EAGLE Netlist conversion

Paul Burridge · Sep 29, 2004

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 11:38:30 +0100, Terry Pinnell
<terrypinDELETE@dial.pipexTHIS.com> wrote:

Paul Burridge <pb@osiris1.notthisbit.co.uk> wrote:

Hi all,

I'm a bit stumped, having had no luck whatsoever trying to find Spice
models for these two devices: 2N5109 (a BJT) and an FD700 (a diode.)
I *have* tried Googling (before anyone suggests it) and have only
found less than 2 dozen references over the last 5 years (all to other
people asking for the same thing without success.) If anyone's got the
gen on these two, then that would be splendid. Many thanks indeed.

This is what CircuitMaker has for the FD700:

IS: Saturation current 71.00p
RS: Ohmic resistance [0,] 840.0m
N: Emission coefficient 1.700
TT: Transit-time [0,] 1.010n
CJO: Zero-bias junction capacitance [0,] 1.330p
VJ: Junction potential 750.0m
M: Grading coefficient 333.0m
EG: Activation energy 1.110
XTI: Saturation-current temperature exponent 3.000
KF: Flicker-noise coefficient 0.000
AF: Flicker-noise exponent 1.000
FC: Foward-bias depletion coefficient 500.0m
BV: Reverse breakdown voltage 20.00
IBV: Current at breakdown voltage 55.00n
TNOM: Paramameter measurement temperature 27.00

The 2N5109 is not in CM's model files. One possible equivalent my ref
books came up with is 276-2038, but I think that is probably just an
old USA Radio Shack product code Shack.

--

"I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend
to write it." - Winston Churchill

Paul Burridge · Sep 29, 2004

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 11:38:30 +0100, Terry Pinnell
<terrypinDELETE@dial.pipexTHIS.com> wrote:

This is what CircuitMaker has for the FD700:

IS: Saturation current 71.00p
RS: Ohmic resistance [0,] 840.0m
N: Emission coefficient 1.700
TT: Transit-time [0,] 1.010n
CJO: Zero-bias junction capacitance [0,] 1.330p
VJ: Junction potential 750.0m
M: Grading coefficient 333.0m
EG: Activation energy 1.110
XTI: Saturation-current temperature exponent 3.000
KF: Flicker-noise coefficient 0.000
AF: Flicker-noise exponent 1.000
FC: Foward-bias depletion coefficient 500.0m
BV: Reverse breakdown voltage 20.00
IBV: Current at breakdown voltage 55.00n
TNOM: Paramameter measurement temperature 27.00

Many thanks, Terry. If you read my post entitled "What's wrong with
this amplifier?" you'll see why I wanted this model. It's certainly
kick-started the amp simulation referred to in that thread as no other
has done. Any idea what type of diode the FD700 is? I'm a bit confused
as to how come it's made so much difference to the performance of the
amp in question. :-/
--

"I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend
to write it." - Winston Churchill

Spehro Pefhany · Sep 29, 2004

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:11:10 +0100, the renowned Paul Burridge
<pb@osiris1.notthisbit.co.uk> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 11:38:30 +0100, Terry Pinnell
terrypinDELETE@dial.pipexTHIS.com> wrote:

This is what CircuitMaker has for the FD700:

IS: Saturation current 71.00p
RS: Ohmic resistance [0,] 840.0m
N: Emission coefficient 1.700
TT: Transit-time [0,] 1.010n
CJO: Zero-bias junction capacitance [0,] 1.330p
VJ: Junction potential 750.0m
M: Grading coefficient 333.0m
EG: Activation energy 1.110
XTI: Saturation-current temperature exponent 3.000
KF: Flicker-noise coefficient 0.000
AF: Flicker-noise exponent 1.000
FC: Foward-bias depletion coefficient 500.0m
BV: Reverse breakdown voltage 20.00
IBV: Current at breakdown voltage 55.00n
TNOM: Paramameter measurement temperature 27.00

