SAE J1939 defines a comprehensive framework for message formatting, transport, and network behavior in heavy-duty vehicle systems. While many Parameter Group Numbers (PGNs) are publicly standardized, a substantial portion of real-world J1939 traffic consists of proprietary messages. These messages are intentionally undocumented by OEMs and are often central to machine functionality, diagnostics, and performance optimization.
Engineers frequently encounter proprietary PGNs when monitoring J1939 networks and are tempted to decode them through observation and inference. This report examines what proprietary J1939 messages are, why they exist, what can realistically be learned from them, and the technical and practical limits of decoding without OEM documentation.
Understanding Proprietary PGNs
J1939 defines two categories of proprietary PGNs:
• Proprietary A (PGN range with destination-specific addressing)
• Proprietary B (PGN range used for broadcast or global communication)
These PGNs intentionally reserve payload interpretation for the OEM or system designer. The protocol specifies how the message is transported, but not what the data means. This allows manufacturers to implement custom control strategies, diagnostics, and feature sets while remaining compliant with the J1939 transport layer.
In practice, proprietary messages may carry:
• Calibration and configuration data
• Internal state variables
• Control commands between ECUs
• Extended diagnostic information
• Feature enablement or security data
Their presence is normal and expected on most production networks.
Why OEMs Rely on Proprietary Messaging
Proprietary messages serve both technical and business purposes. From a technical standpoint, they allow flexibility beyond the standardized parameter set. OEMs can introduce new features without waiting for SAE standardization cycles.
From a business and legal standpoint, proprietary PGNs protect intellectual property and support product differentiation. They also act as a barrier to unauthorized modification, reverse engineering, or third-party control of safety-critical systems.
As a result, proprietary messaging is often closely monitored by OEM ECUs, and unexpected interaction with these PGNs can have consequences beyond simple communication errors.
What Can Be Learned Through Passive Observation
Despite the lack of documentation, passive monitoring can reveal useful structural information about proprietary messages.
Engineers can often determine:
• Message frequency and timing behavior
• Source and destination ECUs
• Payload length and segmentation patterns
• Correlation between payload changes and machine behavior
For example, a proprietary message that updates at a fixed interval and changes smoothly with engine speed may indicate sensor-derived data rather than control commands. Stepwise changes synchronized with operator input may suggest switch or mode status.
Time correlation, repetition rate, and interaction with known standardized PGNs provide valuable contextual clues.
Common Reverse-Engineering Techniques
Several techniques are commonly used to infer meaning from proprietary messages:
Correlation analysis
By observing payload changes while specific actions are taken, relationships between data bytes and system behavior can be inferred.
Delta analysis
Comparing payload differences between operating states can highlight which bytes are significant and which remain constant.
Statistical analysis
High-resolution logging allows detection of scaling, signed versus unsigned values, and potential bit-field usage.
Gateway comparison
Monitoring traffic before and after a gateway ECU may reveal translation between proprietary and standardized PGNs.
While these methods can provide insight, they rely heavily on assumptions and must be treated cautiously.
Frequent Misinterpretations and Pitfalls
Decoding proprietary messages carries significant risk of misinterpretation. Common mistakes include:
• Assuming byte alignment without evidence
• Applying scaling factors borrowed from standardized SPNs
• Treating control messages as sensor data
• Confusing multiplexed payloads with linear data structures
Many proprietary messages use bit-packed fields, conditional layouts, or mode-dependent semantics. A byte that appears to represent a physical value in one state may have an entirely different meaning in another.
Without documentation, apparent patterns may be coincidental rather than intentional.
Multiplexing and Mode-Dependent Payloads
A frequent source of confusion is payload multiplexing. OEMs often reuse the same PGN to transmit different data sets depending on an internal mode, index value, or state variable embedded in the payload.
In such cases:
• Byte meaning changes dynamically
• Scaling rules are conditional
• Fields may be invalid or reserved in certain modes
Decoding a multiplexed message without recognizing the multiplexer field leads to contradictory or nonsensical results. Identifying such structures requires extensive logging across all operating conditions.
