¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Date

Re: Membership renewal problem ....

John Woodgate
 

In message <CALBs-TiyNyiDGCR5spojfv-1bnxAjbrU3Wv1CkREMu81ne9=HQ@...>, dated Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Andy <Andrew.Ingraham@...> writes:

I thought a Yahoo ID *was* a Yahoo account.
Not exactly. You get a Yahoo email address when you set up a Yahoo identity, and you can associate other email addresses with it. But Yahoo could cancel your Yahoo email address if you don't use it, without cancelling your Yahoo identity. Indeed, there seems to be no reason to cancel an identity if it's not used, because if it's not used, it's as if it didn't exist.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Nondum ex silvis sumus
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK


Odd behaviour when attempting to simulate an LTC3633 switching regulator.

 

I am using the ltspice simulator to simulate a design based on the LTC3633.? I have little confidence in the efficiency calculation.

If i design the regulator to run at 4MHz with an output of 1.1V@98mA according to the formula defined in the LTC3633 datasheet the regulator needs a 6.4uH inductor and an output capacitor of 1.4uF.? When I simulate this in ltspice using the LTC3633 I get an efficiency of around 59%

If I then change the inductor to a rather small value of 1u for example the efficiency rises to around 70%.? I do not understand why this happens.? Why would using an adsurdly low inductor value increase the efficiency percentage of the model?

What is the best way to determine the efficiency of a switching regulator using the ltspice software?

I have included the spice netlist of the model below.

* U:\jobs\13_12_M154 regulator simulations\simulated\LTC3633_12_to_1V1_experiment.asc
V1 IN 0 12 Rser=1
XU1 NC_01 N001 IN N001 N008 IN 0 NC_02 N007 NC_03 N001 OUT1 N005 MP_01 IN MP_02 N003 IN N001 N002 IN MP_03 N004 MP_04 OUT2 N001 NC_04 N006 0 LTC3633
C1 0 N001 2.2?
L1 N004 OUT2 1? Rser=14m
C2 N002 N004 .1?
R1 OUT2 N006 8.2k
R2 N006 0 10K
R3 N008 0 80.2K
C4 OUT2 0 47? Irms=0 Rser=0.002 Lser=0
L2 N005 OUT1 1? Rser=14m
C5 N003 N005 .1?
R4 OUT1 N007 8.2K
R5 N007 0 10K
C6 OUT1 0 1.4? V=6.3 Irms=0 Rser=0.0008 Lser=0
C7 IN 0 47? V=6.3 Irms=0 Rser=0.002 Lser=0 mfg="TDK" pn="C4532X5ROJ47@M" type="X5R" x2
I1 OUT1 0 0.098
I2 OUT2 0 0
.tran 0 2ms 1ms steady startup nodiscard uic
* Note:\n? If the simulation model is not found please update with the "Sync Release" command from the "Tools" menu.\n? It remains the customer's responsibility to verify proper and reliable operation in the actual application.\n? Component substitution and printed circuit board layout may significantly affect circuit performance or reliability\n? Contact your local sales representative for assistance. This circuit is distributed to customers only for use with LTC parts\n? Copyright ? 2011 Linear Technology Inc. All rights reserved.
* LTC3633? - Dual Channel 3A, 15V Monolithic Synchronous Step-Down Regulator\n1.1V/0.9V Buck Regulator with 2.5V LDO Output\nInput: 12V?????? Output1:1V1 @ 0.5A?????? Output2: 2.5V @ 2A
* 3x3mm
* 4x4mm
.lib LTC3633.sub
.backanno
.end


Spice model

 

How can I get model of c828 trasistor. Please help.


Re: How do I correctly install CD4000.lib into LTSpiceIV

 

Fraser wrote:

?
?"Could not open include file "CD4000.lib"

?
?Any ideas?

Did you?
extract the contents of the ZIP file?

Did you put the .LIB file in the same directory with your schematic?

If both of those are OK, then check your .INCLUDE statement for a typo.

The error message means the operating system couldn't find the file where you said it would be.

Regards,
Andy



Re: Membership renewal problem ....

 

Yahoo has always retired accounts that go unused for just a few months.
(At most 6.) I know this from personal experience.
But do they cancel Yahoo identities? I don't think any other form of
'Yahoo account' is required.

I thought a Yahoo ID *was* a Yahoo account.

