Driver to drive?

Lostgallifreyan · Jan 23, 2012

Lostgallifreyan <no-one@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:Xns9FE1C0DDF59A8zoodlewurdle@216.196.109.145:

Please help. I'm sure plenty of people here know Spice, and use the CA3240,
and would have no trouble trying this subcircuit (below) as a quick
substitution just to see if it works.

Lostgallifreyan <no-one@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:Xns9FE1BE34E7BC6zoodlewurdle@216.196.109.145:

In what context did this model ever work in LTspice used as supplied? I
can't find one. I have no trouble with any other amp model I need to
use, but in all the realworld CA3140 situations I have emulated in
LTspice, THIS model fails, with an interesting variety of errors.

Now I am NOT interested in what spurious ways I might be getting it
WRONG, I'll work that out in my own time without bothering anyone at
all. Right now I want to know if it EVER worked RIGHT. In complete
context please. If I can see proof that it works, I'll start to figure
out why I could never use it.

(It's interesting to me that on the web at large, though this model has
been given and accepted gratefully many times, no-one has ever actually
said whether they managed to USE it or not.)

First post had broken formatting of the model (web page copy), here's
the copy I originally found and used. (Also, crossposted to s.e.d this
time, and corrected some typos above..) Maybe this model is still borked
in copying, or maybe it has fundamental flaws. Please help me find
out...

*$ model description: "awbca3140"
*a Device model created by analog_uprev for ca3140 on Thu Mar 1 18:48:14
IST 2001
* CONNECTIONS: NON-INVERTING INPUT
* | INVERTING INPUT
* | | POSITIVE POWER SUPPLY
* | | | NEGATIVE POWER SUPPLY
* | | | | OUTPUT
* | | | | |

.subckt CA3140 1 36 15 20 12
*START OF DECK
* +IN -IN OUT +VSS -VSS
*NODE: 1 36 15 20 12
*------INPUT STAGE-------
VOSBAL 7 29 3.00000000E-03
EU1 8 1 20 12 0.0001
EU2 8 7 5 12 -1
RB1 12 10 1 TC= 1.991040E-03 (-1.244400E-04)
IB4 10 12 1.000000E-06
RB3 12 5 8743.17 TC= 1.60000000E-03 (0.00000000E+00)
*IB3 for CA3140, and CA3140A
IB3 12 5 5.718750E-07
*IB3 12 5 2.287500E-07
G1 12 1 10 12 1.025000E-05
G2 12 36 10 12 9.750000E-06
RDM 36 29 1.500000E+12
RCM 31 13 1.500000E+12
CDM 36 29 4.000000E-12
G5 31 13 36 31 6.66667E-13
G6 31 13 1 31 6.66667E-13
*------INTERMEDIATE STAGE-------
GDM 31 16 29 36 1
GCM 31 16 13 31 -1.58113883E-05
R1 31 16 3.16358380E+02
C1 31 16 6.45457E-11
VCP 23 31 100
VCM 24 31 -100
DD1 16 23 MD2
.MODEL MD2 D XTI=1.000000P
* SPECTRE: + IMAX=1000
DD2 24 16 MD2
G3 31 6 16 31 -1.07249255E-06
R2 31 6 100000
C2 11 6 1.2E-11
RP1 31 20 3750
RP2 31 12 3750
*------OUTPUT STAGE-------
G4 31 11 6 31 -5.10867719E+01
ROUT 31 11 60
DD3 11 9 MD3
.MODEL MD3 D IS=10.0F XTI=1.0P N= 3.612647E-01
* SPECTRE: + IMAX=1000
DD4 9 11 MD4
.MODEL MD4 D IS=10.0F XTI=1.0P N= 8.028126E-01
* SPECTRE: + IMAX=1000
EU6 9 31 2 31 1
RO1 11 26 20
FF1 31 28 VFF1 1
VFF1 26 2 0.0
FF2 31 20 VFF2 -1
VFF2 33 31 0.0
FF3 12 31 VFF3 -1
VFF3 31 27 0.0
DD8 27 28 MID
DD7 28 33 MID
.MODEL MID D XTI=1.000000F N=1 IS=10.000000F
* SPECTRE: + IMAX=1000
VP 20 22 -29.2613
VM 21 12 -29.3113
DD5 25 22 MID
DD6 21 17 MID
VP1 20 30 2.7501
VM1 32 12 .859456
DD9 2 30 MD9
DD10 32 15 MD9
.MODEL MD9 D XTI=1.000000F N=1 IS=10.000000F
* SPECTRE: + IMAX=1000
HH1 25 2 POLY(2) VIC2 VIC1 0 1960 0 1540 0 0 0 0 0 0
HH2 2 17 POLY(2) VIC3 VIC1 0 -1960 0 -1540 0 0 0 0 0 0
VIC1 37 3 0.0
VIC2 2 14 0.0
VIC3 14 15 0.0
VPP 37 0 1
RPP 3 0 100.0K
RO3 15 20 200.0MEG
RO2 15 12 200.0MEG
.ends
*$ end model description: "awbca3140"

