As FPGAs have become larger their use as a prototyping tool has become more diverse, including using multiple processors in a single design and system. And the business of FPGA prototyping has grown with that ability. What began as a means of prototyping other silicon devices, has become a way to validate the FPGA itself, an indication of how the FPGA verification market can be used in bootstrapping a next-generation FPGA based on known designs. S2C is one of the companies that is making a profitable business in this niche as this New Tech Press Report demonstrates.
By Douglas Alexander, Component Engineer Special to NewTechPress
A few years back, an employee of a capacitor manufacturer left the company and stole the formula for a low equivalent series resistance electrolytic capacitor. He brought the formula to a black market operation and began to produce the capacitors using the same markings as the original company.
As it turns out, his bogus operation did not get the formula right and produced millions of bad capacitors that were sent all over the world. My company was one of the unfortunate recipients of the bad caps and we had to spend thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours reworking boards, removing the bad counterfeit capacitors, and replacing them with the good parts. Had we performed an incoming inspection based upon what is known as an Acceptable Quality Level screening, we would have caught the bad parts and saved ourselves a lot of money and grief.
Over the years companies have developed a systematic approach to the business basics of components and product assembly, often from the hard lessons of costly errors. And now, there are new technologies being introduced to detect counterfeit integrated circuits, and companies are being formed for the sole purpose of screening for counterfeits.
Processes
Componentselection: The task of identifying a “correct” component for the circuit may involve an understanding of how the circuit works and extrapolating the correct parametric for a device or it may involve identifying the device from a given “list” of parameters. The latter case may be presented as: “I need a low drop-out regulator that can handle 500 milliamps with a 5V input and 3.3V output.” The individual responsible for identifying the final component must also know what questions to ask the Design Engineer in order to expedite the selection of the right part. Is there a package preference, a preferred mounting configuration, an operating temperature consideration, a size constraint, or any number of other factors that may affect the final selection?
Testing: Screening is often required to verify that a device meets the manufacturer’s specifications and functions as expected in the design process or existing circuit under test. This can be as simple as verifying a resistor’s value and tolerance on an LCR meter (Inductance/Capacitance/Resistance), or it can be as involved as qualifying a higher-level, purchased assembly that has hundreds of critical parameters.
Analysis: This may involve what is known as Failure Mode Effect Analysis where a component is found to be the cause of a failure in a circuit. Every failure must be examined for “Root Cause” in order to understand the fundamental reason for the failure. Until this is understood, there can be no assurance that the failure will not occur again. To say a component failed because of excessive electrostatic discharge (ESD) does not delineate the full causation of the failure. How much of a charge is needed to destroy the device? What was the source of the ESD? How did the charge reach the component? Is the circuit protected against ESD? These questions and many others must be asked in order to determine the ultimate “fix.”
Douglas Alexander has been working in the electronics R&D and manufacturing sector for over 25 years with experience in all aspects of component selection, qualification, verification, specification control, reliability prediction, and assurance. His goal in Componentsengeineering.com is to offer the reader a comprehensive understanding of the various types of electronic components used by designers and manufacturers who are associated with electronic engineering and manufacturing.
The article states that although isolated DC/DC converter modules for 3.3 to 3.3V and 5 to 5V conversion are readily available on the market, 3.3 to 5V converters in integrated form are still hard to find. Even if a search for the later proves successful, these specific converters— in particular, those with regulated outputs—often possess long lead times, are relatively expensive, and are usually limited to certain isolation voltages.
A low-cost alternative to integrated modules is a discrete design, if an application requires isolation voltages higher than 2kV, converter efficiency higher than 60%, or reliable availability of standard components. The drawback of designing a discrete DC/DC converter is that it requires a great deal of work: choosing a stable oscillator structure and break-before make circuit, selecting good MOSFETs that can be driven efficiently by standard logic gates, and performing temperature and long-term-reliability tests. This entire effort costs time and money. Therefore, before rushing into such a project, the designer should consider that integrated modules have usually passed temperature tests and have met other industrial qualifications. These modules not only represent the most reliable solution, but also provide a fast time to market. The see the entire article at Element14.
This week, a free, online community for components engineering (CE) professionals has been launched at www.componentsengineering.com. This new site offers a forum for engineers to resource information, as well tools to create and maintain a CE department within their respective organizations.
The site includes free, downloadable content of procedures, processes, flowcharts, and guidelines, as well as tools and resources for learning the basic disciplines of components engineering. The site also provides resources for both fundamental and advanced component-specific education.
Douglas Alexander, the founder and principle consultant, created this website to capture and increase the knowledge of experienced of CEs. In addition to the current content, contributions of original white papers and other related document contributions are welcomed.
“After working in this field of electronics for over 30 years, and finding no website or book dedicated to this core discipline, I was determined to develop a site giving proper recognition to the community of engineers working behind the scenes at almost every manufacturing and engineering company known today.”
The title of components engineer has been around for many years, Alexander said. There is a vast body of knowledge and capability resident in those who, for various reasons, have not worked in their field for some time but are not ready to retire. “Experience and knowledge should not be retired even if you are. Now, here is where you keep it alive.”