I may be mistaken. I know that the Yahoo ID that I got when I first
signed up for YahooGroups, has email, and I log-in to it, to access my
YahooGroups, just like any other Yahoo account (I think).

Andy


How do I correctly install CD4000.lib into LTSpiceIV

 

I have managed to locate a CD4000.lib zip file - I have attempted to download an example which has the 'include CD4000.lib' listed on the schematic, however, I keep getting the following error:

"Could not open include file "CD4000.lib"

Any ideas?

regards,
Fraser


I don't remember the procedure...

 

Hello,

I don't remember the procedure to use a "new" Spice model (IRLML5103.spi).
Where can i find the information?
(Something like rename as "X" and...)
Thank you for your help.

A Merry Christmas,
Rudi,HB9ARI


Re: Modified Trapezoidal Method

 

Sorry the link in 1) was wrong, I meant: http://bit.ly/1kUR0Um


Re: LTSpice IV Time Step Algorithm

 

Sorry, the A. Brambilla link was wrong. I meant http://bit.ly/1kUR0Um


Re: LTSpice IV Time Step Algorithm

 

Thanks Andy for your reply!

You are totally right; the step size is reduced with a factor of 8, when the non-linear equations do not converge. But that is not the only control method. The local truncation error of the numerical integrations is evaluated in each time step. Depending on that error the step-size get a smooth shape.

Meanwhile I found Mikes statements to the modified trap as well. Too bad, there is no information about the way it works. I don't think it is a complete proprietary method, because as far as I know it's also used in Spice Opus (and maybe other Spice-like programs?). It was also explained by A. Brambilla in http://bit.ly/1dNhwgl.

Another thing is, that one need a lot of research to invent a complete new time integration method. Gear's method for instance is studied in lots of papers, before it was used in software program. I have written a new topic in order to find more information. If you are interested, you can follow the discussion in: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/LTspice/conversations/messages/72509


Modified Trapezoidal Method

 

For my Master Thesis I have written a small implementation of a spice-like simulator. I am using a 2nd-order Gear and the Trapezoidal Method. But the speed and accuracy is not satisfying to me. I would really like to test the modified trap method.

I have found two publications, which mention this method.

1) A. Brambilla explains the method in http://bit.ly/1dNhwgl . But there is no detailed information how the parameter is controlled, which switches from Euler to Trapezoidal Rule.
2) Tuma and Burmen give a more detailed outlook in "Circuit Simulation with SPICE OPUS". But in this book is not explained how the error coefficient of the LTE behaves while switching.

Maybe one of you can give me a hint where I can get more information. I would be glad if somebody could help me!

Best,
Niclas


Re: CIC unstable output

 

Hello Andy


And thank you for the reply. If you're worried about not being in your area of expertise, what can I say? I''' be brave and try to address your notes in the order you posted them.


> Why is the Gain of the first VCCS (G1) so very low?


The upsampler, as it is now, uses a SW controlled by V(0.3), but I also tried removing SW (replaced by the nearby R17) and using a B-source with the expression V(0.3)*V(108). You probably know that they tend to get slower as the processed values are higher so, given that with a unity gain at the input I could have gotten some hundred volts at the resampler (with the current input) and could have gotten even higher depending on the input levels, I decided to use the (M*R)**-N gain at the input knowing that it would, eventually, have had to be used somewhere along the way. The schematic you see is what is left after testing. After changing the upsampler I was left with the small gain at the input which made no difference to the output so I just left it there.


Still, you have a point there with the V <-> nV (MV <-> V in the case of unity gain input), so that may be one of the causes, but I suspect not because I also tried using integrators with 1/M/R gain, each stage, but didn't get any improvement. I haven't fiddled with tolerences, though, I will later today.


> Current source I1 looks odd


Since .AC through a S&H is not possible and since I try not to use voltage sources otherwise than grounded (convergence issues, as by the book), I used Rout=1 for the S&H (unlike its cousins, it defaults to 1k) and used I1 with only "AC 1" for .AC analysis. However, .AC works just fine (it needs a minor change to the current schematic to work).


> V4 and V5 have "zero" fall times


Yes, I know about the default times and that's the reason they are there as such: the clock sources are only needed for their rise times; fall times and pulse width have no influence (other than messing with the time-step). So, forcing only tr and period makes the source give the needed rise time while relaxing tf and ton, thus achieving the same results only a bit faster. In more complicated schematics this can be quite the time saver.


