Linux Takes On Automotive Apps

loconet writes "Linux Devices has released an article about Metrowerks setting out to drive Linux further into the automotive telematics market by launching what it calls "Automotive Grade Linux," a version of Linux enhanced with non-traditional features to address the specific requirements of automotive telematics."

Comments

Re:Strange article

[erick99]

The article states:

What automotive telematics is not

Automotive telematics does not include areas of automotive computing that involve powertrain management (such as fuel-injection microcontrollers), or what Metrowerks terms "body/safety/chassis" computing applications. These applications are typically based on proprietary process-based real-time OSes such as QNX, VxWorks, AE, LynxOS and others.

Telematics

[OneNonly]

Was expecting this device / software to be for general control of car systems (engine performance, monitoring etc) but from here:

http://linuxdevices.com/news/NS6531324140.html

What is "telematics"?

Telematics is a fairly new word sometimes defined as the combination of telecommunications and computing, or, alternatively, "telemetry" (radio-based instrumentation) and "informatics" (information management using statistics and computers).

Automotive telematics, then, is the application of telematics to the automotive market. Metrowerks lists examples of automotive telematics that include:

* Call center services such as GM OnStar
* In-car navigation and guidance systems
* Car/cellphone integration (for example, for hands-free operation through the radio and a dash-mounted microphone)
* XM radio and Becker Online Pro
* Fleet management systems such as Qualcomm Omnitracs

What automotive telematics is not

Automotive telematics does not include areas of automotive computing that involve powertrain management (such as fuel-injection microcontrollers), or what Metrowerks terms "body/safety/chassis" computing applications. These applications are typically based on proprietary process-based real-time OSes such as QNX, VxWorks, AE, LynxOS and others.

Re:One problem:

[barzok]

OK, lets learn what is the difference between the two. Two or three valves per cylinder are better (more efficient?) because they allow more air intake as compared to the total cylinder head available space. OHC vs. OHV, how does it work?

On the off chance that this isn't a troll...

More valves = more air. More air coming in means more efficient combustion, generally.

All modern automobile engines I'm aware of (with the exception of Mazda's rotary) are OHV.

"Pushrod" engines have the camshaft in the bottom of the V of a V-type engine, just above the crankshaft, and driven by a chain off the crankshaft. The camshaft pushes on rods, which then push levers (rocker arms) which operate the valves. This wastes a lot of energy, and generally is limited on the RPMs (unless you're building race engines). To get more than 2 valves per cylinder, you'd need a lot more pushrods and lobes on the cams (which there isn't room for), or some extra levers/paddles over the valves to split the force of the pushrod. But that can flex, and flex is bad. And you'll waste more energy regardless.

An Overhead Cam engine has the camshafts directly above the valves, no pushrods. To add a second pair of valves, move the first set to the side, along with their camshaft, and put a second set right next to them. These engines are much easier to run at high RPMs.

Could the latest HEMI design be 4-valved to produce a Ferrari-killing 650HP?

Well, the true HEMI design from the '50s and '60s can do it with 2 valves per cylinder. The new one requires more than '60s knowledge to do it, due to all the computer controls which haven't been cracked yet. The engine hasn't been picked over by the shadetree "hackers" yet. And can it do it and still meet emissions?