Owner experiences steering and brake failure

[krispykreme]

It seems to me that Tesla is certified for L2 because it is not safe for L3 and not because of hardware. I am sure that you are right about the hardware systems and I am not arguing it. I do not see how whether the cameras render effectively in bad weather has anything to do with redundancy. If you look at the Tesla camera coverage diagrams (which may or may not be correct but that is what they publish) there is overlap on all of their camera coverage so there is some degree of redundancy.

I do not know why we are even talking about this. You are clearly not a supporter of FSD and maybe not even Tesla. I am a realist and not a blinded fanboy. I know that federal regulations must be adhered to and that if Tesla wants to do business it will adhere to them. You seem to have a conspiracy theory attitude that I just don't follow.

That is because I actually worked on self driving system and have first hand experience.

I am not a fan or have any strong bias favoring any car brand.

I had a model S P100D and my daughter has Y and I have a CT Cyberbeast on order.

I speak from what I know and first hand experience in dealing with agency.

Contrary to your belief-

1. At federal level there is no law governing self driving system. I wish there is- but as of today there isn’t.

Hence department of justice is using fraud to go after FSD.

This was fully disclosed by Tesla own document to public. That it is under DOJ investigation for Autopilot/FSD.

2. Currently Self driving regulations are left at states level. Hence companies such at MB, Waymo… all work with both state and city administration to gain L3 and above certification.

That is also why DMV is suing Tesla on FSD.

3. You really should read Tesla rebuttal in December 2023-

https://insideevs.com/news/700272/tesla-dmv-implied-autopilot-fsd/amp/

it’s really pathetic .

4. Again- it’s not about how many camera you have. It’s same technology with common failure mode.

You really should read into how CA certify its self driving cars and how license to operate in road is given.

I am not a blind lemming .

I heard plenty of Tesla fanboys stating complete none sense.

1. camera has over lapping coverage therefore it has redundancy. In reality you need two different object detection and classification system at minimum.

2. Lidar and HD maps are limited by Geo Fencing- when in reality Geo Fencing is not technical barrier. But requirement by agency to achieve system reliability before allowing further expansion.

3. lidar and HD maps are used to create detail 3D maps and hence limited to place it have data to recreate. In reality, lidar by itself can already provide raw image of 4D including object speed, direction and distance in real time. HD map is mainly used to correct vehicle position on the road- it’s used in combination of GNSS correction as well as lane marking seen from cameras to accurate correct true positioning of vehicle with 0.25” drift.

have you ever wonder why when line marking disappears- Tesla FSD will drift.

Below is CA DMV self driving license status as of early this year.

it’s very clear on how license operation conditions are given and and achieces

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/vehic...es/autonomous-vehicle-testing-permit-holders/


Truth is there if you open your mind and see thru the coolaid

Sponsored

 

[krispykreme]

It seems to me that Tesla is certified for L2 because it is not safe for L3 and not because of hardware. I am sure that you are right about the hardware systems and I am not arguing it. I do not see how whether the cameras render effectively in bad weather has anything to do with redundancy. If you look at the Tesla camera coverage diagrams (which may or may not be correct but that is what they publish) there is overlap on all of their camera coverage so there is some degree of redundancy.

I do not know why we are even talking about this. You are clearly not a supporter of FSD and maybe not even Tesla. I am a realist and not a blinded fanboy. I know that federal regulations must be adhered to and that if Tesla wants to do business it will adhere to them. You seem to have a conspiracy theory attitude that I just don't follow.

The reason we are talking about this is simply you don’t understand how problematic these two system would went into limp mode simultaneously and its impact on overall functional safety for a vehicle.

Brakes and steering does have rules and regulation. FSD sits above that (even though there is no federal law). To have lower system fail at same time it’s actually extremely bad.

 

[krispykreme]

.

I do not know why we are even talking about this. You are clearly not a supporter of FSD and maybe not even Tesla. I am a realist and not a blinded fanboy. I know that federal regulations must be adhered to and that if Tesla wants to do business it will adhere to them. You seem to have a conspiracy theory attitude that I just don't follow.

Lastly- the biggest conspiracy theory that from Tesla supporter is that government is going after Elon because of his personal view.

in reality- government has failed to act early and protect the public.

what is more pathetic this is exact the response given to CA DMV by Tesla in December 2023

https://insideevs.com/news/700272/tesla-dmv-implied-autopilot-fsd/amp/

 

[Cyber Man]

I only joined this forum for this specific topic.

There is some basic mis conception here.

