Cosimulation with Matlab

D

Debjit

Guest
Dear All,

I am trying to Cosimulate Matlab and Cadence. That is my idea is to
simulate the circuit in Cadence using Spectre or AMS and to feed the
data to Matlab for deep analysis. For that I setup the
SimulinkCoupler
and the Fixed-Cell coupler. But whenever I am trying to simulate from
AMS, (either in Parallel Matlab and AMS or Cosimulating Matlab and
AMS) I am getting two errors:
1. LD_ASSUME_KERNEL variable set which may cause unstable simulation.
2. couple module 'tb_ieee_802_11a_demo.I10': *E,INITCF: ERROR
(SIMLNK-66): [Internal] The connection to host 'localhost' and port
5023 failed

Please any one can suggest some remedy for this problem?

Also it says that some of the modules in the Simulink Schematic of the
template "tb_ieee_802_11a_demo" (it comes as a part of Cadence
Distribution) is outdated and compalins about the mex files.

I am usimg the following version of Matlab, Spectre.


Matlab : R2009a
Spectre : sub-version 7.2.0.174.isr3
NCSIM: ncsim: 08.20-s021
ICFB: sub-version 5.10.41_USR6.127.29


Please suggest.

Thanks in advance for your support in advance..

------------------------------
Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,
Debjit
======================
Debjit Pal
 
Hi Debjit,

Can you look at Cadence's AVUM workshop ?

The AMS Virtuoso use model (AVUM) workshop is in
$CDSHOME/tools/dfII/samples/tutorials/AMS

There is one dedicated chapter for Matlab/Simulink with AMS Designer.
I remember having seen some info about which Matlab version to set,
Can't really recall off the top of my head.

The workshop comes with both the doc and the simulation database you
can exercise for a better understanding.

let me (us) know whether you solve your problems with this.

regards,
Riad.
 
Am 10.03.2010 20:19, schrieb Debjit:
Dear All,

I am trying to Cosimulate Matlab and Cadence. That is my idea is to
simulate the circuit in Cadence using Spectre or AMS and to feed the
data to Matlab for deep analysis. For that I setup the
SimulinkCoupler
and the Fixed-Cell coupler. But whenever I am trying to simulate from
AMS, (either in Parallel Matlab and AMS or Cosimulating Matlab and
AMS) I am getting two errors:
1. LD_ASSUME_KERNEL variable set which may cause unstable simulation.
2. couple module 'tb_ieee_802_11a_demo.I10': *E,INITCF: ERROR
(SIMLNK-66): [Internal] The connection to host 'localhost' and port
5023 failed

Please any one can suggest some remedy for this problem?

Also it says that some of the modules in the Simulink Schematic of the
template "tb_ieee_802_11a_demo" (it comes as a part of Cadence
Distribution) is outdated and compalins about the mex files.

I am usimg the following version of Matlab, Spectre.


Matlab : R2009a
Spectre : sub-version 7.2.0.174.isr3
NCSIM: ncsim: 08.20-s021
ICFB: sub-version 5.10.41_USR6.127.29


Please suggest.

Thanks in advance for your support in advance..

------------------------------
Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,
Debjit
======================
Debjit Pal
Click to expand...
If you need Matlab for postprocessing there is no need to do a
cosimulation. There is a Cadence Toolbox available which can read
simulation data into Matlab.
It's available in the MMSIM instalations, check the docu for details.

Regards,
Marc
 
On Mar 11, 3:33 am, Riad KACED <riad.ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Debjit,

Can you look at Cadence's AVUM workshop ?

The AMS Virtuoso use model (AVUM) workshop is in
$CDSHOME/tools/dfII/samples/tutorials/AMS

There is one dedicated chapter for Matlab/Simulink with AMS Designer.
I remember having seen some info about which Matlab version to set,
Can't really recall off the top of my head.

