question for purchasing DSP

Hi, everybody. I am a newcomer here and not familar with DSP. I got a
problem during my work. I need to do a project about anti-vibration
control for a machine. For this realtime system, I want to do active
vibration control for this system. I don't know which kind of DSP board
i need to buy for hardware concern. I know I need floating point. Thus,
TI TMS320 3x or TI TMS67x will be a good selection. I searched the TI
third party items, but I have no idea what items is what i want to look
for.I am confused to select. I know I need a board combined DSP,memory,
A/D,D/A and I/o together. So if anybody can give me some suggestion, I
really appreciate.

iris wrote:
> Hi, everybody. I am a newcomer here and not familar with DSP. I got a
> problem during my work. I need to do a project about anti-vibration
> control for a machine. For this realtime system, I want to do active
> vibration control for this system. I don't know which kind of DSP board
> i need to buy for hardware concern. I know I need floating point. Thus,
> TI TMS320 3x or TI TMS67x will be a good selection. I searched the TI
> third party items, but I have no idea what items is what i want to look
> for.I am confused to select. I know I need a board combined DSP,memory,
> A/D,D/A and I/o together. So if anybody can give me some suggestion, I
> really appreciate.
> 

Google is your friend.  The owner of http://www.danvillesignal.com/ will 
respond pretty soon, directing you to his site.  You should be able to 
pick up some search terms there.

I suspect that you'll be lucky to find a single board that has 
everything you need -- certainly you'll be very lucky to find the signal 
conditioning that you need, and if you need to make a custom signal 
conditioning board you may as well put the A/D and D/A converters there 
as well.

To pick the right board you need to have a structured understanding of 
what you're trying to accomplish -- what are your performance goals, 
what requirements does this place on your control system in terms of 
accuracy of measurement and drive, what algorithm do you need to use and 
what sampling rate do you need to sustain?  Once you have answered these 
questions then you should be able to determine what sort of data 
conversion you need, and with a bit of code prototyping you should be 
able to determine what kind of processor speed you need.

-------------------------------------------
Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

"iris" <haiyan77@gmail.com> wrote in news:1117747878.090276.272550
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:

> Hi, everybody. I am a newcomer here and not familar with DSP. I got a
> problem during my work. I need to do a project about anti-vibration
> control for a machine. For this realtime system, I want to do active
> vibration control for this system. I don't know which kind of DSP board
> i need to buy for hardware concern. I know I need floating point. Thus,
> TI TMS320 3x or TI TMS67x will be a good selection. I searched the TI
> third party items, but I have no idea what items is what i want to look
> for.I am confused to select. I know I need a board combined DSP,memory,
> A/D,D/A and I/o together. So if anybody can give me some suggestion, I
> really appreciate.
> 
> 

I think we probably have a number of good solutions based around the Analog 
Devices SHARC DSPs. Analog Devices and TI have about equal market share 
when it comes to general purpose DSP applications (after you factor out 
large vertical markets). Did you know that 70% of all DSPs are in cell 
phones? 

We would be glad to discuss your application in detail.
 

-- 
Al Clark
Danville Signal Processing, Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Purveyors of Fine DSP Hardware and other Cool Stuff
Available at http://www.danvillesignal.com

Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> wrote in 
news:119v11kl30ukjee@corp.supernews.com:

> iris wrote:
>> Hi, everybody. I am a newcomer here and not familar with DSP. I got a
>> problem during my work. I need to do a project about anti-vibration
>> control for a machine. For this realtime system, I want to do active
>> vibration control for this system. I don't know which kind of DSP 
board
>> i need to buy for hardware concern. I know I need floating point. 
Thus,
>> TI TMS320 3x or TI TMS67x will be a good selection. I searched the TI
>> third party items, but I have no idea what items is what i want to 
look
>> for.I am confused to select. I know I need a board combined 
DSP,memory,
>> A/D,D/A and I/o together. So if anybody can give me some suggestion, I
>> really appreciate.
>> 
> 
> Google is your friend.  The owner of http://www.danvillesignal.com/ 
will 
> respond pretty soon, directing you to his site.  You should be able to 
> pick up some search terms there.

Tim, I actually responded to Iris before I even opened your response. I 
guess I am a little predictable but I would be remiss if I didn't follow 
up on an application that our boards are well suited for.....
 

> 
> I suspect that you'll be lucky to find a single board that has 
> everything you need -- certainly you'll be very lucky to find the 
signal 
> conditioning that you need, and if you need to make a custom signal 
> conditioning board you may as well put the A/D and D/A converters there 
> as well.

Absolutely true!. This is precisely why our DSP boards use separate I/O 
modules. In many cases we design a custom I/O module for the customer's 
application which is much easier than creating a DSP board.


