Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
15 Paper 30121116 IJCSIS Camera Ready Paper Pp. 85-90

15 Paper 30121116 IJCSIS Camera Ready Paper Pp. 85-90

Ratings: (0)|Views: 15 |Likes:
Published by ijcsis

More info:

Published by: ijcsis on Feb 19, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/31/2014

pdf

text

original

 
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 10, No. 1, January 2012
Mathematical Model for Component Selection inEmbedded System Design
Ashutosh Gupta
#1
, Chandan Maity
#2
 
#
 Embedded Systems Group,Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC), Noida, India
1
ashutoshgupta@cdac.in
2
chandanmaity@cdac.in
 
 Abstract
 — 
Changes in embedded technologies and marketdynamics have made traditional electronic parts selection andmanagement practices inadequate. Component selection is aprocess designed to evaluate the electronic part, and facilitateinformed decisions regarding its selection and future use.Embedded Designers face challenges when they are about toselect the electronic component, for new design as it is difficult tocompare the parts in terms of quantitative and qualitative termsin absence of any mathematical model. This paper proposes anew hybrid model which combines Linear Weightage andAnalytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Models linear weightagemodel to assist in the decision making activity and helps to selectthe best electronic component among a number of potentialcandidates. The final decision from this new model will help inbetter selection methodology for assisting embedded designers tomake the right decision and select the most suitable componentrequired for the design from the large pool of the componentsavailable in the market.
 Keywords - Mathematical Model, Component Selection, Embedded System Design,
 
 Linear Weightage Model, Analytic Hierarchy Process, Microcontroller
I.
 
I
NTRODUCTION
 The component selection and management methodologyhas been designed to aid in making risk informed decisionsregarding the selection and use of electronic parts. Theprocess aids in determining the acceptability of a componentfor an application, while considering factors such asfunctionality, performance, standardization, cost, availability,technology (new and aging), and logistics support.Component selection is a process of selecting devices forthe board design based on the various requirements likefunctional, electrical, mechanical, thermal, etc. Selection of awrong component can create major problems in thefunctionality of the board. Hence, component selection is avery important aspect in the board design cycle. Componentselection is a critical step, which will have lot of impact onrest of the project from the point of view of meetingfunctionality, performance, testing, manufacturing, confirmingto standards and also to the schedule. In a typical productdesign cycle, component selection is required in the 3following phases: Before a new design
 – 
new componentselection; Component obsolescence
 – 
replacement with anupdated version; Performance or feature enhancement
 – 
 replacement with enhanced features.Embedded Designers are often responsible for makingpurchasing decisions which is definitely a difficult task. Thereare many reasons which make the selection process a complexone, and the major are [1]:
 
Component selection involves a huge number of criteria, so the embedded designers should considerthat when they are choosing the best component.
 
Multiple criteria are usually taking place; some of them are quantitative while the others are qualitative.
 
The criteria itself could be conflicting to each other,such as quality against price.
 
Changing in criteria may happen across time andplace.
 
Besides the huge number of alternatives may beinvolved according to the competitiveness amongthem.Component selection is a multi-criteria problem whichincludes both qualitative and quantitative factors. Thus,attention should be given to component selection problem byembedded designers in order to make the right decisions.There are a variety of steps that often embedded designersfollow in order to make the right decisions and finally becapable of selecting the most appropriate component. It isagreed that component selection decision is so complicatedand difficult to cope with and thus authors proposed amathematical model in component selection which will helpthe designers to identify the right components for the new orexisting designs.
85http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
 
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 10, No. 1, January 2012
II.
 
R
ELATED
W
ORK
 
 A.
 
 Linear Weightage Model
One of the linear weightage models is maximax. Thismodel is very easy and mostly depending upon decision
maker’s judgment as they have to assign weights to the
criteria that involve in decision making process. In most casesthere are some criteria considered as more important thanothers, such as Operating voltage, ADC resolution, ADCChannel number and communication peripheral. Decisionmakers should assigned weight to each individual criterion inorder to determine the relative importance of each one. Theseweights play a vital role in decision making process andextremely affect the final decision. After identifying all thecriteria related to website selection decision, decision makerhas to determine threshold for each criterion. In fact, thresholdcan be divided into two types, i.e. maximum and minimum.
One criterion may be “Smaller is better” and the threshold for 
this type of criteria must be maximum. On the other hand
other criteria can be considered as “larger is better” wh
erethresholds must be minimum.Cmax = Max
 – 
Component / Max
 – 
Min (1)Where,Cmax = Component value that has maximum type of threshold with respect to a particular attribute/criterion.Component = Specific component that is considered at thetime.Max = Maximum value of particular attribute/criteria amongall component.Min = Minimum value of the same attribute among the wholecomponent.In the other case when the attribute is classified under theminimum type of threshold, formula 2 is the only option for
calculating the component’s value.
 Cmin = Component
 – 
Min / Max
 – 
Min (2)Where.Cmin = Component value that has minimum type of thresholdwith respect to a particular attribute/criterion.Component = Specific component that is considered at thetime.Max = Maximum value of particular attribute/criteria amongall componentMin = Minimum value of the same attribute among the wholecomponent.The idea of using formula 1 and formula 2 is extremelyvaluable because they provide a method that enables thecomparisons among decision criteria. Usually decision criteriahave different units of measure so any comparisons amongthose criteria are not logically acceptable. By using the datanormalization concept which was represented in formula 1and formula 2, all the criteria will be having weights insteadof a variety of measurement units and then the comparisonscan simply be made. When all values of the criteria matrix arecalculated, series of calculations should be achieved bymultiplying weights Wi of criteria by the whole values Xiwithin the matrix. The total score should also be calculatedusing formula 3 for each component which represents thecomponents scores. The final decision table includes a totalscore for each component and the one who gains the highestscore is recommended as the best component over all. Thelimitation of this model is assigning weights to various criteria.
Total Score = Σ W i X i
(3)
 B.
 