The workshop comes with both the doc and the simulation database you
can exercise for a better understanding.

let me (us) know whether you solve your problems with this.

regards,
Riad.
Click to expand...
Hi Riad,

I have worked out the workshop before I wrote into the group. But it
is really to concise and I think very hard to have the deeper
understanding of the actual tool flow for the co simulation purpose.
Can you please provide any more good references?

Thanks in advance.

Cheers!!!

Regards...
Debjit.
 
Debjit wrote, on 03/11/10 09:29:
Hi Riad,

I have worked out the workshop before I wrote into the group. But it
is really to concise and I think very hard to have the deeper
understanding of the actual tool flow for the co simulation purpose.
Can you please provide any more good references?

Thanks in advance.

Cheers!!!

Regards...
Debjit.
Click to expand...
Debjit,

First of all, do you really need to do co-simulation, or just post-processing in
Matlab (as Marc asked)?

Also, did you get the workshop working? If you had, that probably would have
made it clearer. In other words, did you get the problem you were originally
reporting when using the workshop, or was that just when trying to use your own
data and design?

It should work with 2009.a (I have 2009.b on my computer).

Regards,

Andrew.
 
Debjit,

I don't have any other references I am afraid.
I guess the Other existings would tell you which versions you need.
My best advice now is to understand what both Marc and Andrew have
said, i.e. do you need the cosimulation ?
If you problem still shows, then you may contact Cadence Customer
Support.

Cheers ... I meant to be on holiday right now ...
Riad.
 
On Mar 11, 5:40 pm, Riad KACED <riad.ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
Debjit,

I don't have any other references I am afraid.
I guess the Other existings would tell you which versions you need.
My best advice now is to understand what both Marc and Andrew have
said, i.e. do you need the cosimulation ?
If you problem still shows, then you may contact Cadence Customer
Support.

Cheers ... I meant to be on holiday right now ...
Riad.
Click to expand...
Hi Riad and Andrew and Marc,

It seems to me that I really require the co-simulation. Because I will
do some online monitoring and real-time signal processing on the
simulated outputs. It would be better if you please explain the fine
line of demarcation of Co-Simulation and Post Processing. It may be
that what may seem to you experienced people obvious, may be non-
trivial for me.

So it will be of great help if you can explain. I have found the
library which Marc referred. But I think for Real Time Signal
Processing, Co-Simulation is necessary with Matlab/Simulink.

Please suggest.

Thanks and Regards...

Cheerssss!!!!


Debjit.
 
Debjit wrote, on 03/11/10 13:50:
On Mar 11, 5:40 pm, Riad KACED<riad.ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
Debjit,

I don't have any other references I am afraid.
I guess the Other existings would tell you which versions you need.
My best advice now is to understand what both Marc and Andrew have
said, i.e. do you need the cosimulation ?
If you problem still shows, then you may contact Cadence Customer
Support.

Cheers ... I meant to be on holiday right now ...
Riad.

Hi Riad and Andrew and Marc,

It seems to me that I really require the co-simulation. Because I will
do some online monitoring and real-time signal processing on the
simulated outputs. It would be better if you please explain the fine
line of demarcation of Co-Simulation and Post Processing. It may be
that what may seem to you experienced people obvious, may be non-
trivial for me.

So it will be of great help if you can explain. I have found the
library which Marc referred. But I think for Real Time Signal
Processing, Co-Simulation is necessary with Matlab/Simulink.

Please suggest.

Thanks and Regards...

Cheerssss!!!!


Debjit.
Click to expand...
Hi Debjit,

The Spectre Toolbox for Matlab allows you to open simulation results from
Cadence simulators and read the data directly into Matlab. There you can use all
of the Matlab processing tools to take that data and do whatever calculations
you want.

If instead you were simulating in simulink, but want to include the effect of
the actual circuit in your simulink simulation, then the co-simulation approach
is good. For example, say you want to use simulink to simulate all the DSP
you're doing to generate the input signal to a circuit-level system, and then
want to read the output of that circuit-level system and do post-processing on
it (e.g. things like ACPR, EVM), then the co-sim with simulink is the right way.