1. Both steering and brakes are consider ASIL-D system. Which means based on FIT calculation its shouldn’t fail in 10,000 year to 1.1M system (I can’t remember if brakes or steering is either class 1, class 2 or 3)

2. To have two independent ASIL-D system fail at same time is mathematically possible, but in reality highly unlikely.

3. I am not sure which suppliers provides the brake by wire for CT. But previous models I believe is Bosch- which did maintain mechanical connection to the brake booster with redundant loop to actual hydraulic pump. This system has been used for at least 10 years.

4. Tesla steering by wire has 2 redundant circuits and backup battery. So it’s highly unlikely that 48V system failure would simultaneously cut power to steering by wire as well as drain the backup battery.

Most likely is the OTA release bricked the vehicle control stack causing both brakes and steering system to fail. Highly doubt this is issue with both brake and steering subsystem.

I would be more concern with how the control software stack is tested, released, and what redudant check within the software stack as a whole.

Thanks for joining the forum and sharing your great insights. I learnt quite a lot from your posts on this thread. There are so many myths out there. We need more technical people like you and other forum members to not dumb down and share the real facts based on science and data. So thank you for doing that!

 

[HaulingAss]

Lastly- the biggest conspiracy theory that from Tesla supporter is that government is going after Elon because of his personal view.

You're right, the government is not going after Tesla for Elon's personal views, they are going after them on multiple levels because Tesla is a huge threat to legacy business interests, from autos to media empires funded by advertising to well-connected military/industrial/space contractors.

These people couldn't care two hoots about Elon's personal views, they just leverage those to slow down Tesla, SpaceX and the financial harm they are and will be doing to established financial interests. It's a mentality of everyone gang up on Elon to slow him down. Because Elon bad.

As usual, it's all about the money and money is power.

 

[krispykreme]

You're right, the government is not going after Tesla for Elon's personal views, they are going after them on multiple levels because Tesla is a huge threat to legacy business interests, from autos to media empires funded by advertising to well-connected military/industrial/space contractors.

These people couldn't care two hoots about Elon's personal views, they just leverage those to slow down Tesla, SpaceX and the financial harm they are and will be doing to established financial interests. It's a mentality of everyone gang up on Elon to slow him down. Because Elon bad.

As usual, it's all about the money and money is power.

I think you are way over on the conspiracy theory.

Tesla was given too much slack like Boeing did before.

US government has always been pro business.

btw- Tesla is drawing fire from all side. It’s not even a left vs right.

From technology point of view- Tesla wasn’t regulated like it should have been from day one.

Every L3 approved for road use has proper Driver monitoring systems and went thru operation domain certification to prove its reliability.

Again- there is no federal at this moment. All is local level

 

[krispykreme]

So on the FB CT page. Someone just had similar breakdown. But this time only steering went into limp mode. The driver was able to pull over and get towed.

It looks like the 48V went down first- then it triggered the SBW fault.

so could auto revolution report be wrong that there is no redundancy in terms of power path to the SWB?

If this is really the case, I am super shocked at this design.

 

[HaulingAss]

I think you are way over on the conspiracy theory.

It's a free country, you have the right to stick your head in the sand, but I recommend you open your eyes and your mind.

US government has always been pro business.

True, the question is, which business. Did you forget POTUS "forgetting" to invite the American leader in EVs to the EV Summit or how he credited GM with the EV revolution, LOL!

btw- Tesla is drawing fire from all side. It’s not even a left vs right.

That's true, I didn't say it was left vs. right, I said it depends upon which business.

From technology point of view- Tesla wasn’t regulated like it should have been from day one.

Disagree on that. Tesla's technology has been saving lives for a decade, over what the death rate would be without Tesla. The statistics don't lie. Stiffle innovation with government regulations and more people will die, not less.

It looks like you have fallen for the "Tesla's cars are dangerous" narrative, hook, line and sinker.

 

[Amuma]

I only joined this forum for this specific topic.

There is some basic mis conception here.

1. Both steering and brakes are consider ASIL-D system. Which means based on FIT calculation its shouldn’t fail in 10,000 year to 1.1M system (I can’t remember if brakes or steering is either class 1, class 2 or 3)

2. To have two independent ASIL-D system fail at same time is mathematically possible, but in reality highly unlikely.

3. I am not sure which suppliers provides the brake by wire for CT. But previous models I believe is Bosch- which did maintain mechanical connection to the brake booster with redundant loop to actual hydraulic pump. This system has been used for at least 10 years.

4. Tesla steering by wire has 2 redundant circuits and backup battery. So it’s highly unlikely that 48V system failure would simultaneously cut power to steering by wire as well as drain the backup battery.

Most likely is the OTA release bricked the vehicle control stack causing both brakes and steering system to fail. Highly doubt this is issue with both brake and steering subsystem.

