11 ms·

Standardizing Automotive Connectivity

165 points by hardikgupta 2y ago

taylodl 2y ago
> Tesla invites all device suppliers and vehicle manufacturers to join us in this initiative. This is not a standard in the sense that engineers use the term. Tesla is hoping it will be adopted as a standard and since Tesla doesn't appear to want to involve any standards bodies, Tesla appears to only be interested in making these connectors a de-facto standard. In any case, that is not a standard.
- instagraham 2y ago
  Relevant xkcd, though one imagines that successful standards form despite the lack of choice in how standards are formed https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/
  - Someone1234 2y ago
    The XKCD doesn't really apply here, since intra-vehicle 48v is kind of unexplored, so there aren't multiple competing standards for that in particular. I do agree that this isn't a real open and free standard however. edit: Inter to Intra.
    - duskwuff 2y ago
      Nitpick: intra-vehicle. Inter-vehicle power would be pretty weird.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - toss1 2y ago
        True, but Inter-vehicle could be cool for several things. First is the EV equivalent of jump-start-and-bring-a-can-of-gasoline, an in-the-field recharge for cars that run out before the recharging station or home charger. It would also be useful as a plug for a range-extending spare battery pack on a small trailer. Seems like other potential uses too. (But no, I'm not liking that Tesla is taking the typical entitled-ass attitude of avoiding all the standards bodies, doing whatever they want, and expecting others to ratify their standard. If it is that good, it should be readily agreed to by the relevant standards bodies.)
        SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
        > Inter-vehicle could be cool as the EV equivalent of jump-start This exists: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41975736 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41975736 But for Lucid, not Teslas. And also more generally as a use of V2L. > in-the-field recharge for cars that run out before the recharging station This exists: https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/latest-news/2023/06/30/electric-vehicles-join-aa-s-breakdown-fleet https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/latest-news/2023/06/30/elec... https://www.taxi-point.co.uk/post/rac-to-equip-breakdown-vans-with-new-ev-boost-technology-to-help-vehicles-low-on-electric-fuel https://www.taxi-point.co.uk/post/rac-to-equip-breakdown-van... > a range-extending spare battery pack This is a real Tesla Cybertruck accessory: https://insideevs.com/news/706702/tesla-cybertruck-range-extender-battery-order-take-rate/ https://insideevs.com/news/706702/tesla-cybertruck-range-ext...
      - vaillancourtmax 2y ago
        I think they meant "across manufacturers".
      - reaperducer 2y ago
        Inter-vehicle power would be pretty weird. Sounds like jumper cables.
        duskwuff 2y ago
        You know what? You're right. That's literally jumper cables. But no, I don't think Tesla is doing those.
        SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
        Tesla vehicles do not currently support V2L or V2G, although many other EV makes do. But it does seem that Tesla is planning to do those some time: https://cleantechnica.com/2023/08/19/tesla-plans-to-adopt-bi-directional-charging-by-2025/ https://cleantechnica.com/2023/08/19/tesla-plans-to-adopt-bi... https://thedriven.io/2024/05/06/teslas-take-on-v2g-controlling-ev-charging-load-is-the-low-hanging-fruit-to-help-grid/ https://thedriven.io/2024/05/06/teslas-take-on-v2g-controlli...
        Pet_Ant 2y ago
        Honestly that would be awesome. I still dream of autonomous vehicles auto-convoy and link up for efficiency. Just quietly become a train as needed.
        SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
        Why is it that when describing EV technology, HN people have a tendency to frame it as "imagine if it could, that would be amazing if" While describing stuff that exists in some form, and usually has existed for years already now. It's not evenly distributed new tech for sure (1). But maybe it's the false assumption that "if it was anywhere, I'd be among the ones to see it early". 1) See William Gibson: "The Future is Already Here, it's Just Not Very Evenly Distributed."
      - SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
        > Inter-vehicle power would be pretty weird. That's entirely possible at present. Many electric vehicles can send power out to power appliances. It's called "Vehicle to Load" or "V2L". And electric vehicles can slow-charge off a wall power socket, so they could get that from V2L. It won't be a common use, but it would work in a pinch to get you enough juice to get to a better charger?
        _ea1k 2y ago
        Lucid supports this directly too: https://lucidmotors.com/stories/introducing-rangexchange https://lucidmotors.com/stories/introducing-rangexchange <10kw, so not super fast, but I bet most people are really close to the charging station when they run out.
- vel0city 2y ago
  I agree. Is this some kind of free licensing for these connector standards or are they still behind the "you can use this but if we rip off any of your IP and you sue us we'll revoke your license and sue you" license?
  - kotaKat 2y ago
    They have a "patent pledge" for their patented parts, at least -- they will "not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology". https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#patent-pledge https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#patent-pled...
    - vel0city 2y ago
