theoretically this is easy: Use the diagnostic service you like to support as a functional API. The layers below then can be /(and have to be) configured to support the appropriate network protocol.
But in practise this often will not work, since the typical ECU will not provide enough resources for running such flexible configuration.
Post by Rotti, Prasad (IE10)-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Rotti, Prasad (IE10)
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 12:37 PM
Subject: RE: [CANLIST] KWP2000 over CANopen, J1939
Hello Juergen,
If I understand correctly, you are trying to say that KWP2000
as a protocol can be used in combination with either J1939 or CANopen.
Now with so many variants of CAN existing is there any
suggestion on how to implement the app layer, so that one
seamlessly integrates the different variants like J1939,
CANopen. A customer may just want CANopen today, whereas a
different one tomorrow may request for the J1939 with CCP and
another one the J1939 with KWP. How does one handle such
changes efficiently?
Is anything happening on this front, so that number of
variants are reduced? Or do we have to live with it?
Rgrds,
Prasad
-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Klüser, Jürgen
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 3:42 PM
Subject: RE: [CANLIST] KWP2000 over CANopen, J1939
Hello Prasad,
J1939 - here you can find many combinations in the market.
KWP2000, UDS, J1939 specific diagnostics are mixed and run in
parallel on CAN. Nearly every manufacturer has his own
approach here. Currently there are many activities to
harmonize that. I am not a specialist on that, perhaps
someone else will answer more detailled.
CANopen - CANopen has a different approach. It provides an
interface (object dictionary) where diagnostic objects and
functions can be integrated. The communication protocol
allows appropriate access to these objects.
Anyhow there are more and more requirements to use automotive
standards for diagnostics via CANopen networks. The point is,
that a CANopen network has to be seen from the application
point of view: A concrete application will have a set of
services, that are used in the network. This is the base for
the configuration of the network. Dependent on that
configuration you can use any other protocols like KWP, UDS
or XCP / CCP in parallel.
This does not really help a device manufacturer, since you
always have the task of the system integrator ensuring the
right configuration.
Therefore CiA more and more focuses not only on device
profiles, but also on so-called application profiles. Here
also the relation between devices is specified. With this
approach pre-defined (or "standardized") diagnostics get
possible. For example the application profile
car-add-on-devices CiA447 explicitly introduced the usage of
UDS diagnostics within CANopen. It assigns CAN-IDs for these
services. The protocol itself is to be used as specified in UDS.
In principle the very same is possible with KWP. But if you
are going to design future stuff, it is worth thinking about UDS.
I hope, these few words do not make more confusion, but help
a little bit.
Best Regards / Mit freundlichen Gruessen
Juergen Klueser
-------------------------------------------------
Global Product Line Manager PON
Open Networking Tools and Components
Vector Informatik GmbH
Ingersheimer Strasse 24
D-70499 Stuttgart, Germany
Phone: +49 711 80670-202
Fax: +49 711 80670-249
Internet: http://www.vector-informatik.de
-------------------------------------------------
________________________________
Behalf Of Rotti, Prasad (IE10)
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 10:35 AM
Subject: [CANLIST] KWP2000 over CANopen, J1939
Hello,
I have may have asked this question earlier, but I have
still not been able to get a clear answer for this.
From what I know, KWP2000 (ISO 15765) is standard for
Diagnostics over CAN. CANopen, J1939 are one of the many
application layer implementations.
Can KWP2000 be used on CANopen, J1939 or do they have a
separate protocol for diagnostics over CAN? I searched over
the net, but did not find anyone using CANopen or J1939 in
conjunction with KWP2000, so am a bit confused.
We have implemented a simple protocol in our module for
diagnostics over CAN. Now a customer is asking us to follow
the KWP2000 protocol for the same. Also there are couple of
other customers who want CAN communication to be as per
CANopen and J1939 respt. So can I go ahead and implement the
KWP2000 protocol stack and use it in my product irrespective
of CANopen, J1939, etc.
Rgrds,
Prasad
--
Archives and useful links: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CANbus
Subscribe and unsubscribe at www.vector-informatik.com/canlist/
--
Archives and useful links: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CANbus
Subscribe and unsubscribe at www.vector-informatik.com/canlist/