# Electric Vehicle Interface Controller (EVIC)



## AInterfaces (Nov 17, 2014)

Hello,

Just wanted to let everyone know about our E.V.I.C. (http://ai-displays.com/evic_products/)

It was designed to help consolidate gauges and make it easier to interface with your subsystem components to display information to help drive your vehicle more efficiently.

We are a new company and this product is now available for purchase. Sales would be great, but we have a lot of respect for DIY conversion hobbyists and would definitely appreciate some feedback. Thanks!


----------



## skooler (Mar 26, 2011)

Looks great!

Any non computer generated images?

What about price?

How do I integrate it into a typical conversion? E.g. lifepo4, soliton/curtis controller, kostov/warp/hpevs motor.

Finally, are the screens available in different sizes? Could see this fitting in my flip up sat nav housing 

Cheers,

Mike


----------



## z_power (Dec 17, 2011)

How does it communicate with car systems? If CAN is used - is it diy-friendly? (I mean available documentation and customisation options)

edit: should've checked website first before asking, but diy question is still actual


----------



## Moltenmetal (Mar 20, 2014)

The motor controller graphical interface for a Curtis controller at $570 with none of the optional features is way too expensive for me as a DIYer to consider. It does give high visibility access to quite a few useful parameters and it replaces a few standalone gauges in one package, so some people with limited dash space and larger budgets might find it appealing.


----------



## AInterfaces (Nov 17, 2014)

Q:"Any non computer generated images?"
A: All the pictures of the device are real from a product photo shoot. Only thing is the GUI is super-imposed onto the device bc taking a picture of it running does not look good. Take a closer look in the features section:
http://ai-displays.com/product/e-v-i-c-portable-enclosure2/

Qricing?
A: We are offering two variations of the device for Orion BMS and the Curtis Controller AC1238/1239. Ranging from $495-$695 USD. 

Q: How do I integrate it into typical conversions?
A: The supported devices we currently interface with are Curtis Motor Controllers and Orion BMS, which both utilize CAN interfaces. The attached diagram shows how to best wire multiple devices with CAN interfaces. If there are devices that do not support CAN as an interface, there are other interface options built into EVIC (e.g., RS-232, Ethernet) but we would need to evaluate the device to determine if this is a device we can support.

We have two enclosures that are equipped for mounting into your dash or external bracket.



Q: Screen available in different size?
A: Currently we only offer them in one size which is 7" Diagonal

Thanks a lot for checking us out! Let me know if I could help answer other questions.

Yes, sorry about the price being too high for you. Hopefully in the future we can bring this down.


----------



## AInterfaces (Nov 17, 2014)

z_power said:


> How does it communicate with car systems? If CAN is used - is it diy-friendly? (I mean available documentation and customisation options)
> 
> edit: should've checked website first before asking, but diy question is still actual


Yes, the idea was to make it diy-friendly


----------



## AInterfaces (Nov 17, 2014)

skooler said:


> Looks great!
> 
> Any non computer generated images?
> 
> ...



Please, let us know if you think you can make it fit into your nav housing. Perhaps we can help with some mounting tips as well. 

Also, do let us know which:
-Motor controller/inverter 
-Battery Management System
-Battery Charger
-DC/DC Converter 

for us to check our devices compatibility.

Thanks again!


----------



## skooler (Mar 26, 2011)

I could make it fit.

I'm using an evnetics soliton which outputs it's log in a udp stream over bog standard wthernet.

No bms

Two brusa nlg513 chargers

Dumb Meanwell 650w ac power supply used as a dcdc


----------



## sergiu tofanel (Jan 13, 2014)

This is a cool product, but not suited for the DIY market. For starters, it's way too expensive. The price point should be about half what it is now. Second, the people buying this product are tinkerers and many of us know our way around fancy software and hardware. I would love to purchase the hardware, download the software, program the device, and tinker/modify it according to my needs and wants. That's why most successful companies who cater to the hobby-DIY community have open source design (think Arduino, Raspberry Pi, RepRap, etc, etc, etc)

The trick to running a successful business in the DIY space is to empower the customers. Instead of asking them how to make you product better, let them do the work for you. But that requires relinquishing some control over the development. Unless that happens, I don't see myself buying this product. To use a Shark Tank expression, I'm out.


----------



## skooler (Mar 26, 2011)

Not sure if I agree sergeu.

I'd quit like to be able to more or less plug and play to get started and then be able to tinker if I wish.

There are far too many other things happening when converting a car to be worrying about meters!


----------



## rwaudio (May 22, 2008)

skooler said:


> Not sure if I agree sergeu.
> 
> I'd quit like to be able to more or less plug and play to get started and then be able to tinker if I wish.
> 
> There are far too many other things happening when converting a car to be worrying about meters!


I would agree. Things like the EMW charger are good in theory, but often they can take over the project and become your focus for months hindering progress on the conversion itself or holding up completion because you just can't charge the car.

An off the shelf item that just works is what we really need, if it's open and allows future customization that's even better.


----------



## CKidder (Dec 12, 2009)

rwaudio said:


> I would agree. Things like the EMW charger are good in theory, but often they can take over the project and become your focus for months hindering progress on the conversion itself or holding up completion because you just can't charge the car.
> 
> An off the shelf item that just works is what we really need, if it's open and allows future customization that's even better.


I would agree that, for a display, what people really want is something that works and shows them the information they want to see. Obviously I could tinker and make my own display. Maybe I'd grab an Android tablet and run Torque or something. This could easily cost me $200-400 for the tablet and some time to get the tablet into a frame to mount it and then set up torque and find a bluetooth dongle and write up some interface software. By the time I'm done I could have $500 into hardware and $1000 worth of my time into it. Or, I could spend $550 or so on this EVIC. And then I'd want them to add support for all the stuff in my car. It's no longer my problem. This is attractive to many people. Is it attractive to me? Well, sort of. But, I'm more of a tinkerer so I can see where Sergiu is coming from as well.

Having helped to launch a few different open source hardware/software projects I am well acquainted with the allure of tinkering. But, this doesn't always have to take the form of open hardware or even open software. I can tell you that *some* people took the GEVCU design and built their own. *Some* people have hacked on the software. I think both groups could be counted on my two hands. As opposed to this I believe Jack has sold like 100 GEVCU units. Most people use it to drive their car. They don't want to work on the hardware, they don't want to work on the software. They want to drive their car. For those people there are still configuration options so they can tweak the motor controller parameters without needing to code. The EVIC could do something similar to torque - allow the end user to ask for PID codes to monitor. This requires no open hardware and not even really open software - just expose an interface to add more monitoring options. Maybe even expose a way to monitor a given canbus frame for data. This could get complicated but it's possible. My point is that there is a wide range of options in the DIY world ranging from open everything to closed everything. There is a niche for many different products.

The EVIC product seems pretty nice. It might be a tad expensive but that's what you get at low quantity. This isn't something that they're building a million of at Foxconn. Realistically the market is probably a few hundred to a few thousand units. At that market it's going to be expensive but you pay for the convenience of a product geared to what you need. In that respect it isn't out of the realm of reason. Little cheap monitoring systems can be a few hundred dollars. So, I think it is probably priced about right at the moment and I hope they can do well with it.


----------



## sergiu tofanel (Jan 13, 2014)

The reason I would insist on open source is because of the contributions other users can make to the platform. I just purchased an Arduino board for my 3D printer. This is a little controller board to which I connect a shield which drives the stepper motors and heater controllers. Now I can go online and choose to download from several open source versions of the CNC interpreter code, test them, and choose the one that suits me best. Similarly, I can choose from several versions of host software, install it on the host PC, and test the system. Because all programs are open source, I can calibrate my machine the way I choose to, enable or disable features as I see fit. And I really do not need to reinvent the wheel and write my own code if I choose not to.

I am looking for something similar for my project. Right now I do not plan to use an Orion BMS. I have a Curtiss controller, but I may choose not to use it. Will this company write custom code for my specific BMS/controller combination? I really doubt it. What if I don't like the way the graphics look. Can I write my own? Again, if the code is open source, there are many people who would be willing to tinker with it and come up with their own versions. Open source does not mean that the device is not plug and play. Take a look at the 3D printing industry. You can purchase the hardware for next to nothing, download software off the internet, and within hours (if not minutes) you can have a working machine. That's the power of open source.


----------



## AInterfaces (Nov 17, 2014)

skooler said:


> I could make it fit.
> 
> I'm using an evnetics soliton which outputs it's log in a udp stream over bog standard wthernet.
> 
> ...


Unfortunately EVIC does not currently interface with the soliton controller. This is something that we would like to explore in the future as the hardware does have the ability to support ethernet messaging.


----------



## skooler (Mar 26, 2011)

AInterfaces said:


> Unfortunately EVIC does not currently interface with the soliton controller. This is something that we would like to explore in the future as the hardware does have the ability to support ethernet messaging.


Ok great,

Let me know when tbat's sorted. Would love to try one!


