Re: Warning: Multiple definitions of model ...
You have to think about it the other way around.? One doesn't open the box and observe the cat.? The only way to observe the cat is to place the observer in the box and then the state of the system (its reality) is completely different because it is a different reality.? The observers quantum state is coupled with the cat in QFT.
|
Re: Warning: Multiple definitions of model ...
Well, that is a sort of
opposite to the cat. It's real, but so far inexplicable.
======================================================================================
Best wishes
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
Rayleigh, Essex UK
I hear, and I forget.
I see, and I remember.
I do, and I understand.
Xunzi (340 - 245 BC)
On 2023-07-12 12:06, mhx@... wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 07:43 PM, eewiz wrote:
And there lies "the (philosophical) flaw."
Nothing in this universe is instantaneous.
Analyses that assume any sort of instantaneousness are simply flawed to start with.
[..]
Like quantum entanglement?
-marcel
|
Re: Warning: Multiple definitions of model ...
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 07:43 PM, eewiz wrote: And there lies "the (philosophical) flaw."
Nothing in this universe is instantaneous.
Analyses that assume any sort of instantaneousness are simply flawed to start with. [..] Like quantum entanglement? -marcel
|
Re: Loss simulation problem
You are right. I apologize, I am writing from Hungary. My English is, um... But you get the point (: Even if I put the cursor on the semiconductor, it doesn't turn into a thermometer. I checked the setting, and it's okay. The example file you can find here: /g/LTspice/files/Temp/3878_temp_test.rar
|
Re: Warning: Multiple definitions of model ...
Tony, I'm with you almost 100%! The only questionable point may be QSPICE. I'm often conflicted between keeping LTspice as the only one, and invest time only there, or trying to spend some effort in checking QSPICE. I think it has some strength against LTspice, but honestly, do we really need it? I think someone like you should take part in the evaluation of this new tool, in case even to decide it does not make sense to shift on it. But I agree, if you feel good with LTspice (as I do), why should you move from it? Nevertheless, the higher speed and some other features of QSPICE are attracting. I think it is still in a preliminary phase, probably too early for one like you to invest time in it. Just thoughts.
My compliments for your wonderful English! I like reading your posts even for learning some language usage! Thanks for teaching.
Regards
Francesco
|
Re: Loss simulation problem
I'm always losing transistors, too. I have no idea why - maybe I'm
just forgetful. ?
I think you probably mean power dissipation.
If the thermometer doesn't appear, can you still plot currents of
the transistor? If you can't plot currents either, check that:
Control Panel > Save Defaults > Save
Device Currents
.. is checked.
If it is, perhaps you can upload a troublesome schematic where you
can't plot dissipation?
--
Regards,
Tony
On 12/07/2023 11:33, Csizmadia Mikl?s
wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
is it only me
who finds it strange (or does it not work )that the loss of
transistors cannot be simulated? I can't see the little
thermometer. Does this function not work for you either?
|
Dear all,
?
is it only me who finds it strange (or does it not work )that the loss of transistors cannot be simulated? I can't see the little thermometer. Does this function not work for you either?
|
Re: Filters (Butterworth, Chebychev etc.)
Thanks for uploading the file. As said, I got it meanwhile. And thanks for pointing out LTSPIC’s builtin filter functions.
— Christoph
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Am 12.07.2023 um 10:36 schrieb Tony Casey < tony@...>:
I didn't have any trouble downloading Filt.zip - must be something
in your Firefox setup. Perhaps you are using the HTTPS Everywhere
add-in? You can disable the "https only" option, or temporarily
disable the add-in.
If you still can't download it, I have placed it in Files > Temp,
Filt.zip.
Don't forget, there are also 2nd order filter functions in the
LTspice pre-installed libraries:
Place Component (F2) > SpecialFunctions
--
Regards,
Tony
On 12/07/2023 09:08, Christoph wrote:
I
would like to apply filters to a signal of discrete sample points
and watch the effect of order, gain and other characteristics.
