Check Out This Month's "Microwaves & RF" Magazine

Leon Heller · Sep 4, 2004

"Adrian Hey" <ahey@NoSpicedHam.iee.org> wrote in message
news:x66dnWhehOgEaaTcRVn-ug@nildram.net...

Leon Heller wrote:

Same here. I've been using Pulsonix since it first came out. I've tried
all the other packages but don't like any of them. Protel, for instance,
has lots more features, but I doubt if many people actually use them,
and
it is consequently rather slow and cumbersome, as well as having lots of
bugs.

Just curious, but do you know how EasyPC and pulsonix compare? They seem
to be from the same outfit AFAICT, but there's a huge price difference.

What can you do with pulsonix that you can't do with EasyPC?

They are out of the same stable, but aimed at different markets, and there
are a lot of differences. Have a look at the web sites and compare the
specifications, and try the two demos.

Leon

Clarence · Sep 6, 2004

"Don Prescott" <DMBPrescott@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7fb54666.0409060424.731aa92b@posting.google.com...

nothing@nothing.com wrote in message
news:<4138b654$1$woehfu$mr2ice@giganews.aros.net>...
Protel is not an easy package to use, and after a lot of experience in
using
it, I would not recommend it to anyone. Consider that maybe they have great
support because the software is so badly implemented that it is the only
way
they can get anyone to use it. I have used the products you mentioned, in
one
version or another, and Protel falls way short in any about any comparison.
Its best to remember that some people take their software packages very
seriously and would probably let you say things about their wife and kids,
that they would not allow you to say about the favorite CAD program. If
you
want to be productive, avoid Protel.

Yep, have to agreed the above. Protel used to be a cheap (but buggy)
product. They had their heyday in the 90s when there was much else
around at the price that was any good. There is now!

I just took a look at the Altium stock price and got a shock that it
had slumped to 34 cents. I then got an even bigger shock when I
realized these are Australian cents, this price equals 23 US cents...!
You have to wonder where this company is heading......
Prescott

Last Quote is $0.63 USD

Not much different than a month ago.

I am also a user of their software, and Find it actable and not too hard to
use.

If some one is looking for a schematic package there are cheaper less powerful
packages available, once you learn it Protel is a productive tool.

Clarence · Sep 7, 2004

"Don Prescott" <DMBPrescott@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7fb54666.0409070049.7a32110c@posting.google.com...

I believe the Protel product is not user-friendly by today's standards
and it is over-priced. There's better products around these days at
fairer prices.
Prescott

Your belief is limited to your experience. I have worked (contracted) with
eight companies who exclusively use Protel. They do so because it is cost
effective.

I am sure that your belief is sufficient for your decisions, but I do wander
why you would inflict your narrow view on people trying to make a choice with
out their understanding the reasons fro you bias?

I do respect your right to an opinion and to speak out in a clear and
unambiguous manner that YOU (emphases a personal nonobjective position) Do not
feel that PROTEL is a good program for beginners. I also think that a
Beginner can find a less expensive and easier to use (fewer features) on the
internet. But to flatly state that is not a useful system? No! "Rockwell
International" "Raytheon" "DRS" "Boeing" and many others might disagree.
Myself included.

The stock information I obtained is from my broker. The dip is about the same
as many other companies. I have made quite a bit from the variation in prices
the last few years. Including some that dropped even more only to gradually
return to somewhere near the year 2000 price.

Some Software companies in the US went down and were purchased by someone. It
happens, and usually because they have a good product.

Clarence · Sep 7, 2004

<nothing@nothing.com> wrote in message
news:413e3b01$1$woehfu$mr2ice@giganews.aros.net...

In <06q%c.12764$QJ3.10670@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>, on 09/07/04 at 09:54
PM,
"Clarence" <No@No.Com> said:

Your statements were too adamant to be interpreted as anything but
condemnation. With a finality that would brook no disagreement.
I objected to that.

Well, they were not my words, but that's okay. I know what you meant.

Also, your implication that English speakers have some problem is really
interesting. Would you suggest what language is totally unambiguous? I
should
like to learn it!

