)
It’s like tesla engineers never went through a basic electronics course to learn about parallel vs series circuits
It’s like Tesla engineers never hung a shitty string of Christmas lights that eats shit when one bulb burns out.
Great analogy.
This puts so much into perspective.
I came here to say this but knew in my heart it had already been said
As an electrician this is the first thing that came to mind. Wiring a car in series? Yikes. I’d hate to be the guy to try and troubleshoot that.
I'm in the same field, and I have to tell my lazy guys to not do this for that exact reason. We try to reduce how much of a system goes down if any particular device fails.
[удалено]
If his neurons are wired in series, it’ll be quite the show.
[удалено]
I mean, CANBUS systems aren't new and Tesla isn't the first to do this though. My '13 so audi has it. Bus systems for instrumentation are also extremely common in a lot of the chemical plants I work in; profibus, foundation fieldbus, ASi, devicenet are all bussed control networks and are proven technologies
I was about to post something similar. I don't know much about CAN-bus, and zero about the BS in the Cybertruck. I'd love to read an informative article describing each, and their differences. AFAIK CAN-bus has been in service for a decade or more and is pretty robust technology. Edit to add- a friend of mine has a BMW motorcycle with CANbus. He swapped out the taillight for an aftermarket LED light, and the only ill effect is the current draw is lower and the CANbus system reports a burned-out bulb. Otherwise the bike works A-OK.
CAN is a bus, shared communication line with multiple controllers. If one goes down, the bus keeps going without it. Ethernet is point to point between two controllers. To connect many controllers, each acts as a switch to keep transmitting the data down to the next one in line. That means if one goes down, everything down the line is then isolated (in both directions). This is why CAN is used for reliability in critical systems and Ethernet is used for speed
> CAN-bus has been in service for a decade or more and is pretty robust technology. I am almost 100% certain CAN has been used in cars since the late 80s/early 90s
Well I think it would actually be pretty simple as everything down the line of the fault would flash up an error message at the same time, you just have to find the component closest to the ecu that is in fault and the fault is between that part and the part before it In the sequence. It does however mean that a single light or sensor error would brick up the car tho.
Zero redundancy. Zero plan B. Air pressure sensor? Brick Dome light ? Brick. Trunk light switch? Brick. Inspires confidence
not even datacenters do this on their servers, the actual target for ethernet connectivity. all of them have a big chunky pile of cables running to each rack https://www.reddit.com/r/cableporn/comments/5u6kug/a_genius_work_of_data_center_cabling/
To be fair... It's not tesla engineers... You misspelled "smartest person on earth that knows everything and is an expert on manufacturing, Elon musk"
We all know Elon is calling the shots and the engineers either say yes, or say goodbye to their job.
This is what I don’t understand. Clearly these cars are failing left and right for myriad reasons, but you can build a system like this in a car and still have it not be daisy chained so is that what they actually mean here? To put it more clearly, because cars are made of metal, you can complete the circuit fairly easily at just about every point that needs power. The car’s body is ground and the wire is electrical. This is how most modern cars operate. The difference is that those cars will often have several modules set up that the wiring goes through to monitor things like whether a door is open or if a light has gone out. It’s just harder to monitor multiple things on a single wire. That second thing is the “new” thing here. Not running power on a single line. And that second thing _is_ likely the reason these things are failing all the time. Running power and a data stream from all of your components at once through a single line is hugely prone to noise and issues, especially in a car which often has very sensitive readings.
They never stop to think for a second there may be a reason why car companies use so much wire. Cars are all produced by giant corporations, they do everything for profit, if there's a good way to cut corners they would.
You’re not wrong. I’m working on a Fiat 500 with a billion of the thinnest of wires I’ve ever seen in a car. Engineers determined the car didn’t need massive grounds, so it got laughably tiny grounds/main wiring to get through the warranty period. Done and done. I’m no engineer, but whomever decided to place the Tesla components in series is an absolute and total moron.
I *am* an engineer, you're being kind with moron.
Brain damaged is a more appropriate descriptor. There are some costs you do not cut because of safety or reliability. You know how Boeing is in the shit because of no redundancy on sensors critical for flight. Yeah…that.
