Re: [SI-LIST] : skin effect and transmission line simulators

Syed Huq (huq@rockie.nsc.com)
Fri, 5 Sep 97 13:13:40 PDT

Dmitri,

I think HPICE used to have IBIS capabilities with their Meta I/O
tools. As far as I understand, under Avanti, there is no support
for IBIS within HSPICE.

Am I correct ?

Regards,
Syed
National Semiconductor Corp.

> From owner-si-list@silab.Eng.Sun.COM Fri Sep 5 13:09:59 1997
> Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 12:47:10 -0700
> From: Dmitri Kuznetsov <vdm@iname.com>
> Organization: Avant! Corporation
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.4 sun4m)
> To: Chris Simon <simon@mcc.com>
> Cc: si-list@silab.Eng.Sun.COM, Jonathan Smith <jonathan@pnc.com>
> Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] : skin effect and transmission line simulators
> Content-Type> : > text/plain> ; > charset=us-ascii>
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Sender: owner-si-list@silab.Eng.Sun.COM
>
> Chris,
>
> Hspice 97.1 and later has very fast lossy multiconductor
> frequency-dependent transmission line model (W element). There is no
> limit on the number of coupled conductors, and both skin-effect and
> frequency-dependent dielectric loss are ACCURATELY modeled in the time
> domain.
>
> Hspice has IBIS capability, and, of course, transmission lines can be
> terminated with arbitrary nonlinear devices.
>
> If you have unexpired Hspice technical maintenance, you can get Hspice
> with W element free of charge.
>
> Regards,
> -- Dmitri
>
> =======================================================
> Dmitri Kuznetsov, Ph.D.
> R&D Engineer
>
> Avant! Corporation e-mail: vdm@avanticorp.com
> 46871 Bayside Pkwy. Tel: (510)413-8631
> Fremont, CA 94538 Fax: (510)413-7706
> =======================================================
>
>
> Jonathan Smith wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > The Pacific Numerix toolsuite can handle all five of the requirements that
> > you specified.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 4 Sep 1997, Chris Simon wrote:
> >
> > > I am looking for a time domain lossy transmission line simulator for
> > > digital signals with bit rates of 1Gbit/sec and higher. I would like to
> > > get information on simulators that you have experince with.
> > >
> > > The simulator I'm looking for should include all of the following:
> > > 1. The results can be viewed in the time domain.
> > > 2. Transmission line models that include series resistance and
> > > inductance which are functions of frequency to ACCURATELY model skin
> > > effect. (i.e., a frequency dependent line model that is used to get time
> > > domain simulation results)
> >
> > The SPICE simulator from Pacific Numerix does accurately model
> > lossy dispersive lines including the frequency dependent resistance and
> > dielectric conductance for dielectric loss.
> > All frequency-dependent parasitics (RLGC) are produced
> > automatically from any layout tool database, in 2-D or 3-D.
> >
> > > 3. SPICE CMOS models and/or IBIS type non-linear models can be used
> > > as drivers and receivers
> >
> > Of course, Pacific Numerix provides a tool that converts the data
> > from IBIS information sheets into Pacific Numerix SPICE models, and these
> > can be used in the SPICE simulation. Where a higher level of accuracy is
> > needed, the Pacific Numerix tool can automatically generate and run the
> > SPICE of your choice, for instance whatever SPICE version you may have
> > transistor-level driver/receivers from.
> >
> > Jonathan Smith
> > Consulting Engineer
> > www.pnc.com
> >
> > > 4. Arbitrary driver data patterns can be used (i.e., not limited to
> > > repetative signals)
> > >
> > > There is one other criteria, but I'm not certain that this one is required
> > > for signals with 150 to 200 pSec rise and fall times. Any opinions?
> > > 5. Includes the effect of dielectric losses.
> > >
> > > I am aware of several products that claim to meet these critria. Upon
> > > close inspection several of the lossy line models didn't really meet number
> > > 2. This seems to be the tough one.
> > > I am going to take a detailed look at Microwave Design System (MDS) from
> > > Hewlett-Packard, although someone told me that the current version doesn't
> > > meet number 3 above.
> > > I would be interested in hearing which of the above criteria are met by
> > > other tools, or whether a future revision will incorporate these features.
> > > If you know how the following tools stack up, especially with regard to
> > > number 2, I would appreciate hearing from you.
> > > Quad Design, Quantic, Interconnectix/Mentor Graphics, Pacific Numerix,
> > > Cadence SigNoise, ApSim/Contec, EMC-workbench, others?
> > >
> > > Chris Simon
>