Hello Fellow PCB Designers,

We have a 10 layer PCB design that originated in Pads and was converted over to Allegro 17.4, this is an old design but is manufacturable and works perfectly fine.  When I try to generate a Gerber for the Top or Bottom layers

the Gerber comes out fine.  But Most of the middle layers are Etch's and via's for power and grounds, but the Gerber's come mostly blank, there might be some details, but in the Gerber view everything is displayed correctly.

The design does have many close spacings, I have not changed anything in the constrains manager yet, turned off a lot of the DRC's, but thinking there might be something wrong with the constrains.

  I find that the CSet is set to 2_18, not sure yet what this means, also there are many of these definitions, PCS 3,4,5,ect, are the same as CSet 2_18 any suggestions would be great, we are currently looking into this, have seen

that even small change in constraint manager can cause long processing and even Allegro crashing, this is a large project.

Thanks Much, Thanks, Mike Pollock.

1， Some components in the installation package cannot choose to install; even if they do not choose them, they will still be installed; just less shortcut icons, the documents are still released to the installation directory.

2， "Catia Application Frame" repeat the problem?
       “x:CadenceSPB_17.4 oolsin“
       ”x:CadenceSPB_17.4 oolsspatial“
       "Catia Application Frame" shouldn't you use the latest version?

3，Follow-up update patch cleaning the useless files and extra empty folder action !!!

The SPB17.4 installation package is currently the worst installation package I have seen for large-scale software packaging.

I'd like to be able to edit a footprint for a part in my design without needing to find the footprint filepath and directly open that file in PCB Editor. I see that I can view footprints from Capture, and that doing so shows me the footprint path, but I can't find any way to launch the editor. Is there any way to go directly from a part in a Capture schematic or a placed part in a PCB Editor board design to editing that part's footprint?

I have managed to convert our old schematic and PCD file to from Layout 16.2 to 17.4

I have exported the footprints and moved them to the correct lib directory. 

I get no DRC errors and I can build a new netlist file. The problem is I can't get the PCB editor to update using the new netlist and get the following error:

I cannot figure out how to fix the Name is too long error. 

(---------------------------------------------------------------------)

(                                                                     )

(    Allegro Netrev Import Logic                                      )

(                                                                     )

(    Drawing          : 70055R2.brd                                   )

(    Software Version : 17.4S023                                      )

(    Date/Time        : Tue Dec 14 18:54:25 2021                      )

(                                                                     )

(---------------------------------------------------------------------)

------ Directives ------------

Ripup etch:                  Yes

Ripup delete first segment:  No

Ripup retain bondwire:       No

Ripup symbols:               IfSame

Missing symbol has error:    No

DRC update:                  Yes

Schematic directory:         'C:/AFS/70055 PCB Test 2'

Design Directory:            'C:/AFS/70055 PCB Test 2'

Old design name:             'C:/AFS/70055 PCB Test 2/70055R2.brd'

New design name:             'C:/AFS/70055 PCB Test 2/70055R2.brd'

CmdLine: netrev -$ -i C:/AFS/70055 PCB Test 2 -x -u -t -y 2 -h -z -q netrev_constraint_report.xml C:/AFS/70055 PCB Test 2/#Taaaaae57776.tmp

------ Preparing to read pst files ------

Starting to read C:/AFS/70055 PCB Test 2/pstchip.dat 

   Finished reading C:/AFS/70055 PCB Test 2/pstchip.dat (00:00:00.02)

Starting to read C:/AFS/70055 PCB Test 2/pstxprt.dat 

   Finished reading C:/AFS/70055 PCB Test 2/pstxprt.dat (00:00:00.00)

Starting to read C:/AFS/70055 PCB Test 2/pstxnet.dat 

   Finished reading C:/AFS/70055 PCB Test 2/pstxnet.dat (00:00:00.00)

------ Oversights/Warnings/Errors ------

#1   ERROR(SPMHNI-176): Device library error detected.

ERROR(SPMHNI-189): Problems with the name of device 'SW DPDT_9_SWITCH_OTTO_ALT_SW DPDT': 'Name is too long.'.

ERROR(SPMHNI-170): Device 'SW DPDT_9_SWITCH_OTTO_ALT_SW DP' has library errors. Unable to transfer to Allegro.