> 
> To pick the right board you need to have a structured understanding of 
> what you're trying to accomplish -- what are your performance goals, 
> what requirements does this place on your control system in terms of 
> accuracy of measurement and drive, what algorithm do you need to use 
and 
> what sampling rate do you need to sustain?  Once you have answered 
these 
> questions then you should be able to determine what sort of data 
> conversion you need, and with a bit of code prototyping you should be 
> able to determine what kind of processor speed you need.

Yep.





> 
> -------------------------------------------
> Tim Wescott
> Wescott Design Services
> http://www.wescottdesign.com
> 



-- 
Al Clark
Danville Signal Processing, Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Purveyors of Fine DSP Hardware and other Cool Stuff
Available at http://www.danvillesignal.com

>Hi, everybody. I am a newcomer here and not familar with DSP. I got a
>problem during my work. I need to do a project about anti-vibration
>control for a machine. For this realtime system, I want to do active
>vibration control for this system. I don't know which kind of DSP board
>i need to buy for hardware concern. I know I need floating point. Thus,
>TI TMS320 3x or TI TMS67x will be a good selection. I searched the TI
>third party items, but I have no idea what items is what i want to look
>for.I am confused to select. I know I need a board combined DSP,memory,
>A/D,D/A and I/o together. So if anybody can give me some suggestion, I
>really appreciate.
>

AFAIK, the TMS320C6713 DSK(DSP Starter Kit) boards would be a good choice
for evaluating one's solution.Am not sure if you need to break your head
with third party(hence more specialized and verticalized) solution at
all!

[http://focus.ti.com/docs/toolsw/folders/print/tmdsdsk6713.html]

The board come with a bundled IDE speacially tweaked for the DSK. Some say
this is the words best optimizing compiler(including me). The an on-board
codec AIC23--sigma delta ADC-- a programmable codec capable of doing upto
78khz, so that should be enough for your requirements? If not, you can use
some speacialized daughter cards that can sample at higher rates.

[http://dspvillage.ti.com/docs/catalog/devtools/dsptoolslist.jhtml?familyId=132&toolTypeId=48&toolTypeFlagId=2&templateId=5154&path=templatedata/cm/toolswchrt/data/c6000_daughtercds]

And please be assured that the DSK board comes with all that you want
I/O,memory,DSP,A/D,D/A etc. all of em! It has on chip memory of about
100kb and onboard memory of 16MB.There are expansion slots available for
you to interface more memory if need be. There are multiple high speed and
slow speed I/O solutions. The on-chip high speed serial port in C6000 is
called McBSP(multi channel buffered serial port), this runs at 100mbps and
there are two of em, so thats a through put of about 200 mbps! It has a DMA
throughput of >26000 mbps as well.

I would rate CPU performance based on three characteristics:

1] Maximum CPU performance:

2] Maximum I/O performance

3] Available High Speed Memory

Once you evaluate these three issues, you can then go ahead scale the
numbers to compare with your applications needs and the determine:

* CPU Load (% of maximum)
* Availability of head room to do *extra*( This is very important)

--Bhooshan

		
This message was sent using the Comp.DSP web interface on
www.DSPRelated.com

>Analog Devices and TI have about equal market share 
>when it comes to general purpose DSP applications 
>(after you factor out 
>large vertical markets)
>Did you know that 70% of all DSPs are in cell 
>phones? 

TI dominates the digital media application domain as well but thats not
cell phones? In fact none of the C6000 devices (DM64x,C67xx,C62xx,C64xx)
are used in cell phones(in fact they cannot be because of their non
low-power characteristics) but are dominant market players when it comes
to high performance ILP demanding applications.Google "Digital media
processors" , you will likely come up with lots of DM64xx based product
press releases!

--Bhooshan





		
This message was sent using the Comp.DSP web interface on
www.DSPRelated.com

"bhooshaniyer" <bhooshaniyer@gmail.com> wrote in news:Z5ydnY6uJvZcZgLfRVn-
uA@giganews.com:

>>Analog Devices and TI have about equal market share 
>>when it comes to general purpose DSP applications 
>>(after you factor out 
>>large vertical markets)
>>Did you know that 70% of all DSPs are in cell 
>>phones? 
> 
> TI dominates the digital media application domain as well but thats not
> cell phones? In fact none of the C6000 devices (DM64x,C67xx,C62xx,C64xx)
> are used in cell phones(in fact they cannot be because of their non
> low-power characteristics) but are dominant market players when it comes
> to high performance ILP demanding applications.Google "Digital media
> processors" , you will likely come up with lots of DM64xx based product
> press releases!
> 
> --Bhooshan
> 

TI certainly has a significant portion of the DSP market. I think there is 
a tendency to consider that they are the only game in town since their cell 
phone chip sales are so large.

