6 ms·

The Great Lakes region has a surprising concentration of advanced manufacturing skillsets. With large manufacturing facilities with extremely stringent quality

The Great Lakes region has a surprising concentration of advanced manufacturing skillsets. With large manufacturing facilities with extremely stringent quality standards like a bleeding edge chip fab there's going to be a enormous need for people with traditional manufacturing-specific support skillsets that are simply not available in large quantities anywhere else in the US. If the current administration's support of the transition to electric vehicles doesn't falter, that's going to drive an increasing need for microprocessors in vehicles. Intel locating themselves in central Ohio puts their production facilities on an interstate highway hub that puts them within a 6-12 hour drive of nearly every major auto manufacturing facility in the US, which is an enormous incentive for the auto manufacturers to source from them. Additionally, Columbus has the Rickenbacker International Airport which is a dedicated air freight airport that lets them get their product global faster. This announcement of two facilities makes me think that Phoenix is going to be a smaller facility handling the more advanced, smaller run chip designs, but host the R&D and design offices (To take advantage of the city's concentration of tech talent) while Columbus is going to be the primary production facility.

coredog64 5y ago
They’re going to fab there and then ship the output to Malaysia, Costa Rica, or the Philippines for package and test. Being close to Detroit doesn’t count for much.
galangalalgol 5y ago
the only thing an ev actually needs chips for is charge controllers which can be old fab tech, and motor controllers which aren't normal silicon or tiny feature size. Tesla is using silicon carbide, and gallium arsenide will probably be next. The Bollinger takes this route of minimalism. Ironically, an EV has less reliance on processing than a modern ICE vehicle.
- ridgeguy 5y ago
  I think it's gallium nitride (GaN), not gallium arsenide (GaAs).
  - galangalalgol 5y ago
    you are absolutely right. I couldn't figure out why GAN didn't make sense so I spelled it out and got the wrong one. It is amazing how much smaller and cooler GaN made usbc power supplies and rf power amps. I'm waiting on lunchbox welders based on it. It is so insanely efficient.
- bbreier 5y ago
  Also the infotainment. And real questions because I'm genuinely curious: do driver assists (ABS, ASR, TCS) and their adjustments rely on processors? What about in-car adjustments to suspension height, ride firmness, throttle response (e.g. eco vs sport vs comfort modes)? Lane keep assist, blind spot checking, adaptive cruise control all seem like things that would require processing power as well.
  - hnov 5y ago
    Even headlights and brake pedals (brake by wire) have ICs in them these days, I doubt getting rid of a PCM will make an EV less IC heavy.
  - nradov 5y ago
    Most current vehicles use separate embedded microcontrollers for those features. In principle it's possible to build a car with a single powerful processor controlling everything, but the engineering becomes far more challenging and you need a higher level of vertical integration on the parts supply chain. There are also safety risks: you don't want an LKA code defect to cause a TCS failure. And wiring harness would have to grow to carry all the separate data signals. Tesla is partially going the integration route but they still have many separate processors in the car.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    The only infotainment a car needs is interfacing with CarPlay/Android Auto.
  - totalZero 5y ago
    > do driver assists (ABS, ASR, TCS) and their adjustments rely on processors? If I'm not mistaken, microprocessors aren't the only semiconductor components that have been in short supply recently. Things like shaft position sensors are also solid-state devices.
- hnov 5y ago
  Do EVs not have all of the ancillaries hanging off CANBUS or something? Or is the lion's share of chips in an ICE vehicle engine and transmission control?
  - SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
    Of course. There isn’t an EV in the world that is less complex than it’s ICE counterpart. GP is very mistaken. I wrote a longer explanation above.
    - elihu 5y ago
      Most of the complexity of EVs is just generic modern car complexity, though. EVs don't have to be any more complicated than ICE vehicles, and EV conversions especially are usually really simple (though to be fair a lot of the vehicles being converted are old classic cars that didn't have any computers in them to begin with). The EV drivetrain might have more or less computers than an ICE drivetrain, but really managing batteries and a motor isn't inherently all that complicated. On the ICE side of things you have a lot more moving parts and the necessity of keeping everything properly tuned so it can pass emissions checks. Braking and traction control I could see being fairly complicated, but it's a similar problem whether it's an ICE engine or an electric motor. Self-driving is hugely complicated, but that's not complexity that's inherent to EVs specifically, it's just a feature that's usually only implemented on EVs for some reason. All the other stuff: infotainment, tire pressure sensors, back up cameras, and so on are just modern car complexity.
      - SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
        The braking is way way more complex because of regenerative. That isn't a factor with ICE. Trust me - it's not simpler. I know you think we just apply power to the motor and go, but that is not the case. There are facets of "soft start" and it ties in to traction control, there are efficiency processes, etc. Instead of map tables for rpm and injection, you have battery heating and cooling targets with current sensed feedbacks and torque targets, and bla bla bla. Stop making me bring work home with me! ;) EVs are not simpler. It's literally impossible in automotive to ever get simpler. At least since the 1970s. I think we're hitting a point of unsustainability and the people in charge think OTA firmware is going to fix that, I think it'll make it much worse. EDIT: fwiw, I wish I could go back to a time when backup camera was even mention worthy of "things I consider complex in a vehicle". It's just a couple shielded wires and plugs into the radio/telamatics. I can tell you without a doubt that the starter in most vehicle is now far more complicated, to the point it too has it's own microcontroller and data bus (typically LIN, not sure I've seen a CAN yet).
- SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
  Automotive EE here… > the only thing an ev actually needs chips for is charge controllers which can be old fab tech, and motor controllers I wish I had the time to explain how this could not be more wrong. Quickly, I’ll mention that the vehicle I’m working on has 8 separate modules for the driver’s seat. Inside these modules are a combined total of 10 processors with as many bootloaders and flash procedures and validation records and crypto and peripheral drivers, 17 CAN-FD modules, 6 system basis chips, 9 switching power supplies with a number of accessory LDO supplies, at least 40 more “chips” of various functions and capacities… for just the driver’s seat alone The steering wheel buttons for radio left and right side and the cruise control comprise 3 modules and power supplies and etc etc. >The Bollinger takes this route of minimalism. Ironically, an EV has less reliance on processing than a modern ICE vehicle. I know what you are trying to say, but it is largely incorrect. The EVs still have “engine” control modules and powertrain systems. Instead of figuring out injector pulse widths, they’re calculating deliverable torque. The ABS/brake controllers are more complex, the battery heating and cooling systems require modules and processing, the HVAC, the transmission, steering systems, everything is more complex compared to ICE with an old ample supply of hydraulics and coolants and a simple fuel that is stable and usable at all storage temps fed into a mechanical device. I’m not trying to be confrontational, but you couldn’t be more wrong about automotive electronics.
  - vel0city 5y ago
    The previous poster is definitely massively oversimplifying things, and I do value your input as someone who actually works in the field. Obviously, there's still a lot of the same kind of controllers when it comes to all the switches and displays and motorized chairs and turn signal logic and all of those things which are practically the exact same as an ICE. And obviously there's some places where you don't need controllers and sensors on an EV where you would have them on an ICE, like mass airflow sensors and fuel injection controls and stuff like that. Meanwhile you do have additional circuitry like the inverters to actually drive the motors, BMS systems, there's still sensors on the motors and wheels and what not, brake regen, etc. You mentioned the transmission is more complex compared to an ICE, but that does not make much sense to me at all. To my knowledge most EVs are essentially fixed gear ratio gearboxes, so you're either in drive, reverse, or neutral. Meanwhile ICE transmissions are becoming more and more like computer-controlled manual transmissions what with the rise in popularity of dual-clutch automatic transmissions. To me it seems a ton more complicated keeping track of operating that DCT than just "the dial is in D, change transmission to the forward mode."
dillondoyle 5y ago
I was surprised to learn Minnesota has a fab that's critical to the US govt! They are one of the only secure trusted chip makers. Growing up there I had no idea. My dad loved to talk up MMM, Honeywell, Monsanto and a bunch of other legacy companies in MN that still play huge roles that I have overlooked. Just one article at top of search I found even talks about the public-private partnerships (tax & other incentives) https://www.aroundosceola.com/news/skywater-seeks-dod-approval-neocity https://www.aroundosceola.com/news/skywater-seeks-dod-approv...

