--- Quote Start ---
If you described the problem rather than repeat this stuff about the NoC, then maybe we could help you design an appropriate system.
--- Quote End ---
You also need to decide what you mean by a NoC. Newer FPGAs provide a fabric that is physically designed for such architectures with higher-level pathways available to a larger degree. Implementing a NoC in a raw FPGA could really strain your timing resources depending on architecture, as you are overlaying a significant number of communication lines on top of the core fabric. Qsys generates a perfectly acceptable routing network, otherwise you can license IP for something like the Arteris NoC used in the Arria 10, or you can even license the ARM AMBA interconnect components.
But a NoC is just a communications interconnect-- I'm in agreement. Figure out exactly what you need or are trying to do. Remember that an FPGA is hardware/firmware, NOT software, so imagine how such a system would be implemented in hardware before anything else.
--- Quote Start ---
Going back to the NoC topic, is there any chance to make utilization of this NoC in the FPGA? I mean, the basic idea of NoC, has a number of cores (20 - 100) communicated with a network subsystem of routers, this bring you the posibility of choose a topology among the cores, or if one of the cores fail, routers routes data trough other paths (it's fault tolerant). I expected to find something like this in the so-called NoC of Qsys, but it seems it's something totally different.
--- Quote End ---
Also, this is asking a huge amount of a designed architecture. Adding fault-tolerance is not the purpose of a communications architecture; that would require some sort of supervisory layer on top of the architecture. You'd also need to design a specialized interconnect that could bypass a node based on certain conditions. It really all comes sown to needs! Even AXI breaks down pretty spectacularly if you don't use a timeout block.