Jim Thompson · Jan 23, 2012

Lostgallifreyan · Jan 23, 2012

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in news:abtqh7pt15qalknp9vfi8bqvvkje7j9fc6@4ax.com:

The description pin order does not match with the

+IN -IN OUT +VSS -VSS order

* CONNECTIONS: NON-INVERTING INPUT
* | INVERTING INPUT
* | | POSITIVE POWER SUPPLY
* | | | NEGATIVE POWER SUPPLY
* | | | | OUTPUT
* | | | | |
.subckt CA3140 1 36 15 20 12
*START OF DECK
* +IN -IN OUT +VSS -VSS
*NODE: 1 36 15 20 12

Amazing. Thanks.

I never noticed that because I assumed the post I found it in
was right because all the other amp models use the first order stated in comments,
not the second (so I didn't notice the conflict at all..)

I corrected that and saw traces graphed, at last... I still get some errors though,
for example: (in LTspice)
Analysis: Time step too small: time = 0.00138, timestep = 1.25001e-018: trouble with node "n010"

Things like this are why I didn't notice the obvious error, I was confronted with
many more subtle ones like this one which persist, there really does seem to be a
flaw in the model even after the pin correction.

Node n010 in my circuit is the noninverting pin on a differential amp, with 3K3 in,
and 680R to ground, nothing unusual there, and exactly what LT1215 wants for good
fast and accurate performance. No other amp model I tried has trouble with it, just
this one...

I tried changing the resistors to ten times the low values LT1215 likes, to something
more usual for CA3240, and removing the compensation caps that LT1215 needs and the
CA3240 doesn't, and I get a different error:
Analysis: Time step too small: time = 0.001368, timestep = 1.25001e-018: trouble with U2:mid-instance d:u2:d6

Sorry if this is not helpful info, I'm doing the best I can short of posting a huge
post with the entire context, and even from this is should show that there is
something wrong with model internally, beyond the original pin order error, and
where one major flaw exists, there may well be others too. Please can you tell me
if this model is in any way redeemable. The CA3240 is a fine and venerable old IC
and I'd really like to see a good working model for it.

Lostgallifreyan · Jan 23, 2012

Looking at the Harris and Intersil datasheets for CA3140 I see an identical
schematic. I don't know much about Spice notations in subcircuits, but when I
did this in the past for some other amp (possibly LF412 or more likely LM317)
I saw a close match with transistor and resistor numbers that helped me to
understand that I was at least looking at a real model of a real device.

In this case, things are not so clear! To start with, both input pins should
connect only to an FET gate and a diode, yet the model appears to show at
least 4 internal connections to the inverting input pin. Is it a fine model
of exacting conditions beyond anythign the datasheet sdescribes, or is it
just a broken mess? I really have no way to know without help, because no
matter what I do I never see it working so I can't learn from breaking it.

