开云体育

Don't even think abut trying to do that. It would make your version of LTspice unique, even if you could do it. Instead, make your own library files for such devices, i.e. My MOSFETS etc. -- This

Yes/Nope.... They are the LTSpice provided "Pick one of These".? I have not yet ventured into other models as provided by manufacturers. I'm not even sure I want to and if I did I would go mad and

That is not quite what I meant. When you open the model for each MOSFET, and look at its contents, does it look like this? Or does it look like this? If you are using only the MOSFETs that come with

Curly braces are needed here in order to avoid an ambiguity. Because you might also have .model MOS ...

Oh. The transistor models are just the normal 3 Pin nmos devices. MN M1 With Value set to {MOS} and using a name from the list you get when you "Pick New Mosfet" Overall the idea (need) is to reuse

Face Palm... Sorry. I finaly twigged it having found the help. Doh. For anyone else text is passed by enclosing in inverted thingies. In a subcircuit pop up on the .PARAMS box write something like

Per, what kind of transistor models are you using, and trying to pass into a subcircuit? Are they .MODEL models?? Or are they defined by a block of netlist lines surrounded by .SUBCKT ... .ENDS? Andy

OK I'm still flummoxed... "Not quite. LTspice also knows string parameters, which were introduced extactly for the purpose discussed here." Mathias. Can you give an example?

Hello Andy and Tony, What you have mentioned is correct. Accuracy and precision are needed. And I checked the derivative option too. Due to ringing during DCM the derivative makes the situation

Yes.? LTspice calculates the Average and RMS values over the displayed plot only.? Right-click on the X-axis and change the Left: value to something after the waveforms have stabilized.? Then use

Switching to the Alternate solver in LTspice 24.1.8 allows the simulation to run successfully without stalls. I also changed the simulation command to ".tran 0 5m 2m" eliminate the uic and skip past

No.? But I get hundreds of "Heightened Def Com" warnings, without the 1 ohm series resistor.? With it, those warnings disappear. Andy

Yes, my 8A/16A figures were what I saw without expanding the waveform. Using CTRL-left click, I see 5.9124 A, but that includes the inrush current at t=0+. Is there any way to change the 'Interval

I entirely agree. I may be doing something wrong, but I can't see what. Do you get a very long series of entries in the expanded netlist about relaxing tolerances to seek convergence?? That occurs

After adding Rser=1 ohm to V9: The average current from V9 is 5.858 Amps, compared to the 8 Amps you said yours had.? Our simulations should not have differed by more than 2 Amps!? Something is

That is true, IF Ankit wants to know only the long-term average of the voltage waveform.? But this is for a thesis project, so I assume it is somewhat research related, and he might want to know

I question whether taking the derivatives of the waveform is good or bad.? Since there is ringing, it might manifest itself as large spikes in the derivative, which could mess up those .MEAS

Wow!? Which schematic was that?? What makes our simulations so utterly different? I used dd.asc with UIC removed.? The input current from V9 is hardly sinusoidal.? If you had sinusoidal current,

Set Lp = 2,3mH Ls=5,1mH Llkg=76uH . Imagn=magnetizing current =8% of primary peak current, Llkg = 3% of Lp (values chosen for 30KHz). Imagn/Ipeak may be a little bit higher, i.e. 15% A small gap

Without UIC, it runs under version 24.1.8. The input voltage is 100 V, the input current is 8 A DC plus 8A peak roughly sinusoidal (so the current goes from 0 to 16 A). The output voltage is 132 V DC