> The time-delay elements in the lower string are curious


They're intended. In order to turn it into an integrator and make it as the simplest approach, I used the tline as inverting output feeding the - input.


> Have you considered using B-elements as the delay lines


Yes, various combinations, with or without custom functions (like comb(x) {v(x)-delay(v(x),tcomb)}) and they seemed to behave worse. Maybe it's because of the nV <> V difference? I'll have to try this one today, too.


> You may need to specify a Maximum Timestep.


I even had patience for usec timesteps :-) , no change, though it's true I, too, would've expected a more "detailed" clock output with no timestep imposed.


> How did you get the "COUNTER" behavioral element to use a gate-type symbol?


You simply rename INV to COUNTER. No, it doesn't matter :-)


> The error log has several "singular matrix" flags


I don't know why, node q is the output of the first integrator, node o is the output of the last one (the output of the filter). If it complains about them, why not complain about the other 6? Is it only because they're named? Apparently not since deleting q (for example) will make LTspice complain about N025 (as I have it) and o. The simulation runs, though, as you can see... No idea what other meaning it has.



At the end, it seems there are two things to try: the nV <> V difference and the reltol, abstol & co. I'll test these later and see what comes out of it.




Thank you for the answers.

Vlad


Re: Membership renewal problem ....

John Woodgate
 

In message
<CALBs-TjCzp09SySczUQwfsmEPJ+Cz3H1nGNxPoho_Y4tT=7L4g@...>,
dated Tue, 17 Dec 2013, Andy <Andrew.Ingraham@...> writes:

Yahoo has always retired accounts that go unused for just a few months.
?(At most 6.) ?I know this from personal experience.
But do they cancel Yahoo identities? I don't think any other form of
'Yahoo account' is required.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Nondum ex silvis sumus
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK


Re: FFT Resolution

 

ronw6wo wrote, "If someone can send me the set-up details to show what is possible for a simple square-wave it would be enormously helpful".

I uploaded two examples to the "Temp" folder; one with a 1 kHz square wave and one with a 10 MHz square wave.

I played around a bit with the Maximum Timestep but for these square waves it seems to have very little or no effect, so in the end I just left it alone.

Andy


Re: FFT Resolution

 

Yes? I can appreciate there are various? sources of inaccuracy? Those? I have seen are not even close to a narrow band response.for example 1.5 MHz at 14MHz, similar bandwidth % at 1kHz

If someone can send me the set-up details to show what is possible for a simple square-wave it would be enormously helpful?


Re: Membership renewal problem ....

 

Jack wrote, "Obvious scam"

I wouldn't say obvious.

Yahoo has always retired accounts that go unused for just a few months. ?(At most 6.) ?I know this from personal experience.

However, you do need to be careful anyway, because the information Peter was given, and required to supply, might have been a scam.

Andy



Re: Membership renewal problem ....

 

Obvious scam
Sent from my BlackBerry? by Boost Mobile

From: Andy <Andrew.Ingraham@...>
Sender: LTspice@...
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 17:14:44 -0500
To: <LTspice@...>
ReplyTo: LTspice@...
Subject: Re: [LTspice] Membership renewal problem ....

?

As far as I know, there are two ways to join a YahooGroup:
- Via the web, pressing the "Join Group" button, or
- Via e-mail to the 'subscribe' address.

The first method used to require a Yahoo account. ?These days they seem to allow Google or Facebook accounts too, but I don't know how that works. ?The first time I joined a YahooGroup, the sign-up effectively gave me a Yahoo account, even though I didn't know it at the time.

The second method (e-mail) does not require a Yahoo account. ?However, unless I'm mistaken or unless it has changed, you don't get access to the group's website via this method, until you later associate a Yahoo (or Google or Facebook?) account to your sign-up. ?Somehow or another, Yahoo needs to know that it's you trying to get to the website and the Files area, since they are not open to the public, and normally it does that by having you logged on to your Yahoo (/Google/Facebook) account at the time.

It's possible Yahoo uses your cellphone number to send you a text message with a verification code. ?Gmail did this when it was very new. ?But it's more likely they want it to make it easier for you to fix if someone hacks your account. ?Gmail/Google does that too, but you can opt out from the cellphone number. ?Check if Yahoo lets you too (it might be a hyperlink in small text).

Contacting Yahoo for help is pretty much impossible these days. ?It used to be possible. ?Now, I can't find any method.