Jim Thompson · Jan 23, 2012

On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 09:52:36 -0600, Lostgallifreyan
<no-one@nowhere.net> wrote:

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in news:abtqh7pt15qalknp9vfi8bqvvkje7j9fc6@4ax.com:

The description pin order does not match with the

+IN -IN OUT +VSS -VSS order

* CONNECTIONS: NON-INVERTING INPUT
* | INVERTING INPUT
* | | POSITIVE POWER SUPPLY
* | | | NEGATIVE POWER SUPPLY
* | | | | OUTPUT
* | | | | |
.subckt CA3140 1 36 15 20 12
*START OF DECK
* +IN -IN OUT +VSS -VSS
*NODE: 1 36 15 20 12

Amazing. Thanks. I never noticed that because I assumed the post I found it in
was right because all the other amp models use the first order stated in comments,
not the second (so I didn't notice the conflict at all..)

I caught it because I often change subcircuit node order to match my
home-made symbols.

I corrected that and saw traces graphed, at last... I still get some errors though,
for example: (in LTspice)
Analysis: Time step too small: time = 0.00138, timestep = 1.25001e-018: trouble with node "n010"

Things like this are why I didn't notice the obvious error, I was confronted with
many more subtle ones like this one which persist, there really does seem to be a
flaw in the model even after the pin correction.

Node n010 in my circuit is the noninverting pin on a differential amp, with 3K3 in,
and 680R to ground, nothing unusual there, and exactly what LT1215 wants for good
fast and accurate performance. No other amp model I tried has trouble with it, just
this one...

I tried changing the resistors to ten times the low values LT1215 likes, to something
more usual for CA3240, and removing the compensation caps that LT1215 needs and the
CA3240 doesn't, and I get a different error:
Analysis: Time step too small: time = 0.001368, timestep = 1.25001e-018: trouble with U2:mid-instance d:u2:d6

Sorry if this is not helpful info, I'm doing the best I can short of posting a huge
post with the entire context, and even from this is should show that there is
something wrong with model internally, beyond the original pin order error, and
where one major flaw exists, there may well be others too. Please can you tell me
if this model is in any way redeemable. The CA3240 is a fine and venerable old IC
and I'd really like to see a good working model for it.

Back up to some simple circuit configuration and make sure that it
behaves as an OpAmp... verifying there isn't some other node out of
proper order.

I'm not familiar with that CA3140 model, but it seems to have a lot of
behavioral components, so add some capacitance to slow your external
nodes, then see if it converges.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice

Jim Thompson · Jan 23, 2012

On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 06:22:25 -0600, Lostgallifreyan
<no-one@nowhere.net> wrote:

Lostgallifreyan <no-one@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:Xns9FE1C0DDF59A8zoodlewurdle@216.196.109.145:

Please help. I'm sure plenty of people here know Spice, and use the CA3140,
and would have no trouble trying this subcircuit (below) as a quick
substitution just to see if it works.

[snip]

Further perusing that subcircuit, it seems I was the original poster
of that netlist, having found it in some Analog Workbench materials.

But I've never used it myself.

Looking it over... it's crap of the finest level

Behavioral modeling to an extreme.

(Though that "Dynamic Current Sink" looks like a disaster waiting to
happen.)

Amusingly the schematic bears a strong resemblance to my Master's
Thesis of 1968, except I used JFET's, the only kind I could make back
then

Lostgallifreyan · Jan 23, 2012

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
news:a55rh7tmrjnmlfoam5r395iav4es1b75ce@4ax.com:

Back up to some simple circuit configuration and make sure that it
behaves as an OpAmp... verifying there isn't some other node out of
proper order.

I'm not familiar with that CA3140 model, but it seems to have a lot of
behavioral components, so add some capacitance to slow your external
nodes, then see if it converges.

I don't think it does.

Try this, a simple voltage follower, the kind often
used to generate a split rail from a single supply. I used 10K resistors to
halve a 15V single-rail supply, and to add some capacitance to slow the
transition on the +input I added a 10ľF cap across the ground-side resistor.

If I use an LF412 model I get the exact result expected, as with LT1215.
If I omit the 'startup' part of a .tran directive I see the 300 ms or so of
cap charging curve omitted from the graph, as expected. In either case with
either model, the output is a clean 7.5V.