coredog64 5y ago

They’re going to fab there and then ship the output to Malaysia, Costa Rica, or the Philippines for package and test. Being close to Detroit doesn’t count for much.

galangalalgol 5y ago

the only thing an ev actually needs chips for is charge controllers which can be old fab tech, and motor controllers which aren't normal silicon or tiny feature size. Tesla is using silicon carbide, and gallium arsenide will probably be next. The Bollinger takes this route of minimalism. Ironically, an EV has less reliance on processing than a modern ICE vehicle.

ridgeguy 5y ago
I think it's gallium nitride (GaN), not gallium arsenide (GaAs).
- galangalalgol 5y ago
  you are absolutely right. I couldn't figure out why GAN didn't make sense so I spelled it out and got the wrong one. It is amazing how much smaller and cooler GaN made usbc power supplies and rf power amps. I'm waiting on lunchbox welders based on it. It is so insanely efficient.
bbreier 5y ago
Also the infotainment. And real questions because I'm genuinely curious: do driver assists (ABS, ASR, TCS) and their adjustments rely on processors? What about in-car adjustments to suspension height, ride firmness, throttle response (e.g. eco vs sport vs comfort modes)? Lane keep assist, blind spot checking, adaptive cruise control all seem like things that would require processing power as well.
- hnov 5y ago
  Even headlights and brake pedals (brake by wire) have ICs in them these days, I doubt getting rid of a PCM will make an EV less IC heavy.
- nradov 5y ago
  Most current vehicles use separate embedded microcontrollers for those features. In principle it's possible to build a car with a single powerful processor controlling everything, but the engineering becomes far more challenging and you need a higher level of vertical integration on the parts supply chain. There are also safety risks: you don't want an LKA code defect to cause a TCS failure. And wiring harness would have to grow to carry all the separate data signals. Tesla is partially going the integration route but they still have many separate processors in the car.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  The only infotainment a car needs is interfacing with CarPlay/Android Auto.
- totalZero 5y ago
  > do driver assists (ABS, ASR, TCS) and their adjustments rely on processors? If I'm not mistaken, microprocessors aren't the only semiconductor components that have been in short supply recently. Things like shaft position sensors are also solid-state devices.
hnov 5y ago
Do EVs not have all of the ancillaries hanging off CANBUS or something? Or is the lion's share of chips in an ICE vehicle engine and transmission control?
- SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
  Of course. There isn’t an EV in the world that is less complex than it’s ICE counterpart. GP is very mistaken. I wrote a longer explanation above.
  - elihu 5y ago
    Most of the complexity of EVs is just generic modern car complexity, though. EVs don't have to be any more complicated than ICE vehicles, and EV conversions especially are usually really simple (though to be fair a lot of the vehicles being converted are old classic cars that didn't have any computers in them to begin with). The EV drivetrain might have more or less computers than an ICE drivetrain, but really managing batteries and a motor isn't inherently all that complicated. On the ICE side of things you have a lot more moving parts and the necessity of keeping everything properly tuned so it can pass emissions checks. Braking and traction control I could see being fairly complicated, but it's a similar problem whether it's an ICE engine or an electric motor. Self-driving is hugely complicated, but that's not complexity that's inherent to EVs specifically, it's just a feature that's usually only implemented on EVs for some reason. All the other stuff: infotainment, tire pressure sensors, back up cameras, and so on are just modern car complexity.
    - SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