Found this page:
Firefox refuses to download the files (e.g. Filt.zip
at the bottom of the page) since the links aren’t secured. Any
alternatives?
|
Re: Filters (Butterworth, Chebychev etc.)
I didn't have any trouble downloading Filt.zip - must be something
in your Firefox setup. Perhaps you are using the HTTPS Everywhere
add-in? You can disable the "https only" option, or temporarily
disable the add-in.
If you still can't download it, I have placed it in Files > Temp,
Filt.zip.
Don't forget, there are also 2nd order filter functions in the
LTspice pre-installed libraries:
Place Component (F2) > SpecialFunctions
--
Regards,
Tony
On 12/07/2023 09:08, Christoph wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I
would like to apply filters to a signal of discrete sample points
and watch the effect of order, gain and other characteristics.
Found this page:
Firefox refuses to download the files (e.g. Filt.zip
at the bottom of the page) since the links aren’t secured. Any
alternatives?
|
Re: Filters (Butterworth, Chebychev etc.)
Now got one of these filters into my circuit. Anyone familiar with these models?? How do I have to set the parameters for a low pass filter, of, say, corner freq. = 100Hz?
|
|---|
| 窜颈苍=&濒迟;-1,0,0+..∞&驳迟; |
Ω |
Input impedance. There are three possible settings:
- Zin=-1 ? zero-impedance input (voltage source)
- Zin=0 ? high-impedance input (current source)
- Zin>0 ? 调窜颈苍皑Ω
|
| 窜辞耻迟=&濒迟;0,0+..∞&驳迟; |
Ω |
Output impedance. There are two possible settings:
- Zout=0 ? high-impedance output (floating)
- Zout>0 ? 调窜辞耻迟皑Ω output
|
| Only one of the impedances can be zero at a time! |
| fp1, fs1, fp2, fs2 |
Hz |
Corner frequencies for the passband and stopband, defaults <500,400,2k,2.5k> |
| BWp, BWs, fc |
Hz |
Alternate frequency settings: passband bandwidth,
stopband bandwidth, and center frequency, defaults are calculated based
on the corner frequencies and, based on those, <1.5k,2.1k,1k> |
| As |
dB |
Stopband attenuation, default 40 |
| Asc |
dB |
Frequency-scaling attenuation. If Asc=0, N>0 the passband is optimized. Default 3.0103 |
N=<0:1:32>
N=<0:2:64> |
- |
Order of the filter, its value represents the order
after the frequency transformations. For lowpass and highpass the
maximum order is 32 and can take odd and even values. For bandpass and bandstop it's 64, but only even values are valid. If N=0 and Asc>0, the minimum order is determined based on the values of the frequencies and attenuations. Default 13 |
| sim |
s |
Total .TRAN simulation time, default 1 |
|
| Rpar, Rser |
Ω |
LTspice's specific for inductors and capacitors, common for both (i.e. setting Rser means inductors and capacitors, together, will have it set, same for Rpar), defaults <1g,0> |
—
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Am 12.07.2023 um 09:39 schrieb Christoph < kuku@...>:
Am 12.07.2023 um 09:08 schrieb Christoph < kuku@...>:
I would like to apply filters to a signal of discrete sample points and watch the effect of order, gain and other characteristics. Found this page:
Firefox refuses to download the files (e.g. Filt.zip at the bottom of the page) since the links aren’t secured. Any alternatives?
OK, I managed to download the Filt.zip file using?
$?wget
|
Re: Filters (Butterworth, Chebychev etc.)
Am 12.07.2023 um 09:08 schrieb Christoph < kuku@...>:
I would like to apply filters to a signal of discrete sample points and watch the effect of order, gain and other characteristics. Found this page:
Firefox refuses to download the files (e.g. Filt.zip at the bottom of the page) since the links aren’t secured. Any alternatives?
OK, I managed to download the Filt.zip file using?
$?wget
|
Re: Warning: Multiple definitions of model ...