If I do this with the CA3140 model, it works if the startup bit is added, but
if not, it oscillates at around 7.5V. The datasheet suggests a 3K9 resistor
for feedback instead of the direct link used for voltage followers, but if I
add that the output, while not oscillating, is only 2V! I know that a REAL
CA3140 doesn't behave this way as a voltage follower because I've done it.

it gets weirder... Keeping the single 15VDC supply, add a new 5V supply to
feed the 10K+10K divider. Output should be 2.5V, with or without the cap
charge curve depending on use (or not) of 'startup' in the .tran directive.
It isn't. With 'startup' the output is a millivolt below 15V (that amp cannot
swing that far!), and there is no sign of the cap charge curve at the start.
Without 'startup, it oscillates at about 125 KHz between 45.5 kilovolts and
46.1 kilovolts!!!!!!! The only word that I can use to describe this without
waxing explosively lyrical, is 'rediculous'.

Lostgallifreyan · Jan 23, 2012

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
news:689rh79n8b4qn03kbfs7rhmlrpvcv01o6r@4ax.com:

Further perusing that subcircuit, it seems I was the original poster
of that netlist, having found it in some Analog Workbench materials.

But I've never used it myself.

Looking it over... it's crap of the finest level

Behavioral modeling to an extreme.

(Though that "Dynamic Current Sink" looks like a disaster waiting to
happen.)

Well, thanks for looking at it seriously now. Better late than never. I knew
it couldn't just be me it did strange things to. What amazes me that in TEN
YEARS no-one else seems to have noticed and posted about it anywhere. It's
all over the net now, I'd have thought someone might have mentioned it, but
no...

Amusingly the schematic bears a strong resemblance to my Master's
Thesis of 1968, except I used JFET's, the only kind I could make back
then

I'll see if I can't write a better subcircuit.

That will be awesome. I think all who love the CA3140 will welcome it.

See
my other post, it shows some very strange stuff...

Lostgallifreyan · Jan 23, 2012

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
news:689rh79n8b4qn03kbfs7rhmlrpvcv01o6r@4ax.com:

I'll see if I can't write a better subcircuit.

Here's something I can do that may help... It's as exact a rendering of the
CA3140 schematic as I can make from the Intersil datasheet. Resistors have
correct values, and numbering of all parts is exact (though the MOSFETS get
an M where bipolars get a Q). I have repeatedly double-checked the wiring so
the nodes should be right (though arbitrarily numbered in the netlist). I
made (far simpler) working subcircuits for SPST and SPDT switches yesterday
(things strangely lacking from LTspice as supplied!) based on netlists, and
applied my methods to this one, below, so it should be intact. I don't know
nearly enough to get the modelling right for the CA3140 diodes, bipolar and
FET transistors, and what appear to be Schottky diodes, let alone add
anything else vital like temperature related behaviour, but this starting
framework might save you some work if you're willing to add the vital
details. It likely also needs a reduction to 5 pins from 8 to fit a standard
op-amp model.

