Platform-led Software Integration For Evs To Deal With Multi-party Development Scenarios

Speakers:

Sophia Suo, Head, Electrified Powertrain, KPIT
Geetha Srinivasan, Chief Architect, Powertrain, KPIT

A holistic approach to EV powertrain software development often encounters challenges around:

• Increased software complexities and evolving feature requirements
• Involvement of multiple  parties for software components from OEMs to Tier
  1s and Third-party entities
• Changing architectural trends
• Optimization of the multi-core processor
• Compliance with AUTOSAR
• Compatibility between hardware-software
• Functional safety

This is where a platform-led approach for software integration in EVs can ensure improved validation, enhanced productivity and reduced costs over the program lifecycle while effectively meeting critical safety, function and timing demands. In this context, AUTOSAR emerges as a standard interface for components even as it ensures their reuse and management across platforms while protecting the intellectual property of each party.

In this webinar, KPIT’s Sophia Suo and Geetha Srinivasan discuss the challenges and analyse the software development and integration journey for EVs from prototype-to-production while offering insights into KPIT’s holistic solution.

Challenges in EV component integration into vehicle system

Even as EV tech swiftly evolves, it faces not just architectural complexities but other hurdles in making a concept-level technology, production-ready. OEMs hardware samples typically undergo evaluations starting with — the B sample (functional) followed by the C sample (design verification and validation for design concept), the manufacturing process validation and finally, the final production.

Likewise, the Tier 1s have similar milestones to align component maturity and vehicle samples. The entire process entails multiple steps and iterations from B to -D sample stages, in addition to frequent software releases at a fast pace that often destabilise both, Tier 1s and OEMs. Also, increased inputs from OEMs and Tier1s, constant architecture changes, program management and multiple V-cycle verification and validation during the sample stages pose huge challenges for software integration.

Challenges from the architectural side

• Multiple and iterative inputs from the industry to thefor functional requirements
• Incompatible architectural design
• Inability of project management to ensure agile workflows
• Inadequate verification and validation

Hardcore embedded systems have proved themselves in the legacy systems yet the architecture needs to evolve to accommodate challenges over time to:

• Ensure seamless portability across multiple hardware
• Check for base software being AUTOSAR-compatible while the architecture remains a legacy
  system.
• Migrate the application to AUTOSAR standards so that the interfaces are standardised and multiple V cycles include continuous and early integrations.
• Migrate to the multicore architecture that can handle high performing systems and multiple complex components

Some critical drivers are:

• Interface specifications for different modules
• Hardware resources, peripheral access and functional safety aspects
• Software components and ASIL
• Performance requirements

Enabling seamless software integration and improved productivity

Platform-based development is key at the:

• Module-level
• Software architecture-level
• AUTOSAR migration-level
• Multi-core architecture-level
• Safety-level

Transitioning from single- to multi-core architecture

In case of a single-core architecture, the performance measurements from that system are taken as the input. This is followed by data profiling before partition definition is finalised or interface speculation occurs. Mapping components to cores and cores to partitions is key. Subsequently, component clusters are built to look at memory handling, task execution and read-write access consistencies for data-sharing and finally, the multi-core architecture is determined.

Data Profiling and Component Coupling: How to Quantitatively and Qualitatively Assess Existing Architecture to Derive Multi-core Software Architecture?

This entails: Define the interfaces, components and access rate. Feed this into a dependency matrix simulation environment. Derive the coupling factor and coupling index for each component, which cannot be split across the partition. Cluster them and finally, derive the amount of shared data required to be taken care of for concurrent access from multi-core scenario.

Safety Architecture

It’s important to acquire the function safety analyses early on so there is clarity on components that are ASIL- driven, for example, so safety is not compromised. Then, derive the allocation concepts along with the multi-core migration guidelines before finally, getting the safety test cases.

Approach to manage accelerated software development sprint cycles

A software integration partner with years of experience working on numerous production programs accelerates the development process by fine-tuning the:

• Approach for EV software development
• Approach for ensuring test coverage
• Approach for managing requirements and test cases
• Approach to handle snowballing feature

Conclusion

KPIT’s time-tested and holistic approach to challenges across sample and production-ready prototype stages entails – ready frameworks (SOTA cybersecurity-compliant), libraries (Safety, MIL, SIL), platforms (with generic requirement specifications) and accelerators for key electric vehicle components like (Charger, Inverter, BMS and VCU.). Its suite of solutions spans a host of architecture guidelines and health evaluations, DFA templates and methodology, automated checks and proven ePT software components. Leveraging KPIT’s comprehensive capabilities here can significantly assist redressal of growing software architecture complexities revolving around changing requirements, delivering on time and verification and validation depth and coverage.

Click here to watch the webinar on-demand