      Yeah, and they define good faith in that document as: A party is "acting in good faith" for so long as such party and its related or affiliated companies have not: asserted, helped others assert or had a financial stake in any assertion of (i) any patent or other intellectual property right against Tesla or (ii) any patent right against a third party for its use of technologies relating to electric vehicles or related equipment; So, if another company rips off your IP but Tesla doesn't think it is a "knock-off product", you sue that other company, you're now in violation of Tesla's "patent pledge". Its an attempt to use a carrot of Tesla's patents to make all the other rightsholders essentially give up all their IP. If you sue anyone protecting your EV IP, you're in violation of this agreement and will be open to litigation by Tesla.
- 1234letshaveatw 2y ago
  like NACS ?
- DevelopingElk 2y ago
  There are different types of standards. Car design teams are big organizations; internal standards can help reduce the development effort. Tesla needs to coordinate with their suppliers, so sharing this helps even if it isn't used by other companies. I think we should give Tesla the benefit of the doubt for now. Harmful use of patents could cause issues, but this has potential. We will simply see if other companies are interested, and if they are it can go from internal standard to de facto standard to formalized standard.
- electriclove 2y ago
  I’m not sad they didn’t work with a hundred companies and take tens of years and still have nothing to show for it. They are doing what they need done for their business and then inviting others to join. And way earlier than they did with NACS: https://www.tesla.com/blog/opening-north-american-charging-standard https://www.tesla.com/blog/opening-north-american-charging-s...
  - yegle 2y ago
    Huh I noticed this section in the linked NACS post: > As NACS is now recognized in a SAE recommended practice (RP) under SAE J3400, we have removed the technical specifications and CAD from our website. So something that was previously freely available now requires a $300 payment to access. I'm sad to see that.
    - MichaelZuo 2y ago
      I don’t think the SAE has the authority to remove anything from the public domain? It likely is still freely shareable for existing copies.
  - Ajedi32 2y ago
    Yeah, there are advantages to the "just do it" approach to standardization vs design by committee. A lot of web technologies started out that way (arguably most of them actually). Both approaches are valid.
  - throwaway19972 2y ago
    > I’m not sad they didn’t work with a hundred companies and take tens of years and still have nothing to show for it. what a ridiculous counterfactual. We have plenty of wildly successful standards that weren't just thrown at consumers and called a standard.
    - saturn8601 2y ago
      IDK man, when I think of standard connectors I think of clunky junk: CCS which was all engineering and no focus on human centered design with its clunky connector that also wiggles in ports. all of the USB connectors including USB-C, with it mandate to support so many different edge cases that cause cables to not always be compatible with each other defeating the purpose. Bluetooth again with so many edge cases that made it terrible until Apple came along and cut a lot of that out in their solution finally made it tolerable. Hell even a lot of electrical connectors (such as the US outlet) suck: developed in that way due to historical interests, it looks terrible, is not entirely safe (ie. ground does not go in first) and now has stuff bolted on to make up for its shortfalls. (GFCI, in line fuses etc.) Now there are probably loads of terrible proprietary connectors but it seems like the free market eventually takes care of disposing of the chaff. That itself is a forcing function to get to a better design that users will like. Whereas you have no choice of a standardized connector because some "standards body" made up of opposing interests artificially keeps lousy designs around and forces it upon the population. Im not arguing for one or the other but its just annoying that standards bodies always seem to get a pass when in my experience they produce a lot of mediocre stuff.
- foxglacier 2y ago
  It's going to be a standard within Tesla, so in that way it's a standard. It sounds like they anticipate benefitting from cost reduction themselves even if nobody else uses it.
- moralestapia 2y ago
  If you want to be pedantic, What is a "standard" then? Does it need to have an ISO seal?
- hardikgupta 2y ago
  That's fair. Should have said "Tesla proposes new standard electrical connector".
- _ea1k 2y ago
  Don't think of it as a standard as-in SAE, but a standard as in "molex", "AT", or "ATX". Yeah, they aren't really "standards", but they aren't exactly proprietary either and they also are clearly useful. The goal seems to be to promote reuse of a good-enough design in as many places as possible. Noone's forced to use it, but it'd make things simpler for everyone if there is as much commonality as possible.
- kortilla 2y ago
  Most useful standards did not originate from standards bodies. The standards bodies just formalized what already had buy-in from the significant players.
- hoseja 2y ago
  Tell us about NACS.
tapoxi 2y ago
NACS is finally standardized as SAE J3400 with other vendors shipping those cars in the United States next year, and now they're introducing a new connector with no clear advantage?
- Someone1234 2y ago
  If you clicked the link/read the article, you'd realize this is an internal vehicle 48v connector.
  - tapoxi 2y ago
    Ahh thanks, I read it but In was confused why it was talking about 48v as if that couldn't be done by the other standards.
  - yodon 2y ago
