Re: [SI-LIST] : Linpar 2-D field solver experiences?

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Benoit DERVAUX (benoit.dervaux@libertysurf.fr)
Date: Mon Feb 26 2001 - 15:54:40 PST


Hello,

 I am using LINPAR V2.0 from ARTECH HOUSE since 2 years.

 You can easely solve using the predefined geometry, especially using with multilayer and rectangular multiconductors.

 But in fact I often use the user defined mode. In this case you have all freedom to set your own geometry.

 I use that in order to compute Zo of wire bonds, in single or differential, or to compute Zo of balls in BGA ...., PCP imedance trace,

 packaging issues with Tungsten trace in Al2O3

 Very usefull and cheap software.

 Recently I have use it and compare to ANSOFT SI2D simulator which is a 20000 $ software and results agree very well, better than 1%.

 Drawbacks of LINPAR in user defined mode : You have to make your own .txt file describing the geometry. That is time consuming but you can help with a LOTUS or EXCELL spreadsheet to make repetitive writtings. With some experience you could write the .txt quite quickly (that is like pre-processing) and use the LOTUS to store the main information.

Another serious limitation is that it DO NOT shows the E fiedls and V equipotential.

  I hope you will be able to buy it and try.

  Benoit Dervaux in Grenoble , French "Silicon valley"

 

____________________________________________

Has anybody used the Linpar CAD 2-D field solver?
I've used ansoft, CALIF, Greenfield, Pacific Numerix,
and have recently come across Linpar.

Linpar seems to be a very easy to use CAD tool, and
seems very cost effective (sub $500) for a general
purpose 2-D field solving tool for simulating impedance
and crosstalk.

I'm looking for other's experiences with the tool,
good, bad, ugly.

Thanks
Dave Chengson
chengson@juniper.net


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 08 2001 - 14:30:57 PDT