If you just want to read the output of a simulation and do (say) an fft and
further signal processing on it, the toolbox would be sufficient (you're using
Matlab rather than simulink in that case).

You also didn't answer my question - did it work when you tried the example in
the workshop?

Regards,

Andrew.
 
On Mar 11, 9:24 pm, Andrew Beckett <andr...@DcEaLdEeTnEcTe.HcIoSm>
wrote:
Debjit wrote, on 03/11/10 13:50:



On Mar 11, 5:40 pm, Riad KACED<riad.ka...@gmail.com>  wrote:
Debjit,

I don't have any other references I am afraid.
I guess the Other existings would tell you which versions you need.
My best advice now is to understand what both Marc and Andrew have
said, i.e. do you need the cosimulation ?
If you problem still shows, then you may contact Cadence Customer
Support.

Cheers ... I meant to be on holiday right now ...
Riad.

Hi Riad and Andrew and Marc,

It seems to me that I really require the co-simulation. Because I will
do some online monitoring and real-time signal processing on the
simulated outputs. It would be better if you please explain the fine
line of demarcation of Co-Simulation and Post Processing. It may be
that what may seem to you experienced people obvious, may be non-
trivial for me.

So it will be of great help if you can explain. I have found the
library which Marc referred. But I think for Real Time Signal
Processing, Co-Simulation is necessary with Matlab/Simulink.

Please suggest.

Thanks and Regards...

Cheerssss!!!!

Debjit.

Hi Debjit,

The Spectre Toolbox for Matlab allows you to open simulation results from
Cadence simulators and read the data directly into Matlab. There you can use all
of the Matlab processing tools to take that data and do whatever calculations
you want.

If instead you were simulating in simulink, but want to include the effect of
the actual circuit in your simulink simulation, then the co-simulation approach
is good. For example, say you want to use simulink to simulate all the DSP
you're doing to generate the input signal to a circuit-level system, and then
want to read the output of that circuit-level system and do post-processing on
it (e.g. things like ACPR, EVM), then the co-sim with simulink is the right way.

If you just want to read the output of a simulation and do (say) an fft and
further signal processing on it, the toolbox would be sufficient (you're using
Matlab rather than simulink in that case).

You also didn't answer my question - did it work when you tried the example in
the workshop?

Regards,

Andrew.
Click to expand...
Hi Andrew,

I am extremely Sorry. I missed to read that you asked whether the
workshop worked or not. It worked in my setup with Matlab R2009a.
Do you mean the collection of codes of Matlab and Simulink in the path
$MMSIMHOME/tools/spectre/matlab and $MMSIMHOME/tools/spectre/simulink
respectively as the Spectre Toolbox?
If you mean them as the "Spectre" toolbox, then they are really good
for offline post processing. But I want to do online processing, for
which Simulink Cosimulation is the best candidate as you explained in
your post.
Thanks for the neat and concise explanations of the ideas.

Thanks and Regards !!!!

Cheers !!!!

Debjit.
 
Debjit wrote, on 03/12/10 05:56:
Hi Andrew,

I am extremely Sorry. I missed to read that you asked whether the
workshop worked or not. It worked in my setup with Matlab R2009a.
Do you mean the collection of codes of Matlab and Simulink in the path
$MMSIMHOME/tools/spectre/matlab and $MMSIMHOME/tools/spectre/simulink
respectively as the Spectre Toolbox?
If you mean them as the "Spectre" toolbox, then they are really good
for offline post processing. But I want to do online processing, for
which Simulink Cosimulation is the best candidate as you explained in
your post.
Thanks for the neat and concise explanations of the ideas.

Thanks and Regards !!!!

Cheers !!!!

Debjit.
Click to expand...
Hi Debjit,

So I'm assuming that the issues you described in your original post (the first
in this thread) are resolved? You say you got it working, whereas in the
original post it was not working - you had various errors.

Regards,

Andrew.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top