*Intersil CA3140, basic model drafted from datasheet.
* 8, Strb -------------------------|
* 7, V+ -----------------------| |
* 6, Out --------------------| | |
* 5, null -----------------| | | |
* 4, Gnd --------------| | | | |
* 3, +In -----------| | | | | |
* 2, -In --------| | | | | | |
* 1, null -----| | | | | | | |
* | | | | | | | |
..SUBCKT CA3140 31 21 23 15 30 16 1 12
D1 N001 N002 Diode
Q1 N005 N002 N001 0 PNP
Q2 N007 N002 N001 0 PNP
Q3 N006 N002 N001 0 PNP
Q4 N012 N005 N006 0 PNP
Q5 N024 N005 N007 0 PNP
Q6 N011 N005 N002 0 PNP
Q7 N005 N011 N017 0 NPN
R1 N017 N015 8K
M8 N020 N015 N011 N011 PMOS
D2 N020 N015 Diode
D3 N022 N021 Schottky
D4 N022 N023 Schottky
D5 N022 N024 Schottky
M9 N025 N021 N024 N024 PMOS
M10 N026 N023 N024 N024 PMOS
R2 N025 N029 500R
R3 N026 N027 500R
Q11 N029 N025 N030 0 NPN
Q12 N027 N025 N031 0 NPN
R4 N030 N015 500R
R5 N031 N015 500R
Q13 N012 N027 N015 0 NPN
C1 N027 N012 12pF
Q14 N018 N020 N032 0 NPN
Q15 N016 N020 N015 0 NPN
Q16 N016 N028 N015 0 NPN
D6 N028 N033 Diode
R6 N032 N015 50R
R7 N033 N015 30R
Q17 N001 N012 N018 0 NPN
R8 N018 N019 1K
Q18 N013 N019 N016 0 NPN
Q19 N006 N009 N013 0 NPN
Q20 N001 N003 N008 0 NPN
R9 N004 N010 50R
R10 N009 N010 1K
R11 N010 N013 20R
R12 N008 N014 12K
R13 N001 N003 5K
R14 P001 N015 20K
M21 N028 N016 N014 N014 PMOS
D7 N001 N004 Diode
D8 P001 N003 Schottky
*
*MODELS NEEDED FOR CA3140 INNARDS
..model Diode D
..model Schottky D
..lib E:\EDITORS\LTSPICE\lib\cmp\standard.dio
..model NPN NPN
..model PNP PNP
..lib E:\EDITORS\LTSPICE\lib\cmp\standard.bjt
..model NMOS NMOS
..model PMOS PMOS
..lib E:\EDITORS\LTSPICE\lib\cmp\standard.mos
..ends

Jim Thompson · Jan 23, 2012

On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 16:51:47 -0600, Lostgallifreyan
<no-one@nowhere.net> wrote:

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
news:689rh79n8b4qn03kbfs7rhmlrpvcv01o6r@4ax.com:

I'll see if I can't write a better subcircuit.

Here's something I can do that may help... It's as exact a rendering of the
CA3140 schematic as I can make from the Intersil datasheet. Resistors have
correct values, and numbering of all parts is exact (though the MOSFETS get
an M where bipolars get a Q). I have repeatedly double-checked the wiring so
the nodes should be right (though arbitrarily numbered in the netlist). I
made (far simpler) working subcircuits for SPST and SPDT switches yesterday
(things strangely lacking from LTspice as supplied!) based on netlists, and
applied my methods to this one, below, so it should be intact. I don't know
nearly enough to get the modelling right for the CA3140 diodes, bipolar and
FET transistors, and what appear to be Schottky diodes, let alone add
anything else vital like temperature related behaviour, but this starting
framework might save you some work if you're willing to add the vital
details. It likely also needs a reduction to 5 pins from 8 to fit a standard
op-amp model.

*Intersil CA3140, basic model drafted from datasheet.
* 8, Strb -------------------------|
* 7, V+ -----------------------| |
* 6, Out --------------------| | |
* 5, null -----------------| | | |
* 4, Gnd --------------| | | | |
* 3, +In -----------| | | | | |
* 2, -In --------| | | | | | |
* 1, null -----| | | | | | | |
* | | | | | | | |
.SUBCKT CA3140 31 21 23 15 30 16 1 12
D1 N001 N002 Diode
Q1 N005 N002 N001 0 PNP
Q2 N007 N002 N001 0 PNP
Q3 N006 N002 N001 0 PNP
Q4 N012 N005 N006 0 PNP
Q5 N024 N005 N007 0 PNP
Q6 N011 N005 N002 0 PNP
Q7 N005 N011 N017 0 NPN
R1 N017 N015 8K
M8 N020 N015 N011 N011 PMOS
D2 N020 N015 Diode
D3 N022 N021 Schottky
D4 N022 N023 Schottky
D5 N022 N024 Schottky
M9 N025 N021 N024 N024 PMOS
M10 N026 N023 N024 N024 PMOS
R2 N025 N029 500R
R3 N026 N027 500R
Q11 N029 N025 N030 0 NPN
Q12 N027 N025 N031 0 NPN
R4 N030 N015 500R
R5 N031 N015 500R
Q13 N012 N027 N015 0 NPN
C1 N027 N012 12pF
Q14 N018 N020 N032 0 NPN
Q15 N016 N020 N015 0 NPN
Q16 N016 N028 N015 0 NPN
D6 N028 N033 Diode
R6 N032 N015 50R
R7 N033 N015 30R
Q17 N001 N012 N018 0 NPN
R8 N018 N019 1K
Q18 N013 N019 N016 0 NPN
Q19 N006 N009 N013 0 NPN
Q20 N001 N003 N008 0 NPN
R9 N004 N010 50R
R10 N009 N010 1K
R11 N010 N013 20R
R12 N008 N014 12K
R13 N001 N003 5K
R14 P001 N015 20K
M21 N028 N016 N014 N014 PMOS
D7 N001 N004 Diode
D8 P001 N003 Schottky
*
*MODELS NEEDED FOR CA3140 INNARDS
.model Diode D
.model Schottky D
.lib E:\EDITORS\LTSPICE\lib\cmp\standard.dio
.model NPN NPN
.model PNP PNP
.lib E:\EDITORS\LTSPICE\lib\cmp\standard.bjt
.model NMOS NMOS
.model PMOS PMOS
.lib E:\EDITORS\LTSPICE\lib\cmp\standard.mos
.ends