    [flagged]
unsnap_biceps 2y ago
> The 48V architecture is the optimal long-term choice, requiring ¼ of the current to deliver the same amount of power. Is there a reason why 48V is better long term than going higher like 96V?
- two_handfuls 2y ago
  I believe 50V is a safety limit.
  - cptcobalt 2y ago
    Below 50v is considered "low voltage". Higher voltage would require different safety considerations.
  - outworlder 2y ago
    And that's because of your skin resistance. Around 50V is when voltage starts to overcome it.
    - rcxdude 2y ago
      usually. It's very possible to get a shock off of significantly lower voltages in bad conditions (very sweaty skin, for example).
- hmottestad 2y ago
  48v is probably more common than 96v in general, so more components available already.
  - 8note 2y ago
    For which - why standardize around this connector and not XLR, which is the first thing that comes to mind for 48V? Too big/bulky?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
sitkack 2y ago
They would have to 100% open this up and give it to standards bodies, otherwise it isn't a standard. The conformity tests and testing equipment designs and protocols should be freely available.
- duskwuff 2y ago
  For that matter: who's going to be manufacturing and supplying these connectors? Tesla? I don't think so.
  - themaninthedark 2y ago
    Generally a connector manufacturer would make these, Amphenol, Aptiv (formerly Delphi), Cinch, JAE, JST, Molex, TE Connectivity, Yazaki. See Mouser for some examples(https://www.mouser.com/c/connectors/automotive-connectors/# https://www.mouser.com/c/connectors/automotive-connectors/#) Usually they create their own design so maybe having an open standard would allow you to do contract orders with any plastic injector that has the molds.
  - inferiorhuman 2y ago
    Anyone really. If you look at the quick connect fittings commonly found on German cars they're all built to a standard (VDA not DIN in this case) but built by the NORMA Group or Parker.
FriedPickles 2y ago
> LVCS...is available in industry-standard light blue Is this tongue-in-cheek, or is there a reason manufacturers care about the color?
- Aloisius 2y ago
  They tend to color-code connectors in vehicles by voltage for safety reasons. Light blue is used for 48V.
  - plorg 2y ago
    Meanwhile 12V connectors turn up in a wide variety of grey, where different colors might just mean the connector is keyed differently.
- dtparr 2y ago
  In various industries, colors are used to differentiate between various voltages so it's obvious whether you're working with high voltage, low voltage, etc. so you can determine the necessary precautions for whatever you're dealing with (and some will also make the connectors incompatible so you can't accidentally join high and low voltage sets of wiring). I'm not super familiar with the automotive side, but I believe they use orange for high voltage and light blue for 48v.
- 7thpower 2y ago
  Mid voltage (~48-60) uses light blue. Ideally you should be able to differentiate high voltage (orange, iirc), safety (yellow), mid voltage, and everything else.
cyberax 2y ago
Tesla really deserves some kudos for pushing the 48V architecture and the Ethernet-based communication. It drastically simplifies the wiring mess that is in a typical car. And it's not even close. Just watch the teardown of Cybertruck and compare its wiring to something like F150.
- outworlder 2y ago
  We can simplify the wire mess today by using more CAN bus devices. What is ethernet bringing to the picture?
  - the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
    Central bus instead of many point to point connections. Look at how much fewer cabling the cybertruck has.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - rcxdude 2y ago
      CAN is also a bus, that's not really a point in favor of ethernet.
      - elcritch 2y ago
        Ethernet can do both bus and switched. High speed switches enables a lot of architecture not easily enabled by CAN.
  - mulmen 2y ago
    Bandwidth?
  - KK7NIL 2y ago
    > What is ethernet bringing to the picture? Over 3 orders of magnitude faster datarates. CAN FD: up to 5Mb/s Automotive Ethernet: up to 10 Gb/s
two_handfuls 2y ago
With the appropriate grain of salt due to the source, standardizing those power connections would probably be a good thing. Also, speeding up the adoption of 48V, the industry has been talking about it for so long!
- zaroth 2y ago
  Grain of salt due to the source? What is that supposed to mean? Tesla is so far ahead when it comes to these things (48V architecture), there literally is no other source in this case.
  - sixQuarks 2y ago
    There is so much Elon and Tesla hate, these comments are so weird.
xyst 2y ago
> Today a single vehicle typically requires over 200 connections—and the number of electrical I initially thought this was referring to the connector between the charge port on the EV and the charger base station. Had to think for a second and realized it’s the electrical connections between the various components in an EV. Glad to know I don’t have to carry 200+ dongles in case I buy an EV.
- HPsquared 2y ago
  That must be only the high voltage connections, right?
  - atonse 2y ago
    These are talking about 48V, so my guess is it's for all the little bits (window motors, wipers, all the internal electronics, switches, turn signal lights, etc etc)
    - HPsquared 2y ago
      To be honest I'm kind of surprised by the low number. Though I guess each connector has two sides, and they can have tens of pins per connector on the bigger ones.
  - connicpu 2y ago
    (Semi-permanent) High voltage connections are usually made with spec-torqued bolts, not plastic connectors. These are for the "low voltage" (<=48V) components spread throughout the vehicle.
