2023 01 19 HW

2023 01 19 HW

Okay, then let's start.  Okay.

Maybe Karina, we start with the C2 design freeze.

Yeah, of course we can start with that. Yeah, so about the workshop, I think Zorin, you already talked about it with Hans-Michel yesterday.

So we booked our flights for the 31th of January that we can have the workshop on the, no,

at the 34th of January.

And then on Tuesday, we will have to workshop at Hitler.

And I will write it down here, workshop on Tuesday.

Yeah, we get a document, maybe some question to this.

On one side, okay, you tell us a wish that we have a wizard in our test labs, maybe in our hardware test lab and the sample shop and also the EMC test lab.

We checking that. Maybe we can place it.

I'm not sure, but that other domains, if they have time for us and if they are able to present something on the other side, maybe when it is possible, it could also be that we have

to shift the scheduling in that way.

This is not a problem.

That's why the first topic when it comes to the, yeah, discuss the agenda, we can, I don't or shifted topics depending on how everybody has time and so on.

So we are kind of open to that.

Yeah, from this point of view, not an issue.

But maybe so, do you want to talk about the agenda more detail now?

Yeah, so basically I could try or we could present you the agenda,

go a little bit to the topics and to the expectations basically.

If you have any further questions after you have checked it,

and I would have proposed also maybe to go a little bit through the two PowerPoint presentations we have uploaded.

To give you a little bit of an idea what to expect basically.  That's fine.

Should I share then or can you open the presentations?

Give me a second, I can open it as well.

Okay, let's start with the end of line topics, I would say.

Yeah, this is a special point. I think the responsibility for AOL is by HRO.

But anyway, I think we can talk about, is it right? I heard it from Julia. Is there also a meeting directly by HRO at the following days after the 31 of January?

There is a workshop. This is what I meant. At least Christian Kani will visit.

This is what I meant. Do you mean the workshop in Uminia?

Yeah. So I do not know if you will join.

Yeah, so when and how you will join.

You mean the workshop in March this year?

Yes, yes. Yeah, we will attend.

Yeah, then maybe it's a good idea to place stuff like this in this workshop.

Yeah, because surely the definition, let's say, is done in development,

but the definition, the implementation of the testing and so on and so on.

and so on. Everything is done in Romania.

OK, yeah, but I will still like to keep it also for this workshop because we also have some questions. Sure, yeah.

Sure, the definition and what we forwarded as a requirement to them. Yeah, what needs to be implemented? This is part of this round. Yeah, only the implementation, the sequence of if you want to have a deeper look in how exactly it's done.

Understood. Basically, the status of the implementation of the AOL, it's done in Timisoara,

understood, but about the topics and the things which will be tested in the end-of-line, we can discuss also with you. Understood. I saw that you already opened the end-of-line presentation. So basically, yeah, from the from the agenda, as I said, first topic 8 to 830,

get to know and agenda review. As I said, we can shift the topics depending on how everybody has time or how does it fit to you. Yeah. Yeah. After lunch, as I said, we'll check also the

OIL specification. Then we have a joint topic where also URI will be able to support a little

bit more. It's regarding the PV planning and DV status. And also we have included the status of the EMC PV plan. And as a last topic, we said we would like to visit a little bit your development side let's say. What's possible, what is open of course yeah because I'm also guessing we have parallel projects going on it's a littlebit tricky maybe to present us everything and yeah. But would be interesting.

Yeah maybe just remark from my side regarding the PV planning we will not have a very detailed planning at that time yet because the samples will arrive end of February and this is the right time then to put the detailed planning

so the fine planning will happen then so there's regarding planning phase is not much to discuss okay understood it must not be mr. Gala a very let's say detailed and fixed planning which I don't know with the exact date we need a

yeah I cannot say the word a group planning yes basically rough planning Yeah, so that we know because one of the idea behind this planning, why we would like to see it.