Wow! That's extraordinarily helpful. Now all I have to do is search
my libraries for appropriate models. (I believe the diodes you call
Schottky are actually zeners... see D8 for instance... it's reverse
biased at all times.)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice

Lostgallifreyan · Jan 23, 2012

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
news:jeprh7l78plbm57tdibhfqmmi58omcrieq@4ax.com:

Wow! That's extraordinarily helpful. Now all I have to do is search
my libraries for appropriate models. (I believe the diodes you call
Schottky are actually zeners... see D8 for instance... it's reverse
biased at all times.)

Now I feel better.

I understand a need to do what I can for myself. I just
wish I'd known that makign a SUBCKT from a netlist was this easy, just takes
time and care. But the real core detail is beyond me, this is where I really
do need help.

I'll see if I can figure out the reduction needed for the 5-pin amp model but
there seems to be a conflict of interest because some might like that offset
network modelled in full. Working out what to include was easy, workign out
what can safely be omitted might be more than I should try to do. This model
needs to help all those who encountered that other one.

Lostgallifreyan · Jan 23, 2012

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
news:jeprh7l78plbm57tdibhfqmmi58omcrieq@4ax.com:

I believe the diodes you call
Schottky are actually zeners... see D8 for instance... it's reverse
biased at all times.)

Ooops.

So true, I don't know why I did that, my last circuit had enough
zeners. I think I saw the Schottky symbol in a moment of uncertainty. Also,
no zener voltages are specified, so that's another detail I don't know enough
to solve here.

Lostgallifreyan · Jan 24, 2012

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
news:jeprh7l78plbm57tdibhfqmmi58omcrieq@4ax.com:

Now all I have to do is search
my libraries for appropriate models.

I tried something of my own, so far with no luck...
Googling for 'PMOS Bipolar process', and 'BiMOS Operational Amplifier',
hoping to find some IC that also had a good working Spice subckt that I could
raid models from. I learned that a CA3260 exists, but could not find a model
for it. NTE7144 may be another source of appropriate models IF there's a
subckt for it, but again, I can't find one. I'm fairly sure I don't know
enough to decide if it's usable even if I do.

Incidentally, that old CA3140 model appears to have no transistor models, and
a very wrong diode model count. I'm no judge of these things, but when I look
at it I can imagine how Mulder or Scully feel when confronted with a human
form that has no clearly discernable anatomy.

Lostgallifreyan · Jan 24, 2012

I found this:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=16322

....but I have no way to get a look at it.

Jim Thompson · Jan 24, 2012

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:40:37 -0600, Lostgallifreyan
<no-one@nowhere.net> wrote:

I found this:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=16322

...but I have no way to get a look at it.