xpe 2y ago
Just to clarify, the linked article about the LVCS connector is for internal electrical cabling, not for electric-vehicle charging. For Tesla's charging standard (SAE J3400), see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Charging_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Charging_System
nimbius 2y ago
why not use the Chinese standard, GB/T? china has the most electric cars, the largest manufacturers, and the most advanced battery production on the planet. their experience with electric vehicles and charging would be a valuable leap forward.
- BrianGragg 2y ago
  The GB/T is for charging and not in car connections. Tesla already has an arguably better connector NACS or J3400 now. As for China having the most electric cars on the planet. I don't feel that makes them the experts. China tends to steal / copy technology from other countries and has little innovation them self from my view point. They have the most EV's from heavy government subsidies. Tons of cars in graveyards over there.
- iknowstuff 2y ago
  lmao are you a bot? this is not about charging connectors, and GB/T (with its two separate connectors for AC and DC) is awful compared to NACS.
Aloisius 2y ago
How is this better than all the other 48V connectors out there (MX150, MCON, PP, etc.)? Surely it isn't just that they reduced the number of connectors since one could have just standardized on a subset of mass-produced connectors by molex, te, etc. instead.
- riskable 2y ago
  I'd like to know this too. Their website claims "cost" but doesn't actually list the costs of the new connectors compared to existing ones. At least give us some comparisons!
Animats 2y ago
Those look much like AMP automotive connectors. Using one kind of unkeyed connector in a car may be a bad idea. Things can be plugged in wrong during repairs. There's a lot to be said for making connectors not fit where they shouldn't. Especially in automotive, where many connectors are plugged in blind, by feel. This simplifies manufacturing at the cost of repair. If it can be plugged in wrong, it will be plugged in wrong. AAA put a battery in backwards in my Jeep once, and most of the vehicle electronics had to be replaced.
- themaninthedark 2y ago
  These looked keyed to me. Aside from the bulge on the top of the connector where the lock attaches to it's mate there is a middle vane that extends 2/3 way down with a little bit of a J hook on it.
  - Animats 2y ago
    That's the latch, not a key. Keying prevents putting the wrong plug in a receptacle. Usually that's done with notches on the receptacle and ridges on the plug.
    - themaninthedark 2y ago
      You can use the ridge that the latch attaches to as part of the key structure. There is also a J-shaped structure inside the plug that would function as a key as well, prevents the plug from starting when rotated 180 degrees. == ------ | | | | / | ------
  - cduzz 2y ago
    I think by keyed it isn't just "can't be plugged in upside down" but also "can't be plugged into the other plug that's basically the same but connects to some other subsystem." Ideally a system like this would let you select some per-subsystem physical lockout mechanism.
    - taneq 2y ago
hatsunearu 2y ago
there is utility in this. the motorsports world generally has converged to exactly two connectors: DT series connectors and AS series connectors. The former is made of plastic and very robust. The latter is made of metal and is extremely robust. It's nice having to just have a bunch of DT parts and just be good to put it in everything.
Animats 2y ago
What's the signal connection? Does this use CANbus? Ethernet? What?
sanex 2y ago
Someone's going to post this eventually may as well be me I guess. https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/
7thpower 2y ago
Molex and others may as well get behind this. EVs are driving all the content (as you can imagine, electric vehicles are way more profitable than IC not only because they have additional connectors but also because they tend to have more advanced in vehicle entertainment). The other reality is that all of the Chinese OEMs will generally work with the companies like Molex, TE, Amphenol, etc just long enough to let them shoulder the R&D cost and then reverse engineer and vertically integrate the part in their supply chain. If there is a chance to leverage their scale and supply chain to compete where there is known demand, it’s worth it to be early in and then be able to help OEMs customize the reference designs as needed.
BerislavLopac 2y ago
Judging just by the title (and without noticing the source), I was hoping that this will be about standardisation of the vehicle metrics data via OEM sources. Last year I worked on a system that collects this data, and currently each OEM has a different method (sometimes several, for different message types) it can use to share it with the wider world.
incorene 2y ago
There are already MANY standard types of connectors that automakers don't use consistently, why add another one to the mix? What does this offer that Deutsch or Weatherpak don't? XKCD summed this up pretty well: https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/ Besides that, I have no respect for Tesla. They can't engineer their way out of a paper bag, they are hostile to both the customer and the rest of the industry, and notoriously so in terms of repairability--why would I believe that now they suddenly care about designing a better, more universal connector? They don't even make repair parts available to the consumer! For those reasons and many more, the absolute LAST thing I would ever do as an engineer is to buy into a standard set by Tesla, or any other company run by Elon Musk.