Regards,
Andy



Re: Membership renewal problem ....

 

As far as I know, there are two ways to join a YahooGroup:
- Via the web, pressing the "Join Group" button, or
- Via e-mail to the 'subscribe' address.

The first method used to require a Yahoo account. ?These days they seem to allow Google or Facebook accounts too, but I don't know how that works. ?The first time I joined a YahooGroup, the sign-up effectively gave me a Yahoo account, even though I didn't know it at the time.

The second method (e-mail) does not require a Yahoo account. ?However, unless I'm mistaken or unless it has changed, you don't get access to the group's website via this method, until you later associate a Yahoo (or Google or Facebook?) account to your sign-up. ?Somehow or another, Yahoo needs to know that it's you trying to get to the website and the Files area, since they are not open to the public, and normally it does that by having you logged on to your Yahoo (/Google/Facebook) account at the time.

It's possible Yahoo uses your cellphone number to send you a text message with a verification code. ?Gmail did this when it was very new. ?But it's more likely they want it to make it easier for you to fix if someone hacks your account. ?Gmail/Google does that too, but you can opt out from the cellphone number. ?Check if Yahoo lets you too (it might be a hyperlink in small text).

Contacting Yahoo for help is pretty much impossible these days. ?It used to be possible. ?Now, I can't find any method.

Regards,
Andy



Re: CIC unstable output

 

CIC interpolators are WAY out of my realm of expertise. ?But I am puzzled by a few things.

Why is the Gain of the first VCCS (G1) so very low? ?You have volts going in, and nanoamps & nanovolts coming out. ?From there forward the transconductance gains are all 1 with 1 ohm loads, so the rest of the chain is down in the nanovolts range ... but with volts of signal elsewhere in the same circuit. ?Mixing nanovolts and volts in the same simulation, and expecting proportional accuracies (down in the femtovolt range!), does not always work well in analog circuit simulation. ?Maybe that's part of the problem. ?You might need to tighten up the tolerances (abstol, reltol, vntol or volttol, etc.). ?Or scale the amplitudes better.

Current source I1 looks odd. ?Is it there for a reason? ?Does the S/H not have a voltage output?

V4 and V5 have "zero" fall times. ?As you should know, you can't get zero rise or fall times because they are impossible. ?LTspice substitutes much slower values when you specify "zero" (because "zero" is shorthand for "use a default value here"). ?If you want very fast fall time, use a small, non-zero value.

The time-delay elements in the lower string are curious, but I hope you really meant for them to be used that way, as inverting delay elements (taking advantage of the way SPICE implements lossless transmission lines). ?Do they present the right kind of load to the current sources driving them? ?(I haven't used them this way so I don't know.)

Have you considered using B-elements as the delay lines, instead of T-elements? ?I have a suspicion that the results might differ at the microscopic level.

Looking at node 0.4, it appears LTspice isn't using fine enough internal timesteps. ?You may need to specify a Maximum Timestep.

How did you get the "COUNTER" behavioral element to use a gate-type symbol? ?I suppose it doesn't matter ... does it?

The error log has several "singular matrix" flags, pointing to nodes 'q' and 'o'. ?Your guess is as good as mine what it means, or whether it is important.

Regards,
Andy



Re: Membership renewal problem ....

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

On 17/12/2013 21:12, Peter Kapas wrote:
In last days I faced to a problem to renew my LTspice group's membership. Simply, I am
not a member right now, because Yahoo canceled my account, like inactive (?) and for
renewal is asking for a cell-phone number (for verification ?) What happens, if some one
has no cell-phone, or does not want to by a new one just for that reason.

I thought there was a box you could tick to say you didn't have a cell

Honestly, I do not
want to give out my cell-phone number for the public, for future selling it for advertisement
reason, how the companies frequently do it. How to become again a LTspice member? ...
Why do I mention it? So, if I read reactions, "see ... this and this letter/folder on the LTspice
group's website" I doubt I will be able to do it in future or other with same problem.

Yahoo are doing this to reduce problems with accounts being hacked. They only use it to text you a verification number when you log in on a new device. I was more worried about typing mine when Gmail asked me for it when I was in China. Typing my cell phone into Google on a Chinese computer was worrying...

Is there a different way to enter into this group's website?

not sure, try the "group Managers Forum":-



or the Yahoo help., there is a contact customer care on there:-



Thanks,
Peter

Dave