      The braking is way way more complex because of regenerative. That isn't a factor with ICE. Trust me - it's not simpler. I know you think we just apply power to the motor and go, but that is not the case. There are facets of "soft start" and it ties in to traction control, there are efficiency processes, etc. Instead of map tables for rpm and injection, you have battery heating and cooling targets with current sensed feedbacks and torque targets, and bla bla bla. Stop making me bring work home with me! ;) EVs are not simpler. It's literally impossible in automotive to ever get simpler. At least since the 1970s. I think we're hitting a point of unsustainability and the people in charge think OTA firmware is going to fix that, I think it'll make it much worse. EDIT: fwiw, I wish I could go back to a time when backup camera was even mention worthy of "things I consider complex in a vehicle". It's just a couple shielded wires and plugs into the radio/telamatics. I can tell you without a doubt that the starter in most vehicle is now far more complicated, to the point it too has it's own microcontroller and data bus (typically LIN, not sure I've seen a CAN yet).
SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
Automotive EE here… > the only thing an ev actually needs chips for is charge controllers which can be old fab tech, and motor controllers I wish I had the time to explain how this could not be more wrong. Quickly, I’ll mention that the vehicle I’m working on has 8 separate modules for the driver’s seat. Inside these modules are a combined total of 10 processors with as many bootloaders and flash procedures and validation records and crypto and peripheral drivers, 17 CAN-FD modules, 6 system basis chips, 9 switching power supplies with a number of accessory LDO supplies, at least 40 more “chips” of various functions and capacities… for just the driver’s seat alone The steering wheel buttons for radio left and right side and the cruise control comprise 3 modules and power supplies and etc etc. >The Bollinger takes this route of minimalism. Ironically, an EV has less reliance on processing than a modern ICE vehicle. I know what you are trying to say, but it is largely incorrect. The EVs still have “engine” control modules and powertrain systems. Instead of figuring out injector pulse widths, they’re calculating deliverable torque. The ABS/brake controllers are more complex, the battery heating and cooling systems require modules and processing, the HVAC, the transmission, steering systems, everything is more complex compared to ICE with an old ample supply of hydraulics and coolants and a simple fuel that is stable and usable at all storage temps fed into a mechanical device. I’m not trying to be confrontational, but you couldn’t be more wrong about automotive electronics.
- vel0city 5y ago
  The previous poster is definitely massively oversimplifying things, and I do value your input as someone who actually works in the field. Obviously, there's still a lot of the same kind of controllers when it comes to all the switches and displays and motorized chairs and turn signal logic and all of those things which are practically the exact same as an ICE. And obviously there's some places where you don't need controllers and sensors on an EV where you would have them on an ICE, like mass airflow sensors and fuel injection controls and stuff like that. Meanwhile you do have additional circuitry like the inverters to actually drive the motors, BMS systems, there's still sensors on the motors and wheels and what not, brake regen, etc. You mentioned the transmission is more complex compared to an ICE, but that does not make much sense to me at all. To my knowledge most EVs are essentially fixed gear ratio gearboxes, so you're either in drive, reverse, or neutral. Meanwhile ICE transmissions are becoming more and more like computer-controlled manual transmissions what with the rise in popularity of dual-clutch automatic transmissions. To me it seems a ton more complicated keeping track of operating that DCT than just "the dial is in D, change transmission to the forward mode."

dillondoyle 5y ago

I was surprised to learn Minnesota has a fab that's critical to the US govt! They are one of the only secure trusted chip makers. Growing up there I had no idea. My dad loved to talk up MMM, Honeywell, Monsanto and a bunch of other legacy companies in MN that still play huge roles that I have overlooked. Just one article at top of search I found even talks about the public-private partnerships (tax & other incentives) https://www.aroundosceola.com/news/skywater-seeks-dod-approval-neocity https://www.aroundosceola.com/news/skywater-seeks-dod-approv...