Many thanks, Terry. If you read my post entitled "What's wrong with
this amplifier?" you'll see why I wanted this model. It's certainly
kick-started the amp simulation referred to in that thread as no other
has done. Any idea what type of diode the FD700 is? I'm a bit confused
as to how come it's made so much difference to the performance of the
amp in question. :-/

http://www.wenzel.com/pdffiles/diodedbl.pdf

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

Terry Pinnell · Sep 29, 2004

Paul Burridge <pb@osiris1.notthisbit.co.uk> wrote:

Any idea what type of diode the FD700 is? I'm a bit confused
as to how come it's made so much difference to the performance of the
amp in question. :-/

All I can find is that suggested equivalents are BAX13 and BAW75.
The former is described elsewhere as a switching type of silicon
planar epitaxial construction, with specs:
PIV = 75V, Min I(forward) = 2mA at 0.7V, Max I(reverse) = 0.05uA at
50V.

--
Terry Pinnell
Hobbyist, West Sussex, UK

Paul Burridge · Sep 29, 2004

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:49:15 GMT, Spehro Pefhany <speff@interlog.com>
wrote:

http://www.wenzel.com/pdffiles/diodedbl.pdf

Best regards,

Thanks, Speff; a most helpful pointer I must say. Looks like the
junction capacitance and the transit time are the chief parameters
that determine suitability for the circuit I had in mind. Whilst the
1N914 is in the same category of diode as the FD700 (both high-speed
switching) the latter has *much* lower junction capacitance and is far
faster. I can understand how lower capacitance helps in this instance,
but I'm still a bit in the dark as to how speed comes into it when the
diode in question is across (in parallel with) the input.
--

"I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend
to write it." - Winston Churchill

Paul Burridge · Sep 29, 2004

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 19:49:18 +0100, Terry Pinnell
<terrypinDELETE@dial.pipexTHIS.com> wrote:

All I can find is that suggested equivalents are BAX13 and BAW75.
The former is described elsewhere as a switching type of silicon
planar epitaxial construction, with specs:
PIV = 75V, Min I(forward) = 2mA at 0.7V, Max I(reverse) = 0.05uA at
50V.

I think I may well have a BAX13 somewhere around here. The only
foot-note to the design in question relates to this diode. It states:
"The diode keeps the duty-cycle near 50% for good efficiency for a
wide range of power levels."
Making very small changes to the diode model's key parameters makes a
large difference to the amp's efficiency. It's quite instructive to
run simulations using difference diode models. Even with other,
closely related members of the same diode category, the circuit fails
to amplify at all. :-|

--

"I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend
to write it." - Winston Churchill

Paul Burridge · Sep 29, 2004

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:00:30 -0700, Jim Thompson
<Jim-T@golana-will-get-you.com> wrote:

My apologies for equating the FD700 and the 1N914. Being only
familiar with the 1N914 from 40 years ago, I erred by relying on the
accuracy of a FRENCH site ;-)

No problem, Jim. It takes a big man to admit he's made a mistake.
Visiting a french site, I mean.
;-)
--

"I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend
to write it." - Winston Churchill

Jim Thompson · Sep 29, 2004

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 23:41:51 +0100, Paul Burridge
<pb@osiris1.notthisbit.co.uk> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:00:30 -0700, Jim Thompson
Jim-T@golana-will-get-you.com> wrote:

My apologies for equating the FD700 and the 1N914. Being only
familiar with the 1N914 from 40 years ago, I erred by relying on the
accuracy of a FRENCH site ;-)

No problem, Jim. It takes a big man to admit he's made a mistake.
Visiting a french site, I mean.
;-)

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

Michael A. Terrell · Sep 29, 2004

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:33:13 +0100, Paul Burridge
pb@osiris1.notthisbit.co.uk> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:49:15 GMT, Spehro Pefhany <speff@interlog.com
wrote:

http://www.wenzel.com/pdffiles/diodedbl.pdf

Best regards,

Thanks, Speff; a most helpful pointer I must say. Looks like the
junction capacitance and the transit time are the chief parameters
that determine suitability for the circuit I had in mind. Whilst the
1N914 is in the same category of diode as the FD700 (both high-speed
switching) the latter has *much* lower junction capacitance and is far
faster. I can understand how lower capacitance helps in this instance,
but I'm still a bit in the dark as to how speed comes into it when the
diode in question is across (in parallel with) the input.

My apologies for equating the FD700 and the 1N914. Being only
familiar with the 1N914 from 40 years ago, I erred by relying on the
accuracy of a FRENCH site ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--

How do you get the snails out of your computer after that? ;-)

--

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

Jim Thompson · Sep 29, 2004

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 03:56:03 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:33:13 +0100, Paul Burridge
pb@osiris1.notthisbit.co.uk> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:49:15 GMT, Spehro Pefhany <speff@interlog.com
wrote:

http://www.wenzel.com/pdffiles/diodedbl.pdf

Best regards,

Thanks, Speff; a most helpful pointer I must say. Looks like the
junction capacitance and the transit time are the chief parameters
that determine suitability for the circuit I had in mind. Whilst the
1N914 is in the same category of diode as the FD700 (both high-speed
switching) the latter has *much* lower junction capacitance and is far
faster. I can understand how lower capacitance helps in this instance,
but I'm still a bit in the dark as to how speed comes into it when the
diode in question is across (in parallel with) the input.

My apologies for equating the FD700 and the 1N914. Being only
familiar with the 1N914 from 40 years ago, I erred by relying on the
accuracy of a FRENCH site ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--

How do you get the snails out of your computer after that? ;-)

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

K Wind · Sep 29, 2004

"Gigi Craig" <g_craig@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:80a6846f.0309050634.60c4c624@posting.google.com...

I've tried several times to import an Orcad (9.2) netlist pads2k in
PowerPCB 4.0, however I keep getting the same error saying "Can't find
part Type item". I assume that it has something to do with
incompatibility of the Orcad Library and PowerPCB, but I'm not sure
and don't know how to solve. Any ideas?

Any help would appreciated, tks.

The parts in both libraries have to have the same name. You have to go
through the Orcad netlist and make sure there is a corresponding part name
in PADS for both "part type" and "PCB decal".

Ken

Chaos Master · Sep 29, 2004

Joe McElvenney screamed:

[removed the crossposting in order to avoid angry people on
comp.cad.cadence]

In even a full-blown version, at least in Capture 7.0, many
generic parts are in PSPICE.OLB and so will hide themselves from
a simple part search by having 'D' or 'Q' or whatever in front of
the part number (e.g. Q2N3055). There then may be a good reason
for not duplicating them in the main libraries.

We are talking about Capture 9.1. And using a D, Q or <whatever letter>
is standard for many simulators. e.g. SIMetrix will not accept models
that start with numbers - it will say that the model name must start
with a letter.

--
E-mail address is fake. Please reply to the group!

Jim Thompson · Sep 29, 2004

On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 19:54:25 GMT, "Robert Hickey" <robert@yahoo.com>
wrote:

"Jim Thompson wrote in message
After layout we do what is called back-annotation which
calculates
these strays. The back-annotation netlist is added to the
original
netlist and the simulations are re-run.

...Jim Thompson

Do you have to deal with stray inductance? Or only resistance &
capacitance?

The tools seem to be quite lacking there.

Robert

As Kevin notes, not usually, although the wirebonds can be quite a
hassle at higher frequencies. I think I've posted a wirebond model
with skin effect in the past.

...Jim Thompson

shrug

My first project at <mumble> had me struggling to get a redesign of an
amplifier to run at 10-13 GHz with acceptable performance. All I had
for a simulator was PSpice and an in-house Model for our MESFETs. I
made some custom fitted Models for circuit transitions (wirebonds
mostly) from measurements with a HP8510 Network analyzer and struggled
with the rest.

