A growing body of pilot project evidence shows that MicroTCA-based embedded platforms are meeting both technical and commercial requirements of equipment OEMs and their customers.

 The value propositions of MicroTCA – a compact form factor, hot swap capability, NEBS compliance, cost efficiency, scalability, time to market savings, and open standard architecture – were initially developed to satisfy a host of requirements in the telecommunications market. Today, however, MicroTCA looks increasingly attractive to a host of vertical markets that utilize embedded communications computing systems such as medical, industrial, military/aerospace/homeland security, transportation, and instrumentation.

To be clear, MicroTCA is not “making” these markets – at least not on its own. A number of trends in these markets –standards, processing capacity, connectivity, and others – are combining to bring requirements into a closer fit with MicroTCA capabilities.

Venture Development Corporation (VDC) used data it collected from between 20 and 30 OEMs from each of four key vertical markets about the importance of each MicroTCA value proposition to create a value proposition analysis framework that can be used to segment the market and each vertical market by most important value propositions. The OEMs interviewed ranked the importance of each value proposition on a scale of 1 to 5. The framework is presented in Table 1.

 

Table 1

From the rankings it is evident that telecommunications and then military/aerospace close behind have the greatest perceived demand for the advantages/value propositions offered by MicroTCA. These two vertical markets have been identified by VDC as those with the greatest potential for MicroTCA time and again in VDC’s MicroTCA research efforts.

However, an interesting point is that telecommunications and mil/aero do not have a much greater number of highly rated MicroTCA value propositions than industrial and medical, but the former two markets consistently rated all of the value propositions with comparatively high scores. Medical, for instance, had the greatest number of value propositions rated over a 4.5, but scored the lowest overall for MicroTCA because this vertical rated some of the value propositions extremely low. This shows that MicroTCA should be successful in telecommunications and mil/aero because it provides a value proposition and feature set that is thoroughly and consistently in line with the needs of those markets. While in the medical market MicroTCA satisfies some of the important needs, it also provides extra features (such as hot swap and carrier-grade capability) that medical customers do not need, care about, or want to pay for.

The rankings also show that the total score across the four verticals for six of the value propositions were above the average total score. These six value propositions represent the most valuable selling points for MicroTCA and provide a way to forget about vertical markets and segment the market by value proposition. In other words, if suppliers take these six most important value propositions and structure their MicroTCA product portfolios, support, and demand generation (marketing) around them, it should help create demand for MicroTCA.

Planning your first MicroTCA product

Choosing AdvancedMC modules

There are numerous AdvancedMC modules from multiple vendors to choose from, and the standards group, PICMG, hosts routine Interoperability Workshops, where more than 19 companies participate, to ensure compatibility. What AdvancedMC boards exist that can be utilized in the platform? What boards need to be designed? To maximize innovation, yet minimize costs, it is important to choose the AdvancedMC modules carefully based on performance, where it is needed, or cost-optimized versions. There are several dependencies between AdvancedMC modules and the MicroTCA platform.

AdvancedMC form factors

One criterion to pay close attention to during the AdvancedMC module selection process is the form factor. The AdvancedMC specification allows for mid or full, and single or double. Make sure that the platform can accommodate the AdvancedMC modules properly, especially if they are different sizes.

Chassis

Chassis options range from the maximum of 12 slots down to 2 slots. To minimize costs, select a chassis that has the minimum number of slots your application requires, but consider leaving one or two slots available for expansion.

Buying one with too many slots is not only costly from the connectors, power supply, and sheet metal standpoint, but also from the MicroTCA Carrier Hub (MCH) that is supporting all the fabric and management functions to the empty slots. Also consider the deployment. NEBS-level requirements come into play for telecom, while military deployments could vary from telecom-level requirements to full ruggedization with extended temperature capability. Highly integrated chassis can help cut costs.

For example, the Performance Technologies IPnexus AMP5071 integrates the MCH functions into a motherboard and utilizes a very reliable high-volume/low cost enterprise class power supply. (See Figures 1 and 2).

Figure 1: Front  view of single rack space MicroTCA application-ready system that includes a preintegrated Linux OS and development environment. (Image courtesy of Performance Technologies.) (click graphic to zoom by 1.9x)

Figure 2: The built-in MCH and shelf management, and enterprise class, removable power supplies of the IPnexus AMP5071 greatly reduce costs. (Image courtesy of Performance Technologies.) (click graphic to zoom by 1.5x)

Processor and OS selection

A number of AdvancedMC module offerings support variations of capacity, size, performance, and processor type. This allows engineers to be more selective in designing their end product to match their preferences in processor technology, such as x86 or PowerPC. Another consideration is the pre-integration of the modules with a leading OS, such as Linux, to enable faster and tighter integration with your products.

Fabric interconnects

What fabric switching is needed between the AdvancedMC modules and do the AdvancedMC modules support those interconnects? How much bandwidth is needed for the fabric? What I/O is needed to the outside world from the AdvancedMC modules? And do the bandwidth requirements from the AdvancedMC modules match the platform’s bandwidth capabilities? Do the boards communicate appropriately to each other?

Power budget

 The AdvancedMC specification provides guidelines for maximum power consumption to each type of AdvancedMC form factor. For example, the mid-size single module is 40 W. Make sure that the platform can deliver adequate power to each board. Otherwise, the platform management controller may not allow an AdvancedMC module to boot up.

Cooling

Very closely tied to power are thermals. First consider the airflow path of the chassis. Many deployments require front to back airflow, such as telecom deployments in Central Offices (see Figure 3). If the platform is configured with numerous boards that require maximum power, consider the configuration of each AdvancedMC module and how to maximize cooling to each module. In a platform that supports multiple tiers, one AdvancedMC module receives ambient air, and the one(s) behind it will receive preheated air. Consider placing the AdvancedMC modules with the most power consumption in the back-end of this stack. Also look at the height of the components and determine if the thermal “shadow” of one module will restrict too much air to the subsequent AdvancedMC.

Figure 3: Front-to-back airflow illustration of a single rack space, MicroTCA application-ready system. (Image courtesy of Performance Technologies.)

System management

The Intelligent Platform Management Interface (IPMI) specification allows for a great deal of flexibility in the use of standards-based and IP-based monitoring software solutions to enable end users to save considerable time diagnosing and troubleshooting potential problems. Rather than having to dispatch field technicians to the far corners of the world to access components in hard to find equipment rooms, IP-enabled MicroTCA systems provide a far more efficient method for these service applications. There are many user-based interfaces (such as web-based GUIs and front panel I/O) and programmatic interfaces (for example, RMCP and SNMP) available for platform management. As a starting point, refer to the MicroTCA platform technical and the MCH technical manual. It will list the management commands it supports. In addition, there are numerous software interface options available. User-based interfaces include simple front panel LEDs, Command Line interfaces, and GUIs that can access platforms remotely. Programmatic interfaces include Remote Management Control Protocol (RMCP) which supports IPMI commands over IP, and Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP), which is a widely accepted industry standard. The IPMI specification, available at http://www.intel.com/design/servers/ipmi/spec.htm, provides complete detail, but in generic terms. To fully understand how IPMI is implemented in MicroTCA and AdvancedMC modules, go to the www.picmg.org and purchase the MicroTCA and AdvancedMC specifications.

Application-ready MicroTCA systems

One traditional method of building a new system is to obtain individual elements for the new system from two, three, or even more, vendors. So for example, a project may have several suppliers for specific hardware components, another vendor for development software, and perhaps, one final supplier who is a software specialist to integrate the OS with the combined hardware.

Performance Technologies is one company that has taken a proactive approach for these types of applications. The company’s Advanced Managed Platforms, called AMPs, provide a well-rounded lineup of CompactPCI and MicroTCA integrated hardware solutions. The company’s Carrier Grade Linux solution integrates the entire package into an application-ready system. Configuration of the platform can be done using the available payload slots using AdvancedMC modules.

While the traditional approach can be effective, there can also be considerable risk where these complex systems experience integration issues. These integration difficulties can potentially and dramatically slow down projected completion schedules, jeopardize release dates and sales forecasts, and ultimately, adversely impact the financial performance of an organization.

When one considers the potential lost revenues of a delayed project, related time and material expenses from multiple purchases, and associated engineering costs for resolving hardware-to-software integration challenges, a single source vendor approach emerges as an attractive alternative. If the hardware supplier happens to have a robust software solution that is preconfigured to work on all its hardware chassis, SBCs, modules, and Ethernet switches, and provides an integrated solution, this warrants more investigation as part of project planning.

As a preintegrated hardware and software platform, the application-ready approach virtually eliminates integration risk and can place your project into the application development phase more quickly.

Performance Technologies

www.pt.com