Yeah, it has to do also with the three PV. Yeah, what's written there. Basically, you said that you would like to run some of the emissions tests, conducted emissions radiated before the actual start of the EMC PV. And this is something which on one hand comes really good into hand for us,

yeah now we are able to go into vehicle measurements so that's is the idea that is the idea behind understood but i guess there's some misunderstanding so so we are just doing one test run we are doing c1 test so we have performed c1 test with a c2 target design on the the yeah critical topics but there is no distinguishing of pre-PV and PV at Haller site anymore.

We will have one test run and of course, put the test in proper order.

But we will not separate a pre-PV there.

I think as Owen meant here, the tests which we need to perform on EVE site, so a pre-PV at EVE and a PV as well at EVE.  Yeah.  So we just keep it in mind and plan

when we want to do it that also EVE knows when they need to get in touch with the EMC chambers. Just for planning.

Then it makes sense to discuss the timelines that we see at Hella as a draft and then derive when it would make sense for EVE to make a kind of initial early test run. Exactly.

Thank you for clarifying, Kalle.  Yeah, thank you a lot.  No problem.    Now it's geared to me.

Is there already known now a date for the vehicle testing at BMW side?

Depends on when we get the first drafts of the reports.  So it does, depending on this.

It's the only requirement from our system guys that we get the reports and after that we can do some vehicle measurements.

So basically they want to make sure that the component more or less looks green, yeah.

And then they will agree to go into the vehicle measurements.

Because they say if the component, I don't know, it has to be over the limits, then It makes no sense to make any vehicle measurements, but yeah.  So that's the reason.

This was a really clear affirmation from the guys last year.

That's why we would like to get as fast as possible,

especially for the emissions tests conducted and radiated some first results to be able to present them.

And then, yeah, also in parallel, going to the vehicle measurements.  OK, I understand.

Yeah, I think when we will start the test, CMC test, then we can put something together,

send it to our colleague, and we should have a go.

I think this shouldn't be a problem. We need to also see if it's a real formal report they need,

because this always takes a lot of time.

I know, I know the QBA report takes a lot of time. Yeah.

About the form and this details, I think we can discuss.

I think that the actual results are very important for our colleague.  Okay, good.

Good, otherwise I would like to jump a little bit to this OIL presentation because I think that the questions

we have regarding the schematics review are quite clear.

We can discuss about them directly during the workshop. Yeah.

I have also loaded up the agenda on my workplace, so you can also access it here.

And did you already try, if it's possible for you to access this page?

Not from my side, not yet. OK, no problem.

But if you have any problems, please ask. then we can also talk about how to solve it.

But normally, you should have access. OK, thank you.  OK, then let's jump to the EOL tests.

I can also open the presentation here.  Exactly.

To start right over what we've done earlier here, she went out.

Oh, I cannot open it. I'm not sure why. I have to try it again.

I think it's already opened.  No, it's another.

Okay. Yeah. So basically what we've done is, as Julia told us, we have checked the error matrix because in the error matrix we have this column with the end of line handling.

So basically where we, in that column, basically we have a remark of the topics which are going to be tested or are tested currently in the end of line.

And we've reviewed all the topics.  And yeah, of course we have some questions.

Some of the tests are failed.    Some of the tests are open.

Some of the tests have a question mark.

So we don't really know exactly what is the current status at the end.

So I have some network problems, I'm not able to access the Panama.

Okay, let me try to share it.  Let me try it.

Maybe it's a general problem. Okay, you have access, perfect.

Yeah, it works, seems to work.  So C2.

So please tell me when you see the screen.  Yeah, you can see it.  Is it OK?

I can see it. OK, perfect. I'm in presentation mode.

As I said, there are some questions.

I have clustered this again between end-of-line and ICT, because to some of the tests you've mentioned that ICT is an end-of-line testing, but it's not actually an end-of-line test, but I can understand it.

We would like to discuss basically about the fail test, about the tests where you have question mark in the error matrix here. We don't know what's the status there.

Yeah, in some cases we have also some questions.

So basically this is the test status according to the error matrix to the R330 software iSTEP. Yeah.

So yeah, as I said a lot of a lot of topics here are still not known or some cases failed.

We'd like to better understand what's the failed description,

basically, what does exactly this mean, and so on.  Understand.

What we've also done, let me check.

