Logic Design for Unpredictable Behavior

In summary, the conversation discusses a design issue involving a CPLD controlling the activation of 8 MICs. The issue is that the PTT active signal and MIC supervision signal can create a race condition, preventing the MIC from activating if the PTT button is pressed slowly. The question at hand is how to program the CPLD to meet the design requirements, considering the unpredictable speed at which the MIC will be keyed.
  • #1
kal22
6
0
I have a design issue. I've programmed a CPLD so that it controls whether a MIC can activate or not. There are 8 MICs. A MIC is allowed to activate if there are no opens nor shorts on its lines. Each MIC has 4 wires (red, black, white, green). The red and black wires are for the "push-to-talk (PTT) active" signal. The white and green wires are for the MIC supervision signal. Here's the problem: When a MIC is keyed, the wires are shorted inside the MIC. There's a race between the PTT active signal going through (so that the MIC can activate) and the MIC supervision signal (which detects a short and doesn't allow the MIC to activate, even though it's not a real short on the line). The PTT active signal can go through depending on how fast the MIC is keyed. If the MIC is keyed fast enough, the PTT active signal goes through. If the MIC is keyed a bit slower (meaning the PTT button is pressed slowly), then the MIC short signal goes through and prevents activation when it shouldn't. So my question is... How can I program my CPLD to meet these design requirements, when the speed at which the MIC will be keyed is unpredictable?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
I don't understand the design requirement. Since the shorting of the PTT wires is normal operation, why would the CPLD be programmed to detect a short on these lines as a fault?
 
  • #3


One possible solution to this design issue could be to implement a delay circuit in the CPLD that allows for a certain amount of time to pass before the MIC supervision signal is activated. This delay would give the PTT active signal enough time to pass through before the MIC supervision signal is triggered. This way, even if the MIC is keyed at a slower rate, the delay will ensure that the PTT active signal is still able to pass through and allow for activation.

Another approach could be to use a flip-flop circuit to synchronize the PTT active and MIC supervision signals. This would ensure that both signals are in sync and prevent any race conditions. Additionally, it may also be helpful to implement some sort of debounce circuit to filter out any false signals that may occur due to the speed at which the MIC is keyed.

It may also be beneficial to incorporate some sort of feedback or error checking mechanism in the CPLD to detect and handle any unexpected behavior. This could include monitoring the signals and alerting the system if there are any discrepancies or errors in the activation process.

In summary, designing for unpredictable behavior can be challenging, but by incorporating delay circuits, synchronization mechanisms, and error checking, it is possible to create a robust and reliable logic design for this type of system.
 

FAQ: Logic Design for Unpredictable Behavior

What is "Logic Design for Unpredictable Behavior"?

"Logic Design for Unpredictable Behavior" is the process of designing logical systems or circuits that can handle and respond to unexpected or unpredictable inputs or scenarios.

Why is "Logic Design for Unpredictable Behavior" important?

As technology becomes more complex and interconnected, there is a higher likelihood of encountering unpredictable situations. "Logic Design for Unpredictable Behavior" ensures that systems can still function properly and avoid potential malfunctions or failures.

What are some common techniques used in "Logic Design for Unpredictable Behavior"?

Some common techniques include adding redundancy to circuits, implementing error correction codes, and using feedback loops to continuously monitor and adjust for unexpected inputs.

How does "Logic Design for Unpredictable Behavior" differ from traditional logic design?

Traditional logic design focuses on creating circuits that function as expected under specific inputs, while "Logic Design for Unpredictable Behavior" takes into account potential unpredictable inputs and designs systems to handle them appropriately.

What are the challenges in "Logic Design for Unpredictable Behavior"?

One of the main challenges is balancing the need for robustness and reliability with the cost and complexity of implementing these techniques. Additionally, accurately predicting and accounting for all possible unpredictable scenarios can be difficult.

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
22
Views
987
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
6K
Back
Top