Too Many Automotive Sensors, Not Enough Time (Or Money)
The dashboard lit up again—an issue with the blind-spot sensor. That was the third time this quarter. Nathan, a senior design engineer at a major Tier 1 supplier, stared at the validation report, knowing exactly what it meant: another round of testing, another delay, and more cost.
Designing sensor systems for modern vehicles is not a small undertaking. Today’s cars carry dozens of sensors—radar, LiDAR, ultrasonic, cameras—all feeding data into advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS). And as safety standards grow more stringent and autonomous features expand, the number of sensors continues to climb.
But here’s the catch: while the number of sensors is growing, the space to fit them, the time to develop them, and the budgets to build them are not.
The Problem Behind the Problem
For engineers like Nathan, the challenge isn’t just the sensor itself. It’s everything around it—power management, signal integrity, thermal performance, EMI, and the complexity of integrating these modules across different platforms and vehicle models.
Sensor modules often require custom PCBs, housings, and harnessing for each vehicle line. Add to that the rigorous automotive qualification process (ISO 26262, AEC-Q100), and you’ve got a recipe for ballooning development cycles and costs.
Every modification—whether to meet a new spec or fit a new vehicle chassis—carries ripple effects. A slightly different mounting angle? Redesign the PCB and revalidate the system. A new ECU interface? Rewrite part of the firmware and re-verify signal timing. The complexity scales fast.
Taking a Modular Approach
Some design teams are shifting to modular, platform-based sensor architectures. The idea is to standardize the key sensor module—processing, power, and core sensing—into a repeatable unit. Then adapt the housing or interface board for specific vehicles as needed.
This approach isn’t new, but what’s changing is how chipsets and development kits are catching up to support it. Some new automotive-grade sensor SoCs now integrate signal processing, power regulation, and even basic diagnostics into a single package. That shrinks board size and reduces the number of components needed—less validation, fewer sourcing headaches, and lower cost.
Leveraging Pre-Qualified Reference Designs
Designing from scratch is becoming harder to justify. Many vendors now offer reference designs that include not just the schematic, but also thermal simulation data, EMI test results, and design files aligned with automotive standards.
These aren’t cookie-cutter solutions, but they give engineers a head start and help avoid common failure points. They’re especially useful for Tier 2 and 3 suppliers trying to meet OEM expectations without massive R&D teams.
The Hidden Cost-Saver: Smart Diagnostics
One of Nathan’s recent breakthroughs didn’t come from changing the sensor at all—it came from adding smarter diagnostics. A self-monitoring feature using basic voltage and current sensing detected connector issues before they triggered a hard fault. That saved service costs and improved OEM satisfaction, all without redesigning the core module.
Small changes in the design phase—like integrating on-chip diagnostics or selecting a sensor that supports OTA calibration—can significantly cut down lifetime maintenance costs and design complexity.
Who’s Helping Tackle the Problem?
Several semiconductor and component manufacturers are stepping in with solutions aimed at reducing the burden on design teams. Companies like Texas Instruments and Analog Devices are offering highly integrated sensor signal chains that combine power management, signal conditioning, and diagnostics in a single AEC-Q100-qualified IC. Infineon is pushing scalable radar sensor platforms, with MMICs and microcontrollers designed to streamline corner radar and front radar designs across multiple vehicle models. NXP is taking a modular approach with its S32 platform, providing pre-integrated hardware and software for sensor fusion and ADAS applications. Meanwhile, Renesas has launched smart sensor reference designs that include pre-tested thermal and EMI performance, cutting weeks from development timelines. These companies aren’t just selling chips—they’re offering design ecosystems that help engineers reduce risk, speed up validation, and keep costs in check.
Final Thoughts
Designing automotive sensors will never be simple—but it doesn’t have to be chaotic. The winning teams are finding ways to reduce redundancy, leverage modularity, and think a few steps ahead.
Nathan’s team eventually resolved the blind-spot sensor issue, not by beefing up the sensor, but by simplifying it—using a more integrated chipset, a flexible platform design, and smarter upfront choices. It’s not about designing more. It’s about designing smarter.