Exactly. We have double-checked once again our last in-heft,

requirements basically and from our point of view we would need some additional tests in the end  offline and we've added this. I think one topic should be more or less implemented but yeah for

example we have the topic about the cooling function. I don't know if there is the possibility that we test this function basically if it's if we really need it we can discuss about it quite open and so on.

So this is the slide about. This is basically the one more detailed topic about the possible internal faults which the AORICs might have.

Some of the topics were already included in the end-of-line testing, but for some of the tests,

there is no status here.

So basically, this is the column for the oil handling. And it's written overall NA.

So from my understanding, this means this is not included, not applicable.

So yeah. So this would be basically mandatory to have this consistent, just this internal faults check.

So I'd like to understand this status.  And yeah, as you can see here, there in the AeroMatrix a lot of NA's topics where basically a test in the AOA end-of-line test that should be included.

And yeah, it's written NA.

Would like to discuss about this topic, each topic into detail. Same case here.

We've also checked the R330 implementation status, failed some tests, why it failed and so on.

How we handle the topics at the end.  Good information.

I saw these documents but it's no more clear what you requested.  That's okay.

For example, this operating mode, we have checked it.

It's written, yeah, CB unexpectedly opens, set condition, same description.

What is the actual set condition is the question. Yeah. How do you test this since one? Yeah.

This, yeah, general question. Yeah, we have some, yeah, you've written somewhere, implicitly tested what does exactly mean. I think we can clarify all these topics during the workshop .

but I wanted to we wanted to give you a idea what we expect basically .

yeah so I would assume from my point of view .that in some cases you will need somebody from the software from the function function owner oh yeah yeah  i sorry somehow trouble with teams .I can explain what does it mean implicitly tested.

Yeah, if you want, you don't have to do it right now.

OK, this is the kind of overview with your questions as far as I understand.

Exactly, yeah, and you will provide us this question. So you are you have already already sent it this morning to you.

This is a link in the PTC. Yeah. It's OK. Not willing to work at the moment.

That's why I do not know what I received.  OK, understood.

Yeah, then a set we will prepare again.

Actually, Arometrics asset is a system document.  Yeah, that's why.

Is in our hand to explain everything and to give you. Explanations.

Okay, sounds good. Otherwise, from the other two topics, we have some other topics.

Two changes we have reviewed a little bit.

Detailed schematic changes, we have some questions to some of the topics.

This is not something which is not clear.

Shouldn't be an issue for the hardware responsible, for the guys from the hardware to reply to this question.

I have already looked there, I think that's no problem to go through this document and explain what you point out here.  Exactly.

Okay, so that is basically everything we have, what we would like to better understand during this workshop and of course one of the ideas behind was to get to know you.

Especially from my side.  is also possible. Perfect.

Okay can you see my screen again?

Yes. Okay I also wrote down that we will clarify the questions about the C2 changes which we have at the workshop and also about EOL tests where we still have a few questions about the missing tests or which tests were failed and why, depending also on the software status.

Okay, then maybe the next topic, which would be good to clarify, maybe we can start now from the top.

Yes. So we have added some new topics. I think you can share the screenshot I have added.

it's quite small to see it.

Perfect. I got an email from Uri,  from our colleague, and he also received an email from EV.

Basically, there is a requirement in our last  in our requirements regarding the content of highlight.

It has to do with plastic and polymer additives basically,

And this halide material, yeah, in some of the cases, it's allowed.

In some of the cases, it's not allowed. And I have checked this.

And basically, from the fovea side, you will have to do a double check for the plastic housing.

But it's related to the housing and maybe  to the material of the bus pass?

If there is any halide content, I was a little bit... Can you hear me?

Yeah, we can hear you again, but I think it was just a short part where we really didn't hear you.

Yeah, I noticed also.

So as you can see underneath, the requirement regarding this halide content.

And Mike, our kind request to you is to have this checked,

because we are not allowed to exceed for the electrical components this 100 ppm rate and for the plastic components structures you are not allowed to have any content.

And you have here as a document I have also uploaded the exact email from from URI and from the colleagues from EVE. You can directly check it if you have any further questions please contact us.