165 points by hardikgupta 2y ago

> Tesla invites all device suppliers and vehicle manufacturers to join us in this initiative. This is not a standard in the sense that engineers use the term. Tesla is hoping it will be adopted as a standard and since Tesla doesn't appear to want to involve any standards bodies, Tesla appears to only be interested in making these connectors a de-facto standard. In any case, that is not a standard.

instagraham 2y ago
Relevant xkcd, though one imagines that successful standards form despite the lack of choice in how standards are formed https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/
- Someone1234 2y ago
  The XKCD doesn't really apply here, since intra-vehicle 48v is kind of unexplored, so there aren't multiple competing standards for that in particular. I do agree that this isn't a real open and free standard however. edit: Inter to Intra.
  - duskwuff 2y ago
    Nitpick: intra-vehicle. Inter-vehicle power would be pretty weird.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - toss1 2y ago
      True, but Inter-vehicle could be cool for several things. First is the EV equivalent of jump-start-and-bring-a-can-of-gasoline, an in-the-field recharge for cars that run out before the recharging station or home charger. It would also be useful as a plug for a range-extending spare battery pack on a small trailer. Seems like other potential uses too. (But no, I'm not liking that Tesla is taking the typical entitled-ass attitude of avoiding all the standards bodies, doing whatever they want, and expecting others to ratify their standard. If it is that good, it should be readily agreed to by the relevant standards bodies.)
      - SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
        > Inter-vehicle could be cool as the EV equivalent of jump-start This exists: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41975736 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41975736 But for Lucid, not Teslas. And also more generally as a use of V2L. > in-the-field recharge for cars that run out before the recharging station This exists: https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/latest-news/2023/06/30/electric-vehicles-join-aa-s-breakdown-fleet https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/latest-news/2023/06/30/elec... https://www.taxi-point.co.uk/post/rac-to-equip-breakdown-vans-with-new-ev-boost-technology-to-help-vehicles-low-on-electric-fuel https://www.taxi-point.co.uk/post/rac-to-equip-breakdown-van... > a range-extending spare battery pack This is a real Tesla Cybertruck accessory: https://insideevs.com/news/706702/tesla-cybertruck-range-extender-battery-order-take-rate/ https://insideevs.com/news/706702/tesla-cybertruck-range-ext...
    - vaillancourtmax 2y ago
      I think they meant "across manufacturers".
    - reaperducer 2y ago
      Inter-vehicle power would be pretty weird. Sounds like jumper cables.
      - duskwuff 2y ago
        You know what? You're right. That's literally jumper cables. But no, I don't think Tesla is doing those.
        SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
        Tesla vehicles do not currently support V2L or V2G, although many other EV makes do. But it does seem that Tesla is planning to do those some time: https://cleantechnica.com/2023/08/19/tesla-plans-to-adopt-bi-directional-charging-by-2025/ https://cleantechnica.com/2023/08/19/tesla-plans-to-adopt-bi... https://thedriven.io/2024/05/06/teslas-take-on-v2g-controlling-ev-charging-load-is-the-low-hanging-fruit-to-help-grid/ https://thedriven.io/2024/05/06/teslas-take-on-v2g-controlli...
      - Pet_Ant 2y ago
        Honestly that would be awesome. I still dream of autonomous vehicles auto-convoy and link up for efficiency. Just quietly become a train as needed.
        SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
        Why is it that when describing EV technology, HN people have a tendency to frame it as "imagine if it could, that would be amazing if" While describing stuff that exists in some form, and usually has existed for years already now. It's not evenly distributed new tech for sure (1). But maybe it's the false assumption that "if it was anywhere, I'd be among the ones to see it early". 1) See William Gibson: "The Future is Already Here, it's Just Not Very Evenly Distributed."
    - SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
      > Inter-vehicle power would be pretty weird. That's entirely possible at present. Many electric vehicles can send power out to power appliances. It's called "Vehicle to Load" or "V2L". And electric vehicles can slow-charge off a wall power socket, so they could get that from V2L. It won't be a common use, but it would work in a pinch to get you enough juice to get to a better charger?
      - _ea1k 2y ago
        Lucid supports this directly too: https://lucidmotors.com/stories/introducing-rangexchange https://lucidmotors.com/stories/introducing-rangexchange <10kw, so not super fast, but I bet most people are really close to the charging station when they run out.
vel0city 2y ago
I agree. Is this some kind of free licensing for these connector standards or are they still behind the "you can use this but if we rip off any of your IP and you sue us we'll revoke your license and sue you" license?
- kotaKat 2y ago
