Maker Pro
Maker Pro

electronic design software?

J

John Smith

Jan 1, 1970
0
mrgizmo said:
Which is the most popular? Is there a demo?


In my opinion, you should avoid Islandlogix's VisualSpice. Even if it's
free.

Good luck in your search.

John
 
M

Mike

Jan 1, 1970
0
Which is the most popular? Is there a demo?

Depends on what you're doing. I use Mentor Design Architect and Cadence
Analog Artist for analog schematic entry, and Eldo and Hspice for
simulation. Together, they'll set you back more than $100k, with
maintenaince (yearly) on top of that. You can get a demo from the local
sales office, but I suspect this stuff isn't what you were referring to.

What is it you want to do?

-- Mike --
 
K

Kevin Aylward

Jan 1, 1970
0
mrgizmo said:
Which is the most popular? Is there a demo?

All vendors of Spice have demos. The most popular is not nessesarilly
the best.

After you've tried my SuperSpice http://www.anasoft.co.uk:-), use google
and search on analog simulation, spice etc, maan ones are LTSpice, TINA,
Electronic Workbench, B2 Spice, CircuitMaker.

Take all vendor waffle with a pinch of salt and see what one you think
does the job for you.

Kevin Aylward
[email protected]
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
 
P

Paul Burridge

Jan 1, 1970
0
Which is the most popular? Is there a demo?

LT Spice from Linear Technology. Look no further. I'm only sorry I did
and wasted so much time.
 
R

Rene Tschaggelar

Jan 1, 1970
0
mrgizmo said:
Which is the most popular? Is there a demo?

Sounding oldfashioned : what do you guys do with this
simulation software ? In my 20+ years in the field I never
had the need for them.
Mostly a few (+-*/log,exp) operations are sufficient.
Seldom I write a simulation myself, and rarely an
application is further useful :
http://www.ibrtses.com/products/index.html for the story,
http://www.ibrtses.com/products/teiler22.zip for the app.
I doubt one the mentioned spice's is able to do that.
So what do they do ?
What can they optimize ?

Rene
 
R

Rene Tschaggelar

Jan 1, 1970
0
Kevin said:
Well, with all due respect, you cant possible do much serious analogue
design.
True. Mainly RF and digital till now though they become analog at
one point.
Oh dear...Ever actualy tried to produce an analytical, closed form
solution for a 2 transister circuit, ac and transient? e.g.
http://www.anasoft.co.uk/EE/widlarlambert/widlarlambert.html

no. mainly numerical plus approaches on how to solve equations
on an embedded with reduced resources. Which approximation
with how many digits at what order and such.
I certainly see you have no idea at all.

Ok, a cheap bicmos process might cost $100k for the mask set, and 2
months fab time. Just what do you think the probability of getting a
1000 transistor circuit right first time? What about a 10,000 transistor
circuit?

It just aint goanna happen mate. Spice simulation is routinely used, 8
hours a day, 5 days a week by 1000's of analogue chip designers. Its the
only way to it today. Even then, concept to production can take a year.
There is simple too much to check out over all worst case operating
conditions and process corners to not use simulation. I don't really
know where to begin a description as there is so much that spice is used
for, that cant be done cost effectively with hand methods in today's
market. Its a never ending list. For example, amplifier stability,
temperature effects, pulse responses, etc...

What you need to do is actually try using spice to design say, a 50
transistor op-amp. Spend a few weeks doing this, then it should sink in
that you never want to go back to trying impossible hand calculations
again.
I wouldn't even consider trying to outdo a commercial opamp. I just buy
them. There are plenty different ones around. Recently also entering
RF regions, with 3GHz GBW and 150mA current. There is now way to achieve
a THS3002 or similar with discretes.

Thanks. That gave a hint.
I see this software is used to do designs that may or may not be
integrated as analog chips. I tend to buy generalized approaches as single
chips then. Also none of my colleagues does something similar. There is not
that much time for a project over here to go into such depths of analog
design. We're expected to have quicker solutions.
Unfortunately the pace is picking up. Every so often a part is becoming
obsolete. I wouldn't want to spend too much time in parts becoming
obsolete that quick.