I would be more concern with how the control software stack is tested, released, and what redudant check within the software stack as a whole.

You're an ex Tesla employee!! ?

 

[JBee]

1. That is because Tesla has been hiding under L2 in all of their legal disclaimer. In that sense- human driver sits above and final responsibility over the vehicle control. Hence its “FSD” is never have final responsibility and control.

2. ISO 26262 principle is very clear. Any system above an ASIL-D system will be to be ASIL-D.

For L3, the compute or vehicle control systems sits above brake and steering needs to be full ASIL-D compliant.

3. As I mentioned above- HW 4 failed due to same homogenous SOC, same PCBA, and common power source. That is a no no from compute point of view. Been there and done that.

4. Have multiple camera is not redundancy. Because same with homogeneous SOC above. Camera sensor have same failure mode- you can’t see in bad weather conditions. That is not how redundancy work.

5. Tesla was never certified for L3. Nor it has achieved any permit to test and collect data for L3 on public roads.

6. That is reason why both CA DMV and US department of justice is going after Tesla.

First up welcome to the forum, happy to see you here. Let alone to give some more weight to the seriousness of the critical failures being experienced by CT owners.

Your posts have been Interesting.

I am also very concerned why the system design allows the SbW and brake booster to fail at the same time.

But I'm wondering why you say CT has brake by wire? My understanding is that it is hydraulic brake calipers on the wheels and a electric boosted main cylinder with actuation? Brake by wire would not have a hydraulic path connecting the pedal to the brakes? Or do you mean it's brake by wire because an electric signal can Brake the vehicle by itself, like with most ADAS?

For a truly redundant setup they shouldn't even be running cable harnesses next to eachother, yet they employ a ring bus over ethernet for their main loop to the nodes? Sure the ring has two paths per node, but that counts as two fault paths as well. One of the failures was repaired with a rear harness swap and there has been no reoccurrence so far.

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.com/forum/threads/two-days-in-critical-errors-25-of-them.12614/

There's another here with a substantial amount of errors:
https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...-redundancy-detected.13048/page-3#post-258975

Or:
https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...-redundancy-detected.13048/page-3#post-258975

There's also a wiring recall atm that leads to MV failure:
https://service.tesla.com/docs/Serv...Harness_To_Address_PCS2_Harness_Retention.pdf

Overall quite a few with seemingly long list of electrical faults, that once again should not be happening on a system with redundant isolated power circuits.

As for the software stack being at fault this seems somewhat unlikely, unless the stack is also spitting out false error codes resulting in unnecessary repairs and replacements of parts that are not broken, and means the vehicles are still faulty until the next time the stack decides it's time to throw a wobbly again.

Of all of them, this would be the most bizarre, but potentially the most likely depending on how many lines are in there. Surely they are doing both software and hardware in the loop testing before pushing a OTA? I mean even we do that on our UAVs.

 

[krispykreme]

You're an ex Tesla employee!! ?

No. They tried to recruit me about 3-4 years ago. Not my cup of tea.

I can't stand build quality and lack of detail coming from Apple.

No I didn't work on Titan.

 

[krispykreme]

First up welcome to the forum, happy to see you here. Let alone to give some more weight to the seriousness of the critical failures being experienced by CT owners.

Your posts have been Interesting.

I am also very concerned why the system design allows the SbW and brake booster to fail at the same time.

But I'm wondering why you say CT has brake by wire? My understanding is that it is hydraulic brake calipers on the wheels and a electric boosted main cylinder with actuation? Brake by wire would not have a hydraulic path connecting the pedal to the brakes? Or do you mean it's brake by wire because an electric signal can Brake the vehicle by itself, like with most ADAS?

For a truly redundant setup they shouldn't even be running cable harnesses next to eachother, yet they employ a ring bus over ethernet for their main loop to the nodes? Sure the ring has two paths per node, but that counts as two fault paths as well. One of the failures was repaired with a rear harness swap and there has been no reoccurrence so far.

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.com/forum/threads/two-days-in-critical-errors-25-of-them.12614/

There's another here with a substantial amount of errors:
https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...-redundancy-detected.13048/page-3#post-258975

Or:
https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...-redundancy-detected.13048/page-3#post-258975

There's also a wiring recall atm that leads to MV failure:
https://service.tesla.com/docs/Serv...Harness_To_Address_PCS2_Harness_Retention.pdf

Overall quite a few with seemingly long list of electrical faults, that once again should not be happening on a system with redundant isolated power circuits.

As for the software stack being at fault this seems somewhat unlikely, unless the stack is also spitting out false error codes resulting in unnecessary repairs and replacements of parts that are not broken, and means the vehicles are still faulty until the next time the stack decides it's time to throw a wobbly again.

