[SI-LIST] Re: package SSN model accuracy requirements
- From: "Hassan O. Ali" <hassan@xxxxxxxx>
- To: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 15:48:11 -0600
Ray Anderson wrote:
>Chris seems to favor Hspice models for doing SSN simulations (certainly
>an option), Gary is a proponent of Eldo, AMS and n-port package models
>does anyone else have opinions on what other solutions for SSN
>simulations (or what works for them) are out there that can be utilized
>today (are IBIS 3.2 models "good enough" for SSN today??) ?
>
>
This thread has certainly been very interesting and informative. It
would be even more interesting if the arguments were supported with
quantitave/qualitative data.
We've been told that IBIS 3.2 models cannot be relied upon to perform
SSN analysis, but we've not yet been told how do IBIS 3.2 models compare
in accuracy/speed against the more favored (transistor level) HSPICE
models in today's designs.
It would benefit us a lot if the arguments were specific enough to say,
for example, IBIS 3.2 models are not good for which types of I/O
technologies, I/O interfaces, data/clock speeds, signal rise/fall times,
chip package technologies, PCB implementations, etc. And if IBIS 3.2
models are not good, we've to be told, in a quantifiable manner, how bad
they are.
With my limited knowledge, I always thought I could use the HSPICE
simulator to perfrom SSN analysis with IBIS 3.2 models. I always thought
I could use the following combination of models to successfully perform
SSN analysis using the HSPICE simulator:
- IBIS 3.2 models of I/O buffers of all the devices involved (not
including device packages)
- S-parameter package models of all the devices involved with I/O and
near-by power/ground pins as extracted using such tools as Ansoft HFSS.
(Note here: this could be a partitioned package model)
- HSPICE netlist with the PCB trace models (in W-element format) as
extracted using such tools as Allegro PCB SI
Again, with my limited knowledge, I always thought that SSN is largely a
function of signal edge rates, and as long as IBIS models could
faithfully provide those, I was OK, especially with the tremendous
simulation speed enhancement of IBIS models.
Please someone tell me if my thoughts are wrong.
Best regards.
Hassan.
------------------------------------------------------------------
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 FAQ wiki page is located at:
http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
List technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.org
List archives are viewable at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
or at our remote archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
Other related posts:
