I wonder how Atmel defines "automotive applications"

The Atmel (and I presume newer Microchip) datasheet says clearly*

Unless specifically provided otherwise, Atmel products are not suitable for, and shall not be used in, automotive applications.

I wonder how they define an application as being automotive, and if anyone has some real experience with them on this matter?

*ok, in tiny print on page 400-odd.

I can speculate the following ends of a continuum:

  • Loading Blink in an Uno, powering it off a AA battery pack, and watching the led blink while sitting with the Uno on my lap in the driver's seat of my car is not an automotive application even though it's in the car
  • Taking a 70s points-ignition, carburetor-fueled car and sticking electronic sensors in staetgic places like the venturi, the manifold, the fuel line, the accelerator pedal and so on, and having the Arduino decide the choke and throttle butterfly positions to be controlled by servos, certainly would be an automotive application

I wonder if anyone's ever actually asked them (other than the car companies that is, who probably have huge liaison teams of engineers and lawyers dealing with their component suppliers). I also wonder if anyone had an insurance claim kicked out, or was prosecuted after an incident, for using an Arduino in their car, even if their engineering was flawless.

I wonder how they define an application as being automotive,

If it is used on or in a car, is a good starting point.

I also wonder if anyone had an insurance claim kicked out, or was prosecuted after an incident, for using an Arduino in their car

I doubt it but if any lawyer found out I am sure it would be, you know what they are like.

Basically it is two fold:-

  1. Arse covering exercise
  2. To sell their automotive approved parts at a higher price.

even if their engineering was flawless.

Has sod all to do with anything, it doesn't trump anything.

Grumpy_Mike:
If it is used on or in a car, is a good starting point.

That's what actually prompted my question. Nobody (not even a shyster lawyer bar steward?) would call Blink on a standalone self-powered Uno sitting in a car, an automotive application, would they?

Grumpy_Mike:

even if their engineering was flawless.

Has sod all to do with anything, it doesn't trump anything.

That's exactly why I added the word "even": if they say you mustn't do it, you mustn't do it, no matter how well you do it.

You're probably right on the cya and yes I noticed they have a range of auto components.

I'd go for "If the Arduino is connected to the automobile and performing any activity associated with the operation of the automobile then it shouldn't be".

But we can all make guesses. So why are you bothered?

Steve

bloodnok_vc:
Nobody (not even a shyster lawyer bar steward?) would call Blink on a standalone self-powered Uno sitting in a car, an automotive application, would they?

You won't know until you get to court.

Suppose the plaintiff's lawyer claimed that the blinking (in all senses of the word) device had distracted the driver and caused the injury to his client?

...R

slipstick:
So why are you bothered?

I'm not: more "interested", since there are a load of questions about using Arduino in cars. Like the current question about the grille leds which isn't an Arduino question yet, but that OP said he might consider using Arduino to Knight Rider them.

Of course, no matter what Atmel says about their hardware being suitable (which I assume goes to reliability in an electrically tricky environment, not to mention heat/cold, vibration, g-forces and other factors) if you code like blink not blink without delay and thus miss a sensor at a crucial time.....

if you code like blink not blink without delay and thus miss a sensor at a crucial time.....

Yes but Atmel are in the clear on that one even if it is an automotive grade processor. You really need to see the agreement with the automotive grade hardware, but I bet you can't without a nondisclosure agreement.

Grumpy_Mike:
Yes but Atmel are in the clear on that one even if it is an automotive grade processor.

That was exactly my point.

I actually almost did an LLB after my udergrad engineering degree: sometimes still wish I had. Was thinking to be a patent attorney, but product (mis-) use liability would have been fascinating.

bloodnok_vc:
That’s what actually prompted my question. Nobody (not even a shyster lawyer bar steward?) would call Blink on a standalone self-powered Uno sitting in a car, an automotive application, would they?

You have obviously never discussed law with an actual lawyer.

wvmarle:
You have obviously never discussed law with an actual lawyer.

Damn, I left of the

bloodnok_vc:
Damn, I left of the

Given your self given name, I would have expected you to lament the absence of an irony emoji.