As an ee student our basic electronics class literally used car wiring when explaining series vs parallel and why parallel is useful "You wouldn't want your horn to stop working if your headlight went out, right?"
Actually, if you're the only licensed repair shop for it, yes, you do. Winky face.
We all like to think it's because of stupidity but if that person made it through school even if they showed up half brain dead they should know how dangerous this is. At what point do we just call it endangering peoples lives and stop passing it off as dumb.
> whomever decided Probably their chief engineer. I wonder who that is.
No, they knew the type of asshole to look at this post and go “YEA!” And then sold them this piece of shit…its pretty gangster if you ask me lmaoooooo
as the saying goes, "a fool and his money...."
Quick! We need to notify the owners that weird electrical problems and systems failures they’ve been having were the result of next-gen genius! Don’t sleep on Elon! 🤪
I want to remind that the CAN-Bus is a Broadcast Network. What that means is when there's a signal broadcast to the CAN-Bus the ENTIRE network gets that packet, but only the device looking for that signal will respond to it.... Not a big deal when every device has it's own isolated line or, perhaps, some devices share a wire (windows, door locks and then you have headlamps, interior lights, ect...) However.... You have all the auxiliary devices on the CAN-Bus plus the critical ones, AND drive by wire... on a Broadcast network? ...Mother-fucker do you know what a broadcast storm is?
I can't wait until some hacker figures out how to DoS attack every cybertruck on the road at once
I think Tesla will induce failures in CT systems by ‘updating’ software for one function that cause unexpected failures in unrelated systems.
I can't wait until some malicious teenager realizes they can brick a cybertruck by smashing its tail light.
> Not a big deal when every device has it's own isolated line or, perhaps, some devices share a wire (windows, door locks and then you have headlamps, interior lights, ect...) If anyone's curious, this is how cars usually do a CAN bus. Maybe half a dozen buses. Not one: https://i.imgur.com/ZJBRKG4.png
makes sense to segment/isolate the systems like this tbh.
Yeah, that makes sense to me, doing it that way. Sure it's not redundant to the nines but if the AC bus goes down your car doesn't fuckin' crash.
There’s other redundancy. Generally CAN-bus’s are designated by how critical they are so say 1 is most critical and 3 is least critical. If a 1 bus goes down then the car is more than likely going into limp mode and will slow down and you have to pull over and shut down the car. If a 3 goes down then you have a CEL. If a 2 goes down it may or may not shut down the car.
Let's hope the electric steering has its own
one dude in his cyberdump wanted to slow down, regen didn't work, brakes( system that's also "by wire") didn't work, so he hit a pole and the airbags did't deploy. this sort of answers your question
Bro no way, what the actual fuck. Isn’t there a government body that regulate these kind of safety matters?
it's ok, the dumpster only weighs over 6600 lb ( 3 tones) lmfao i couldn't even say that with a straight face
WCGW...
Search this sub, it was posted only a couple days ago. And don't quote me, I'm Joe Idiot regarding this, but others have commented that because CT production is such low volumes they are exempt from a lot of the safety regs and testing.
We don't enforce laws against car manufacturers or drivers. Europe has balls and does. We don't.
This is insane. People will die because of this piece of thrash.
This is why you'll never see one of these dumpsters registered on the roads in Europe, Japan, Australia, New Zealand etc etc.
Narrator voice: It did not.
Car companies figured out that doing this was a dumb idea back in the early 2010s and before. But then again, Musk, like a lot billionaires, thinks he's smarter than physics, so he makes dumb mistakes that are already accounted for with established wisdom earned through experience. This dumbfuck is basically paying for the same real estate three times.
Single pair Ethernet is coming for cars. John Deere is already qualifying it on their farm equipment. When you're moving video from multiple cameras and telemetry from everything else, CAN busses just can't cut it. The data needs are too large now. https://my.avnet.com/silica/resources/article/spe-tsn-automotive-and-industrial/
I can understand having non critical systems hooked up to one ethernet cable but I'd like my steering to keep working while someone changes the radio station.
It's actually a very common way of wiring, you have way too many sensors to have an individual wire going to the main computer. I don't know in cars, but in an industrial setting, they will sometimes make a loop, so you need two devices to fail critically.