#2   ERROR(SPMHNI-176): Device library error detected.

ERROR(SPMHNI-189): Problems with the name of device 'SW DPDT_10_SWITCH_OTTO_LIGHTS_SW DPDT': 'Name is too long.'.

ERROR(SPMHNI-170): Device 'SW DPDT_10_SWITCH_OTTO_LIGHTS_S' has library errors. Unable to transfer to Allegro.

#3   ERROR(SPMHNI-176): Device library error detected.

ERROR(SPMHNI-189): Problems with the name of device 'SW DPDT_7_SWITCH_OTTO_ALT_SW DPDT': 'Name is too long.'.

ERROR(SPMHNI-170): Device 'SW DPDT_7_SWITCH_OTTO_ALT_SW DP' has library errors. Unable to transfer to Allegro.

#4   ERROR(SPMHNI-176): Device library error detected.

ERROR(SPMHNI-189): Problems with the name of device 'SW DPDT_3_SWITCH_OTTO_MASTER_SW DPDT': 'Name is too long.'.

ERROR(SPMHNI-170): Device 'SW DPDT_3_SWITCH_OTTO_MASTER_SW' has library errors. Unable to transfer to Allegro.

#5   ERROR(SPMHNI-176): Device library error detected.

ERROR(SPMHNI-189): Problems with the name of device 'SW DPDT_6_SWITCH_OTTO_LIGHTS_SW DPDT': 'Name is too long.'.

ERROR(SPMHNI-170): Device 'SW DPDT_6_SWITCH_OTTO_LIGHTS_SW' has library errors. Unable to transfer to Allegro.

#6   ERROR(SPMHNI-176): Device library error detected.

ERROR(SPMHNI-189): Problems with the name of device 'SW DPDT_3_SWITCH_OTTO_MASTER_DPDT': 'Name is too long.'.

ERROR(SPMHNI-170): Device 'SW DPDT_3_SWITCH_OTTO_MASTER_DP' has library errors. Unable to transfer to Allegro.

#7   ERROR(SPMHNI-176): Device library error detected.

ERROR(SPMHNI-189): Problems with the name of device 'CONNECTOR DB15_DSUBVPTM15_CONNECTOR DB15': 'Name is too long.'.

ERROR(SPMHNI-170): Device 'CONNECTOR DB15_DSUBVPTM15_CONNE' has library errors. Unable to transfer to Allegro.

#8   ERROR(SPMHNI-176): Device library error detected.

ERROR(SPMHNI-189): Problems with the name of device 'CONNECTOR DB9_DSUBVPTM9_CONNECTOR DB9': 'Name is too long.'.

ERROR(SPMHNI-170): Device 'CONNECTOR DB9_DSUBVPTM9_CONNECT' has library errors. Unable to transfer to Allegro.

#9   ERROR(SPMHNI-175): Netrev error detected.

ERROR(SPMHDB-195): Error processing 'M6': Text line is outside of the extents..

------ Library Paths ------

MODULEPATH =  . 

           C:/Cadence/SPB_17.4/share/local/pcb/modules 

PSMPATH =  . 

           symbols 

           .. 

           ../symbols 

           C:/Cadence/SPB_17.4/share/local/pcb/symbols 

           C:/Cadence/SPB_17.4/share/pcb/pcb_lib/symbols 

           C:/Cadence/SPB_17.4/share/pcb/allegrolib/symbols 

           C:/Cadence/SPB_17.4/share/pcb/pcb_lib/symbols 

PADPATH =  . 

           symbols 

           .. 

           ../symbols 

           C:/Cadence/SPB_17.4/share/local/pcb/padstacks 

           C:/Cadence/SPB_17.4/share/pcb/pcb_lib/symbols 

           C:/Cadence/SPB_17.4/share/pcb/allegrolib/symbols 

           C:/Cadence/SPB_17.4/share/pcb/pcb_lib/symbols 

------ Summary Statistics ------

#10  Run stopped because errors were detected

netrev run on Dec 14 18:54:25 2021

   DESIGN NAME : '70055R2'

   PACKAGING ON Nov  2 2021 14:32:04

   COMPILE 'logic'

