Smartpost

1
Smart-post Statemate - June 27th update

• Peter Miller

Motorola AIEG. June 27th 2000.
2
Smartpost - current development approach
3
Option 1 Just change from Betterstate to
Statemate.

• Motorola would provide class 2 interface
  functions, etc required for central controller.
• D-C /or Ford would purchase development
  environment (see next slide)
• Motorola would have someone (Pete) in Detroit
  available to answer questions about Motorola
  interface.
• Would enable D-C and Ford to start work as soon
  as they liked.

4
New Person on the team

• Pete Gleneski who is a System Engineer over in
  Rochester Hills.
• Pete's number is [phone]

5
The following tool set appears to allow Statemate
models to be used with the existing central
controller/smartpost

• Software required and estimated costs
• Statemate (NT) 26K
• Rhapsody 13K
• pRISM 19K
• Motorola support code
• main routine
• Class 2 module
• smartpost specific hooks to class 2 module

6
Option 2 upgrade smartpost processor and dont
use central controller.

• Current smartpost microcontroller does not have
  enough memory to allow it to be used directly
  from Statemate
• An external processor board would have to be
  hand-modified to interface to smartpost power
  hardware.
• Knock-on issues (like power supply capability)
  means hardware will not meet required spec.
• Code downloading may be slow.
• Rhapsody/micro-C should directly link to this new
  processor.
• No software support available from Motorola AIEG.
• Solution not vehicle ready and not easy to
  clone.

7
Dc-Dc converter with truly integrated smartpost -
Motorola Universal Converter

• A M.U.C. can operate with any (positive or
  negative) voltage on the post.
• Generate any positive or negative voltage on
  the post.

8
Option 3 - wait till a MUC is available

• The Motorola Universal Converter is effectively a
  smart-post and DC-DC converter integrated
  together.
• Should be available Q4 2000
• Software will be developed by Motorola using
  ideas from Statemate diagrams already generated.
• MUC is more flexible (eg it can top up its
  internal 12V battery while also giving aid via
  the post)
• Switches must be controlled in real-time not
  just on/off.
• Will incorporate SOC calculations rather than
  fixed times.
• Software will be in C/assembler

9
Comparison

• Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
• Statemate HC08 MUC
• When now ??? Q4 2000
• Vehicle ready Yes No Yes?
• Run from Flash Yes No Yes
• Cost (Ford D-C) 58k 39k none (for s/w)
• Post voltage -60/14V ???? /-60V
• Fixed times Yes Yes No- SOC based
• Functionality Medium Low High
• With external switch box connected (adds
  significantly to load on smartpost power-supply),
  when linked into vehicle system could be higher.
  Production intent systems would be able to meet
  /-60V if required.

10
Dont forget

• Current hardware/software proves concept is valid
• Major outstanding issue is how fast will surface
  charging process be - and will people wait that
  long?
• Reminder on estimated costs
• Basic (MUC) 12
• Dual voltage (MUC) 28
• /- Dual voltage (MUC) 34
• External smartpost 35
• Intelligent jump leads 150 (incl Dc-Dc,
• user-interface, etc)