| Topic | Notes |
|---|---|
| Communication Interface (CAN, Ethernet, other options) | |
| Narrow down requirements Backplane Architecture Requirements | |
| Metric | Ethernet better | CAN better | Impact and why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cost | X | Low - Difference is that of Ethernet chips, switches, and supporting passives | |
| Software complexity | X | High - less software bandwidth; more experience with Ethernet implementation | |
| Hardware complexity | X | Medium - More careful routing required, more traces in general, but that is concentrated to the backplane and we have hardware engineering bandwidth | |
| Data Bandwidth | X | Medium - CAN precludes video over the bus | |
| Physical size | X | Low - Not that much worse | |
Module testing | X | High - Individual modules easier and there are many of them | |
| Backplane testing | X | Medium - Fewer points of failure to troubleshoot but is very important | |
| MCU compatibility | X | Low - Lots for either | |
| Power | X | Medium - Ethernet very slightly violates modularity philosophy due to having ICs on the backplane + Ethernet switches require more current |
Summary:
| Priority | Ethernet | CAN |
|---|---|---|
| High | 2 | 0 |
| Medium | 1 | 3 |
| Low | 1 | 2 |
Additional notes:
Decision: Ethernet, due to high impact tradeoffs.