I do all my searches -IEEE

Lostgallifreyan · Jan 24, 2012

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in news:smhth75nfahtlc3hfpkqfke0docfqf37d9@4ax.com:

I found this:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=16322

...but I have no way to get a look at it.

I do all my searches -IEEE

They're invariably worthless anyway.

Ok

I figure that if they need to hide them that much,
maybe they are like the Emperor's New Clothes, and they
don't want too many people to notice.

How about these?
http://www.intusoft.com/nlpdf/nl30.pdf
(More than halfway through file, model of a Phillips BiCMOS bjt).
http://espice.ugr.es/espice/src/modelos_subckt/spice_complete/ABTMBN.LIB
Related to the ABT BiCMOS mentioned above, whole sets of models.

Any good?
(That LIB file also appears to directly reference the above file...)

Jim Thompson · Jan 24, 2012

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 09:30:41 -0600, Lostgallifreyan
<no-one@nowhere.net> wrote:

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in news:smhth75nfahtlc3hfpkqfke0docfqf37d9@4ax.com:

I found this:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=16322

...but I have no way to get a look at it.

I do all my searches -IEEE

They're invariably worthless anyway.

Ok I figure that if they need to hide them that much,
maybe they are like the Emperor's New Clothes, and they
don't want too many people to notice.

How about these?
http://www.intusoft.com/nlpdf/nl30.pdf
(More than halfway through file, model of a Phillips BiCMOS bjt).
http://espice.ugr.es/espice/src/modelos_subckt/spice_complete/ABTMBN.LIB
Related to the ABT BiCMOS mentioned above, whole sets of models. Any good?
(That LIB file also appears to directly reference the above file...)

Lostgallifreyan · Jan 24, 2012

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
news:2eoth7ph79r380a7pn9v43sal3ebpjc2gl@4ax.com:

I found some high-voltage MOS models dating back to the dark ages, and
am now trying to remember how they work ;-) (They're subcircuits that
include the parasitics found in BiCMOS.)

Sounds good. Sort of what I was looking for, but I was never there, and
might not know if if I saw it. I guess like good records of anything, it
helps to have saved stuff from the time and place of occurence. If Google is
anything to go by, BiMOS wasn't used all that much. Weird, given how good it
can be.

Jim Thompson · Jan 24, 2012

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:04:57 -0600, Lostgallifreyan
<no-one@nowhere.net> wrote:

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
news:2eoth7ph79r380a7pn9v43sal3ebpjc2gl@4ax.com:

I found some high-voltage MOS models dating back to the dark ages, and
am now trying to remember how they work ;-) (They're subcircuits that
include the parasitics found in BiCMOS.)

Sounds good. Sort of what I was looking for, but I was never there, and
might not know if if I saw it. I guess like good records of anything, it
helps to have saved stuff from the time and place of occurence. If Google is
anything to go by, BiMOS wasn't used all that much. Weird, given how good it
can be.

Google doesn't know $#^*

BiCMOS is wonderful for high-end analog/mixed-signal systems. I've
designed numerous chips on XFAB and Polarfab BiCMOS processes. BiCMOS
is quite a bit more expensive, but well worth it given the performance
gains.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice

Lostgallifreyan · Jan 24, 2012

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
news

spth79223jbsmjv1blovv8kpac0j6mlk7@4ax.com:

Google doesn't know $#^*

Well, that's kind of my point. >

I'm citing their best output to encourage
you to come up with the good stuff.

I think analog accuracy has been underrated over many years. Never mind that
it doesn't get to the last bit-worth of accuracy, the SPEED of calculating
complex forms is second till none, at least until someone does it with
quantum computing. So much time might have been saved by analog cumputers,
leaving digital ones to refine the output.

Driver to drive?

Lostgallifreyan

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Lostgallifreyan

Guest

Lostgallifreyan

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Lostgallifreyan

Guest

Lostgallifreyan

Guest

Lostgallifreyan

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Lostgallifreyan

Guest

Lostgallifreyan

Guest

Lostgallifreyan

Guest

Lostgallifreyan

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Lostgallifreyan

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Lostgallifreyan

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Lostgallifreyan

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor