System Design Flows, Requirements and Implementation

  • Joris van den Hurk
  • Jochen Jess


An effective system design flow supports all phases in the life cycle of an electronic product (section 2.1). A system design flow therefore must account for the inputs associated with each of the life cycle phases. The flow is furthermore required to support the tasks and activities within each phase, and to provide for the desired outputs and deliverables. These preconditions and postconditions constitute a set of technical requirements on system design flows (section 2.2.1). When trying to assess all design flow requirements however, economic aspects may not be ignored (section 2.2.2). Over the past years, the importance of these economic requirements has increased considerably, and is expected to continue growing rapidly [13]. This chapter proposes a hierarchical system design flow to meet both the technical and the economic requirements (section 2.3). It furthermore reviews the tools and formalisms currently available for the practical implementation of the tasks and description levels in such a hierarchical design flow (sections 2.3.3, 2.3.4, 2.3.5, 2.3.6).


Design Flow Type Description Life Cycle Phase System Level Design Module Description 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    M. Awad, J. Kuusela and J. Ziegler, “Developing Object-Oriented Software for Real-Time Systems”, Embedded Systems Programming,pp. 54–64, September 1996.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    M. Awad, J. Kuusela and J. Ziegler, “The Octopus Method: Requirements Specification and Software Architecture”, Embedded Systems Programming,pp. 22–36, October 1996.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    M. Awad, J. Kuusela and J. Ziegler, “Octopus: Subsystem Analysis / Design and Performance Analysis”, Embedded Systems Programming,pp. 66–97, November 1996.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    K. Buchenrieder, “Industrial Hardware / Software Co-Design”, Proc. Workshop on Hardware — Software Codesign,Philips Research Laboratories, Eindhoven (The Netherlands), December 7–8, 1995.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    W.-T. Chang, A. Kalavade, E.A. Lee, “Effective Heterogeneous Design and Co-Simulation”, Presented at the NATO Advanced Study Institute Workshop on Hardware / Software Codesign,Lake Como (Italy), June 18–30, 1995.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    C. Di, “Modelling and Simulation of Defect Induced Faults in CMOS ICs”, Ph. D. Thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology,The Netherlands, ISBN 90–386–0040–2, March 1995.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    B. Dumaine, “How Managers Can Succeed Through Speed”, Fortune,February 13, 1989.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    C.F. Fey, D.E. Paraskevopoulos, “Studies in LSI Technology Economics II: a Comparison of Product Costs Using MSI, Gate Arrays, Standard Cells, and Full Custom VLSI”, IEEE Journal on Solid State Circuits,vol. SC-21, no. 2, pp. 297–303, April 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    E.M. Goldratt, R.E. Fox, “The RACE”, North River Press,pp. 6–7, ISBN 0–88427–062–9, 1986.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    A.K. Gupta, D.L. Wilemon, “Accelerating the Development of Technology-Based New Products”, California Management Review,vol. 32, pp. 24–44, Winter 1990.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    J.A.A.M. van den Hurk, “Evaluation of the PCALE VLSI Design Flow for HDTV ICs”, Instituut Vervolgopleidingen, Eindhoven University of Technology,The Netherlands, ISBN 90–5282–189–5, April 1992.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    J.A.A.M. van den Hurk, E.R. Dilling, “System Level Design, a VHDL Based Approach”, Proc. European Design Automation Conf. (EuroDAC),pp. 568 – 573, Brighton (UK), September 1995.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    C. Karman, “Growth in the Semiconductor Industry”, Proceedings of the Twenty-first Europ. Solid State Circuits Conf. (ESSCIRC),pp. 2–9, Lille (France), September 1995.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    L. Mittag, “Trends in Hardware / Software Codesign”, Embedded Systems Programming,pp. 36–45, January 1996.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    G.J. Myers, “The Art of Software Testing”, John Wiley & Sons,New York, ISBN 0–471–04328–1, 1979.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    D.E. Paraskevopoulos, C.F. Fey, “Studies in LSI Technology Economics III: Design Schedules for Application-Specific Integrated Circuits”, IEEE Journal on Solid State Circuits,vol. SC-22, no. 2, pp. 223–229, April 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    R. Polli, V. Cook, “Validity of the Product Life Cycle”, Journal of Business,pp. 385–400, October 1969.Google Scholar
  18. [018]
    M.E. Porter, “Competitive Advantage. Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance”, The Free Press,pp. 194–196, ISBN 0–02–925090–0, 1985.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    D.G. Reinertsen, “Whodunit? The search for the new-product killers”, Electron. Bus.,vol. 11, pp. 106–109, July 1983.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    W.H. Wolf, “Hardware — Software Co-Design of Embedded Systems”, Proc. of the IEEE,vol. 82, no. 7, pp. 967–989, July 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Status 1995, A Report On The Integrated Circuit Industry, ICE,1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joris van den Hurk
    • 1
  • Jochen Jess
    • 2
  1. 1.Philips Semiconductors B.V.The Netherlands
  2. 2.Eindhoven University of TechnologyThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations