Aubrey,
In 3D solver, I used 10mm=1cm trace. In 2D tool, I divided the results (per
meter) by 100 to convert it to per cm, so all values are aligned.
-Adnan
-----Original Message-----
From: Aubrey Sparkman <asparky@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2020 1:15 PM
To: ryan.lott.ee@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Yassin, Adnan <adnan.yassin@xxxxxxxxx>; SI-LIST <si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] Re: ANSYS Q2D & Q3D Extracted L & C
Adnan,
Probably not as simple as outputs in different format? Is your trace ~50 cm
long?
2D tools give their results in inductance per unit length. 3D tools are more
likely to give their results in total inductance. Try dividing the 3D results
by the length to convert to the per unit length value.
Aubrey
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 3, 2020, at 1:39 PM, Ryan Lott <ryan.lott.ee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
As Scott always says, talk to your app engineer.
But it could be several things (bad source/sink setup, boundary
conditions, improper simulation setup) but sounds like you might want
to make sure you're viewing matrix data results properly (Lumped vs
Maxwell format) and/or doing proper matrix reduction. Even for such a
simple problem, one needs to know the simulator. Talk to app engineer
or read the manual - the details are all in there.
Good luck
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020, 1:03 PM Yassin, Adnan <adnan.yassin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
I have a trace 30um wide, with a thickness of 10um. It is a stripline
with dielectric thickness of 18um above and below the trace. The
dielectric coefficient is 4.5. Running these numbers through a tool
on-line for impedance calculations gives me slightly different
numbers for L & C than ANSYS Q2D, but totally different "L" number
than ANSYS Q3D! Here is a summary of my data:
Online Calculator: L=1.888nH/cm, C=2.648pF/cm, and Zo&.704Ohm
ANSYS Q2D (@ 1GHz): : L=2.311nH/cm, C=2.508pF/cm, and Zo0.43Ohm ANSYS
Q2D (@ 1GHz): : L .112nH/cm, C=2.346pF/cm, and Zo=??
My questions:
1. Why "L" is much higher in Q3D compared to Q2D and the
calculator? Is this different inductance than what is reported by the
latter two (e.g., loop inductance vs. self inductance!)?
2. Can Zo in Q3D be calculated directly from these reported numbers
by applying the equation "SQRT(L/C)" or do I need to do some processing to
"L"
first? Applying the equation to the #'s obtained above will give
SQRT(11.112nH/2.346pF)h.82Ohm, which is not realistic for my stackup
(too high)!
Thanks,
-Adnan
------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from si-list:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
For help:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
List forum is accessible at:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list
List archives are viewable at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from si-list:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
For help:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
List forum is accessible at:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list
List archives are viewable at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu