Many commercial vehicle (CV) players are looking to battery electric vehicles (EVs) to address looming environmental targets, but it’s not an easy transition. Apart from varying charging infrastructure availability, fleets are driven by total cost of ownership (TCO) and uptime, as trucks that are parked charging are not out earning. While battery technology has evolved considerably over the past decade—with advancements in cost, weight, and energy efficiency— there remains considerable room for improvement.
At the same time, vehicles are increasingly defined by software. From the driving controls to the user-experience, software is finding its way into all aspects of design and function. At ZF, applying software innovations to spur the EV revolution is a logical next step.
The software brake resistor
ZF’s recently unveiled software brake resistor offers one example of how software could potentially replace hardware for improved functionality. In this case, intelligent software optimises EV charging by considering the potential for regenerative braking later in the journey. It draws on location data to determine if the vehicle is charging in an area where it is likely to descend a steep gradient, which could create significant additional battery charge at an early stage in its journey. If so, then the system makes sure to leave spare capacity during charging to harvest energy later along the route.
“This is essentially an intelligent prediction system that applies a charge limit to prevent overcharging and the wasted associated heat dissipation while considering recuperation,” explains Karoline Bader, Director OE Digital at ZF Group. “If you are charging a truck or bus at the top of a hill, you should not necessarily charge to 100%. Maybe it would be better to charge to 80%, because recuperation can fill up the remaining 20%. The system is clever.”
In this instance, the software solution helps replace hardware in the form of brake resistors. “One key value proposition is that we need fewer components and can thus reduce weight,” Bader tells Automotive World. The shift to software also increases space within the chassis.
This is good news for OEMs and fleets. At the moment the solution is at the proof of concept stage and not yet market-ready. “We have proved the technical feasibility of the software brake resistor and are currently in close discussions with customers relating to a possible industrialisation approach,” she notes.
The software-defined CV
This particular innovation is targeted at truck and bus developers and represents yet another step towards the software-defined CV. While many of the headlines around the automotive software evolution have focussed on passenger cars, trucks and buses are on a similar trajectory, albeit with some noteworthy differences. “TCO plays an important role in the CV space, particularly in certain use cases,” Bader says. “This means solutions need to be very cost effective. With cargo fleets you want to prevent downtime, which is less critical in the passenger car area.”
In all vehicle segments, the ability to update software is pivotal. Introducing new software features and patching vulnerabilities underlies the whole value proposition of the software-defined vehicle. Type approval regulations in Europe recently received an important update with the introduction of UNECE R155 for cyber security and R156 for software updates in vehicle control units requiring a software update management system (SUMS).
To help CV OEMs comply with these regulations, ZF provides cyber security services even on electronic control unit level related to R155. For R156 ZF offers an end-to-end SUMS Service Suite with tools, services and documents to support OEMs with the software update management of commercial vehicles along the complete lifetime. “It helps to manage software updates for CVs and individual vehicle systems or components, making them available for authorisation. It also manages consistent update records throughout the vehicle’s entire lifecycle,” says Bader.
A common understanding
Looking ahead, software will continue to play a greater role within CVs. While this opens up tremendous new opportunities, it also brings a host of challenges. “We’ve seen software complexity increasing over the years, while at the same time we are trying to move much faster and be more agile. It’s difficult to manage that, both in passenger cars and CVs,” she points out.
At a very basic level, she points to a lack of agreement on industry jargon. Everyone may be talking about the software-defined vehicle, but not everyone means the same thing. “As an industry, we don’t have a joint understanding of what the software-defined truck really means. Recent meetings with multiple stakeholders highlighted how definitions differ from one individual to another. We need to find a common understanding in our industry.”
She also wants to see consensus on what features could be standardised in this new software paradigm: “Standardisation is definitely a big challenge in the automotive industry.” Bader points to maps for advanced driving assistance systems and autonomous driving as an example of where integration consensus, in the form of the Navigation Data Standard (NDS), made a huge difference. Aside from maps, she also flags a lack of standardisation with E/E architectures that needs to be addressed.
For ZF, and all players within the commercial transport space, the rise of the software-defined truck heralds a huge market disruption, but one in which the pursuit of cleaner, smarter, more connected CVs offers tremendous opportunity for innovation.