   CHECK_PIN_NAMES OFF

   CROSS_REFERENCE OFF

   FEEDBACK OFF

   INCREMENTAL OFF

   INTERFACE_TYPE PHYSICAL

   MAX_ERRORS 500

   MERGE_MINIMUM 5

   NET_NAME_CHARS '#%&()*+-./:=>?@[]^_`|'

   NET_NAME_LENGTH 24

   OVERSIGHTS ON

   REPLACE_CHECK OFF

   SINGLE_NODE_NETS ON

   SPLIT_MINIMUM 0

   SUPPRESS   20

   WARNINGS ON

 10 errors detected

 No oversight detected

 No warning detected

cpu time      0:00:27

elapsed time  0:00:00

Hi

In the environment I'm currently working, axes are shown for schematic, symbol, and layout views.For schematics and symbols, I'd prefer a dim gray, such that the axes are just visible but not dominant. For the layout, I'd prefer a brighter color. Is there a way to realize this? So far when I change the color of the 'axis' layer in the display resource editor, the axes in all three views get changed together:

Thanks very much for your input!

Dear all,

I defined two design variables in ADE Assembler, say V1 and V2, that define the voltage 1 and voltage 2 of a "vpulse" voltage source in my schematic.

Then, I define V1 = 1.0, and V2 = 2.0, run a transient simulation, and everything is as expexcted. The source provides pulses between 1.0 V and 2.0 V.

Next, I set V1 = 1.0:0.5:1.5, thereby creating a parametric sweep with 1.0 V and 1.5 V for V1. I keep V2 at 2.0 V. Then the simulation fails, and all I get is "netl err" in my Output Expressions and an error message that the results directory does not exist and nothing can be plotted: This is reasonable, as the results directory is deleted on starting a new simulation, and as there is no simulation result, none of my output expressions can be plotted.

WARNING (OCN-6040): The specified directory does not exist, or the directory does not contain valid PSF results.
        Ensure that the path to the directory is correct and the directory has a logFile and PSF result files.
WARNING (ADE-1065): No simulation results are available.
ERROR (WIA-1175): Cannot plot waveform signals because no waveform data is available for plotting.
One of the possible reasons can be that 'Save' check box for these signals are not selected in the Outputs Setup pane. Ensure that these check boxes are selected before you run the simulation.

Normally, this kind of para,metric sweep is not a problem, I have done this many times before. There must be something special in THIS PARTICULAR test bench or simulator setup. The trouble is, I don't get any useful error messages.

Does anyone know what might be the problem here OR where to find useful information to investigate further (log files stored somewhere)? Thank you!

Regards,

Volker

P.S. Using Corners instead does not help either. Running it through all values by hand works, though.

Hi,

I have a LEF file with simple definitions of pad design which uses M8, M9, and AP layers. However, I failed to import the design with CIW > Import > LEF... as I encountered "ERROR: (OALEFDEF-90019): Ignoring the line 30 in the layer map file ... as it contains a syntax error. Each entry in the layer map file must have two values, LEFLayerName and OALayerNumber separated by a blank space." All lines in the file report the same OALEFDEF-90019 error.

The tech.layermap file looks like this:


# techLayer       techPurpose     stream# dataType

ref drawing 0 0
DNW drawing 1 0
PW drawing 2 0

Hi, 

When I try to run Monte Carlo it gives me a 3 items message for possible failure:

1. It says the machine selected in the current job setup policy isnot reachable

2. The Cadence hierarchy is not detected, not installed properly. or

3. Job start script (with a path and a name like swiftNetlistService#) is not found on the remote machines.

Any recommendation on how to fix this?

How can I place stacked vias with the size exact same cut width without metals around?
As the red part only in the image below?

Hello Everybody

Recently, I want to design a high output Power Amplifier at 2.4GHz using TSMC 1P6M CMOS Bulk Process. I use its nmos_rf_25_6t transistor model to determine the approximate mosfet size

I use the most common Common-Source Differential Amplifier topology with neutralizing capacitor to improve its stability and power gain performance

Because I want to output large power, the size of mosfet is very large, the gate width is about 2mm, when I perform harmonic balance analysis, everything is alright, the OP1dB is about 28dBm (0.63Watt)

But When I perform Transient simulation, the magnitude of voltage and current waveform at the saturation point is too small, for voltgae, Vpeaking is about 50mV, for current, Ipeaking is about 5mA

I assume some reasons: the bsim4 model is not complete/ the virtuoso version is wrong (My virtuoso version is IC6.1.7-64b.500.21)/the spectre version is wrong (spectre version is 15.1.0 32bit)/the MMSIM version is wrong/Transient Simulation setting is wrong (the algorithm is select gear2only, but when I select other, like: trap, the results have no difference), the maxstep I set 5ps, minstep I set 2ps to improve simulation speed, I think this step is much smaller than the fundamental period (1/2.4e9≈416ps)

I have no idea how to solve this problem, please help me! Thank you very very much!

