Don’t depend on the automated settings of your SPICE simulator

Plenty of issues occur mechanically throughout us. Even our personal respiratory and coronary heart charge are automated. Nonetheless, trusting within the automated generally is a mistake generally and the next is a straightforward working example.

That SPICE simulator you’ve been utilizing is one fairly spiffy little instrument, isn’t it? All types of analytic choices happen with out requiring all that a lot consideration from you, the consumer, however please don’t be too complacent about that.

The automated settings that your SPICE simulator offers may not be applicable in your particular evaluation requirement. Be alert for anomalous simulation outcomes that could be correctable by overriding the automated settings primarily based by yourself logic.

Think about this simulation of an R-C oscillator circuit (Determine 1):

Determine 1 An oscillator simulation.

The Determine 1 oscillator’s efficiency seems fairly ragged what with the unstable rise and fall instances of every cycle and the frequency dithering. Please word although that the simulator has made an automated alternative of the ten µsec time steps.

This wasn’t my alternative. It simply occurred mechanically. Nevertheless, if I intervene within the simulation settings, I can markedly have an effect on the simulation outcomes (Determine 2):

Determine 2 A modified oscillator simulation.

The Determine 2 oscillator’s efficiency is obtained with time steps that I’ve personally modified from what had been chosen mechanically as 10 µsec all the way down to 0.01 µsec, a really substantial change certainly.

Now have a look at how significantly better the oscillator’s efficiency has grow to be. The circuit is unchanged. Just one simulation setting is totally different, and the simulation result’s a significantly better reflection of the circuit’s real-world efficiency.

The upshot is to not be afraid to range one’s simulation settings from regardless of the automated setting(s) could be.

Harry Belafonte as soon as sang “Man Good, Lady Smarter.” Please see beneath:

In issues similar to these, please suppose “Simulator Good, Engineer Smarter.”

John Dunn is an electronics advisor, and a graduate of The Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn (BSEE) and of New York College (MSEE).

Associated Content material


Leave a Comment