----------



## AInterfaces (Nov 17, 2014)

sergiu tofanel said:


> This is a cool product, but not suited for the DIY market. For starters, it's way too expensive. The price point should be about half what it is now. Second, the people buying this product are tinkerers and many of us know our way around fancy software and hardware. I would love to purchase the hardware, download the software, program the device, and tinker/modify it according to my needs and wants. That's why most successful companies who cater to the hobby-DIY community have open source design (think Arduino, Raspberry Pi, RepRap, etc, etc, etc)
> 
> The trick to running a successful business in the DIY space is to empower the customers. Instead of asking them how to make you product better, let them do the work for you. But that requires relinquishing some control over the development. Unless that happens, I don't see myself buying this product. To use a Shark Tank expression, I'm out.


We appreciate your honest feedback. And will take into consideration your recommendations about our product. However, currently we are not set-up to make our product completely open-source. We are working to make our device more configurable for the user.


----------



## AInterfaces (Nov 17, 2014)

CKidder said:


> I would agree that, for a display, what people really want is something that works and shows them the information they want to see. Obviously I could tinker and make my own display. Maybe I'd grab an Android tablet and run Torque or something. This could easily cost me $200-400 for the tablet and some time to get the tablet into a frame to mount it and then set up torque and find a bluetooth dongle and write up some interface software. By the time I'm done I could have $500 into hardware and $1000 worth of my time into it. Or, I could spend $550 or so on this EVIC. And then I'd want them to add support for all the stuff in my car. It's no longer my problem. This is attractive to many people. Is it attractive to me? Well, sort of. But, I'm more of a tinkerer so I can see where Sergiu is coming from as well.
> 
> Having helped to launch a few different open source hardware/software projects I am well acquainted with the allure of tinkering. But, this doesn't always have to take the form of open hardware or even open software. I can tell you that *some* people took the GEVCU design and built their own. *Some* people have hacked on the software. I think both groups could be counted on my two hands. As opposed to this I believe Jack has sold like 100 GEVCU units. Most people use it to drive their car. They don't want to work on the hardware, they don't want to work on the software. They want to drive their car. For those people there are still configuration options so they can tweak the motor controller parameters without needing to code. The EVIC could do something similar to torque - allow the end user to ask for PID codes to monitor. This requires no open hardware and not even really open software - just expose an interface to add more monitoring options. Maybe even expose a way to monitor a given canbus frame for data. This could get complicated but it's possible. My point is that there is a wide range of options in the DIY world ranging from open everything to closed everything. There is a niche for many different products.
> 
> The EVIC product seems pretty nice. It might be a tad expensive but that's what you get at low quantity. This isn't something that they're building a million of at Foxconn. Realistically the market is probably a few hundred to a few thousand units. At that market it's going to be expensive but you pay for the convenience of a product geared to what you need. In that respect it isn't out of the realm of reason. Little cheap monitoring systems can be a few hundred dollars. So, I think it is probably priced about right at the moment and I hope they can do well with it.


Very good break down in the thought process in building an EV display. Thanks for well wishes!


----------



## AInterfaces (Nov 17, 2014)

We never introduced ourselves to the community so you can better understand our reasoning for creating EVIC, and we would also like to clarify how we would like to support the DIY Electric community whether it is utilizing EVIC or to brainstorm other solutions for EV instrumentation devices to use in your EV applications.

We were some of the early engineers at a start-up company in California called Aptera back in 2007 (such a cool project). It was there that we were faced with many challenges to incorporate an EV powertrain solution in Aptera's composite structure. As many of you already know, there are numerous EV power electronics (e.g., motor inverters, BMS, DC/DC) that come together to make an EV’s powertrain function properly and new sets of data you need to monitor and display on your dashboard. It was then that we realized monitoring vehicle efficiency and energy consumption are more critical than ever because of driving range limitations experienced in EVs are different than conventional vehicles. 

We then put on our thinking caps to implement various instrumentation devices that could provide us with the reliability and flexibility to interface with this new set of power electronic devices so we could focus our efforts on the human machine experience of driving EVs. At least that was the plan….what we ultimately discovered were the challenges on implementing these “Human Machine Interfaces (HMI)” into EVs. Here is a quick summary of the challenges we faced:

• Costs to implement HMI graphics and software were high especially when going to automotive Tier-1 suppliers to help develop them or to leverage their graphics studio environments 
• Leveraging existing hardware devices (e.g., CarPCs, tablets) gave us flexibility to develop HMI graphics and software, but they were not reliable enough when dealing with CAN dongles or wireless technologies to obtain the data

From here, we made a goal after leaving Aptera to eventually address these challenges and come up with a solution that could help make the driving experience of an EV more accommodating for not only the early adopters, but to help maximize consumer adoption of EVs in the future. We believe EVIC could be the first step in helping achieve this goal, but we are still far from meeting it. 