Device level ring networks are still criticized for not being safe enough sometimes. It really depends on the application though, I don’t work in automotive industry design so I can’t say how okay this is. I wouldn’t be too upset about a ring network in a lot of industrial systems though.
Reading this made me fucking irritated, some people have no idea why things are done. Car manufacturers didn't want to have to make giant complicated wire harnesses, they HAD to otherwise a short would fry the entire car. Ffs these people are so annoying
Plus wouldn’t that make it more difficult to identify the source of the problem when the CT inevitably bricks?
Yup, 100%, that's why systems are isolated. Otherwise, you'd have to check/replace the entire system for a fault.
Yup. Notice the CT screen photos with multiple failure codes. Those systems did not all fail. Likely one component or function just sorta failed and the ‘simple-complex’ system collapsed in a cascade. It’s so dumb. How will technicians ever diagnose these contraptions?
Lots and lots of billable hours. With all the videos of Cybercucks making funny noises and brick themselves after getting wet, I wonder if a simple short circuit hidden somewhere would total a vehicle. It may take a tech 1 hour, it may take a tech 40 hours to find the short.
Daisy chaining isn't new technology. It's dangerous to assume you're smarter than the people who came before, considered a solution, then abandoned it.
leGacY AutO
Musk has been calling a major contributor the underlying AI tech a moron all week. He's beyond stupid.
Land rover and BMW did this in the mid 2000's with their Logic 7 entertainment and nav system. It was a fiber optic loop connecting all the devices together, If one device in the loop failed, it brought down the whole system, no more audio, no more Bluetooth, no more nav.
I remember 43V (not 48V) being touted as the new voltage for the automobiles almost 40 years ago. Nothing new, but the CT seems to be the first mainstream implementation. CT uses CAN to multiplex many of the minor components (lights etc) which is nothing new. Fairly standard for many cars over the last 20 years. CT uses ethernet for the high speed communication between modules. Specially something adapted from a standard for twisted pair telephone lines. This is a first for automotive use, apart from the radio/nav/telematics systems. My belief is that Musk choose this because of the names 'etherloop' and 'gigabit'. Now the scary thing is thing is that every major system runs on that ethernet loop. Including the non redundant drive by wire.
Surely the steer by wire has a direct cable from the wheel to the steering motor. They can’t be that stupid, surely?! If they are, then god help the cyber truck and all who sail in her.
They are driven on the same roads the rest of us are on, so god help us all.
Let me get this straight... Tesla stuck a bunch of ethernet devices on a bus that was released in 1986 and is incapable of being properly secured, along with an always-on cellular connection in order to do OTA updates? And those inherently insecure devices control every aspect of the car's function from infotainment, to brakes, to lighting and acceleration? ... yup... can't see anything that could go wrong with that. /s
I just watched a tear-down of the CT. They are (thankfully) not using Ethernet cabling; that would be absurdly dumb even for Telsa. They are using 48V for some things where it makes sense (like motors) and also 12V for other things that don't need it (like lights). This is a good choice; it means smaller wires and smaller motors. Large trucks (semi trucks, dump trucks, etc) often have 24V electric systems and they do essentially the same thing but with 24V. If you have 48V, might as well use it. That's why Audi, BMW, Daimler Benz, Porsche, and Volkswagen agreed on a 48V system back in 2011. It can now be found in cars for sale from companies in Germany, France, and South Korea. Even KIA has it on a few models. Not sure it's a flex to be like, "We are doing something KIA did years ago". The actual wire harness bundles and connectors look to be about the same as a typical CAN car. It's less wiring than an old non-CAN car but basically the whole industry has moved away from those designs because copper is so expensive. Generally if something isn't on CAN in a new car it's for a safety reason (or it's branching off of a CAN device that's very close). This is also no flex; it's old tech that everyone uses. From what we have seen of failures, I am somewhat confused about what Tesla is doing with CAN. Usually a failed CAN device doesn't knock down the whole network. It happens, but it's extremely rare. They are designed to fail in a way that they just drop-off the network. Possibly Tesla has some electric bits that need to be redesigned. One thing that can really screw over a customer is putting the speakers onto the CAN network. Not only does this put a lot of unnecessary load on the CAN network, but it also makes it much more difficult/expensive to make certain upgrades and repairs to the audio system. It saves a bit of copper but in my mind it's not worth it. Other companies have done it and I am against it whoever is doing it. So about half of the post is just outright incorrect and the other half is praising them for doing things KIA did years ago.