Was there any result from somebody which pointed out that we are over the limits?  No, I think...

What is the reason? Why is this on topic?  Could you please scroll down and open the email?

I think some of our questions arise because we cannot access the tool yet.

Yeah, maybe. I can show you the email from EV. So basically one colleague from EV,

I don't remember the name exactly if you scroll down.  Exactly. So here, basically the colleagues from EV started doing a check of the requirements regarding this amount of leads in the COP and so on.

Basically, at point number three, they came to this allied requirement.

For the first two topics, they were able to provide information.

But for point number three, this has to do more or less with the BMS .

because it also includes electrical components and so on.

and also the housing of the BMS for example.

This is how they came along or came to this requirement.

I will take this with me. Maybe it's more related to the mechanical design requirements.

But anyway, it's okay, I take it. I think if all the components according to the data sheet have this ROHS requirement and reach There are two other names. I think normally this should be everything alright. Shouldn't take too much time to have this checked.

Have a look at it. Hans-Michel, do you think it would be helpful to also receive this email?

I think everything should be alright. It shouldn't take too much time to have this checked.

Have a look at it. Hans-Michel, do you think it would be helpful to also receive this email?

Helpful for us, because then we also have a contact at EVE who mentioned this point.

I can directly, if you cannot access now the B2B portal, I can directly forward this email to you.

Yeah, that would be nice. Then we have the background and yeah.

I will do it right away. Thanks.

Okay, then I think for this point, everything should be clear now.

So we can jump to the next one, the status of the software implementation.

Here we only want to show you that we have now for every topic a driver ticket.

tickets so the always chip temperature the additional 12 volt fast supply input of the microcontroller the and the ground loss I think that should be everything so you can also access it directly here and the chiro ticket and

check the status also from outside or for your side and the and a ticket directly exactly it's just that we have direct interface between software and hardware that's much easier for both sides to track it. So we will not stress you anymore when we want to see the status of each topic we will directly access the Java ticket we have mentioned

here and yeah check the status. So Julia don't be surprised I think this week I don't know when you have this software meeting with Andreas Pahir and Thomas Martuni but I think they will come up also with our topics here. Yeah it's not yours.

A shared one yeah that's why known as uh yeah now it's linked yeah it's fine. Yeah now we have a direct link this is also I think I find it also really good we have a direct link between software and hardware and the other guys are released yeah because they don't have to do anything.

OK, then about the next point, maybe I'm not sure whether we need Krista for that or if you also can answer the questions about the status of the ICT.

Yeah, it's more or less the same situation as we told the last meeting.

I think the Eastern implementation ongoing.

So far as I know, the logic is already OK for the logic ICT adapter. But the power adapter is in work.

And in between, they will using the flying probe for this necessity. So still in progress.

Yes, it's still in progress.

Then everything is clear about that. We already had this topic.

So about the second source components, about the on semi power MOSFET, did you get it or did you already have some investigations or tests with it? Yeah as I also told you they will arrive,

let me have a look. In two weeks this means, this means we're at least one week still left. Yeah still lift and when they arrive by us in the hardware lab we will immediately try to test it and have a look .if it is a possibility to get a second source. So as you know the parameters are a little bit different especially the RDS on and maybe based on this the temperature  behavior would be different .

but maybe it's okay and we can accept it then we have to look for how we can handle it in our production because if there are the same parameters from Hella component system it might

be not possible to put them on the same material number but anyway I think we have to look for a way if it is possible to to place it as a kind of second source yeah.

Totally understood. In one week right? Yeah roughly one week you will expect the BMS and and then they will start testing.

I think we can shift this week.

I think the whole meeting will do it in two weeks because since next week we will have the workshop,

it makes no sense to have the hardware meeting again, from my point of view.

And basically have an update to all the topics, firstly in two weeks.

Yeah, sounds good.

OK, yeah, it was updated for the other points as well later.

OK, so the next point is, again, the change list for the different samples.

It's just because we now add the design phase of the C2 that we, again, have an updated change list as we also had it for the C1. We just want to ask whether it's possible to have it at the workshop already or if it's not possible.

Yeah I think so. Okay Valentin is not in house

as I told you but I believe he will come back next week and we are able to update if it's necessary.

Yeah it would be let's say nice to have because the changes we know them we would like to have

We have also the change list, we have the documentation. And yeah.

But if it's not possible until the workshop, yeah. It's, yeah.

We can shift it also with one week. It shouldn't be a problem.

I think we can give a clear statement to those changes which are placed.

And so far as I know, there is no different to that what Valentin already explained to you.

So until now there are no additional changes? Yes.

As you know, the design fix was on the 6th of January and all the documents are on the way and no further changes are possible to place  and there are no changes. That's a pay message.

Mr. Schweitzer, joining you. OK, then we can go to the DFMEA topic.

I'm not sure, I think Julia wanted to share some information about it, not in the hardware meeting but send it to us.

Or in an additional meeting, I'm not quite sure about it.

Exactly, so before Christmas we said that we will have a deeper look into the FMEA.

the folder. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, so this is something we can plan. Yeah.

Uh. This is not done yet. I can shortly show you what is the current status. Hopefully my teams will not crash. Um, at the moment, yeah. Um. This is the presentation. I think I have already uploaded. Uh, I will double check once again. Um, this is the status.

The latest official one provided to BMW from 9th of September is very old actually.

We had six red issues and 460 and something in yellow.

Yeah, at the moment after the improvements we have only three of them.

These three we have to evaluate them again. and just invited Robert for tomorrow to do this.

Yeah, I just accepted. Yeah, exactly. This is very old actually.

Yeah, this everything regarding CMC. The yellow ones, we had a couple of meetings as well.

So it's reduced by 30, but we have to continue.  At the moment, the planning is that we will have the next loop finished mid of February. Yeah, this is the plan from in B side.

And so for me, it's not only hardware. So I need everything here and both schedules at the moment looks like we will be finished in mid of February.

Yeah, that's why mid of February is my target to get this FMEA approval.

I had it already started.

I tried it already a couple of months ago.

But due to these thermal issues we had and due to this update for this crude solution,

it was rejected. Now everything is in place.

We are in finalization for this everything.

and I said, yes, at the end of February, we will plan this FME approval once again.

By then, we will have a better state here.

Yeah, at the moment, I said this is the improvement.

And I think- So there is progress in this topic, and I think Karina, based on just what Julia said,

I think we can shift also the topic to somewhere end of February.

And until then, yeah, we'll wait for a big update, let's say. Okay.

Regarding the review itself, yeah, you wanted to have a closer look into this.

I think this will be done, done end of February as well.

It's, it's, it's fine. It's fine for me.

Typically, since there are a lot of topics in the, in the DFMA, what have done in the past is basically just picked one or two topics and go back basically from top to bottom and check everything. How this was basically reviewed and then explained there in the DfME. Because you cannot check everything. I trust your experience.

Okay. Yeah, that's all. Okay, thank you. Okay, then I will share again.

Okay, I also shifted now this topic to the end of February,

and then we can talk about the review of it again.

The next point, the test metrics and test procedures.

And just for your information, I got the information yesterday from IC that she sent the BMS from

the load-dump test, which was failed last year to you.

I'm not quite sure when it will arrive, but she sent it already.

should be arrived in maybe the next week then that you are aware of this.

Yeah thanks. To whom have you sent it? Sorry for interruptions. Hi Julia, I sent the BMS to you. Yeah okay thanks. It's easier to search for if you know who is about the test up to now.

Then we can jump over to the EMC test.  I think there was one BCI test report missing

where you did a test at the end of last year. We made a test with a C2 target design.

I can share my screen. we did it with 15 centimeters distance. I've added it here to the presentation.

Actually, this one took place in the very beginning this year.

It's some rearrangement necessary, unfortunately.

But this is the result here, all the main lines. On the left-hand side, the cell voltages are shown.

It should be stable around 3.7 volts and you see very small fluctuations here.

This was always visible in all the tests we did that at some frequencies where you see some oscillation but it's okay according to our test plan.