 Analytic Hierarchy Process
The Analytical Hierarchy Process Model was designed byTL Saaty [3] as a decision making aid. The AnalyticHierarchy Process is based on the assumption that when facedwith a complex decision the natural human reaction is tocluster the decision elements according to their commoncharacteristics.In AHP the problems are usually presented in a hierarchicalstructure and the decision maker is guided throughout asubsequent series of pairwise comparisons to express therelative strength of the elements in the hierarchy. In generalthe hierarchy structure encompasses of three levels, where thetop level represents the goal, and the lowest level has thecomponent under consideration. The intermediate levelcontains the criteria under which each component is evaluated.
GoalCriteria 2Criteria 3Criteria 4Criteria 5Criteria 1Alternative 1Alternative 2Alternative 3
 
Fig. 1. Analytical Hierarchy Process Model
86http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
 
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 10, No. 1, January 2012
III.
 
P
ROPOSED
H
YBRID
M
ODEL
 Based on the previous discussion about both models, thereis an urgent need for new model that can support thecomponent selection decision and offer a powerful tool whichcan ultimately produce satisfactory results. This paper intendsto achieve this objective by proposing a new hybrid model.This new model concentrates on avoiding all the shortcomingsmentioned above. It combines two different aspects from bothAHP and linear weightage model.The new model uses the measurement scale of AHP modelto determine to which degree each single criterion is preferredin comparison with others. Once the pairwise comparisonshave been made, decision maker can obtain the weights of thewhole criteria when the relative preference of criteria isspecified. The next step in the proposed model is to assignthresholds to all
criteria considering “larger is better” or “smaller is better”.
 First stage is to obtain preference criteria matrix, by meansof identifying various criteria against each other. Makepairwise comparison between the criteria by assigning weightsin 1-9 scale. By performing three steps like sum the elementsin each column, divide each value by its column total andcalculate row averages. Finally by doing all the three steps wecan obtain weigtages of each criterion. The second stage is toapply linear weightage model by finding the thresholds fromthe original component data and after normalization processby multiplying the weights obtain from the above process, wecan get the final decision table matrix. Calculation of thewhole values in the decision table matrix has to be producedby considering the two formulae. If the threshold is maximumthen formula 1 should be used, otherwise formula 2 is appliedfor minimum threshold. When the whole cells that representeach component across only criteria will be filled with acertain value in the decision table matrix, then each columnwill multiply by the column of criteria weights and obtain thenew values of these cells. Now each column represents one of the competitive components, the last step in the proposedmodel is to compute the sum of each column to get the finalscores of all components. The highest score indicates to thebest component and that component will be recommended asthe most appropriate component among the competitivecomponents.IV.
 
N
UMERICAL
I
LLUSTRATION
 The data for this case study have been collected from themicrocontroller selection study for the project Design andDevelopment of Object Tracking system for environmentalsensitive object in transit.First row in Table I shows the selection criteria for themicrocontroller. These criteria which are involved in thecomponent selection process are eight different criteria whichdescribe each product. The columns represent the twelvecompetitive products.
TABLE I. M
ICRCONTROLLER
T
ECHNICAL
S
PECIFICATIONS
# Microcontroller CPUPowerconsumptionFlash EEPROM RAMMinOperatingVoltageUSB RTCExpertizeLevelPinsUnits
Bit
μW
Kb Bytes Bytes Volts Yes/No Yes/No High/Low No.1PIC18LF14K508 10.8 16 256 768 1.8 Yes No High 202PIC16LF18298 12.6 8 256 1024 1.8 No No High 203PIC18F87K908 9.9 128 1024 4096 1.8 No Yes High 804PIC24FJ32GB00416 30 64 0 8192 2.0 Yes Yes High 445PIC18LF26J508 12.4 64 0 3776 2.0 Yes Yes High 246MSP430F201316 17.28 2 256 128 1.8 No No Low 147MSP430F552816 11.7 128 0 8192 1.8 Yes Yes Low 808STM8L152M88 56 64 2048 4096 1.65 No Yes Low 809STM32L15xVx32 45 128 4096 16384 1.8 Yes Yes Low 4810MC9S08JE1288 126 128 0 12288 1.8 Yes No Low 6411MC9S08MM1288 126 128 0 12288 1.8 Yes No Low 6412PIC24F16KA10216 14.4 16 512 1536 1.8 No Yes High 20
The ten criteria for the selection of microcontroller areCPU architecture, Typical Power consumption at 32 KHz withVDD = 1.8 v, Flash, EEPROM, RAM, Minimum operatingvoltage, USB support, availability of RTC, Expertise level andnumber of pins. Table II is prepared using the formula number1 and 2 and is named as base reference values.
87http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->