Hi

I have a rather strange question - is there a way to tell layout XL to NOT place the error/warning markers on a design when I open a cell?  I do a lot of my layout by using arrays from placed instances and create mosaics that completely ignore the metadata that Layout XL uses with its bindings with schematic (and instances get deleted etc. but I do like using it to generate all my pins etc.) and it's just really annoying when I open a design that I know is LVS clean and since the connectivity metadata is all screwed up (because I did not use it to actually complete the layout) I have a design that's just blinking at me at every gate, source and drain.  I typically delete them at the high level heirarchically but the second I go in and modify something and come back up it places all of them again.  I know that if I flatten all the p cells it goes away but sometimes it's nice to have that piece of metadata but that's about it.  Is there a way to "break" the features of XL like this?  I realize what a weird question this is but it's becoming more of an issue since we moved to IC 23 from IC 6 where there is no longer a layout L that I can use free from these annoyances that can't use any of the connectivity metadata.

Thanks

Chris

I'm trying to use Jasper for checking parameter propagation in a large design. I have a list of top-level parameters, each with a HDL path of a module parameter somewhere lower in the hierarchy that's supposed to receive its value from the top-level module. The FPV app seems like an excellent tool for this, but elaborating the entire design in it is extremely time-consuming and memory-intensive. So, I'm trying to black-box everything but the interesting HDL paths. I thought using `elaborate -top dut_module_name -bbox_i * -no_bbox_i inst_foo -no_bbox_i inst_bar (...)` would work, but it doesn't. Jasper just starts flooding the log with warnings from modules that are definitely not on the whitebox list, and eventually dies due to insufficient memory. When I use -bbox_m * it correctly elaborates the top-level module with all of its sub-modules black-boxed. But then the -no_bbox_i switches have no effect. Could anyone suggest a working solution for this use case?

I'm completely new to Cadence. I've been able to run a very simple simulation with the -gui option. Simvision opens, I add the variables to the waveform viewer, and press run. All is good.

I don't understand the flow when using the -nogui option. It appears that the simulation runs and returns control to the OS. When I launch Simvision, is there a database or file that I can open to display the already-simulated data?

My command is of the form:

xrun -gui -64bit -sv -access +rwc -top tb_top.sv <src files>

I exported vplan to .odf file in vManager and after editing it I imported it to vManager. The vplan was expected to be synchronized and updated. However, nothing has changed to it. Does anyone know why?

I would like to send an update about a vmanager regression status x days after the regression has been run. In the current environment, the vmanager regression is creating a new filepath for logs automatically based on regression name/date, so I can't use a cron job to gather logs, as the log location is not known. 

I tried to use the pre session script to launch a detached shell script that would run after a delay, but when the pre_script runs, it waits until everything is completed before finishing and moving on to starting the regression.

Here is the test pre_script I am using:

#!/bin/sh

echo "pre_script start"

delay_script "FIRST" 1
nohup delay_script "SECOND" 30 & disown
delay_script "THIRD" 1

echo "pre_script end"
exit 0

Here is the test delay_script I am using:

#!/bin/sh

echo "Starting $1"

sleep $2

echo "Ending $1"

Here is the script output when run from terminal. After the "pre_script end", I get control back.

Here is the script output when run from vmanager. There is no "nohup", and the pre_session phase doesn't complete until all the delay scripts complete.

My question is, is there a better way to achieve my goal here? (The goal being to run a script from the vmanager log directory automatically x days after the regression). I think I could use the pre_script to send directory information for an auxiliary cron job to pick up, but I would prefer to not have to have extra cronjobs needed for this.

I'm working on the code coverage. Doing a metrics analysis by default we see overall average grade and overall covered. But when i do a block analysis on an instance i see overall covered grade, code covered grade, block covered grade, statement covered grade, expression covered grade, toggle covered grade.

As I dont know the difference I started to read the IMC user guide and came to know there are 3 things we come across while doing a code coverage local, covered, average

From my understanding

local - child instances metrics doesnt reach the parent level. For example, we have an instance Q and its sub instances like Q.a, Q.b. Block Local grade of Q can be 100% even when its instances Q.a and Q.b a block local grades isnt at 100%.

In the attached image there is formula 

The key difference between average and covered is the weights.

Average : Mathematically taking the above scenario where Q.a, and Q.b has 10 blocks each. Q.a has covered 8 blocks and q.b has covered 2 blocks. Now if we take the normal average it should be total covered/ totatl number = 8+2/10+10 yielding 50%. But when we add weights saying Q.a is 70% and Q.b is 30% the new number would be (8*0.7+2*0.3) / (10*0.7+10*0.3) resulting 62%. Because of the weights we see 12% bump.

Covered: there is no role of weights.

Among these 3 metrics i've changed my default view to this in the image to get more realistic picture when i do analyze metrics. Do you guys agree with the approach?

I want to do a 2-step build->simulate as follow:

1. Make multiple builds using xrun -elaborate [other options]. The purpose is to create multiple builds with different compile-time macros (+define+MACROA +define+MACROB=ABC). Each build is located in a different directory.

2. Run simulation with xrun -r. This is where I need help. How do I specify which build to simulate? Also, I need the simulation directory (with log files, …) to be different than the build directory.

Has anyone been able to achieve this or similar solutions?

We are trying to run compilation, elab and sim with command xrun -r -u alu, where alu is one of the units to execute. we are getting the following errors.

1) xmsim: *E,DLMKDF: Unable to add default DEFINE std       /home/xxxx/Cad/xcelium/tools/inca/files/STD.
    xmsim: *E,DLMKDF: Unable to add default DEFINE synopsys  /home/xxxx/Cad/xcelium/tools/inca/files/SYNOPSYS

2) xmsim: *W,DLNOHV: Unable to find an 'hdl.var' file to load in.

What is the purpose of hdl.var

3) xmsim: *F,NOSNAP: Snapshot 'alu' does not exist in the libraries.

I cannot see in log files, which libraries is it referring to??

Any one request you to help on how to debug these.

Hi, I'm using the xcelium simulator to simulate a testbench, in which I first stimulate my design to do something (part "A") and then do a direct follow-up test on the design (part "B").

I need two things from this testbench: the results of the test (part "B", passed/failed) and coverage information, but the coverage information should only include part A and explicitly not part B.

I could do the following: run the testbench with part A and B, get the "passed/failed" result of the test and then follow up another simulator run with another testbench, that only includes part A and get the coverage information from that simulation run.

Is there a way to force xcelium to give me the coverage information of only a part of the simulation? Ideally, I would like to write the verilog code of my testbench to look something like this:

• do A
• dump coverage information
• do B

But maybe there is another way to tell xcelium to consider only part of the testbench for the coverage information. I did have a look at the manual, but was not able to find something useful for this problem. Any ideas?

Hi,

Current and valid TCAs for Functional Safety are readily available at the FuSa "one-stop shop".

But I have not been able to find any archive repository for access to the obsoleted versions.

I would need to have also v1.4 of Xcelum TCA to investigate exact changes wrt previous projects.

Anyone knows how to find it?

Best regards,  Lars

Hi, I am uploading a register class, which can be used for modeling hardware registers. I am uploading the source code and examples on how to run it. I also have a user guide which has all the APIs listed and explained. The user guide is ARV.pdf in the attached tar file. I have named the class ARV, which stands for Architect's Register View. It has got very good randomization and coverage features. Users have told me that its better than RAL. You can download it from http://verisilica.info/ARV.php
. There is a limit of 750KB in this cadence website. The ARV file is 4MB. That is why, I am uploading it at this site. I have a big pdf documentation and a doxygen documentation there. That is the reason for the bigger file size. The password to open the ZIP file is ovm_arv. I hope, everyone will use these classes.

Please contact me for any help.
Regards ANil

Attached is the latest revision of the venerable Specman-Matlab package (Lead Application Engineer Jangook Lee is the latest to have refreshed it for a customer in Asia to support 64 bit mode.  Look for a guest blog post from him on this package shortly.)

There is a README file inside the package that gives a detailed overview, shows how to run a demo and/or validate it’s installed correctly, and explains the general test flow.  The test file included in the package called "test_get_cmp_mdim.e" shows all the capabilities of the package, including:

* Using Specman to initialize and tear down the Matlab engine in batch mode

* Issuing Matlab commands from e-code, using the Specman command prompt to load .m files, initializing variables, and other operational tasks.

* Transfering data to and from the Matlab engine to Specman / an e language test bench

* Comparing data of previously retrieved Matlab arrays

* Accessing Matlab arrays from e-code without converting them to e list data structure

* Convert Matlab arrays into e-lists

Happy coding!

Team Specman

Hello,

 I am working in a digital design. The functional, post synthesis and post P&R without IO pads are all working fine, i.e., functionally and with clean timing reports "no setup/hold violations". I just added the IO pads to the same design, I had to change the timing constraints a bit for the synthesis but I have a clean design at SOC Encounter, i.e., clean DRC and clean timing reports "no setup/hold violations". However, when I perform simulation using the exported net-list from SOC Encounter together with SDF exported from the same tool, I got a lot of hold violations. Consequently, the design is not funcitioning.

Why and how I can overcome or trobleshoot this issue?

In waiting for your feedback and comments.

Regards.

Join this insightful on-demand webinar event "SI/PI Simulation and Measurement Correlation Forum" available through Signal Integrity Journal that features industry expert presentations ranging from chip to package to complex board designs.(read more)

Using the EMX solver, X-FAB design engineers can efficiently develop next-generation RF technology for the latest communication standards (including sub-6GHz 5G, mmWave, UWB, etc.), which are enabling technologies for communications and electric vehicle (EV) wireless applications. (read more)

With the latest release (Sigrity and Systems Analysis 2022.1 HF2) of Clarity  3D Solver, support for encrypted component models is now available. With this functionality, vendors that supply 3D components, such as connectors, can now merge their...(read more)

If you have seen any images or demonstrations of the 17.4-2019 release, the GUI may look ...(read more)

Cadence Clarity 3D Solver supports encrypted component models! Using this functionality, vendors can supply their 3D components, such as connectors, to end customers without revealing the physical IP of these designs. The first connector vendor to take advantage of this functionality is Japan Aviation Electronics (JAE),(read more)

The Sigrity and Systems Analysis (SIGRITY/SYSANLS) 2022.1 HF2 release is now available for download at Cadence Downloads. For the list of CCRs fixed in the 2022.1 HF2 release, see the README.txt file in the installation hierarchy.(read more)

Dear All,

To design an outphasing combiner, I need to extract the input impedances when the circuit is driven by two sources concurrently with a varying phase-shift and plot them on a Smith Chart. However, I can't find a way to display the simulated S-parameters on a Smith Chart.

The testbench, shown below, consists of two sources set to 50 Ohm with variable phase (PORT0: theta, PORT1: -theta) swept from -90° to 90°. The NPORTs are couplers used to isolate the forward and reflected power at each source, i.e. the S-parameters are:

• S13 = S31 = 1; through path
• S21 = S41 = 1; forward and reflected power
• All other are zero

The testbench is simulated with an "hb" analysis instead of "sp", as the two sources have to be excited simultaneously with varying phase-shift to see their load-modulation effect. The sweep is setup in the "Choosing Analysis" window. The powers of the forward (pXa) and reflected (pXb) waves are found through the "Direct Plot" window, e.g. pvr('hb "/p1a" 0 50.0 '(1)) as the power for p1a, and named P1A_Watt. The S-parameters are then calculated as the reflected power w.r.t. the forward power P1B_Watt/P1A_Watt. This approach is based on a Hot S-parameter testbench from ADS.

At this point I would like to display these S-parameters on a Smith Chart. However, this seemed more challenging than expected. One straightforward method would seem to create an empty Smith Chart window in the Display Window and dragging the S-parameters from the rectangular plot on it, but this just deletes them from the Display Window. Hence my question:

How can I display these S-parameters on a Smith Chart?

Hi! I'm using EMX with 2 design kits. In one works fine. With another, I do not see the mesh or current view. The menu item is not shown. This happens only with one DK. With the other one I'm able to run Paraview without any issue. 