Our apologies for not marketing EVIC correctly (we are just a couple of engineers and designers), but we provide all of the graphics you see on our current plug-n-play solutions of EVIC free of charge to give you the flexibility to customize them to your liking. We plan to offer our Studio Interface Kit (SIK) we use to help slice and import graphics that our generated from Photoshop, Paint.Net or whatever graphics software you prefer to port onto EVIC, and this is something we will offer free of charge to customers (once we have a good enough version of SIK to release externally). We will also have an EVIC API with our current supported device interfaces and sample code that we will provide to customers so they can create their own HMIs. 

We are a small team but we really want to contribute in any way possible to help get to sustainable transportation and EVs are becoming the future. Whether it is utilizing EVIC or other EV instrumentation devices, WE need to start making the driver’s EV experience more positive and rewarding. 

BR,

Brian G.


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

sergiu tofanel said:


> The reason I would insist on open source is because of the contributions other users can make to the platform. ...


This is one of those things that sounds good in theory, but fails in practice. The stark reality is that there are very few people with both the ability and the inclination to make meaningful/useful contributions to any particular open source project.

I think making the API to this product open is "open enough"; very little value will be added by making the source open and, indeed, would remove almost all commercial incentive to make the product in the first place. The worldwide DIY EV market is in the hundreds to perhaps low thousands per year after all, and so not even remotely the same volume as the Arduino or even a 3D printer like the RepRap project.


----------



## bwjunkie (Jul 31, 2013)

An android tablet with bluetooth costs $79. And that is only a fallback for people who want a fixed device (more than their smart phone). The custom GPS/mapping systems market had to adapt to this reality. Even the arduino/RPi has little market for custom displays (which are only a small screen with HDMI), even that has very little user base. I spent $150 on a 7" RPi display a year ago and was so confused why this market was moving at a snails pace, now I see it is because "an android table with bluetooth only costs $79".

*edit $59* 

josh


----------



## skooler (Mar 26, 2011)

That's great but how are you going to get all that information from the car to the tablet?


----------



## CKidder (Dec 12, 2009)

bwjunkie said:


> An android tablet with bluetooth costs $79. And that is only a fallback for people who want a fixed device (more than their smart phone). The custom GPS/mapping systems market had to adapt to this reality. Even the arduino/RPi has little market for custom displays (which are only a small screen with HDMI), even that has very little user base. I spent $150 on a 7" RPi display a year ago and was so confused why this market was moving at a snails pace, now I see it is because "an android table with bluetooth only costs $79".
> 
> *edit $59*
> 
> josh


It's true that you can buy no-name Chinese knock off tablets very cheaply. They also tend to be cheaply made and slower than a frozen dead dog. But, you can buy one if that strikes your fancy. Couple it to a cheap no-name Chinese knock off ELM327 clone for $10 and you have a very cheap setup that can interface with anything that will do OBDII. Except that the knock off ELM327 devices tend to not actually support canbus so that's an issue. So now you buy a $50 bluetooth dongle that does support canbus. This still isn't quite there because you still need something to turn the canbus signals from a variety of devices into OBDII compliant messages that the ELM can pick up. Also, you will need to configure Torque to read these messages. Torque is pretty cheap ($6?) but the Arduino and canbus shield you'll need will probably set you back something like $50-150 depending on what you get. So now we're up to somewhere in the $176 range for all the hardware and it doesn't have any software on the Arduino yet. You don't need the Arduino if your EV hardware can directly talk OBDII but not many of them do. So $176 is more realistic. If you want a tablet that is higher quality you could spend $200 or more. Let's say you buy a Nexus 7 tablet. I think it's about $160 or so? So that adds 100 bringing us up to $276 and you still probably need software for an Arduino to massage the messages into OBDII. You can put together a reasonably nice set up yourself for about $276 and program it. I think it tends to be the case that things add up to more than you think when you actually get all the parts.


----------



## frodus (Apr 12, 2008)

Collin, The OBDII dongles don't really care what you send through them, they just convert serial to whatever protocol. They're pretty transparent. The only things specific to the ELM327 is the AT command set for setting protocol, baud, etc. The OBDII support is within the ECU of a vehicle or the software of the device.

You CAN use an ELM327 adapter very easily to go from a device (computer with bluetooth, android tablet, etc) to a pure CAN system, but the software on the computer/tablet must talk pure CAN.

The reason you need to talk OBDII, is because of programs like Torque for Android. They speak OBDII, not pure CAN, so you have to support their protocol.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Pricing looks good to me


----------