Of course I agree: it's the
mathematics that accepts instantaneous change, leading to a
paradoxical result. Just like the mathematics accepts the
paradoxical result? 'simultaneously alive and dead', but the
real world doesn't.
======================================================================================
Best wishes
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
Rayleigh, Essex UK
I hear, and I forget.
I see, and I remember.
I do, and I understand.
Xunzi (340 - 245 BC)
On 2023-07-12 07:43, eewiz wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Hello All
John Woodgate wrote:
Consider a theoretical
square wave, varying between -1 and 1 with instantaneous
transitions.
And there lies "the
(philosophical) flaw."
Nothing in this universe is
instantaneous.
Analyses that assume any
sort of instantaneousness are simply flawed to start with.
If you disagree, perhaps I
could sell you an instantaneous perpetual motion machine.
All for now
|
Filters (Butterworth, Chebychev etc.)
I would like to apply filters to a signal of discrete sample points and watch the effect of order, gain and other characteristics. Found this page:
Firefox refuses to download the files (e.g. Filt.zip at the bottom of the page) since the links aren’t secured. Any alternatives?
— Christoph
|
Re: Warning: Multiple definitions of model ...
Hello All
John Woodgate wrote:
Consider a theoretical square wave, varying between -1
and 1 with instantaneous transitions.
And there lies "the (philosophical) flaw."
Nothing in this universe is instantaneous. Analyses that assume any sort of instantaneousness are simply flawed to start with. If you disagree, perhaps I could sell you an instantaneous perpetual motion machine.
All for now
|
POSH (Powershell) tool to manage "user approved" LTspice cmp files
Hello All
eetech00 wrote: I am looking for someone to help test. Anyone interested?
I volunteer.
Proverbially, I find myself standing on the field after the rest of troop took two steps back.
But that's alright, I'll enjoy the opportunity to delve into a working powershell script.
Thank you for all of your programming and modeling efforts.
Contact eewiz@... if you feel the need to communicate directly.
All for now
|
You might have added the 1N3890 model to your "standard.dio" file that's in LTspiceXVII\lib\cmp.
That is often what gets LTspice users into "trouble", where they have a model and can't figure out where they got it, and they assume that everyone else must have that model too.
If you Generate the Expanded Netlist, you should be able to find every component model definition, without having to find where it was.? It would probably be located near the bottom of that listing.
Andy
|
Didn't find 1N3890 in Sborka.lib, so i deleted test1.asc
|
Hi Andy
Thank you for your remarks. I forgot how i got the diode and the TIP 127.
I didn't be able to got switreg.lib to work. So i tried to make my model, which seems functionnal.
Uploaded it for who wants.
|
Re: ISL70444SEH declaration issue?
mliddione89 wrote, " I see that you changed the .MODEL statements for "DESD" and "DN1". Would you mind explaining what those are, and why you changed the statements?" Yes.? In an earlier reply ( #147193), I wrote that there were two lines containing "LEVEL=2" that were causing LTspice errors. When used as a .MODEL parameter, the LEVEL parameter can be used in SOME device models in SPICE, mostly with MOSFETs, and (rarely?) might be used with BJTs, and the LTspice-specific voltage-controlled switch models.? It's a way of having fundamentally different models (different component equations) inside SPICE, without using a new first letter for the component's name. The lines that had LEVEL were these two diode model definitions:
? ? .MODEL DESD? D Level=2? ? N=1 IS=1.00E-15
? ? .MODEL DN1 D Level=2? ? IS=1P KF=1.4N AF=1
?
I don't think I saw LEVEL with diode models before.? LTspice apparently doesn't like it either; but I guess there is a SPICE program somewhere out there that can use LEVEL with diodes, and your ISL70444SEH model may have been written with that SPICE program in mind.? The model says it is for PSpice but I don't believe PSpice uses diode model LEVELs so maybe it's from somewhere else.? I think HSPICE has diode LEVELs but it's been years since I used it.? When LTspice sees them, it gives us these errors:
? ? Error on line 217 : .model desd d level=2 n=1 is=1.00e-15
? ?? * Unrecognized parameter "n" -- ignored
? ?? * Unrecognized parameter "is" -- ignored
? ? Error on line 218 : .model dn1 d level=2 is=1p kf=1.4n af=1
? ?? * Unrecognized parameter "is" -- ignored
?
