Comparative Evaluation of Various Generations of Controller Area Network Based on Timing Analysis.

This paper performs a comparative evaluation of various generations of Controller Area Network (CAN), including the classical CAN, CAN Flexible Data-Rate (FD), and CAN Extra Long (XL). We utilize response-time analysis for the evaluation. In this regard, we identify that the state of the art lacks the response-time analysis for CAN XL. Hence, we discuss the worst-case transmission times calculations for CAN XL frames and incorporate them to the existing analysis for CAN to support response-time analysis of CAN XL frames. Using the extended analysis, we perform a comparative evaluation of the three generations of CAN by analyzing an automotive industrial use case. In crux, we show that using CAN FD is more advantageous than the classical CAN and CAN XL when using frames with payloads of up to 8 bytes, despite the fact that CAN XL supports higher bit rates. For frames with 12-64 bytes payloads, CAN FD performs better than CAN XL when running at the same bit rate, but CAN XL performs better when running at a higher bit rate. Additionally, we discovered that CAN XL performs better than the classical CAN and CAN FD when the frame payload is over 64 bytes, even if it runs at the same or higher bit rates than CAN FD.