Rene
 
P

Paul Burridge

Jan 1, 1970
0
Sounding oldfashioned : what do you guys do with this
simulation software ? In my 20+ years in the field I never
had the need for them.
Mostly a few (+-*/log,exp) operations are sufficient.

(!) I'm staggered. Perhaps you're one of these people who actually
enjoys doing a colossal amount of time-consuming, complicated and
repetitive calculations. Most folk just want to get on with the design
itself!
 
D

ddwyer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Rene said:
Sounding oldfashioned : what do you guys do with this
simulation software ? In my 20+ years in the field I never
had the need for them.

40 years in the field (sometimes wilderness) and there is an important
place for modelling.
And some pitfalls.
If you have the cash you will probably spend too much time proving that
a breadboard works something you already knew.
Models are excellent for tolerancing drawing a schematic and converting
the schematic to a pcb.
Models are a bad way to work out the most efficient means to achieve a
circuit function.
Large org. where I have recent experience take months to get to a
breadboard stage that I can achieve in 1 week (often less) .
Without the mental ability to model; a function may take an fpga and a
shark processor whereas mixed analog and simple embedded processor will
take less power , cash, and space.
Every engineer should have a PC with (LT is free ) Spice a schematic
capture Mathcad and board layout and router.
For quick prototypes mill the pcb directly from the PC to PCB material.
 
R

Rene Tschaggelar

Jan 1, 1970
0
Paul said:
(!) I'm staggered. Perhaps you're one of these people who actually
enjoys doing a colossal amount of time-consuming, complicated and
repetitive calculations. Most folk just want to get on with the design
itself!

To the contrary. I was wondering about the need for complex
programs. Control loops, RC and this sort are done by head,
Only R-dividers are done with the mentioned program.
Then there are a few more to solve trivial detail problems.

Rene
 
M

Mike

Jan 1, 1970
0
Every engineer should have a PC with (LT is free ) Spice a schematic
capture Mathcad and board layout and router.
For quick prototypes mill the pcb directly from the PC to PCB material.

The biggest circuit I've ever built is only 0.2" on a side. LTSpice isn't
compatible with my models, the schematic capture isn't compatible with the
tools from Mentor, Cadence, Synopsis, or anyone else, and board layout and
routing software can't begin to be used to design a chip.

I do have Mathcad, though, and find that to be very useful.

-- Mike --
 
J

Jim Thompson

Jan 1, 1970
0
The biggest circuit I've ever built is only 0.2" on a side.

My biggest is 0.415" on a side ;-)
LTSpice isn't
compatible with my models,

Huh? I'm certain that LTSpice can handle BSIM3v3
the schematic capture isn't compatible with the
tools from Mentor, Cadence, Synopsis, or anyone else,

Anything that can write a netlist can interface with IC layout tools.
Mentor, Cadence and Synopsis just try to make it very difficult. But
there are now economic tools available that make it a snap.
and board layout and
routing software can't begin to be used to design a chip.

PCB routing certainly won't do ICs, but only *digits* use auto-routing
on ICs ;-)
I do have Mathcad, though, and find that to be very useful.

-- Mike --

Can Mathcad solve any equation that PSpice can't?

...Jim Thompson
 
K

Kevin Aylward

Jan 1, 1970
0
Bill said:
Depends what you mean by serious analog design.

I was beeing a bit flippant here.

<You point out -
correctly, I'm sure - that designing analog integrated circuits is
pretty much impossible without simulation.

Oh for the days of kit parts...
The work I've done over the past thirty years included what looked
like fairly serious analogue design at the time, and involved
virtually no simulation software. I've not been designing analog
integrated circuits - obviously - but I've used a lot of them, and the
odd transistor where we needed speed or exponential/logarithmic
transfer functions.

I have done a lot of analogue design without spice in the past, but on
reflection, although some were difficult, were not, after the fact, that
complicated. The point here being that today, all the easy things have
already been done.
Certainly not, and how often is it necessary?

Its not. If it were, we would all have been f'ked long ago:)

Robert Widlar and Barry
Gilbert have already done it where it matters,

Actually, they didn't do the above. To my knowledge, I am the first to
actually have published this result. I did get an email from Bob Pease
saying he was unaware of this result.

Best Regards,

Kevin Aylward
[email protected]
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
 
Top