Most of the other circuits in the place were Cell Phone frequencies
and others up to about 5 GHz. Those they could model fairly well.

I was fairly new and I pushed some areas closer in Layout than I
should have but with no way to model the effects I lacked the
experience to "just know" not to do that.

Didn't work out all that well.

But on that project and many others, the lack of inductance parasitic
modeling was a real problem.

One could say that only HP ADS or Compact's tools should be used at
those frequencies but as Johnson said about the dog walking on it's
hind legs (paraphrased) "...the remarkable thing isn't that it does it
badly, the remarkable thing is that it does it at all" [1]. And for
circuits up to 5GHz they could do it fairly well.

Robert Hickey

[1] Though IIRC, he referred to Women Preachers in the same sentence.

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

Dr. Anton Squeegee · Sep 29, 2004

In article <FMNcb.26247$pU4.4680@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>,
g.ryan@macetech.com says...

<snippety>

I thought it was assumed that no less than 50% of all hams are also EEs.

That might have been true 15 or more years ago. Unfortunately (for
the sake of interesting techie discussions over the air), no longer
true. I'd be stunned if more than 1% of the people I've heard on the
local airwaves know more about their radios than how to operate them,
let alone have any sort of degree.

--
Dr. Anton Squeegee, Director, Dutch Surrealist Plumbing Institute
(Known to some as Bruce Lane, KC7GR)
kyrrin a/t bluefeathertech d-o=t c&o&m
"Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati" (Red Green)

Paul Burridge · Sep 29, 2004

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:57:53 -0700, Dr. Anton Squeegee
<SpammersAreVermin@dev.null> wrote:

In article <FMNcb.26247$pU4.4680@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>,
g.ryan@macetech.com says...

<snippety

I thought it was assumed that no less than 50% of all hams are also EEs.

That might have been true 15 or more years ago. Unfortunately (for
the sake of interesting techie discussions over the air), no longer
true. I'd be stunned if more than 1% of the people I've heard on the
local airwaves know more about their radios than how to operate them,
let alone have any sort of degree.

Yes, it's the same here in the UK. Many new hams (most, even perhaps)
are a right bunch of clueless wankers with no interest in the
technical side of the hobby.
--

"I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend
to write it." - Winston Churchill

Peter Bennett · Sep 29, 2004

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:57:53 -0700, Dr. Anton Squeegee
<SpammersAreVermin@dev.null> wrote:

In article <FMNcb.26247$pU4.4680@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>,
g.ryan@macetech.com says...

<snippety

I thought it was assumed that no less than 50% of all hams are also EEs.

That might have been true 15 or more years ago. Unfortunately (for
the sake of interesting techie discussions over the air), no longer
true. I'd be stunned if more than 1% of the people I've heard on the
local airwaves know more about their radios than how to operate them,
let alone have any sort of degree.

I doubt if it was ever true. However, 25 years ago, I expect chances
were pretty good that an amateur radio operator had an above-average
knowledge of electronics - I don't know if you can say the same now.

--
Peter Bennett, VE7CEI
new newsgroup users info : http://vancouver-webpages.com/nnq
GPS and NMEA info: http://vancouver-webpages.com/peter
Vancouver Power Squadron: http://vancouver.powersquadron.ca

vb · Sep 29, 2004

hello,
I'm looking for the Marantz 74P40/00B stéréo amplifier schematic
many thanks

Animesh Maurya · Sep 29, 2004

animesh_m@yahoo.com (Animesh Maurya) wrote in message news:<58eab14a.0309090518.61646d07@posting.google.com>...

Iam trying to put a load line on diode characteristic curve for a 10
Ohm resistance and 5V supply by adding trace (5V-V(D2:1,D2:2))/10.
The line coincides the Y axis at 500mA and the curve at
(1.1670,382.615m), but it is not coinciding with the X axis at 5V,
else it stops at (1.4867,351.326m).
Although the Q point is located properly, but I want to extend the
line. Iam using Pspice.