Surely the written language of the internet is the easiest to interpret, free
of ambiguity and mis-representations

The point I wanted to make is that if someone says "its hot outside" that is
not a statement of a fact, its an opinion. They are not required by the
"rules" of the English language, to preface it by saying "In my opinion," or
"I think" If someone asks what I think of Protel, and I say "its hard to use"
it is not necessary for me to reply "In my opinion, its hard to use" but the
reader IS required to understand that the "in my opinion" is implied, in
order
to avoid just what you read into the statement. That is what I meant. No
attempt to defame or insult those who use the language.

When someone says Protel is hard to use, it ought not be construed to mean
that they are the all knowing, fact bearing God of Protel. Its just their
opinion, even tho they do not say "in my opinion"

The original poster asked about what Cad package he might use, and IIRC, I
got
involved by saying that he/she ought to avoid Protel, and then I made it a
point to state that some will disagree, so I guess I at least got that right
g

Those who do not stop and consider the "unwritten rules" will sometimes be
confused by someone making a statement, since it can appear to be some kind
of
all-knowing commentary, when in fact, it was just an opinion.

If someone replies to the inquiry and says "Protel is not a good platform"
those words are simply an opinion. Not a closed, condemnation. I think the
best response to someone whose opinioin differs would be "why do you say
that?" as opposed to the assumption that the person claims godhood and is all
knowing. If someone has used Protel, and says they don't like it, I think
that
opinion ought to be accepted as it was given, not hurled back in their face
with an attitude of "you are wrong," since one cannot be wrong when stating
an
opinion.

Anyway, I think Protel is cryptic, the libraries are hard to work with, its
difficult to route, and not very forgiving when it comes to making changes to
existing routes and nets. There are some good points, as with most CAD
software, but overall, I give it a D- based on what I expect to get from a
PCB
package. IMO, of course.

And I give Protel a "B-" But that puts in on a par with several more expensive
packages. (I really don't think $3,995 is that high now days. Orcad was up to
$17,995 when I bought my Protel.)

Unwritten rules are real handy, when you need to explain what you meant, But
since we largely agree, that is a personal opinion. No Big Thing. Hope the
guy took my advice and got someone else to layout his boards!

Clarence · Sep 7, 2004

<nothing@nothing.com> wrote in message
news:413e4592$1$woehfu$mr2ice@giganews.aros.net...

In <L7r%c.12788$QJ3.2027@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>, on 09/07/04 at 11:04
PM,
"Clarence" <No@No.Com> said:

Unwritten rules are real handy, when you need to explain what you meant, But
since we largely agree, that is a personal opinion. No Big Thing. Hope the
guy took my advice and got someone else to layout his boards!

Good advice, but I wish he would have hired me to do it. I could use the
work!

Like everyone on the Electronics Newsgroups.

-)

Fred Bartoli · Sep 9, 2004

"Mike Engelhardt" <nospam@spam.org> a écrit dans le message de
news:a2n%c.17160$wZ2.17027@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...

But noise verses common mode voltage isn't modeled.

Mike,
Any info, pointer on this, and how/why this happens ?

I've seen you make mention of this in a recent thread about shot noise.
Very little info (read no info) on the subject exists in datasheets and I
have to use a LT1128 in a very critical wrt to noise application.

--
Thanks,
Fred.

Mike Engelhardt · Sep 9, 2004

Fred,

But noise verses common mode voltage isn't modeled.

Any info, pointer on this, and how/why this happens ?

I've seen you make mention of this in a recent thread
about shot noise. Very little info (read no info) on
the subject exists in datasheets and I have to use a
LT1128 in a very critical wrt to noise application.

The noise can be dependent on common mode input voltage,
particularly in something like a rail-to-rail input JFET
opamps. It's not an issue in a bipolar design like the
LT1128.

If you want, e-mail me at the address on LTspice's
Help=>About box(I don't put the address anywhere else
for spam reasons) and I'll give you the contact
information for the apps engineer that can help you
with noise on any LT opamp.

--Mike

Sep 10, 2004

In <54d69b7c.0409072256.4427ae2d@posting.google.com>, on 09/07/04 at 11:56 PM,
wojtek2u@wp.pl (greg2u) said:

Hi,
I'm looking for the Protel schematic library with the PCI edge connector.
Anyone could help?

