 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsElectronicsBasicsRepairDesignCADComponentsEquipmentElectrical Engineering ElectronicsKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Electronics Forum / CAD / February 2006how to circumvent :"Convergence problem in transient analysis"
Hi, I'm having that famous problem. Is there any way to cirumvent it (computing time, I have). Can anyone explain the reason for the error ? Can I go lower than the "minimum allowable step size" and what determines the "minimum allowable step size" anyway? Thanks, Dan The full error message is: "ERROR -- Convergence problem in transient analysis at Time = 1.125E-12 Time step = 125.0E-15, minimum allowable step size = 500.0E-15" ********SPICE DECK********** Vin 3 0 pulse (0 5 0 0.1ns 0.1ns 0.830us 4.150us) S1=2 3 3 0 Sbreak1 S2=4 2 3 0 Sbreak2 C1=2 0 0.119244376p IC=0 C2=4 0 480nF IC=0 .model Sbreak1 VSWITCH Roff=1e12 Ron=1.0 Voff=4.9 Von=5.0 .model Sbreak2 VSWITCH Roff=1e12 Ron=1.0 Voff=0.1 Von=0.0 .OPTIONS CHGTOL=1.0e-16 .tran 0.0001ns 0.5s .op .probe .end ********SPICE DECK********** > Hi, I'm having that famous problem. Is there any way to cirumvent it > (computing time, I have). Can anyone explain the reason for the error [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > .end > ********SPICE DECK********** Do you need so much ratio between Roff and Ron /1E12) and do you need so fast risetime on the pulse (0.1ns) If you can relax on any of those parameters then you should be albe to run without convergence problems Regards Klaus I've worked out analytical equations for the circuit and can model this thing in MATLAB but I'm trying to see if the two approaches give identical (or nearly identical) results. The large switch resistance I need to keep (although I have reduced it to 1000Mohms), and I can't sacrifice much w.r.t. the pulse parameter. Going from 0.1ns to 10ns allows the simulation to proceed, but I start seeing significant deviations from the MATLAB at this point. Note that my pulse wave form is high for 830ns then low for 4150ns, so a 10ns transition is starting to be significant ... Is there any way to have my cake and eat it too ? > I've worked out analytical equations for the circuit and can model this > thing in MATLAB but I'm trying to see if the two approaches give [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Is there any way to have my cake and eat it too ? Are you using Orcad PSpice? If so - it has the possibility to shedule better resolution at specific points in time. So for example you would set the maximum step size at your pulse generator transitions (don't know about other programs). What about increasing the number of maximum iterations - perhaps it can get over the converging point after all. (I think they are name ITL1, ITL2, ITL4) Regards Klaus >Hi, I'm having that famous problem. Is there any way to cirumvent it >(computing time, I have). Can anyone explain the reason for the error [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >.end >********SPICE DECK********** Looks like your running PSpice from the type of error message you got. This deck runs fine on LTspice. Download it, it's free and works fabulously. LTspice is also very compatible with PSpice syntax. http://ltspice.linear.com/software/swcadiii.exe --- Mark |
Reply to this Message |
 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.