Thanks

Please refer to Pspice User's Guide Page No. 333

They are putting load line on MOSFET characteristic curve. Iam also
doing the same with Diode characteristic curve but the load line
terminates in the midway.

Please give me some time to solve my problem.

Thanks

Paul Burridge · Sep 29, 2004

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 02:43:12 GMT, Active8
<mTHISREMOVEcolasono@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

Ft of the 3904 he's using is 100MHz and he's already getting a gain of 4
out of it, which is what he wants.

Fo for this deal is 96MHz min and it presents a load of 112.5 ohms to
the amp.

i was thinking in terms of stickin a choke in there so RF doesn't see
the 1k Rc and making the RF load look bigger than 50 ohms.

Thanks to all who've replied to this query. I've noted all the
responses and will be sifting through them in fine detail later today.
I've managed to find my copy of Bowick's excellent book, BTW (bottom
of my suitcase). I'm going to refresh my memory on a few things from
it before I go inquire further of the Panel.
However, I do wish to continue running simulations and need a bit of
clarification on the following final point:-
If I place a coil and capacitor in parallel in a Spice simulation, the
resulting circuit will end up with infinite impedance at resonance,
will it not? This must invalidate any results I obtain. So I need to
know what amount of resistance to add and where it should go in order
to mimic the real world losses such a tuned circuit would give rise
to. I want to get the maximum degree of accuracy, obviously. So chaps,
what's the best way of going about this? And rather more difficult;
how would one accurately model the mutual inductance of close coupling
a collector load coil to a separate coil feeding the next stage?
--

"Windows [n.], A thirty-two bit extension and GUI shell to a sixteen bit patch
to an eight bit operating system originally coded for a four bit
microprocessor and produced by a two bit company."

Kevin Aylward · Sep 29, 2004

Paul Burridge wrote:

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 02:43:12 GMT, Active8
mTHISREMOVEcolasono@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

Ft of the 3904 he's using is 100MHz and he's already getting a gain
of 4 out of it, which is what he wants.

Fo for this deal is 96MHz min and it presents a load of 112.5 ohms to
the amp.

i was thinking in terms of stickin a choke in there so RF doesn't see
the 1k Rc and making the RF load look bigger than 50 ohms.

Thanks to all who've replied to this query. I've noted all the
responses and will be sifting through them in fine detail later today.
I've managed to find my copy of Bowick's excellent book, BTW (bottom
of my suitcase). I'm going to refresh my memory on a few things from
it before I go inquire further of the Panel.
However, I do wish to continue running simulations and need a bit of
clarification on the following final point:-
If I place a coil and capacitor in parallel in a Spice simulation, the
resulting circuit will end up with infinite impedance at resonance,
will it not? This must invalidate any results I obtain. So I need to
know what amount of resistance to add and where it should go in order
to mimic the real world losses such a tuned circuit would give rise
to. I want to get the maximum degree of accuracy, obviously. So chaps,
what's the best way of going about this?

Put a resister in series with the coil. Run 100000000 sims uuntill you
right value.

And rather more difficult;

how would one accurately model the mutual inductance of close coupling
a collector load coil to a separate coil feeding the next stage?

Err... make a spice model of a transformer with K, mutual coupling. As
usual, examples in...

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

EAGLE Netlist conversion

Paul Burridge

Guest

Paul Burridge

Guest

Spehro Pefhany

Guest

Terry Pinnell

Guest

Paul Burridge

Guest

Paul Burridge

Guest

Paul Burridge

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Michael A. Terrell

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

K Wind

Guest

Chaos Master

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Dr. Anton Squeegee

Guest

Paul Burridge

Guest

Peter Bennett

Guest

vb

Guest

Animesh Maurya

Guest

Paul Burridge

Guest

Kevin Aylward

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor