This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

BQ76PL455EVM: Use-Case scenarios

Part Number: BQ76PL455EVM
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: BQ76PL455A-Q1

Dear all,

I work for a french company specialized in electrification kit for automotive. 

We developed our own BMS and we want to try a new version with the BQ76PL455EVM.

We are interested by the architecture proposed in figure 19 in document bq76PL455A-Q1 Use-Case Scenarios (SLUA785–January 2017) but I don't understand why we need two CAN bus (one in RX/TX and one in TX).

In the other architecture there is only one CAN bus, so can you explain me why, in this case we need two CAN bus?

Thank you in advance for your answers.

Best regards,

Mickaël

  • Hi Mickael,

    I do not think this is required as this document is simply to showcase different options and solutions to offer users. So you could use the architecture on the next two diagrams with the one CAN bus if you would like. However, my colleague who worked on this document returns to office next week and I will follow up if he claims something different.

    Best Regards,

    Taylor
  • Hello,

    Thanks you for your answer.

    I understand that is not mandatory to have two CAN bus. 

    I would like to understand what are benefits to add this CAN bus ?

    Thank you in advance for your answer.

    Best Regards.

    Mickael

  • Hi Mickael,

    The second CAN bus is actually to support the nFAULT line from the device because in the local mcu drawing, the nFAULT line is able to go directly to the local mcu rather than having to travel all the way back to the shared mcu.

    Regards,

    Taylor