  They have a "patent pledge" for their patented parts, at least -- they will "not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology". https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#patent-pledge https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#patent-pled...
  - vel0city 2y ago
    Yeah, and they define good faith in that document as: A party is "acting in good faith" for so long as such party and its related or affiliated companies have not: asserted, helped others assert or had a financial stake in any assertion of (i) any patent or other intellectual property right against Tesla or (ii) any patent right against a third party for its use of technologies relating to electric vehicles or related equipment; So, if another company rips off your IP but Tesla doesn't think it is a "knock-off product", you sue that other company, you're now in violation of Tesla's "patent pledge". Its an attempt to use a carrot of Tesla's patents to make all the other rightsholders essentially give up all their IP. If you sue anyone protecting your EV IP, you're in violation of this agreement and will be open to litigation by Tesla.
1234letshaveatw 2y ago
like NACS ?
DevelopingElk 2y ago
There are different types of standards. Car design teams are big organizations; internal standards can help reduce the development effort. Tesla needs to coordinate with their suppliers, so sharing this helps even if it isn't used by other companies. I think we should give Tesla the benefit of the doubt for now. Harmful use of patents could cause issues, but this has potential. We will simply see if other companies are interested, and if they are it can go from internal standard to de facto standard to formalized standard.
electriclove 2y ago
I’m not sad they didn’t work with a hundred companies and take tens of years and still have nothing to show for it. They are doing what they need done for their business and then inviting others to join. And way earlier than they did with NACS: https://www.tesla.com/blog/opening-north-american-charging-standard https://www.tesla.com/blog/opening-north-american-charging-s...
- yegle 2y ago
  Huh I noticed this section in the linked NACS post: > As NACS is now recognized in a SAE recommended practice (RP) under SAE J3400, we have removed the technical specifications and CAD from our website. So something that was previously freely available now requires a $300 payment to access. I'm sad to see that.
  - MichaelZuo 2y ago
    I don’t think the SAE has the authority to remove anything from the public domain? It likely is still freely shareable for existing copies.
- Ajedi32 2y ago
  Yeah, there are advantages to the "just do it" approach to standardization vs design by committee. A lot of web technologies started out that way (arguably most of them actually). Both approaches are valid.
- throwaway19972 2y ago
  > I’m not sad they didn’t work with a hundred companies and take tens of years and still have nothing to show for it. what a ridiculous counterfactual. We have plenty of wildly successful standards that weren't just thrown at consumers and called a standard.
  - saturn8601 2y ago
    IDK man, when I think of standard connectors I think of clunky junk: CCS which was all engineering and no focus on human centered design with its clunky connector that also wiggles in ports. all of the USB connectors including USB-C, with it mandate to support so many different edge cases that cause cables to not always be compatible with each other defeating the purpose. Bluetooth again with so many edge cases that made it terrible until Apple came along and cut a lot of that out in their solution finally made it tolerable. Hell even a lot of electrical connectors (such as the US outlet) suck: developed in that way due to historical interests, it looks terrible, is not entirely safe (ie. ground does not go in first) and now has stuff bolted on to make up for its shortfalls. (GFCI, in line fuses etc.) Now there are probably loads of terrible proprietary connectors but it seems like the free market eventually takes care of disposing of the chaff. That itself is a forcing function to get to a better design that users will like. Whereas you have no choice of a standardized connector because some "standards body" made up of opposing interests artificially keeps lousy designs around and forces it upon the population. Im not arguing for one or the other but its just annoying that standards bodies always seem to get a pass when in my experience they produce a lot of mediocre stuff.
foxglacier 2y ago
It's going to be a standard within Tesla, so in that way it's a standard. It sounds like they anticipate benefitting from cost reduction themselves even if nobody else uses it.
moralestapia 2y ago
If you want to be pedantic, What is a "standard" then? Does it need to have an ISO seal?
hardikgupta 2y ago
That's fair. Should have said "Tesla proposes new standard electrical connector".
_ea1k 2y ago
Don't think of it as a standard as-in SAE, but a standard as in "molex", "AT", or "ATX". Yeah, they aren't really "standards", but they aren't exactly proprietary either and they also are clearly useful. The goal seems to be to promote reuse of a good-enough design in as many places as possible. Noone's forced to use it, but it'd make things simpler for everyone if there is as much commonality as possible.
kortilla 2y ago
Most useful standards did not originate from standards bodies. The standards bodies just formalized what already had buy-in from the significant players.
hoseja 2y ago
Tell us about NACS.

