Online EMC Numerical Simulation

Transcription

1 Online EMC Numerical Simulation Dr. EMC Expert Groupe PSA 09/09/2016 EMC Europe 2016 Symposium Wroclaw (Poland) September 5 th - 9 th, 2016

2 Context and trigger of this approach PSA Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) Challenges Full Digital 2025 Ambition CAE workshop at PSA (Vélizy) June 2 nd,

3 Example of an automotive EMC modeling scheme Metallic parts Harness CAD virtual models Numerical models Car manufacturer Equipment supplier Harness schematic Harness model Multi-conductor Transmission line model Mesh Electrical schematic 2

4 My feelings after 30 years Numerical simulation tools for EMC design have improved significantly (features, speed, size) in the past 30 years The use of such tools for full-system EMC simulations has not progressed proportionally Often not related to the capabilities of the simulation tools themselves Mainly due to technical and industrial issues Not much hope for the next 10 years 3

5 Current industrial issues (1) Intellectual property protection The suppliers are not willing to provide there numerical model to the integrator The integrator is not willing to distribute his numerical model to the suppliers Large system simulation Computational time, memory size The integrator has to support the global model (number of clusters (CPU + memory, licenses ) Multi-scaling issues System, subsystem, components (equipment), chips (up) Currently a 2-level context (car manufacturer / component suppliers, component suppliers / chip suppliers) 4

6 Current industrial issues (2) Completeness issues Numerical simulation can only be run if all the parts of the EEA are present in the global model EMC numerical simulation of the EEA is impossible without the contribution of all the component suppliers Diversity of the system must be taken into account Equivalent model issues Representativeness or lack of data Unable to relate voltage levels to susceptibility levels by the integrator on a large scale Loads are not often imposed by the integrator (functional specifications rather than electrical design specifications) Important number of pins Pin-to-pin characterization by measurements is not feasible Parasitic impedances between pins (connector, PCB traces) are not modeled 5

7 Current industrial issues (3) Model issues Suppliers and integrator do not have the same numerical simulation plateforms Universal import/export formats can be used (Catia, Nastran, STEP, ) models could be exchanged but requires meshing Time to (re-)construct the models Models change during the development phases Obsolete models at a given milestone Requires updating the models Transparency of results No sharing of results (the integrator may not communicate the results to the suppliers) and more depending on the industry 6

8 Some examples of equivalent models Conducted Norton / Thévenin sources Z T I N Z N V T S-parameter black boxes IBIS models ICEM models (conducted emission & radiated emission) DPI measurements (for immunity levels of chips) Radiated Huygens surface 2D scanning 7

9 We are now in a connected world!!! Online games Used international bandwidth Jam online 8

10 Why don t we do the same thing? Chip supplier I supplier J Other System N Chip supplier Z supplier C Associations between software and systems/ components/chips are only examples supplier B Chip supplier A System M Apologies to the software vendors that could not be mentioned on this slide 9

11 Direct connections of the system Chip supplier I supplier J Other System N Chip supplier Z supplier C System M supplier B Chip supplier A 10

12 Direct connections of a component Chip supplier I supplier J Other System N Chip supplier Z supplier C System M supplier B Chip supplier A 11

13 A simple example of data exchange over the internet (1) Ground wire Cable harness Electronic equipment Ground connection 12

14 A simple example of data exchange over the internet (2) Tangential E fields Induced voltages emc.supplier.com:

15 A simple example of data exchange over the internet (3) Induced currents Induced voltages emc.integrator.com:

16 Examples of existing interfaces Message Passing Interface (MPI) computing Hybrid models (FDTD + Finite Volume) computation.llnl.gov Cosimate site.cosimate.com KRON T. Raynaud, M. Bréant, O. Maurice, A. Reineix: Prédiction de risque CEM pour un véhicule - 18`eme Colloque International et Exposition sur la CEM, Rennes

17 Interface issues Common equipotential between different interfaces (1) 16

18 Interface issues Common equipotential between different interfaces (2) supplier 17

19 Interface issues Common equipotential between different interfaces (3) System integrator 18

20 Interface issues Common equipotential between different interfaces (4) Electric interface 1 Electric interface 2 Electromagnetic interface 19

21 Example of development simulation scheme Numerical simulation milestones Vehicle specifications requirements Vehicle design Vehicle validations Homologation T0 Production specifications design validations Schematic PCB Prototype Final product Uncertainties on EMC simulation models 20

22 3 challenges A technical challenge: Be able to run a co-simulation over the internet between an integrator and several electric/electronic component suppliers: without communicating / exchanging / sharing the models between industrial partners using different types of electrical / electromagnetic models for each partner using different type of simulation solvers (electric, electromagnetic) for each partner using different simulation software / vendors for each partner A process challenge: Be able to deploy this same approach on a multiscale level, e.g. between a system integrator and its component suppliers, and simultaneously between the component suppliers and their chip suppliers. A scientific challenge: Be able to model any type of interface between integrator and an supplier using a minimum number of common interfaces and a minimum number of unknowns from an electrical and an electromagnetic point of view. 21

23 Who will play ball? suppliers if several system manufacturers (same industry and different industries) are stakeholders if other component suppliers play ball Chip suppliers if several component suppliers are stakeholders If other chip suppliers play ball Universities / laboratories If system manufacturers, component suppliers and chip suppliers are stakeholders Software vendors if several system manufacturers, component suppliers and chip suppliers playing are stakeholders if proof of concept and modeling methodologies have been demonstrated if other vendors play ball 22

24 Summary / conclusions Goal: Reduce the cost of EMC development and validation of the electric / electronic architecture (EEA) EMC numerical simulation of the EEA is impossible without the contribution of all the component suppliers Co-simulation has many issues such as intellectual property protection, incompatible model import/export formats, poor equivalent models, multi-scaling, computational time, memory size, Only a collaborative co-simulation (similar to online video games) can address all these issues Several scientific issues must be solved (modeling dependent interfaces, computational convergence) Requires a fully collaborative approach amongst system integrators, component suppliers, chip suppliers, universities / laboratories and EMC simulation editors 23