The MCC CAD framework methodology management system

Allen, W.; Rosenthal, Douglas E.; Fiduk, Kenneth

doi:10.1145/127601.127753

Cited by 21 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This concept originated in the electronic CAD world [13][14][15][16] and has now been adopted by the mechanical CAD community [8,[17][18][19]]. An important activity in development of this CAD Framework technology was the formation of the CAD Framework Initiative (CFI) in 1988.…”

Section: The Cad Framework Concept:-a Brief Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Multidisciplinary Concurrent Design Environment for Consumer Electronic Product Design

Wang

Wright

Richards

1996

Concurrent Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most consumer electronic products are electromechanical systems consisting of mechanical components such as structures, enclosures, and mechanisms combined with electrical components such as printed circuit boards (PCBs) power supplies wires (harness), and switches The design of such multidisciplinary products involves high coordination and cooperation between the two different engineering fields of mechanical and electrical design However, in spite of the advancements of CAD tool development in design automation technology within each field, a gap still exists for good communication between the designers in these two fields during the course of the design This gap makes the design process of such products time-consuming and error prone This paper describes a research effort that facilitates multidisciplinary concurrent design for consumer electronic products The focus is on how to integrate mechanical and electrical CAD tools into a more flexible and extensible concurrent design environment to share and communicate critical design information during the design process A multidisciplinary cuncurrent design environment based on the CAD framework concept is described Approaches for integrating the design data and information in such a multidisciplinary design environment are discussed A prototyping system for the concurrent design of consumer electronic products is also presented with two preliminary design examples

show abstract

Section: The Cad Framework Concept:-a Brief Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Multidisciplinary Concurrent Design Environment for Consumer Electronic Product Design

Wang

Wright

Richards

1996

Concurrent Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Design management has been addressed at the chip level (see [All91] for example), but the extensions to the system level are not yet well understood (at least not by these authors). We are investigating a design methodology that treats the design flow as part of the design itself.…”

Section: Design Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Manifestations of heterogeneity in hardware/software co-design

Kalavadee

Lee

1994

Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference on Design Automation Conference - DAC '94

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We identify three distinct types of hardware/software codesign:1. Joint design of an instruction-set architecture and its program. 2. Synthesis of hardware and/or software from a common specification.3. Specification, synthesis, and simulation of heterogeneous systems.These can be viewed as manifestations of heterogeneity in the design methodology.The first type concerns the joint synthesis of a data-path and its controller, two conceptually distinct parts of a processor [Pau93]. The heterogeneity in this approach is limited to distinguishing the datapath from its controller.In type 2, a unified representation of an application is mapped into some mixture of implementation technologies. For example, a dataflow graph could be partitioned, and the separate partitions could be fed to hardware and software synthesis tools [Kal93]. The software components execute on commodity processors, or possibly on processors synthesized as in type 1. A hierarchical finite state machine could also be converted to hardware or software implementations [Har90]. If concurrent FSMs are used, then a mixture of hardware implementations might be attractive. In type 2, the heterogeneity is limited to distinguishing implementation technologies; the model of computation is unified.In type 3, the design representation need not be unified. Distinct models of computation can be used for different parts of the design. The model of computation for each component would be chosen on the basis of the properties of that component. For instance, dataflow would be used for signal processing, and hierarchical FSMs for control. A typical application could combine both models of computation. Within each model of computation, types 1 or 2 might apply in synthesizing the implementations.Type 3 addresses a large cross section of system-level design problems. In the signal processing domain, for example, most applications combine some hard-real-time numerical processing of signals with much more dynamic control. In applications such as modems, wireless communication systems, video phones, voice mail systems, voice recognition systems, disk-drive controllers, and data compression, one or more signal processing kernels are invoked in response to outside stimuli. For example, a modem needs to negotiate a common transmission format with another modem when a connection is established, or when a wireless device moves from one service area to another. System-Level DesignType 1 is fundamentally still a chip-level design problem. It can be viewed as an approach to high-level synthesis. In this paper, we concentrate on system-level problems, and hence on types 2 and 3. In this context, four key problems emerge:• partitioning Even a unified model such as SDF does not preclude a bias towards one type of implementation or another. Certain properties of a graph lead to a preference:• the mix of operations,• the speed requirements,• the regularity of the graph,• the parallelism in the graph,• the word length requirements, and• the need for programmability.In the last of th...

show abstract

“…CFI[16] defines standards for tool encapsulation and data models.Recent efforts address the flow management problem. The MMS framework[17] focuses on distributed tool execution and multi-user environments. Some efforts approach the flow management problem from an AI angle[18][…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Complexity management in system-level design

Kalavade

Lee

1996

J VLSI Sign Process Syst Sign Image Video Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The system-level design problem spans a large design space. Typically, the designer needs to explore possible target architectures, experiment with different tools, and work with a range of constraints and optimization criteria. This design process is quite complex and involves considerable bookkeeping and management, in addition to sophisticated design tools. We believe that managing the design process is an important (albeit often neglected) part of system-level design. The contribution of this paper is in two parts. First, we present a framework for systematically managing the design process. Secondly, we illustrate how this framework can be used to manage a realistic system-level design environment that consists of a suite of sophisticated hardware and software design tools. We begin by identifying some of the desirable features of system-level design methodology management. A candidate framework that manifests these features is presented. Complex design flows with iterative and conditional behavior can be specified within the framework. The framework also supports automated scheduling of tools in a well-defined design flow. It has been implemented as the DMM domain in Ptolemy. In the second part of the paper, we describe a system-level design environment case study that we have developed within this framework. The environment, called the Design Assistant, is a complete hardware-software codesign environment. It encapsulates various codesign tools for specification, partitioning, and synthesis; their interplay can be managed efficiently by the design methodology management framework.

show abstract

The MCC CAD framework methodology management system

Cited by 21 publications

References 8 publications

A Multidisciplinary Concurrent Design Environment for Consumer Electronic Product Design

A Multidisciplinary Concurrent Design Environment for Consumer Electronic Product Design

Manifestations of heterogeneity in hardware/software co-design

Complexity management in system-level design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About