tapoxi 2y ago

NACS is finally standardized as SAE J3400 with other vendors shipping those cars in the United States next year, and now they're introducing a new connector with no clear advantage?

Someone1234 2y ago
If you clicked the link/read the article, you'd realize this is an internal vehicle 48v connector.
- tapoxi 2y ago
  Ahh thanks, I read it but In was confused why it was talking about 48v as if that couldn't be done by the other standards.
- yodon 2y ago
  [flagged]

unsnap_biceps 2y ago

> The 48V architecture is the optimal long-term choice, requiring ¼ of the current to deliver the same amount of power. Is there a reason why 48V is better long term than going higher like 96V?

two_handfuls 2y ago
I believe 50V is a safety limit.
- cptcobalt 2y ago
  Below 50v is considered "low voltage". Higher voltage would require different safety considerations.
- outworlder 2y ago
  And that's because of your skin resistance. Around 50V is when voltage starts to overcome it.
  - rcxdude 2y ago
    usually. It's very possible to get a shock off of significantly lower voltages in bad conditions (very sweaty skin, for example).
hmottestad 2y ago
48v is probably more common than 96v in general, so more components available already.
- 8note 2y ago
  For which - why standardize around this connector and not XLR, which is the first thing that comes to mind for 48V? Too big/bulky?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]

sitkack 2y ago

They would have to 100% open this up and give it to standards bodies, otherwise it isn't a standard. The conformity tests and testing equipment designs and protocols should be freely available.

duskwuff 2y ago
For that matter: who's going to be manufacturing and supplying these connectors? Tesla? I don't think so.
- themaninthedark 2y ago
  Generally a connector manufacturer would make these, Amphenol, Aptiv (formerly Delphi), Cinch, JAE, JST, Molex, TE Connectivity, Yazaki. See Mouser for some examples(https://www.mouser.com/c/connectors/automotive-connectors/# https://www.mouser.com/c/connectors/automotive-connectors/#) Usually they create their own design so maybe having an open standard would allow you to do contract orders with any plastic injector that has the molds.
- inferiorhuman 2y ago
  Anyone really. If you look at the quick connect fittings commonly found on German cars they're all built to a standard (VDA not DIN in this case) but built by the NORMA Group or Parker.

FriedPickles 2y ago

> LVCS...is available in industry-standard light blue Is this tongue-in-cheek, or is there a reason manufacturers care about the color?

Aloisius 2y ago
They tend to color-code connectors in vehicles by voltage for safety reasons. Light blue is used for 48V.
- plorg 2y ago
  Meanwhile 12V connectors turn up in a wide variety of grey, where different colors might just mean the connector is keyed differently.
dtparr 2y ago
In various industries, colors are used to differentiate between various voltages so it's obvious whether you're working with high voltage, low voltage, etc. so you can determine the necessary precautions for whatever you're dealing with (and some will also make the connectors incompatible so you can't accidentally join high and low voltage sets of wiring). I'm not super familiar with the automotive side, but I believe they use orange for high voltage and light blue for 48v.
7thpower 2y ago
Mid voltage (~48-60) uses light blue. Ideally you should be able to differentiate high voltage (orange, iirc), safety (yellow), mid voltage, and everything else.

cyberax 2y ago

Tesla really deserves some kudos for pushing the 48V architecture and the Ethernet-based communication. It drastically simplifies the wiring mess that is in a typical car. And it's not even close. Just watch the teardown of Cybertruck and compare its wiring to something like F150.

outworlder 2y ago
We can simplify the wire mess today by using more CAN bus devices. What is ethernet bringing to the picture?
- the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
  Central bus instead of many point to point connections. Look at how much fewer cabling the cybertruck has.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - rcxdude 2y ago
    CAN is also a bus, that's not really a point in favor of ethernet.
    - elcritch 2y ago
      Ethernet can do both bus and switched. High speed switches enables a lot of architecture not easily enabled by CAN.
- mulmen 2y ago
  Bandwidth?
- KK7NIL 2y ago
  > What is ethernet bringing to the picture? Over 3 orders of magnitude faster datarates. CAN FD: up to 5Mb/s Automotive Ethernet: up to 10 Gb/s

two_handfuls 2y ago

With the appropriate grain of salt due to the source, standardizing those power connections would probably be a good thing. Also, speeding up the adoption of 48V, the industry has been talking about it for so long!

zaroth 2y ago
Grain of salt due to the source? What is that supposed to mean? Tesla is so far ahead when it comes to these things (48V architecture), there literally is no other source in this case.
- sixQuarks 2y ago
  There is so much Elon and Tesla hate, these comments are so weird.

xyst 2y ago

> Today a single vehicle typically requires over 200 connections—and the number of electrical I initially thought this was referring to the connector between the charge port on the EV and the charger base station. Had to think for a second and realized it’s the electrical connections between the various components in an EV. Glad to know I don’t have to carry 200+ dongles in case I buy an EV.