Retired, semi-retired, and full-time CE professionals are welcome to submit their credentials, work-experience, and working locations on the site by email. Fees are confidential between the consultant and the clients.
“There is a catch,” Douglas explained, “The individual requesting a posting as a consultant, must demonstrate a competency level by submitting white papers and/or other CE specific documentation that will be reviewed by members of the site for acceptability.” These documents will be credited to the authors and will be reviewed by prospective clients to determination of the consultant’s applicable knowledge and ultimately “worthiness” for hire.
Alexander said the site is a collaborative effort and will fulfill its full purpose as the community grows with the individual contributions from experienced practitioners. “It is my sincere desire to provide an opportunity for those who want to consult in this special field of engineering to contribute to these pages and form or reestablish peer-to-peer relationships with others of like mind and spirit.”
The establishment of the smart grid is an inevitability, according to experts speaking at the Smart Power Grid Technology Conference, but depending on power utilities, government and “field of dreams marketing” will only delay it. That’s why the latent industry needs the help of the electronic design community, according to speakers at the event put on by ISQED.
Edward Cazalet, CEO of the Cazalet Group, and Tom Tamarkin, CEO of EnergyCite, painted a picture, for 100+ design engineers at the fledgling conference, of an industry that is ready to spread nationwide save for public misunderstandings, governmental gridlock, and utility intransigence. Between the two presentations they offered a road map for the smart grid but that lacked a clear path to public acceptance.
“That’s why I’m here today,” Cazalet concluded. “We need your help to spread this word and identify how it can be done.” Both entrepreneurs were looking for attendees to start looking into the potential of the smart grid for new product development, not unlike what came out of the PC industry in the 1980s.
Cazalet opened the conference with a description of the Transactive Energy Market Information Exchange (TeMIX). The exchange protocol makes it possible for energy providers and customers to buy and sell blocks of power at any time. That includes power utilities, power resellers and even customers with alternative energy systems that create more power than they need. For example, an electric vehicle sitting in a garage after it reaches a full charge is essentially a block of power that can be utilized. Offering that block on the exchange makes it possible for the car’s owner to sell that power to the grid.
“Any party can buy and sell power blocks to any other party,” Cazalet explained. “ Customer purchase blocks of power by subscription, paying extra if they use more than what they purchase or selling back what they don’t use.”
At present, however, that infrastructure is dependent on the connection of smart meters to the supplier’s power blocks and consuming devices. While utilities have been under directive of federal and state governments to deploy these devices since as early as 2004, widespread distribution of the devices is still creeping along.
Tamarkin pointed out that the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) mandated the installation of smart meters by investor-owned utilities in 2004. Southern California Edison (SCE) initiated form opposition that same year. Tamarkin drafted and personally documents to prove the benefit to SCE in 2005, causing SCE to reverse it’s position formally and move forward on the initiative.
Tamarkin explained that the current method of billing rate payers is to provide a bill for what was consumed 90 days previous. Rate payers can only adjust their usage after the fact and hope that they are doing some good. A completed smart grid, starting with smart meters, allows rate payers to see what their consumption is at any particular point and what they will have to pay for it.
Tamarkin likened the potential to the relationship between a car and the gas pump. Once a consumer puts the nozzle into the tank and starts pumping, he knows exaclty what is going in the tank and how much it costs. And the gas gauge in the car tells him exactly what his consumption rate is with some cars telling the driver if his milage is optimal. With that knowledge and TeMIX in place, Cazalet said consumers would be able to purchase sufficient power for their needs on a just-in-time basis and utilities would better be able to predict where that energy should come from and how much to produce.
The problem, however, is the utilities have not shown much interest in completing the loop with the consuming, possibly because it doesn’t benefit them in the short run. As Cazalet put it, “If it isn’t about generation or distribution, they don’t much care to talk about it.”
That has allowed the discussion to be directed by unknowledgeable consumer groups the base arguments against the technology on misrepresentation and isolated instances of bad installations. For example, Joshua Hartnett , a vocal opponent of smart meter installation, based on supposed radiation issues, uses a blackberry phone that emits more radiation at Hartnett’s head than he would ever receive from a neighborhood full of smart meters. The fact that utilities and governments have been moving to correct the misrepresentations only in the past year has contributed to the lack of adoption.
Both Cazalet and Tamarkin asserted that once consumers have easy access to products that could tie into the smart grid, it would create a groundswell of demand and pressure on legislators, regulators and utilities.
![[del.icio.us]](http://www.newtechpress.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://www.newtechpress.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Google]](http://www.newtechpress.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/google.png)
![[LinkedIn]](http://www.newtechpress.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/linkedin.png)
![[StumbleUpon]](http://www.newtechpress.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/stumbleupon.png)
![[Windows Live]](http://www.newtechpress.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/windowslive.png)
![[Yahoo!]](http://www.newtechpress.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/yahoo.png)
![[Email]](http://www.newtechpress.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