Apparently LTspice gets unsynchronized while parsing the model and?seeing the "Level=2" parameter, and then it fails to recognize the remaining parameters on the line as part of the same .MODEL statement.? (That's my guess.)? Those two parameters (N and IS) are so fundamental to SPICE diodes, that I can't imagine them not being used,?unless LTspice thought it was not a diode model anymore -- or something else so unusual that it doesn't use those two basic parameters.
So I deleted the "Level=2" parameter to see what would happen.? That makes the two diode types into regular SPICE diode models like you see everywhere else.? It does mean that whatever the "Level=2" was supposed to convey, is probably lost.? But I don't know what that would have been.? I thought it was better to make the model usable, than to junk it and tell you "you're out of luck."? Admittedly there is some risk, but I believe that risk is minimal. Regards, Andy
|
Re: Warning: Multiple definitions of model ...
Hi Tony, ? ??????????????? Thanks much for your detailed reply. (I don’t have an FB account either.) ? ??????????????? I’ll drop the matter unless someone else replies positively. ? Regards, ? Chris ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] < [email protected]> On Behalf Of Tony Casey Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2023 1:48 PM To: [email protected]Subject: Re: [LTspice] Warning: Multiple definitions of model ... ? I think a social media campaign would achieve little, except maybe get you elevated to ignore status. A lot of engineers don't even have a FB account. I don't. I neither have the time nor the inclination.
The current LTspice dev' team established communication channels with this group some while ago. This user group is almost certainly the largest LTspice interest (lobby) group on the planet - about 70,000 (all time) members at last count, although only minority are currently active. No other SPICE interest group is within a magnitude of that, and is never likely to be. In fact, LTspice ranks 2nd in all of the publicly listed groups on groups.io, behind groups.io/updates in term of popularity.
Beyond mild curiosity, I have no desire or intention to use any other SPICE tool than LTspice. I have invested way too much time and effort into it. At the moment, it beats the crap out of any other similar tool (IMHO). My desire is that it retains that position. LTspice is great tool. Could it be better? Of course. When operational program bugs get reported, they usually get fixed - quickly, if serious. Even when Mike was in sole charge, some reports were acted upon almost by return of email. Others plunged into a black void.
I realise that the standard libraries situation irritates some people more than others. As far as ADI are concerned, repairs are likely to be prioritised according to the impact on sales. Library goof-ups have caused a number of their /examples/Applications schematics (the ones featuring their own premium parts) to fail, as models have been pulled without updating the schematics that call them. Once realised, that must have caused some consternation, and they have been focussed on fixing those schematics.
I whinge about the standard libraries because I feel like I should. Does it irritate me that they are a mess? Yes. Do I lose sleepover it? No. If you want to use a particular device in an important project, you can keep a verified model in your project folder and make sure it's the one that gets used. Am I bothered whether the BC847B from the standard library is from NXP or Rohm? No. Most likely, it doesn't matter for 95% of circuits. If it did, I would make sure I set set aside the one I wanted, making sure it fulfilled my needs, then any future changes in standard.bjt would not affect my important projects. ? On 11/07/2023 18:17, Christopher Paul wrote: Hi Tony, ? ??????????????? Thanks for your reply. ? ??????????????? An email from a disgruntled individual doesn’t always elicit the desired response, as you’ve found. ? ??????????????? I’m talking about possible efforts from a number of individuals in this group to complain publicly: Twitter, Facebook, comments on an EDN Design idea, things such as that. Proposals for using non-ADI tools for analysis would be included. ? Regards, ? Chris
?
|
Tim Hutcheson
John Woodgate
Tony Casey
Christoph
eewiz