Of all of them, this would be the most bizarre, but potentially the most likely depending on how many lines are in there. Surely they are doing both software and hardware in the loop testing before pushing a OTA? I mean even we do that on our UAVs.

1. Brake by wire simply means the brake pedal input is electronically transmitted to ibooster. Ibooster then determines how much brake pressure to put. Even the mechanical linkage for backup is only maintain input to ibooster in case electrical connection to ibooster is shut down. Hence its by wire.

2. Ring bus is here to stay- it highly unlikely to have switch fail completely that data wouldn't be transmitted. Data packet can be rerouted on different wires (of course if the harness is completely cut between two switches- the system fails). Part of benefit with going to Ethernet is no longer dedicated can connection between two point.

3. Redundancy is achieved when you have multiple point of failure not a single point. Because it makes probabilities of system failure so minute due to not all point of failure would fail at once.

4. I still don't understand how 48V system fail would cause 1 or 2 ASIL-D system to fail at same time. Which to me is clear that at least at car level power path is a questionable mark.

5. I only brought up software issue due to 2 reasons

A. I believe the case in Phoenix is right after software update.

B. I really can't believe that Tesla didn't design another power path from another power source. That is strange

 

[krispykreme]

It's a free country, you have the right to stick your head in the sand, but I recommend you open your eyes and your mind.




True, the question is, which business. Did you forget POTUS "forgetting" to invite the American leader in EVs to the EV Summit or how he credited GM with the EV revolution, LOL!



That's true, I didn't say it was left vs. right, I said it depends upon which business.



Disagree on that. Tesla's technology has been saving lives for a decade, over what the death rate would be without Tesla. The statistics don't lie. Stiffle innovation with government regulations and more people will die, not less.

It looks like you have fallen for the "Tesla's cars are dangerous" narrative, hook, line and sinker.

Statistics based on what? Elon and Tesla own data?

The reason why NHTSA opened EP22-02 back in 2021 is based on 3 fatal death and 17 injuries.

No- Tesla car is not unsafe. It's enabling lazy and bad behavior by drivers with a system that lacks proper redundancy.

 

[mark555055c]

Statistics based on what? Elon and Tesla own data?

The reason why NHTSA opened EP22-02 back in 2021 is based on 3 fatal death and 17 injuries.

No- Tesla car is not unsafe. It's enabling lazy and bad behavior by drivers with a system that lacks proper redundancy.

Just curious, why come to a vehicle owners club to bash a vehicle and the company that makes it?

I could never see myself wasting my own time to say, go to an Apple message board and tell everyone why I don't like Apple products.

 

[JBee]

1. Brake by wire simply means the brake pedal input is electronically transmitted to ibooster. Ibooster then determines how much brake pressure to put. Even the mechanical linkage for backup is only maintain input to ibooster in case electrical connection to ibooster is shut down. Hence its by wire.

2. Ring bus is here to stay- it highly unlikely to have switch fail completely that data wouldn't be transmitted. Data packet can be rerouted on different wires (of course if the harness is completely cut between two switches- the system fails). Part of benefit with going to Ethernet is no longer dedicated can connection between two point.

3. Redundancy is achieved when you have multiple point of failure not a single point. Because it makes probabilities of system failure so minute due to not all point of failure would fail at once.

4. I still don't understand how 48V system fail would cause 1 or 2 ASIL-D system to fail at same time. Which to me is clear that at least at car level power path is a questionable mark.

5. I only brought up software issue due to 2 reasons

A. I believe the case in Phoenix is right after software update.

B. I really can't believe that Tesla didn't design another power path from another power source. That is strange

1. I'd say it's a hybrid system though, not purely by wire? The mechanical actuation of the pedal still compresses hydraulic fluid that actuates the brake calipers on each wheel. The brake sensor on the other hand just modulates the level of brake boost, but doesn't directly actuate the brake calipers, unlike Brembo Sensify.

2. Yep agree. CAN was also bandwidth limited.

3. Theres a limit to where redundancy adds reliability though, in that more complex systems also have more parts to fail. Similar to your lidar vs camera vision arguments, having the same power modules for ease or manufacturing and repair, might also make it subject to the same fault. The problem here also becomes isolation in that two asymmetric systems can also fail by the same fault, simply by being connected to the same action. This seems to be the case with the SbW and brakes failing at the same time, which should never be allowed in a vehicle design.

4/B I agree that it is strange that there is no seperate path, but if so I suspect the culprit is the PCS that has bidirectional DC converters that do double time as AC invetters to run outlets, and as the onboard charger etc.

But honestly, I'm not 100% on any common culprit, given the different repairs made so dar, for mostly the same problem.

Sponsored