Have you gotten any help with this part yet? I have Protel99 on my machine
somewhere, and I am sure the PCI sch and pcb decal are in there. Been a while
since I fired it up, bu if you still need it, lemme know.

Mark

Alan · Sep 11, 2004

On 10 Sep 2004 11:55:34 -0700, "weareborg" <podmo3@aol.com> wrote:

Anybody know where I can get a copy of Protel Schematic & Autotrax for
DOS. I only managed to download a demo copy of the latest version, but
I could really do with the DOS version to run on my old laptop.
Cheers

Andy

You can get Autotrax here:
http://www.protel.com.au/downloads/

It's freeware now. I don't think Protel have relased Schmatic as
freeware (wish they would) or if it is available somewhere.

Alan

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jenal Communications
Manufacturers and Suppliers of HF Selcall
P O Box 1108, Morley, WA, 6943
Tel: +61 8 9370 5533 Fax +61 8 9467 6146
Web Site: http://www.jenal.com
e-mail: http://www.jenal.com/?p=1
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Paul Burke · Sep 13, 2004

Patard wrote:

Does someone could give me his personal evaluation on EdWinXP?

What about EdWinXP versus Orcad, Protel and others advanced electronics CAD ?

I was foolish enough to pay for EdWin some years ago. Packed with
features, most of which didn't work. Used it once, spending much time on
the phone to support, then threw it away. So unless it's got a LOT
better, don't bother.

Paul Burke

Paul Burridge · Sep 13, 2004

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 14:19:59 -0500, R wrote

y McCammon
<rbmccammon@mmm.com>

Not actually a problem with the software, but rather the included
op-amp libraries. There are numerous op-amp models using some sort
of unreadable encoding (i.e., you cannot see the equivalent spice
net list). I thought that these being LT opamps and the models
coming from LT that they would be exquisitely accurate. I was
disappointed to learn (by experiment) that input capacitance
wasn't included or is very much smaller than the data sheet
specs. No telling what else isn't included.

I noticed this when I optimizing the feedback capacitance
of a high band width inverting configuration. The optimum
value was less than 1fF when it should have been a few pF.

Its easy enough to add the capacitances, but disappointing
never the less and it's ugly.

Give Mike a fair chance to answer this by posting it to the
appropriate group!
(done)

--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

Paul Burridge · Sep 13, 2004

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 14:19:59 -0500, R wrote

y McCammon
<rbmccammon@mmm.com>

Not actually a problem with the software, but rather the included
op-amp libraries. There are numerous op-amp models using some sort
of unreadable encoding (i.e., you cannot see the equivalent spice
net list). I thought that these being LT opamps and the models
coming from LT that they would be exquisitely accurate. I was
disappointed to learn (by experiment) that input capacitance
wasn't included or is very much smaller than the data sheet
specs. No telling what else isn't included.

I noticed this when I optimizing the feedback capacitance
of a high band width inverting configuration. The optimum
value was less than 1fF when it should have been a few pF.

Its easy enough to add the capacitances, but disappointing
never the less and it's ugly.

Give Mike a fair chance to answer this by posting it to the
appropriate group!
(done)

--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

Jim Thompson · Sep 14, 2004

On 14 Sep 2004 09:24:10 -0700, hailsudip@yahoo.co.in (sudip) wrote:

how can i edit or create a new pspice part in orcad 9.2...plz help.
thanx in advance
Sudip kumar Chatterjee.

Are you using PSched (PSpice Schematics) or Capture?

If Capture I can be of no help.

For beginners I recommend copying an existing part and then modify.

In PSched, Edit Symbol Library, Pick an existing library, Copy Part
and then play with the editing tools to learn how it works.

If all else fails, RTFM ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Dana Raymond · Sep 15, 2004

"Tamim" <tazizi@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3a4d075e.0408200715.3216573e@posting.google.com...

Hi,
I want to buy Orcad. Since they are charging Ł4000 for a new copy
there is no way that i can afford that. Does anyone have Orcad 9 (or
hiher version such as 9.2 or 10) that they are not using. In ur reply
please indicate how much you would want for it.
Thank You.