If you subtract the large vertical markets (cell phones, hard drives, etc) 
and look just at the general purpose market, TI has about a 30% share. 
Analog Devices also has a 30% share with the remaining 40% going to a very 
fragmented remainder. With the exception of Randy Yates, I don't know any 
of us who work outside of the general purpose market.

The third generation SHARC (ADSP-2126x & ADSP-2136x) compare very favorably 
with the C67xx. The SHARC is a 32/40 bit floating point and fixed point DSP 
that in my view is much easier to program than any TI DSP.

Evaluation boards like the TI DSK and Analog Devices EZ-Kits are great ways 
of learning about a specific DSP processor. The catch is that when you are 
done with the eval board, you still have just an eval board.

Danville dspstak boards are designed for small and medium sized production 
runs. Our customers might use 10 - 500 systems a year. The high volume 
customers will usually create their own proprietary solutions where they 
can benefit from economies of scale.

We are not at a disadvantage however when it comes to evaluation boards. 
Recently, we received a license to incorporate the Analog Devices EZ-Kit 
Debugger on our SHARC based dspstak boards. You can use a full featured 
Visual DSP license or you can use an EZ-Kit (free) license. From Visual 
DSP's point of view, these boards look like an EZ-Kit. 

This means that you can develop your application on a dspstak board and 
then integrate it directly into production. We also separate I/O from the 
DSP (two boards) since as everyone has pointed out, the I/O tends be 
different from application to application. It is also a lot easier to 
create a special I/O module than create a DSP board (with or without I/O).

I certainly agree with Tim Wescott that it starts with the requirements of 
the application. We can help with this part of the process, we also provide 
complete turnkey solutions or refer people to skilled consultants like Tim 
and others who participate in this forum.

Bhooshan is a hopeless TI partisan, OTOH, I am a long time ADI JEDI. For 
all you young Skywalkers out there, resist the dark side.



-- 
Al Clark
Danville Signal Processing, Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Purveyors of Fine DSP Hardware and other Cool Stuff
Available at http://www.danvillesignal.com

bhooshaniyer wrote:

   ...

> AFAIK, the TMS320C6713 DSK(DSP Starter Kit) boards would be a good choice
> for evaluating one's solution.Am not sure if you need to break your head
> with third party(hence more specialized and verticalized) solution at
> all!

   ...

It's has been my experience that the right third-party board for any 
class of processor is usually easier to use. Chip makers design their 
boards to fit into as wide a range of applications as they can. 
Third-party suppliers usually select likely niches and design boards 
specialized for them. The problem with third-party boards is knowing 
enough about the application to choose the right one.

Specialization carries extra costs. The chip maker gets his chips at 
cost, whatever the internal accounting may be. Although his development 
board probably doesn't sell as widely as the third-party boards do in 
the aggregate, it usually has a much higher volume than any one of them.

With the right third-party board, the cost is usually more than repaid 
with time saved and the hand-holding that most third-party vendors are 
willing to provide. Chip maker's boards are like undifferentiated stem 
cells: they can become anything. You can usually find a third-party 
board that, while not completely specialized for your application, is a 
much better fit to it.

Jerry
-- 
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
�����������������������������������������������������������������������

>
>TI certainly has a significant portion of the DSP market. I think there
is 
>a tendency to consider that they are the only game in town since their
cell 
>phone chip sales are so large.

I again reiterate that the C6000 devices have NOTHING to do with the cell
phone market but it IS the dominant processor is the digital media,high
speed switching, multi-channel devices,ADSl's,pooled modems etc. 

I have great fascination and admiration for the C6000 architectire, it is
so elegant,simple and powerful. 

Joseph fisher-- the father of VLIW philosophy -- would approve of the
C6000 architecture and he does in his new book "Embedded Computing-A VLIW
Approach.

Fisher has been a long time advocate of engineering the compiler and the
chip together, right from the start of the chip design. The idea is that
the compiler should dictate some of the architectural features for its own
convenience and the result would be a powerful compiler. This, as opposed
to treating compiler as a piece of **** in the DSP market which is the
norm (even today) among many other vendors makes me a c6000 die hard. 

Ray Simar and Nat Seshan had the vision to investigate such a radical
approact to the ISA design as envisioned by Fisher,as far back as 1992.
The chip was sampled in the fall of 1996 (I started programming them in
1998) and the rest is history. (I have heard of a story where the
motorolla and AD guys being caught totally unawares, when TI released a
press note in early 1996,suggesting that their new DSP's would run at 1200
MIPS in the days when 200 MIPS was considered SUPER!)