And on the right hand side you see the current, you see at same frequencies also fluctuations,

also lower than half an amp.

test case and half an amp for the main current is our let's say it's our yeah the pass requirement for EMC test but but it was somehow not derived from any requirement but this was internal target yeah but but this was always visible that we see at it's kind of these frequencies, some oscillation of the current.

And this was the clamp 30 can in the test.

And here you see the results of temperatures.

You see also the values are there. Temperatures are slowly increasing, as is to be expected.

And here you see what we maybe will take out for the PV, the redundant power supply, which is sometimes turning on, but has no effect on the function.

This is what we have discussed last year sometimes.

And then the same test on the clamp 40.

There's less oscillation visible here in this case. So this looks very nice.

And also temperatures, the ECU was already walled, so there's less increase.

and again, the toggling of the redundant power supply.

But the quick test here was just 150 millimeters,

because usually this is the worst case clamp position.

And as mentioned again, this test is with a C2 target design already,

So with some modifications due to inrush current.

I have no question. I know Wolfram, if you have some questions.

Everything is OK. Looks good.

Good to know.  Thank you, Mr. Gallem.

Yeah, you're welcome.  I will make a PDF from it.  And we can upload it on.

Yeah, I don't know if we can upload it to the GRIBA.

Just put it on Panama.  Great.

Then we can align Wolfram so that you can get the access

to the documentary also if you want to double check it.  I cut this mark.

them what or how high the clamp 30 currents will be and depending on the clamp 30 voltage depending on the temperature and that they can get an overview about the consumption and kind of a table.

I think I have to go to one hand.

No, no, go to one hand. I have already uploaded.  Ah, okay, perfect.

Yeah, I saw this email and I saw there was a reaction also from Valentin to Andorra.

But up to now from my side I have no response to this email. So I have also no content to this question.

What is the status? Yeah, so we have, yeah, just for your information that we also can track it here.

But no pressure. So the email was sent yesterday, so we don't need it tomorrow.

So that you only for your information that we track it here and that we need these values and this kind of table.

Okay, I felt also in my mind.

Okay, then I think we have finished with the agenda. Are there any open topics here, Julia?

Sure, I'm somehow not able to drop something into the chat. I just checked the DFMEA status is on Panama. Yeah, the last official presentation I just showed. Maybe you can add somehow the link.

Yeah, but I will try to to to share the link.

I'm sad. Yeah, I'm not able somehow. I dropped it already, but it's not appearing.

Someone from Hella side, can you check if something is in the chat? Yeah, on my side.

It's an empty button somehow. Yeah, no, no, no, I can show you where it is. Yeah, I will take the screen for a sec. Yeah, then you see it. Yeah, so it's directly in EVE, FME, VMS and this one here.

Yeah, and later it will arrive here. Yeah, on my side it's somehow on the way back.

Do not know why it's not appearing. Yeah, Karina, I just added the link to the presentation. You can I link it in the under the topic here in the next one.

Then we have it exactly. Perfect, thank you. Okay, I will add the link.

Are there any further questions in the meeting?

I think we have it all. We have the first point to the Halogenide and we have talked about the agenda of the workshop on 31 of January.

From my side no questions this way.

Perfect. I think we can wish to the EV colleagues a happy holiday, right?

Thank you so much.

And I think we will hear from you also in firstly in two weeks, right?

Yes about in 10 days later. Okay, perfect. And all the best.

Enjoy the time spent with your family and hear from them and to all the other in the round.

We'll see you next week, in two weeks.  Or?  Yeah.

OK, so that means we skip the date,dating the hardware meeting on next Thursday.

I think next Thursday, do we need the? I was just thinking.

What I mentioned, I think we can skip the one from the 2nd of February.

But do we need also the one from next week?

Ah, yeah, OK. Then I understood. OK, thank you.

Maybe you can give us an update next week  regarding this Halide content.

I know maybe to the other topics.

But for the topics regarding the workshop, we can skip them directly.

Yeah, yeah. Yeah, we can have a short discussion next week.

Yeah. OK, I understand. OK, then have a nice day.

Bye bye, thank you. OK.

Thank you, bye.

Thank you, bye.

Thank you.