HPsquared 2y ago
That must be only the high voltage connections, right?
- atonse 2y ago
  These are talking about 48V, so my guess is it's for all the little bits (window motors, wipers, all the internal electronics, switches, turn signal lights, etc etc)
  - HPsquared 2y ago
    To be honest I'm kind of surprised by the low number. Though I guess each connector has two sides, and they can have tens of pins per connector on the bigger ones.
- connicpu 2y ago
  (Semi-permanent) High voltage connections are usually made with spec-torqued bolts, not plastic connectors. These are for the "low voltage" (<=48V) components spread throughout the vehicle.

xpe 2y ago

Just to clarify, the linked article about the LVCS connector is for internal electrical cabling, not for electric-vehicle charging. For Tesla's charging standard (SAE J3400), see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Charging_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Charging_System

nimbius 2y ago

why not use the Chinese standard, GB/T? china has the most electric cars, the largest manufacturers, and the most advanced battery production on the planet. their experience with electric vehicles and charging would be a valuable leap forward.

BrianGragg 2y ago
The GB/T is for charging and not in car connections. Tesla already has an arguably better connector NACS or J3400 now. As for China having the most electric cars on the planet. I don't feel that makes them the experts. China tends to steal / copy technology from other countries and has little innovation them self from my view point. They have the most EV's from heavy government subsidies. Tons of cars in graveyards over there.
iknowstuff 2y ago
lmao are you a bot? this is not about charging connectors, and GB/T (with its two separate connectors for AC and DC) is awful compared to NACS.

Aloisius 2y ago

How is this better than all the other 48V connectors out there (MX150, MCON, PP, etc.)? Surely it isn't just that they reduced the number of connectors since one could have just standardized on a subset of mass-produced connectors by molex, te, etc. instead.

riskable 2y ago
I'd like to know this too. Their website claims "cost" but doesn't actually list the costs of the new connectors compared to existing ones. At least give us some comparisons!

Animats 2y ago

Those look much like AMP automotive connectors. Using one kind of unkeyed connector in a car may be a bad idea. Things can be plugged in wrong during repairs. There's a lot to be said for making connectors not fit where they shouldn't. Especially in automotive, where many connectors are plugged in blind, by feel. This simplifies manufacturing at the cost of repair. If it can be plugged in wrong, it will be plugged in wrong. AAA put a battery in backwards in my Jeep once, and most of the vehicle electronics had to be replaced.

themaninthedark 2y ago
These looked keyed to me. Aside from the bulge on the top of the connector where the lock attaches to it's mate there is a middle vane that extends 2/3 way down with a little bit of a J hook on it.
- Animats 2y ago
  That's the latch, not a key. Keying prevents putting the wrong plug in a receptacle. Usually that's done with notches on the receptacle and ridges on the plug.
  - themaninthedark 2y ago
    You can use the ridge that the latch attaches to as part of the key structure. There is also a J-shaped structure inside the plug that would function as a key as well, prevents the plug from starting when rotated 180 degrees. == ------ | | | | / | ------
- cduzz 2y ago
  I think by keyed it isn't just "can't be plugged in upside down" but also "can't be plugged into the other plug that's basically the same but connects to some other subsystem." Ideally a system like this would let you select some per-subsystem physical lockout mechanism.
  - taneq 2y ago

hatsunearu 2y ago

there is utility in this. the motorsports world generally has converged to exactly two connectors: DT series connectors and AS series connectors. The former is made of plastic and very robust. The latter is made of metal and is extremely robust. It's nice having to just have a bunch of DT parts and just be good to put it in everything.

Animats 2y ago

What's the signal connection? Does this use CANbus? Ethernet? What?

sanex 2y ago

Someone's going to post this eventually may as well be me I guess. https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/

7thpower 2y ago

Molex and others may as well get behind this. EVs are driving all the content (as you can imagine, electric vehicles are way more profitable than IC not only because they have additional connectors but also because they tend to have more advanced in vehicle entertainment). The other reality is that all of the Chinese OEMs will generally work with the companies like Molex, TE, Amphenol, etc just long enough to let them shoulder the R&D cost and then reverse engineer and vertically integrate the part in their supply chain. If there is a chance to leverage their scale and supply chain to compete where there is known demand, it’s worth it to be early in and then be able to help OEMs customize the reference designs as needed.

BerislavLopac 2y ago

Judging just by the title (and without noticing the source), I was hoping that this will be about standardisation of the vehicle metrics data via OEM sources. Last year I worked on a system that collects this data, and currently each OEM has a different method (sometimes several, for different message types) it can use to share it with the wider world.

incorene 2y ago

There are already MANY standard types of connectors that automakers don't use consistently, why add another one to the mix? What does this offer that Deutsch or Weatherpak don't? XKCD summed this up pretty well: https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/ Besides that, I have no respect for Tesla. They can't engineer their way out of a paper bag, they are hostile to both the customer and the rest of the industry, and notoriously so in terms of repairability--why would I believe that now they suddenly care about designing a better, more universal connector? They don't even make repair parts available to the consumer! For those reasons and many more, the absolute LAST thing I would ever do as an engineer is to buy into a standard set by Tesla, or any other company run by Elon Musk.