Tamim

Careful Tamin! There are several cracks freely available for Orcad 9.2.3 and
Orcad 10! Don't buy anything unless you get the actual license and/or docs.
It would be easy for someone to ship you a CD and take your money. Caveat
Emptor!

Jim Thompson · Sep 16, 2004

You have no node 0 (zero)

Add a ground symbol

On 16 Sep 2004 13:17:16 -0700, apparatus.home@lycos.com (Apparatus)
wrote:

Hello,

I'm trying to model a very basic non-inverting amplifier using a
Burr-Brown OPA134 opamp using OrCAD PSpice A/D 10.0 Demo, freely
available from OrCAD's website.

I have zipped my design and put it up on:
http://www.its.caltech.edu/~hiszpans/preamp.zip

The model uses an OPA134, created by following the instructions at:
http://focus.ti.com/lit/an/sloa070/sloa070.pdf
and using the SPICE model provided by TI for the OPA134.

The model also uses a 1k and a 10k resistor for the feedback network
and a VAC source (Vac = 1, Vdc = 0) as input to the non-inverting
input of the opamp.

I have played around with the simulation of this circuit for a while
now, but I keep getting the following (entire PSpice output file
follows):

What could the problem be?

Chris

**** 09/16/04 13:13:25 ************** PSpice Lite (Jan 2003)
*****************

** Profile: "SCHEMATIC1-preamp" [
C:\ORCAD\work\preamp\preamp-PSpiceFiles\SCHEMATIC1\preamp.sim ]

**** CIRCUIT DESCRIPTION

******************************************************************************

** Creating circuit file "preamp.cir"
** WARNING: THIS AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED FILE MAY BE OVERWRITTEN BY
SUBSEQUENT SIMULATIONS

*Libraries:
* Profile Libraries :
.INC "C:\ORCAD\work\preamp\preamp-PSpiceFiles\SCHEMATIC1\preamp\preamp_profile.inc"
* Local Libraries :

**** INCLUDING preamp_profile.inc ****
.STMLIB ".\preamp.stl"

**** RESUMING preamp.cir ****
.LIB "C:/orcad/orcad_10.0_demo/tools/pspice/library/eval.lib"
.LIB "C:/orcad/orcad_10.0_demo/tools/pspice/UserLib/opa134.lib"
* From [PSPICE NETLIST] section of
C:\orcad\orcad_10.0_demo\tools\PSpice\PSpice.ini file:
.lib "nom.lib"

*Analysis directives:
.AC DEC 100 100 1000000
.OPTIONS STEPGMIN
.PROBE V(alias(*)) I(alias(*)) W(alias(*)) D(alias(*)) NOISE(alias(*))
.INC "..\SCHEMATIC1.net"

**** INCLUDING SCHEMATIC1.net ****
* source PREAMP
V_V1 N08548 GND_POWER DC 0Vdc AC 1Vac
V_V2 GND_POWER N092391 20Vdc
R_R1 GND_POWER N08368 1k
V_V3 N092720 GND_POWER 20Vdc
R_R2 N08368 N08386 10k
X_U1 N08548 N08368 N092720 N092391 N08386 OPA134

**** RESUMING preamp.cir ****
.END

**** 09/16/04 13:13:25 ************** PSpice Lite (Jan 2003)
*****************

** Profile: "SCHEMATIC1-preamp" [
C:\ORCAD\work\preamp\preamp-PSpiceFiles\SCHEMATIC1\preamp.sim ]

**** Diode MODEL PARAMETERS

******************************************************************************

X_U1.DX
IS 800.000000E-18

**** 09/16/04 13:13:25 ************** PSpice Lite (Jan 2003)
*****************

** Profile: "SCHEMATIC1-preamp" [
C:\ORCAD\work\preamp\preamp-PSpiceFiles\SCHEMATIC1\preamp.sim ]

**** Junction FET MODEL PARAMETERS

******************************************************************************

X_U1.JX
PJF
VTO -1
BETA 1.010000E-03
IS 2.500000E-15

ERROR -- Convergence problem in bias point calculation

Last node voltages tried were:

