Embedded Systems Conference
Breaking News
Comments
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
jpeterm
User Rank
Author
tesla charger issue
jpeterm   1/20/2014 12:56:14 AM
NO RATINGS
Something here doesn't pass the smell test. If there is abnormally high resistance somewhere, then then the heating will occur exactly where that high resistance is, and NOT ELSEWHERE. Thus, if the high resistance abnormality is in the user's provided circuit, the overheating should occur only there, NOT in the internal guts of what should be a perfectly high conductivity, zero resistance, simple 240v NEMA Tesla plug adaptor. So why and how can a perfect zero resistance simple Tesla adaptor melt when the high resistance problem is asserted to be in the customer;s wiring?

DrQuine
User Rank
Author
Re: 2014 vehicle updates
DrQuine   1/19/2014 7:08:25 PM
NO RATINGS
It seems to me there is a fundamental issue when people are modifying the vehicle firmware and software that controls the safety systems and that may be subject to mandated safety updates ("recalls"). A hobby programmer cannot possibly know how their modifications will interact with all future hardware, software, and firmware updates. Perhaps, the personal software will be blown away by a software update, perhaps it will interact adversely. I think I'll confine my programming efforts to other venues.

Bert22306
User Rank
Author
Many ways to look at this recall
Bert22306   1/15/2014 6:14:30 PM
NO RATINGS
Naturally, it always goes without saying, early adopter "zealots" will always put a positive spin on anything to do with the object of their zeal. So, instead of figuring that it would be practically impossible for the established automakers, who sell 100s of thousands of cars every MONTH, to make "house calls," the zealot makes it sound like government-subsidized Tesla, selling way fewer cars than that per year, is doing something extraordinary. Come now. Let's not gush.

The fact that the Tesla software can be updated remotely is both good and bad, right? Let's be consistent. This can be done to operating software in ANY new car, in principle, but most people seemed to think that it was a bad idea. Most people, in the past, thought it best to take the car to a garage, where the update can only be entered via the OBD-II physical port. Now that we're gushing, though, it's a different story. In principle, any update to any ECU in my GM could be transmitted via OnStar. (They already give the car periodic health checks remotely, via OnStar, so why not updates too?)

Finally, the idea that charging a Tesla can burn your house down is not something to be brushed off either. Filling the tank of your standard car, while in the garage, could also burn your house down. That's why we don't have gasoline pumps in garages. Presumably, to allow anyone to install a gasoline storage tank and pump in his garage, you'd have to pass some sort of stringent inspection. High current battery charging, of the type needed to transfer enough energy to power a car for more than a really short ride, is serious business. It's hardly a surprise that, meeting code or no code, careless homeowners may not know what to watch out for. How many people look inside their 230V receptacles to make sure they are sparkling clean, for instance? Or will Tesla also make house calls to do that?

ThaidUp
User Rank
Author
Re: Not a "recall"
ThaidUp   1/15/2014 2:02:16 PM
NO RATINGS
Tell that to the people who died while using their Iphone with 3rd party chargers

junko.yoshida
User Rank
Author
Re: Not a "recall"
junko.yoshida   1/15/2014 1:52:27 PM
NO RATINGS
Your understanding is absolutely correct. I would not argue with that.

As a safety measure, Tesla took an initiative to report that to NHTHA, and that "recall" notice was posted by NHTSA Monday this week.

But here is the thing.

Even if this overheating issue has everything to do with corroded wall sockets, the fact that Tesla was able to address the issue by changing software means, well, there was a way to fix this on the automotive side.  

And by debating it was a physical "recall" or not, we are underestimating the very fact that there was something Tesla could have done in the first place to make this safer.

orim181
User Rank
Author
Re: Not a "recall"
orim181   1/15/2014 12:43:48 PM
NO RATINGS
I think there may be some confusion. From my understanding, the reason for this "recall" was not to fix a problem Teslas had but to workaround a problem owner's could have with their home wiring. If a home's electrical was installed to code, the update or "recall" was unneeded. I understood it as a safety measure to protect owners from their own home's faulty wiring. Based on that understanding, this wasn't something that Tesla was liable to address, but they did it anyway. Please let me know if I have the wrong understanding here. The press release did not attribute anything with the car itself, but with the charging environment it was being connected to.

Caleb Kraft
User Rank
Author
Re: 2014 vehicle updates
Caleb Kraft   1/15/2014 11:48:57 AM
NO RATINGS
I come from a very hacker friendly background and don't necessarily think it is the auto maker's job to tell me what I can and can't modify on something I own.

Obviously I don't want people to get hurt. That doesn't even need to be part of the argument. Any modification someone does that puts unwilling or unsuspecting people in danger is bad.

That doesn't change the excitement I get thnking about the fact that there is now this plethora of new shiny things for modders to play with when it comes to in-car computing.

junko.yoshida
User Rank
Author
Re: 2014 vehicle updates
junko.yoshida   1/15/2014 11:38:14 AM
NO RATINGS
@caleb, people have been modifying their cars for decades. People "modify" their car's mileage so that they can cheat (on the age of their car0, or modify their speed so they can go faster, etc. etc. Such practices have been hazardous -- for safety reasons, as well as for protecting the value of one's car -- and carmakers have been fighting it. 

NorthTree Associates
User Rank
Author
Re: Not a "recall"
NorthTree Associates   1/15/2014 11:13:27 AM
NO RATINGS
Tesla is taking a page out of the High Tech World guidebook - make it easy for customers to update and fix bugs easily through a simple download. The word "recall" in this article should be the phrase "bug fix sw download". It sounds like Tesla has been doing some superior bad press damage control.

Easy downloads and sw fixes = happy customers. 

junko.yoshida
User Rank
Author
Re: Not a "recall"
junko.yoshida   1/15/2014 10:47:21 AM
NO RATINGS
@DMcCunney, I love your friend's Tesla story. I've heard similar stories as well. The point is that Tesla is doing everything it can to establish its brand and please its customers. That's admirable.

That said, here's my argument about "recall" definition.

OK. You are right. Customers did not physically have to return the car -- hence it was not "recalled" as far as the definition of the word "recall" goes.

But motor vehicle "recalls" are issued because of safety standards. To me, by saying this car was NOT technically recalled, it is as though Tesla is saying that this overheating issue does not fall into the category of "defect." I find Musk's tweet clever but also that tweet makes him sound irresponsible. Just as a reminder, NHTSA only issues a "recall" when it finds the following.

The United States Code for Motor Vehicle Safety defines motor vehicle safety as "the performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment in a way that protects the public against unreasonable risk of accidents occurring because of the design, construction, or performance of a motor vehicle, and against unreasonable risk of death or injury in an accident, and includes nonoperational safety of a motor vehicle."

 

 

 



Page 1 / 2   >   >>


Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
Overview: Battle-hardened veterans of the electronics industry have heard of the “connected car” so often that they assume it’s a done deal. But do we really know what it takes to get a car connected and what its future entails? Join EE Times editor Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of movers and shakers in the connected car business. Executives from Cisco, Siemens and NXP will share ideas, plans and hopes for connected cars and their future. After the first 30 minutes of the radio show, our listeners will have the opportunity to ask questions via live online chat.
Flash Poll
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
Special Video Section
LED lighting is an important feature in today’s and future ...
Active balancing of series connected battery stacks exists ...
After a four-year absence, Infineon returns to Mobile World ...
A laptop’s 65-watt adapter can be made 6 times smaller and ...
An industry network should have device and data security at ...
The LTC2975 is a four-channel PMBus Power System Manager ...
In this video, a new high speed CMOS output comparator ...
The LT8640 is a 42V, 5A synchronous step-down regulator ...
The LTC2000 high-speed DAC has low noise and excellent ...
How do you protect the load and ensure output continues to ...
General-purpose DACs have applications in instrumentation, ...
Linear Technology demonstrates its latest measurement ...
10:29
Demos from Maxim Integrated at Electronica 2014 show ...
Bosch CEO Stefan Finkbeiner shows off latest combo and ...
STMicroelectronics demoed this simple gesture control ...
Keysight shows you what signals lurk in real-time at 510MHz ...
TE Connectivity's clear-plastic, full-size model car shows ...
Why culture makes Linear Tech a winner.
Recently formed Architects of Modern Power consortium ...
Specially modified Corvette C7 Stingray responds to ex Indy ...