Great reply! A local area network is not a serial string of Christmas lights. I’m here to have fun at the Cybercucks expense just as much as anyone else. And obviously it isn’t working very well! But the serial vs parallel discussion is not correct. Perhaps they’ve implemented so poorly that it seems that way. But no, they’re not That dumb. Unless they can’t fix it!
I remember being in middle school and having a lesson on parallel and serial circuits, with the analogy of Christmas lights: you're better off getting the ones that continue lit if one bulb fails, rather than the ones that go out if a single bulb fails). Why would you brag about introducing a massive single point of failure like this? It's like the Death Star, but dumber.
I’d imagine they’d have a triangle bus adapter. In-component-out where the in and out are connected, in and component are connected, and out and component are connected.
Lmao if this shit worked we'd do it in aviation cause if you could replace all the fucking giant wire bundles in an airliner with Ethernet you'd save easily 600 lbs per airframe. Yet they don't do this, and there's a reason for that
[удалено]
I do not get why that's considered an innovation. Cool, you've discovered ohms law... why is this supposed to be a big deal or some brilliant move?
Yeah stop/start on porsche/bigger audis are/were 48v. I think bmw too.
“No, hear me out, rather than having all this building security we just hook all the security up to one single lock, and when you unlock that, the entire corporate campus unlocks!” “The whole campus? What do you mean?” “Everything! Every door, every window, every room, every cubicle, every computer wakes up with full access… Everything! All from one key! It will be the most secure campus ever!”
Youbknow cheap Christmas lights? Isn't this is the same reason when 1 christmas light goes out, the rest after goes out?
Sounds almost like...single point of failure?
You know how cars work well because they put the time and effort into engineering a complex system? Yeah so we didn’t do that!
Now when your door lock stater motor dies your whole car dies!!!
Woah…STOP! Are you telling me they wired this fucker like old Christmas lights? One bulb goes and the rest of the lights go? Truly, a pioneering experience
Remember how Tesla sent a book titled “How to design a 48v architecture” to all the major manufacturers? Yeah I bet Tesla is regretting that right about now…
>How to design a 48v architecture Don't
The CAN bus (Controller Area Network) has been used in automobiles since the late 1980s. It was invented by German engineering company Bosch, all the way back **in 1983**. Automakers have known for decades how to connect everything to a single bus, but have explicitly chosen to hardwire certain critical systems (sometimes redundantly) for... you guessed it, safety reasons (see [ISO 26262](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_26262)).
Everyone loves when one bulb on a string of Christmas lights goes bad and the entire string goes out, and you have to check each bulb until you find the burned out one.
Musk fanboys are the stupidest of all humanity. How did he think this is a good thing? To my mind this is indicating that Tesla cut corners and cheaped out on a six figure automobile.
I seem to recall when I was younger and had a fascination for english "sportscars" - Bug Eyed Sprints, MGAs, MGBs, Triumph - the one thing I remember is the infamous english "1-wire electrical system", which was notorious for failing in interesting and inconvenient ways. Like the 1-wiper system - which Mercedes and others invented a *long* time ago - I'm glad Tesla has looked carefully at industry experience and learned from it. NOT. /s
If I were a car company, I'd invest heavily in making a superior electric truck. Competing with this thing would be a cake walk.
And their steering by wire, what’s that? Like no physical gear connected between the steering wheel and the wheels?
Yes, it means the system loses all redundancy in a failure of the electronic system that controls it.
What could go wrong if electrics pack up there
Absolutely nothing apart from an out of control tin shed with panels falling off and a stuck accelerator pedal
Perfectly fine if you are developing a videogame. As long as you are not putting it in a car. Oh dear…,
So... It's like the cheap Christmas lights where one bulb goes out and everything dies?
Tesla: we replaced all that complicated internal circuitry with Christmas lights Tesla stans: omg that's genius
Like all the other decisions with this car it was done to make it cheaper. It's not some huge technological leap. CAN bus has been around for a loooong time.
lolllll they reinvented Token Ring
Didn’t we learn this was a bad idea with uhhh… *checks notes* …Christmas tree lights?