Till today the C6000 architecture, if not the only one, the MOST
successful VLIW architecture, barring none(trimedia,StarCore,SHARC). I
hear that future ARM processors are going to follow this VLIW, deep
pipeline route as well, ofcourse the key to success depends on the answer
to the question "How powerful would their compilers be?" 

As long as companies keep *fixing* their compilers rather than engineer
them ground up, the answer woould be "Not Very!".


>If you subtract the large vertical markets (cell phones, hard drives,
etc) 
>and look just at the general purpose market, TI has about a 30% share. 
>Analog Devices also has a 30% share with the remaining 40% going to a
very 
>fragmented remainder. 

I dont know about the figures, because am not a marketing guy! I can look
it up at forward concepts, but am too lazy to do that,so I will take your
word for it! But as I mentioned, C6000 is dominating player in the high
end multi-channel, digital media space, without a doubt.

>With the exception of Randy Yates, I don't know any 
>of us who work outside of the general purpose market.

:-) Time to make few friends, AL?


>The third generation SHARC (ADSP-2126x & ADSP-2136x) compare very
favorably 
>with the C67xx. 

Mmmm...am not sure, but I have not studied them carefully either! Of the
hand though my understanding is that the compiler is not powerful enough
for it to be a force.

In the academia, again for various reasons, C6000 is the most popular
architecture for running Real Time DSP Courses. (Rice,Texas
A&M,Utexas,IITD,IITB, Rose-Hulman, George Washington,Stanford...)

Notwithstanding the TI marketing machine, there must be a good reason for
this predisposition(ease of use, elegance, powerful compiler, IDE, royalty
free RTOS...)

I know of only popular course using Analog Devices DSP, which is run by
Dr.Smith at the University of Calgary in
canada-(http://www.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/Smith/2004webs/encm515_04/)

>The SHARC is a 32/40 bit floating point and fixed point DSP 
>that in my view is much easier to program than any TI DSP.

Oh, thats just a matter of which one you start first I suppose! I have
tried my hand at different processors after gaining my initial
understanding and expertise in TI DSP's and I have found the rest of them
lot less intuitive to use and am sure thats just a feeling, thats all!
Thats is as far as the IDE and the tools are concerned, but were you
refering to the difficulty involved in hand-coding scheduled assembly to
the deeply pipelined C6000 architecture? 

>Evaluation boards like the TI DSK and Analog Devices EZ-Kits are great
ways 
>of learning about a specific DSP processor. The catch is that when you
are 
>done with the eval board, you still have just an eval board.

I have seen few customers develop audio solutions, right upto production
using the C6711 DSK.Yes, it is not the norm but can be done.

>Danville dspstak boards are designed for small and medium sized
production 
>runs. Our customers might use 10 - 500 systems a year. The high volume 
>customers will usually create their own proprietary solutions where they

>can benefit from economies of scale.

I think it is a wonderful product from what I hear.I personally cannot
wait to get my hands on it. It will be a chance also for me to evaluate a
non-TI DSP solution, seriously. 

>We are not at a disadvantage however when it comes to evaluation boards.

>Recently, we received a license to incorporate the Analog Devices EZ-Kit

>Debugger on our SHARC based dspstak boards. You can use a full featured 
>Visual DSP license or you can use an EZ-Kit (free) license. From Visual 
>DSP's point of view, these boards look like an EZ-Kit. 

Well, you see, with TI based boards, this is an absolute given-that the
boards will have to have the Code Composer Studio IDE hook! There is not
much else to it, any third party board will support CCS and all TI
evaluation kits, development kits come with CCS. Period.

>This means that you can develop your application on a dspstak board and 
>then integrate it directly into production. 

This is what I alluded to earlier, most of indulge in such methods in TI
solutions.

>We also separate I/O from the 
>DSP (two boards) since as everyone has pointed out, the I/O tends be 
>different from application to application. It is also a lot easier to 
>create a special I/O module than create a DSP board (with or without
I/O).

I have no expertise to comment on this, so am assuming you are right!

>Bhooshan is a hopeless TI partisan,

May be am, may be not.I just LOVE the TI DSP architecture more than I like
TI, in itself but yes TI is much better at enabling channel partners like
us.

>OTOH, I am a long time ADI JEDI. For 
>all you young Skywalkers out there, resist the dark side.

Black is beautiful.


--Bhooshan
		
This message was sent using the Comp.DSP web interface on
www.DSPRelated.com

Al--

>Bhooshan is a hopeless TI partisan, OTOH, I am a long time ADI JEDI. For

>all you young Skywalkers out there, resist the dark side.

May be if you keep sending me those 10$ every week for my pizza, I will
stop being a TI partisan, what say? :-)

--Bhooshan
		
This message was sent using the Comp.DSP web interface on
www.DSPRelated.com