Legal and Operational Boundaries
Even passive decoding raises legal and contractual considerations. OEM license agreements, dealer policies, and right-to-repair regulations vary by region and application. While observing traffic is generally permissible, using decoded proprietary information to influence machine behavior, modify calibrations, or bypass safeguards may violate terms of use or regulatory requirements.
In addition, some systems actively detect abnormal network behavior associated with reverse-engineering efforts, such as unusual request patterns or excessive logging traffic.
Understanding these boundaries is as important as technical accuracy.
When Decoding Is Not Enough
There are clear limits to what can be achieved without OEM cooperation. Certain proprietary messages are encrypted, obfuscated, or context-dependent on internal ECU state not visible on the bus.
In many cases, decoding alone cannot provide:
• Absolute physical meaning of values
• Safety limits or validity ranges
• Interactions with fault-handling logic
• Implicit assumptions used by control algorithms
Attempting to use partially decoded data for control or safety-related decisions can introduce serious risk.
Best Practices for Working with Proprietary J1939 Traffic
Engineers dealing with proprietary messages should follow disciplined practices:
• Operate strictly in passive or listen-only mode
• Treat decoded results as hypotheses, not facts
• Validate findings across multiple machines and conditions
• Avoid transmitting or acting on proprietary PGNs
• Document assumptions and uncertainty explicitly
In many cases, the safest and most effective approach is to use proprietary data only for high-level monitoring, trend analysis, or fault correlation, rather than precise measurement or control.
Conclusion
Proprietary J1939 messages are an integral part of modern heavy-duty vehicle networks. While they can often be partially decoded through careful observation and analysis, their interpretation is inherently uncertain without OEM documentation. Engineers must balance curiosity and practicality with caution and respect for technical, legal, and operational boundaries.
Decoding proprietary messages can enhance understanding of system behavior, but it should never be assumed to provide complete or authoritative insight. Recognizing the limits of what can be known is essential for responsible and reliable use of J1939 data.
References
- SAE International, SAE J1939 Series Documentation
- ISO 11898-1 and ISO 11898-2 CAN Specifications
- Bosch CAN Specification, Version 2.0
- Vector Informatik, J1939 Analysis and Diagnostics Literature
- OEM Diagnostic Architecture and Network Design Publications
J1939 PGN & SPN Fault Decoding Workshop Manual: Step-by-Step Guide to Diagnosing, Interpreting, and Troubleshooting J1939 Fault Codes in Heavy-Duty Vehicles
J1939 PGN & SPN Fault Decoding Workshop Manual is a technical reference for professionals involved in diagnosing, servicing, and maintaining modern heavy-duty vehicle electronic systems. It provides a structured, practical approach to understanding SAE J1939 communication and interpreting diagnostic fault data with clarity and confidence.
This workshop manual explains how J1939 diagnostic information is constructed, transmitted, and used in real-world troubleshooting. Emphasis is placed on translating raw network data into actionable diagnostic insight, rather than relying solely on scan-tool fault descriptions.
In this manual, you will learn how to:
✓ Understand the structure, message flow, and operating principles of the SAE J1939 protocol used in commercial and off-highway vehicles
✓ Decode Parameter Group Numbers (PGNs) and Suspect Parameter Numbers (SPNs) for precise fault identification
✓ Analyze diagnostic messages and fault data transmitted over the CAN bus
✓ Distinguish between communication faults, sensor failures, wiring issues, and ECU-related problems
✓ Correlate scan-tool data with real-world vehicle symptoms and operating conditions
✓ Reduce misdiagnosis and unnecessary component replacement through systematic, data-driven troubleshooting
✓ Apply J1939 fault decoding techniques in workshop, fleet, and field service environments
This book is intended for:
✓ Diesel and heavy-duty truck technicians
✓ Fleet maintenance and service professionals
✓ Heavy equipment and off-highway vehicle mechanics
✓ Automotive and vehicle electronics engineers
✓ Technical students and training programs
Written in a clear and methodical style, this manual serves both as a training resource and a long-term diagnostic reference. It is suitable for professional workshops, fleet operations, and educational settings where accurate interpretation of J1939 fault data is essential.
For technicians and engineers seeking a reliable, workshop-ready guide to SAE J1939 PGN and SPN fault decoding, this manual delivers practical insight, technical rigor, and real-world diagnostic value. More information…
Comments are closed.