[ibis-quality] Re: one liners for error checklist
- From: "Tom Dagostino" <tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <ibis-quality@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 10:49:27 -0700
Bob
Why are were making it impossible for some correct models to pass the check
list? An ECL model will NEVER have the end points equal to the fixture
voltages! It is proper and good to model LVDS with the fixture voltage at
the common mode voltage. In many cases CML does not completely turn off the
driver in the high state.
5.3 LEVEL 0 First/last point of waveforms equal to V_fixture values
***********************************************************
Minimizing should not be the goal, having the correct timing relations ship
among all the VT curves should be the goal with the VT curves with the least
delay having minimum lead-in.
5.5 LEVEL 1 Minimize waveform lead-in-time
********************************************************
In many cases the buffer that is used for I/O and In are the same cell and
thus could have the same C_comp
5.2 LEVEL 1 C_comp not same value for in and io
************************************************************
How do you determine the number of models from a datasheet?
5.8 LEVEL 1 not Fewer models than in data sheet
************************************************************
Many high power/high frequency packages have back side copper slabs that
must be grounded but are typically not in the pin list.
5.12 LEVEL 1 no Package pins missing
***********************************************************
Tom Dagostino
Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC
503-430-1065
tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.teraspeed.com
-----Original Message-----
From: ibis-quality-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-quality-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Bob Ross
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 10:21 AM
To: ibis-quality@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-quality] Re: one liners for error checklist
Eckhard and All:
I agree, we need to make the check off consistent with compliance,
not with failure.
However, the titles need to be cast in a positive manner rather
than in a negative manner. Here are some suggestions:
Revised( from error list )
5.1 LEVEL 0 Typ/min/max order of parameters correct
5.2 LEVEL 1 C_comp typ/min/max values consider both Input and I/O modes
5.3 LEVEL 0 First/last point of waveforms equal to V_fixture values
5.4 LEVEL 1 Enough points in waveform or small time-step in waveforms
5.5 LEVEL 1 Minimize waveform lead-in-time
5.6 LEVEL 1 Open_sink/Open_source model with correct Vref, Cref, Rref, Vmeas
5.7 LEVEL 1 Differential models with waveforms
5.8 LEVEL 1 Models correspond to data sheet
5.9 LEVEL 0 Correct model type
5.1 LEVEL 0 Consistency of waveform table
5.11 LEVEL 1 Open_sink/Open_source model not push-pull
5.12 LEVEL 1 Package pins inserted
(change 5.1 to 5.10 in table)
-------------------------------------------------------
Eckhards suggestions:
old ( from error list )
5.1 LEVEL 0 typ/min/max swizzles of parameters
5.2 LEVEL 1 C_comp same value for in and io
5.3 LEVEL 0 First/last point of waveforms not equal to V_fixture values
5.4 LEVEL 1 Too few points in waveform or time-step in waveforms too big
5.5 LEVEL 1 Minimize waveform lead-in-time
5.6 LEVEL 1 Open-sink model with different Vref,Cref,Rref,Vmeas
5.7 LEVEL 1 Differential models without waveforms
5.8 LEVEL 1 Fewer models than in data sheet
5.9 LEVEL 0 Wrong model type
5.1 LEVEL 0 Inconsistency of waveform table
5.11 LEVEL 1 Open-sink model modeled/measured as push-pull
5.12 LEVEL 1 Package pins missing
new ( negative logic to make the tick )
5.1 LEVEL 0 no typ/min/max swizzles of parameters
5.2 LEVEL 1 C_comp not same value for in and io
5.3 LEVEL 0 First/last point of waveforms are equal to V_fixture values
5.4 LEVEL 1 enough points in waveform or time-step in waveforms too big
5.5 LEVEL 1 Minimized waveform lead-in-time
5.6 LEVEL 1 Open-sink model with different Vref,Cref,Rref,Vmeas
5.7 LEVEL 1 Differential models with waveforms
5.8 LEVEL 1 not Fewer models than in data sheet
5.9 LEVEL 0 no Wrong model type
5.1 LEVEL 0 no Inconsistency of waveform table
5.11 LEVEL 1 Open-sink model not modeled/measured as push-pull
5.12 LEVEL 1 no Package pins missing
---------------
Bob
Lenski Eckhard wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> as we talked yesterday, I resend my attachment concerning the one-liners
for the error-section
>
>
> I see a difference between the titles in the error section and the
one-liners from it that appears in the checklist
>
> I think in the one-liners the description should change
>
> ( it's something like positive negative logic )
>
>
> example:
>
> error list :
>
> typ/min/max swizzles of parameters
>
>
> one-liner should be :
>
> no min/typ/max swizzles
>
> <<one-liners-for-errors-checklist.xls>>
>
> I tried to change it for all problems in the attached excel-sheet
>
> regards
> Eckhard
> ==================================================
> Eckhard Lenski Phone: 0049 89 722 27776
> Siemens AG Fax : 0049 89 722 26879
> Email: eckhard.lenski@xxxxxxxxxxx
> ICN M&L TDC TC3
> Hofmannstr. 51
> 81359 München
> Germany
> ==================================================
>
--
Bob Ross
Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC Teraspeed Labs
121 North River Drive 13610 SW Harness Lane
Narragansett, RI 02882 Beaverton, OR 97008
503-750-6481 503-430-1065
http://www.teraspeed.com 503-246-8048 Direct
bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IBIS Quality website: http://www.sisoft.com/ibis-quality
IBIS Quality archives: //www.freelists.org/archives/ibis-quality
To unsubscribe send an email:
To: ibis-quality-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: unsubscribe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IBIS Quality website: http://www.sisoft.com/ibis-quality
IBIS Quality archives: //www.freelists.org/archives/ibis-quality
To unsubscribe send an email:
To: ibis-quality-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: unsubscribe
Other related posts:
