开云体育

To be more precise, it says that PSRR Response "hasn't been modelled", whatever that means.? It might mean only that the effect may be there but nobody has calibrated or checked it yet for

There are at least two unencrypted models I saw today: LM317_TRANS (No note on PSRR) and a more extensive model LM317A_TRANS, which states: * Model Usage Notes: * * A. Features have been modelled * 1.

Yes, a full transistor model would be great! The problem is that the notes in the T.I. model specifically state that it is NOT applicable to PSRR. And the results I get when I do simulate for PSRR are

It is noteworthy that the two parts (LM317 and LM317A) have such different SPICE models - and the fact that they have different datasheets and do not even share the same webpage.? At first it seems

A beginner cannot know your intention, though. -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.com

Place cursor on the net, then CTRL-right click and select Highlight from the drop-down pane. Use ESC to cancel.

It was just an example of how to get a voltage difference. Not a recommendation to use internally generated node names. -- http://davesrocketworks.com David Schultz "The cheeper the crook, the gaudier

Related, there apparently used to be a Ctrl-F search for net nets by name. I am running XVII, and that does nothing. Also, found a hint that maybe the search function was hiding under Tools, but

That is not very wise, because those nodes can get re-allocated whenever a change is made to the .ASC. It's much safer to name all the nodes, even just A, B, C ... -- This email has been checked for

V(N0001,N0002) -- http://davesrocketworks.com David Schultz "The cheeper the crook, the gaudier the patter." - Sam Spade

<expletive>! Well, currents are important to the analysis, so that’s something, but Power is, as well, and that needs differential voltages. Nets that are significant such as I/O pins are properly

I downloaded an LM317 unencrypted behavioural model from TI's website today, and in the notes it makes no mention that PSRR is not modelled. Looking through the code, I can see that it is modelled.

I don't know how well this works, but....? In theory, if you can find a full transistor-level model for one, it ought to be reasonable for PSRR and Zout.? However, finding one could be a challenge.

And by the way, "Add Traces" is the full list of names of things you can plot.? You can mix and match in algebraic formulas, but that is the full list. Andy

Voltages are net (wire) properties.? You can refer to them only by netname. Choose good (useful) netnames. Andy

I have a fairly large model that I need to probe many of its components for Voltage, Current, and/or Power over a run period. Not difficult once I get the syntax correct, for individual parts withy

nope ! -- just maybe the built in LT1086 matches it's d/s parameters of your interest (i never required such - yet)

Simulation is not the best way to do this. In simulations I never bother with voltage regulators, just using voltage sources. To find the performance of a LM317 requires testing with careful attention

also i used my own transistor LM317 model and downloaded a * RUC002N05 NMOSFET model * Model Generated by ROHM ?? if you use such → it's an *X* type device ? . . . or the new ADi cracked LT?

Yes, and I’m not impressed with other aspects of their model, either. The notes for the most advanced T.I. LM317A model I can find specifically state that the model does not address PSRR. What other