Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsElectronicsBasicsRepairDesignCADComponentsEquipmentElectrical Engineering
ElectronicsKB.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Electronics Forum / CAD / July 2005



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Weird Problem with Cadence...

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Saran - 18 Jul 2005 14:18 GMT
This also addresses  a message I posted a couple of days ago. I am
trying to design an analog switch for a DRAM application.

The problem is "a drastic difference" in behavior when I used cadence
tool to pspice.  My schematic is a very simple test circuit where the
gate of an NMOS is made logic low (-3 V). I am putting a value 100mV on
one end of the NMOS switch (say, drain). A capacitor is connected to
the other side of the switch with a value 1pF. Now, the problem is
that, when I run transient analysis, I am seeing a voltage of about 90+
mV on the capacitor net. How is this possible? The transistor is turned
off and I should ideally not see anything except leakage.

This was the issue when I used spectre simuation in cadence. I did the
same experiment using Orcad pspice and it works as I expect it to.
Before I was working with pspice, I thought it might be a leakage
problem associated with the internal diode inside the MOSFET and to
check that out, I put a transistor whose gate was connected to inverse
clock, before the capacitor. In this setup, if the main transistor is
on, then the other transistor is off. I did this to provide a low
impedence path to the leakage, if any. So, when the main transistor or
the switch is off, any leakage may flow through this low impedence path
created by the second transistor and if the switch is on, the second
transistor functions as open circuit and should not affect my circut.
This setup works.

I am really surprised because, this logically baffles me. Further, how
come Pspice gives me a different behavior (which I believe to be
correct) in the first case?

Any help is greatly appreciated. I hope I have posed the question
clearly.

Regards,
Saran
Ken Smith - 18 Jul 2005 14:42 GMT
[....]
>The problem is "a drastic difference" in behavior when I used cadence
>tool to pspice.  My schematic is a very simple test circuit where the
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>mV on the capacitor net. How is this possible? The transistor is turned
>off and I should ideally not see anything except leakage.

Is there no DC path at all on the 1pF side of the FET?

If so:
It is normal for spice programs to solve the DC problem first to set the
starting point for the transient analysis.  With no DC path, this can lead
to a voltage appearing on the capacitor.

Signature

--
kensmith@rahul.net   forging knowledge

Saran - 18 Jul 2005 14:47 GMT
Hi Ken,

It makes sense logically to me now. So, if I understand correctly, if
there is _no_dc_path_ then the voltage I am seeing is actually not the
voltage on the capacitor. I have to check my schematic and see if I did
not goof things up. Will get back to you ASAP. Thanks a lot.

Regards,
Saran
Saran - 19 Jul 2005 01:16 GMT
Hi Ken,

You were spot on! There was no DC path in the circuit on the 1pF side
of the FET. Thanks a ton and I am sure I will not be so stupid next
time :).

Cheers,
Saran
Ken Smith - 19 Jul 2005 03:24 GMT
>Hi Ken,
>
>It makes sense logically to me now. So, if I understand correctly, if
>there is _no_dc_path_ then the voltage I am seeing is actually not the
>voltage on the capacitor. I have to check my schematic and see if I did
>not goof things up. Will get back to you ASAP. Thanks a lot.

No, you made this circuit:

ASCII - ART

       C1
  NC---!!----GND
       1pF

Some time back around the big bang, a charge was put onto C1 and who knows
how much that was.  Since there is no place for the charge to get away to,
it is still there.  

Most spices start off with all capacitances discharged and all inductances
currents at zero and solve the DC problem.  Many of them use tricks to
make the solution come out.  Circuits with positive feedback and the like
can cause troubles for the straight forward attack on the issue.

Signature

--
kensmith@rahul.net   forging knowledge

Saran - 19 Jul 2005 15:16 GMT
Wow. That is interesting. Very informative. Thanks a lot.

Regs,
Saran
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.