Diagnostic Service.vi reports timeout when CAN-FD+BRS with extended FrameID is implemented

[daveli03]

When I try to execute UDS diagnosis, Diagnostic Service.vi is applied.

The tested ECU(incl. HW & SW) has been verified correctly in the vehicle.

1) when using normal frame ID, this VI works well, diagnostic signal can be transmitted and received quickly (within ~100ms);

2) when extended frame ID (CAN FD is used) is implemented, this VI becomes quite slowly (under continuously running, it could cost more than 1 sec to finish one transmit & receive), and then timeout error will be reported. Sometimes error report will disappear.

Related configuration has been implemented under the instruction of help document. 

To verify whether signal has been sent correctly, BusMonitor (xnet service) or BusMaster is used to monitor CAN BUS, finding that the transmitted signal can be obtained, as well as the feedback signal sent from ECU.

My questions are:

1) why it could become some slowly when extended frame ID is used?

2) if it's not the correct VI, which I should choose to implement UDS diag  service for extended frame ID under CAN-FD is used?

[TomOrr0W]

You might have more luck with this question on the Automotive and Embedded Networks Forum.  I believe the XNET support engineers are much more likely to frequent that forum.  If you make a new post, be sure to add links between that one and this one.  Alternatively, you can use "report to a moderator" to ask a moderator to move this post to the other forum.

Report to a Moderator Option