[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control
From: |
a r |
Subject: |
Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control |
Date: |
Mon, 3 Dec 2007 13:49:05 +0000 |
On Dec 3, 2007 1:17 PM, a r <address@hidden> wrote:
> 2. (this seems more critical) time step is not decreased (or not
> decreased enough) when the transition occurs. Sure, additional events
> are added but all devices (bsim3) driven by this signal are not
> modeled exactly.
Actually the timestep seems to decrease - setting trstepgrow=1.5
(default "infinitive") helps quite a bit. Unfortunately setting
trstepgrow to 1.4 effectively hangs gnucap (the simulation goes down
to minimum step).
Still I have a feeling that playing with options is a hack. Why gnucap
does not recognize that the state of the circuit (bsim3 transistors)
changes and it should simulate the transition more precisely?
-r.
- [Help-gnucap] Time step control, a r, 2007/12/01
- [Help-gnucap] Re: Time step control, a r, 2007/12/01
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, al davis, 2007/12/01
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, a r, 2007/12/01
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, al davis, 2007/12/01
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, al davis, 2007/12/03
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, a r, 2007/12/03
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control,
a r <=
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, al davis, 2007/12/03
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, a r, 2007/12/03
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, al davis, 2007/12/03
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, a r, 2007/12/03
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, al davis, 2007/12/03
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, a r, 2007/12/03
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, al davis, 2007/12/03
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, al davis, 2007/12/03
- Re: [Help-gnucap] Time step control, a r, 2007/12/03