CIU Issues and potential BL 540 Software - Page 2 - Fisker Buzz Forums
Fisker Buzz Forums

User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-08-2016, 10:55 PM   #11 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
FiskerPhilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,084
Mentioned: 159 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 311 Post(s)
Default

Part of the issue is that the CIU and TPI are integrated into the body CAN BUS which complicates things as it is streaming data from HVAC, HCU and other nodes with input/output therefore the "ciu" problem is shared by the rest of the Karma systems making it near impossible to reintegrate.
__________________
EVolution Autosports
EV & Hybrid Performance
Fisker Specialists
[email protected]
FiskerPhilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 12:03 AM   #12 (permalink)
Liked, but not well liked
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,172
Mentioned: 132 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 456 Post(s)
Default

Issue is also that you would need the low level drivers in order to compile whatever modified UI was created. It is possible without the source to create a compatible development environment with open source tools but would take a lot of time. I am also sure there are be-spoke proprietary drivers that would have to be written.

It is possible to just flash the pieces that need to be changed- or even have a day night mode (i.e. same graphics but a white and black background like the roadshow cars). Someone would have to take the ROM file off an existing CIU, de-compile it and then modify the hex files that control these modes. We know that "day mode"is still in there (masked) because sometimes the maps go white as a glitch.

Anyway, it is probably possible but it also depends what the goal is. Just white background for day and black background for night or a more significant UI rehaul?

Then you have the issue of validation, which would take a ton of time because you could potentially introduce a buffer overflow which could corrupt some of the other vehicle modules.

The easier play IMO, would be to get them to release the buggy beta software with the caveat that you are using it at your own peril. Why re-invent the wheel when the software exists? Very unlikely a more stable CIU SW can be created with limited tools. Still don't understand why this software cannot be improved to make it more stable. A much better place to start than from essentially scratch, with 510. YMMV
PowerSource is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 01:02 AM   #13 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
FiskerPhilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,084
Mentioned: 159 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 311 Post(s)
Default

Yeah...what he said
__________________
EVolution Autosports
EV & Hybrid Performance
Fisker Specialists
[email protected]
FiskerPhilly is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Old 03-09-2016, 12:51 PM   #14 (permalink)
Early Adopter
 
Nin ja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,243
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 217 Post(s)
Garage
Default

Still no one has yet to say why a FY2017 update cannot be retrofitted into the FY2012?
__________________
Karma Ecosport eclipse / dune
Nin ja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 01:15 PM   #15 (permalink)
Liked, but not well liked
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,172
Mentioned: 132 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 456 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nin ja View Post
Still no one has yet to say why a FY2017 update cannot be retrofitted into the FY2012?
From hardware perspective you could probably install it (heavy modification to harnesses) but from a software perspective if they are going the "Tier-1" route it is unlikely that they own the underlying software that communicates with the subsystems of the vehicle and a supplier is the one actually doing the work. Thus it will be required to go to the supplier and negotiate with them to do the integration for MY2012 cars. That supplier will likely charge the customer million(s) for this type of work.
PowerSource is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 02:56 PM   #16 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Default

Any merit in running a Kickstarter campaign to purchase the beta CIU software from Karma Automotive? I will pitch in the first $500.
Fanofearth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 06:56 PM   #17 (permalink)
Super Moderator
 
Fabulist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 4,659
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 402 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerSource View Post
From hardware perspective you could probably install it (heavy modification to harnesses) but from a software perspective if they are going the "Tier-1" route it is unlikely that they own the underlying software that communicates with the subsystems of the vehicle and a supplier is the one actually doing the work. Thus it will be required to go to the supplier and negotiate with them to do the integration for MY2012 cars. That supplier will likely charge the customer million(s) for this type of work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fanofearth View Post
Any merit in running a Kickstarter campaign to purchase the beta CIU software from Karma Automotive? I will pitch in the first $500.
If I read @PowerSource answer correctly, FA does not own that software and cannot sell it, eve if they wanted to.
__________________
-- Fab.

Original owner of 2012 Eco Sport Black (Eclipse) with Monsoon Tritone Interior. VIN: -0641
Fabulist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 07:26 PM   #18 (permalink)
Early Adopter
 
Nin ja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,243
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 217 Post(s)
Garage
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerSource View Post
From hardware perspective you could probably install it (heavy modification to harnesses) but from a software perspective if they are going the "Tier-1" route it is unlikely that they own the underlying software that communicates with the subsystems of the vehicle and a supplier is the one actually doing the work. Thus it will be required to go to the supplier and negotiate with them to do the integration for MY2012 cars. That supplier will likely charge the customer million(s) for this type of work.
Has anyone seen the the new hardware? I assume if would have to fit within the tolerances of the current system - why do you think(or know) it to be a problem? Is there any indication that it won't retro fit correctly?

just curious ...
__________________
Karma Ecosport eclipse / dune
Nin ja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 08:25 PM   #19 (permalink)
Liked, but not well liked
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,172
Mentioned: 132 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 456 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nin ja View Post
Has anyone seen the the new hardware? I assume if would have to fit within the tolerances of the current system - why do you think(or know) it to be a problem? Is there any indication that it won't retro fit correctly?

just curious ...
Highly skeptical they designed the new system to be backwards compatible. 2012 cars are based on a vehicle architecture from 2008, so very limiting in what a new unit can do if the requirement was to make it backwards compatible. The auto world has moved leaps and bounds since then. If the car had been in uninterrupted serial production, then it is likely a retrofit would be the solution since the OEM would have been hamstrung by the existing architecture of the vehicle.

With all that being said a retrofit is physically possible and if you could get the right messages to the new hardware it would likely work- but that integration work would have to be done by someone (likely the supplier of the infotainment unit itself). Essentially they would be building two variants of the infotainment system that would have to be validated on two different platforms. Can't see business case for 2012 cars, consolation prize is lighted steering wheel controls.

That being said, I may put the new infotainment center in my car, if it is any good
PowerSource is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 08:33 PM   #20 (permalink)
Liked, but not well liked
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,172
Mentioned: 132 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 456 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fabulist View Post
If I read @PowerSource answer correctly, FA does not own that software and cannot sell it, eve if they wanted to.
This was in reference to the future unit that Ninja was referring to; based on the "Tier-1" assumption, which is norm in this industry. I think only Tesla develops their infotainment in-house. Every other OEM uses a Tier-1 integrator which I assume is the case for Karma vehicles.

With regards to the current beta SW, I am not sure who owns that. If their goal was to release a 540 UI upgrade then it is likely that Karma has the rights to it. From reading the earlier comment from Karmanews, it seems as if the main hurdle is technical knowledge not a licensing/ownership issue.
PowerSource is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Original owner, Karma having major software issues suddenly, Boston area :( drliu Fisker Karma 9 02-12-2016 09:05 PM
Potential Fisker Buyer in Southern California JLawBball Introductions 1 05-12-2015 04:11 PM
New potential member Hipertec Southern California 1 12-14-2014 06:04 PM
Untapped acceleration potential? Sandy Eggo Fisker Karma 12 04-22-2013 04:52 PM
BMW ActiveE software Issues aejdh2v The Car Lounge 1 02-27-2012 10:17 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:41 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.