Click here for the enhanced PDF version of this article

TOOL SUPPLIERS HAVE RISEN TO THE CHALLENGE POSED BY VEHICLE makers and auto electronics suppliers to help reduce system problems, reduce system cost, and reduce time to market. In general, this means greater involvement with tools earlier in the design process. The answers are similar in some cases and quite different in others but in either case, provide options for users. Standardization efforts with strong support from OEMs, tier one and semiconductor suppliers as well as design tool suppliers have made significant progress. This report focuses on the design tool options available to help electronic systems designers cope with the increasing complexity in today's vehicles.

The increasing system complexity in a modern vehicle has been quantified in several areas. According to Gartner/Dataquest report, Electronic Production and Semiconductor Consumption, Nov-ember 2005, worldwide semiconductor consumption for automotive electronics is projected to grow 6.9% from 2005 to 2010^[1]. At the same time, the percent of the average vehicle's cost due to automotive electronics could increase from about 23% in 2004 to 40% in 2010.

From a software complexity standpoint, there is an estimated 4 million lines of code in a 2006 vehicle. “The complexity is in-creasing,” says Chris Washington, product manager, LabVIEW, National Instruments. “The amount of time these engineers have to get these products out the door that are increasing in complexity is shortening. The quality standards are increasing and more and more the differentiators, specifically in electronics, differentiators in vehicle and other products, oftentime becomes the firmware — the embedded technology.”

Figure 1 shows the distribution of warranty expenses in vehicles^[1]. According to the 2003 HAWK study, more than 50% of all breakdowns directly result from faulty software and electronics. At the same time, as shown in Figure 2, the cost to correct these problems increases as the program progresses from the design to the coding and finally into the test phase.

Knowing these facts provides justification for the increased use of design tools but not necessarily the solution. So the OEMs have challenged the tools suppliers to help solve the problem. “The high-level conceptual answer is more simulation, and less physical prototyping and less manual testing,” said NI's Washington. Even in the most innovative design approach, with early simulation, OEMs can find problems earlier in the design or development cycle. There is a side benefit as well. Increased use of simulation reduces the number of prototypes that have to be built, which involves considerable cost and time at the complete vehicle level.

To address the problems sooner, automotive OEMs are pursuing more robust designs. “The issue with robust design is how do you design systems that are repeatable, predictable, reliable and proven,” said David Smith, Synopsys Scientist. Smith is also the chairman of SAE's Electronic Design Automation (EDA) Committee. Since, the committee's efforts are driven by OEMs, its activities provide interesting insight into what the car companies expect.