NODE VOLTAGE NODE VOLTAGE NODE VOLTAGE NODE
VOLTAGE

(N08368)-10.00E+09 (N08386)-10.00E+09 (N08548)-10.00E+09 (X_U1.6)
.0044

(X_U1.7)-10.00E+09 (X_U1.8)-10.00E+09 (X_U1.9) 0.0000
(N092391)-10.00E+09

(N092720)-10.00E+09 (X_U1.10)-10.00E+09

(X_U1.11)-10.00E+09 (X_U1.12)-10.00E+09

(X_U1.53)-10.00E+09 (X_U1.54)-10.00E+09

(X_U1.90) -.0461 (X_U1.91) 40.0000

(X_U1.92) -40.0000 (X_U1.99)-10.00E+09

(GND_POWER)-10.00E+09

These voltages failed to converge:

V(N08548) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV
V(GND_POWER) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV
V(N092391) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV
V(N08368) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV
V(N092720) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV
V(N08386) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV
V(X_U1.11) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV
V(X_U1.12) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV
V(X_U1.7) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV
V(X_U1.10) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV
V(X_U1.99) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV
V(X_U1.53) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV
V(X_U1.54) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV
V(X_U1.8) = -10.00GV \ -10.00GV

**** Interrupt ****

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Paul Camilleri · Sep 16, 2004

I'm certain EDS 3.0 (from QuickRoute) is a dead product unless anyone knows
any better. Their website is no longer up and has not been for quite some
time.

Regards,

Paul

Leon Heller · Sep 17, 2004

"Patard" <patard@orange.Fr> wrote in message
news:75a49f3c.0409170015.5fa7beaf@posting.google.com...

"Paul Camilleri" <paul.camilleri@nexus-research.demon.co.uk> wrote in
message news:<cicu9g$gh2$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk>...
I'm certain EDS 3.0 (from QuickRoute) is a dead product unless anyone
knows
any better. Their website is no longer up and has not been for quite some
time.

Regards,

Paul

Thank you.
Do you know what PCB software will be of convenient use with TINA Pro?
What about TINA Pro and PULSONIX or PROTEUS?....
ORCAD, PROTEL, CADSTAR are too much expensive for my use (proto design
only, no production)

Pulsonix is excellent: http://www.pulsonix.com

Download the demo and join the users group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PulsonixUG/

Leon

Mike Engelhardt · Sep 17, 2004

Not actually a problem with the software, but rather the included
op-amp libraries. There are numerous op-amp models using some sort
of unreadable encoding (i.e., you cannot see the equivalent spice
net list). I thought that these being LT opamps and the models
coming from LT that they would be exquisitely accurate. I was
disappointed to learn (by experiment) that input capacitance
wasn't included or is very much smaller than the data sheet
specs. No telling what else isn't included.

I noticed this when I optimizing the feedback capacitance
of a high band width inverting configuration. The optimum
value was less than 1fF when it should have been a few pF.

Its easy enough to add the capacitances, but disappointing
never the less and it's ugly.

I'm out of town so I'm not reading the group regularly, but
I think you should not use opamp macromodels at all. They
are these PSpice compatible things that are terribly
inefficient. You should just use the UniversalOpamp model
or your own model for the specific aspects you wish to
simulate. There have been many treads regarding opamp models.

--Mike

ChrisGibboGibson · Sep 20, 2004

"weareborg" wrote:

Anybody know where I can get a copy of Protel Schematic & Autotrax for
DOS. I only managed to download a demo copy of the latest version, but
I could really do with the DOS version to run on my old laptop.
Cheers

The autotrax query has been answered elsewhere. If you confirm your email
address is valid you might find that some anonymous address sends the full
protel schematic to you tomorrow

ChrisGibboGibson · Sep 20, 2004

PS. It's sh*t. Orcad SDT is much better.

Check Out This Month's "Microwaves & RF" Magazine

Leon Heller

Guest

Clarence

Guest

Clarence

Guest

Clarence

Guest

Clarence

Guest

Fred Bartoli

Guest

Mike Engelhardt

Guest

Guest

Alan

Guest

Paul Burke

Guest

Paul Burridge

Guest

Paul Burridge

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Dana Raymond

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Paul Camilleri

Guest

Leon Heller

Guest

Mike Engelhardt

Guest

ChrisGibboGibson

Guest

ChrisGibboGibson

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor