Re: LTspice

From: Jim Thompson (thegreatone_at_example.com)
Date: 03/21/05 

Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:08:39 -0700

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:39:28 -0800, ldg <asfd@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:12:03 -0700, Jim Thompson
><thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
>
>>>On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:35:33 -0700, Jim Thompson
>>><thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I'd just place the number after the ModelName per the standard. No M=
>>>>called for.
>>>
>>>So you have different models for different sized devices?
>>
>>What part of "place the NUMBER after the ModelName per the standard"
>>do you have a problem with?
>>
>>Q1 C B E [SUB} ModelName 5 <<<<----
>>
>>Do you get it yet ?:-)
>>
>>
>
>I misread your post. Sorry. I see that you're using <area> as a
>multiplier.

That is the Spice "Standard"
  
>
>This spice "lexicon" really isn't such a good standard, is it? To me
>it would be better to have one syntax for a multiplier that can be
>used across the devices. Hspice and smartspice seem to have settled
>on m= for this. In fact, multiples are calculated by multiplying
>area*m with 1 being the default for both.

To those of us who stopped netlisting by-hand maybe 20 years ago, this
is no longer an issue... the symbol TEMPLATE does all the work.
  
>
>If I could summarize, so far your professional approach seems to be
>using subcircuits to get around Pspice simulator issues which you
>justify the need for by pointing out that the original spice didn't
>have more functionality anyway? Or did I miss something?

You've missed a lot. There are a limited number of NATIVE DEVICES is
Spice, all else are subcircuits.

>
>Many (maybe all?) of these work-arounds simply aren't needed anymore
>and are things I used for years, then rejected when a simpler approach
>became available. Some call this progress. Others call it an
>improper spice lexicon or some such thing.

I call it "head-up-the ass syndrome". You are really so clueless I
might suppose your father is Fred Bloggs ;-)

>
>You also seem to take great pride in creating all of these pspice
>compatible model files from the original foundry files. I prefer not
>to edit the foundry given model files at all and treat these files as
>"gold". It also makes it much simpler to incorporate updates.

Excuse me? What makes you think I edit the original foundry files?
 
>
>LTspice parses the foundry models files without all the modifications,
>so it would be preferable to your approach I'd think.
>
>Regards,
>Larry

I really am tiring of trying to help what appears to be a student,
only to have them turn on me, implying I know nothing.

If you're on this side of the pond you are so ignorant you must be a
Democrat.

Other side of pond, you must be a relative of Bemelman.

You're definitely a fookin' amateur ;-)

                                        ...Jim Thompson 

-- 
|  James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
|  Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
|  Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
|  Phoenix, Arizona            Voice:(480)460-2350  |             |
|  E-mail Address at Website     Fax:(480)460-2142  |  Brass Rat  |
|       http://www.analog-innovations.com           |    1962     |
             
I love to cook with wine.      Sometimes I even put it in the food.
Quantcast