OPEN SOURCE HARDWARE

Introduction:

Open-source refers to a specific set of freedoms applying to a product, but also generally presupposes that the product is the object or the result of a process that relies on the contributions of geographically dispersed developers via the Internet. An open-source phenomenon has several properties that make it interesting for study, and relevant for the discipline of engineering design. Open source eschews traditional engineering concepts such as planning and prototyping in favor of a more organic approach. For instance, the open-source Linux kernel is one engineering feat that reaches high quality. 

Simply put, open-source hardware is a term that refers to any type of device whose hardware specifications are fully documented or otherwise available. Both free and open-source software (FOSS) and open-source hardware are created by this open-source culture movement and applying a concept to a variety of components. The design specification, HDL files, simulation test benches, synthesis results, utilization instructions, and interfaces to other systems should be documented. The openness of necessary design documentation and its disclosure to the public should be governed by the terms of GPL like licenses. All information is disclosed for free, according to the terms of GPL-like licenses. The EDA tools used to develop open hardware should also be open. The openness of resources is a must to allow the community to reuse, develop, and improve open designs.

Open Source Hardware Origins:

Open hardware dates to the late 1990s, when Bruce Perens announced an open hardware certification program. Yet in practice, open hardware goes back much further. As open-source code, open hardware specifications were the default during the first decades of computing. At that time, when many programs were written in assembly code and software was much less portable than it is today, intricate knowledge of hardware was essential for writing software. That meant that companies that manufactured hardware were much more forthcoming than they generally are today with hardware documentation.

The shift toward closed-source software starting in the early 1980s, combined with the standardization of basic hardware platforms like the IBM PC and the adoption of cross-platform programming languages such as C, made hardware specifications less important. For the most part, programmers no longer needed to know lots of details about hardware specifications to write code for a particular platform. As long as you wrote for the PC, your code would run on most computers. And when hardware-specific software was required, companies could release it in closed-source form, which did not require them to give away details about the hardware.

Open-source hardware implementation analogy:

Conventional hardware implementation platforms have various choices. Designs can fit in ASICs, custom silicon, FPGAs, and CPLDs. The question is, what suits open-source hardware design?

The hardware-software analogy points to programmable implementation platforms; hence the answer is programmable logic devices such as PLDs, FPGAs, CPLDs, and FPAAs. The analogy between software and hardware implementations applies to different aspects of the development process. Software programs run on general-purpose processors, but open hardware designs fit on programmable logic devices.

Software assemblers generate assembly code based on a processor's instruction set. Hardware synthesis tools generate a netlist of a particular device, using a digital or analog library. Software compilers generate binary code format from an assembly of a set of processor's instruction set. The programming elements of an FPGA generate a bit-stream format from a netlist of a device's component library.

The dynamic reconfigurability of FPGAs optimizes the performance of hardware designs using real-time dynamic loading and unloading of hardware components on the programmable logic array. This analogy between software and hardware execution and implementation phases helps prove the feasibility of adopting an open-source hardware strategy.

Examples of OSHW projects: 

Well-known examples that use CC BY-SA include Arduino, mBed HDK, BeagleBoard, Particule (formerly Spark), and Tessel. mangOH is an example that uses the Creative Commons Attribution license.

Back in 2013, some successful OSHW projects included Arduino, Raspberry Pi, OpenROV (remote-operated underwater robot), DIY Drones, LittleBits, and Makerbot Replicator 2, Lasersaur, Robo3D, and Console II.

Noteworthy projects of 2016 included the Global Village Construction Set (fabricate industrial machines), Open Source Beehives (bee home and sensor kits for tracking), AKER garden kits, WikiHouse (building system), FarmBot (CNC farming machine), OpenDesk (make furniture), OSVehicle, RepRap (3D printer), OpenKnit (digital knitting), Defense Distributed (3D firearms), APM: Copter, and Open Hand Project (robotic prosthetic hands).

Some OSHW boards include Arduino Due, Freescale Freedom, Microchip ChipKIT Uno32, and Beaglebone Black. Mouser's website also lists dozens of other boards. Olimex offers OSHW boards including Linux-based OLinuXino boards.

At the chip level, RISC-V offers an open architecture from which customized SoCs can be designed. Other include lm32, mor1kx, and blocks from the OpenCores project. There's talk of even building an open-source supercomputer.

Challenges and suggested solutions:

The following are some problems designers face that prevent them from developing open-source hardware.

1)Cost of EDA tools

Designers can't afford the cost of EDA tools. The suggested solution is to pursue the development of open-source EDA tools and improve them with feedback from the design community. Alliance and gEDA are good models for open EDA tools.

2)Manufacturing cost

Hardware manufacturing is relatively expensive. The suggested solution is implementation on FPGA-based prototyping boards or simulation of designs using formal verification techniques.

3)Design protection
The suggested solution is the protection of the open designs using GPL-like licenses that reserve rights for original designers, according to particular terms and rules.

4)Market

Market competition is mainly based on patents and intellectual property that maintain all rights for the originator firm. Companies may oppose aspects of open source that generate alternatives for commercially protected products.

The suggested solution is that companies might take advantage of open source as a way of bridging the gap for time and cost absorbed in R&D. The researchers might find they don't have to reinvent already existing wheels. Companies may find the adoption of an open-source design with a large base of customers as a win-win deal. Companies can refine the open-source design with affordable prices and make use of bug fixing provided by the community. The result is cutting-edge reliable products with affordable prices.

5)Credibility

Open source has to build confidence. The suggested solution is that designers produce high quality and completely documented designs. It will be only a matter of time to convince the user community of the credibility of open designs. For instance, the Linux operating system has become reliable and competitive due to efforts exerted to enhance quality and performance from the developing community.

-Authored by Esha Shivdas

References:

1)Gupta, Gagan & Nowatzki, Tony & Gangadhar, Vinay & Sankaralingam, Karthikeyan. (2016). Open-source Hardware: Opportunities and Challenges. 

2) Gregor J. Rothfuss; “A Framework for Open Source Projects.” Master's Thesis in computer science, Department of Information technology, University of Zurich. November 12, 2002, Supervisor, Prof. K. Bauknecht.

3)Challenges and Opportunities of Open Source Licensed Hardware based on our experiences from the PULP project by Frank K. Gürkaynak

4) OSHWA. 2013. "Brief History of Open Source Hardware Organizations and Definitions." July 10.

5) Bonvoisin, Jérémy, Robert Mies, Jean-François Boujut, and Rainer Stark. 2017. "What is the “Source” of Open Source Hardware?" Journal of Open Hardware, September 05. Accessed 2019-05-31.