Besides, I would like to know if there is any way to see the 3D view without mesh and current. Just a nice 3D view. 

I've also tried to install the latest version (EMX2023_2) but nothing changes. 

Hello Team,
I am currently following this AWR script posted on them, to run a python script directly from inside AWR using VBA script.

Launching Python from AWRDE VBA Script - AWR Scripts - AWR Knowledgebase

Following all the basic steps with no changes to the code. I have Vscode and python-3.12.2 installed in my system. 

This is the error I am getting while running this code. 

Thank you for your help 

Best Regards

SID

Dear all,

Hi!

I'm trying to do a Harmonic Balance (HB) Large-Signal S-Parameter (LSSP) simulation to figure out the input impedance of a nonlinear circuit.

Through this simulation, what I want to know is the large-signal S11 only (not S12, S21 and S22).

So, I have simulated with only single port (PORT0) at input, but LSSP simulation is terminated and output log shows following text.

" Analysis `hb' was terminated prematurely due to an error "

The LSSP simulation does not proceed without second port.

Should I use floating second port (which is not necessary for my circuit) to succeed the LSSP simulation?

Does the LSSP simulation really need two ports?

Below figure is my HB LSSP simulation setup.

Additionally, Periodic S-Parameter (PSP) simulation using HB is succeeded with only single port.

What is the difference between PSP and LSSP simulations?

Hello, Currently i am designing a 96MHZ crystal oscillator using pierce topology and also I use for amplitude gain control circuit for regulation. The problem is when i run a PSS + Pnoise i get these warnings :

WARNING (CMI-2375): M2: Vgs has exceeded the oxide breakdown voltage of `vbox' = 6 V.
WARNING (CMI-2375): M4: Vgs has exceeded the oxide breakdown voltage of `vbox' = 6 V.
WARNING (CMI-2377): M4: Vgd has exceeded the oxide breakdown voltage of `vbox' = 6 V.
WARNING (CMI-2377): M3: Vgd has exceeded the oxide breakdown voltage of `vbox' = 6.6 V.

and also WARNING (CMI-2682): M5: The bulk-drain junction forward bias voltage (1.38154 V) exceeds VjdmFwd'=851.514mV ,The results are now incorrect because the junction current model has been linearized

Note : i am using Supply 1.2 V hence it is not possible to exceed the oxide breakdown. 

So i am asking why i am getting these warnings , it could be a convergence problem and the Results computed are not corrected.

Also when running DC and transient , i don't get these warnings.

Hello,

I am trying to design an RF mixer for a TX.
Assume my input IF signal is at 1 GHz, my LO at 2 GHz and I want my RF at 3 GHz, and assume that the mixer fully works after testing it with HB.
How to simply set the envelope analysis to check the EVM ?
I read through the documentation but I couldn't get it (I couldn't fully understand the settings of the source, probe, analysis.)
Which source and probe to use? I want custom modulation with custom bandwidth and center frequency.
Is there some examples for the ENVLP analysis ?

I am using IC23.1 and spectre 20.1.354.

Hi,

In our design team, we're looking for a strategy to make all cell views self-contained. We are struggling to do so when nport devices are involved.

The nport file requires a full path, whereas what we need is a relative path to the current path of the cell in which we're using the nport.

I have browsed through the forums & cadence support pages, but could not find a solution.

1) There is a proposal from Andrew to add the file directory in ADE option "Simulation Files." :https://community.cadence.com/cadence_technology_forums/f/rf-design/27167/s-parameter-datafile-path-in-nport . This, however, is not suitable, because the cell is not self contained.

2) The new cadence version off DataSource "cellView" in nport options:

This however is not suitable for us due to two reasons:

i- Somehow we don't get this option in the nport cell (perhaps some custom modification from our PDK team)

ii- Even if we had this option, it requires to select the library, which again makes it unsuitable: We often copy design libraries for derivative products using "Hierarchical Copy" feature. And when the library is copied, the nport will still be pointing to the old library. Thus, it is still not self-contained.

In principle, it should not be difficult (technically) to point to a text file relative to the cell directory (f.ex we can make a folder under the same cell with name "sparFiles" & place all spar files under this folder), however it does not seem to be possible.

Could you perhaps recommend us a work-around to achieve our goal: making the cells which contain nport devices self-contained so that when we copy a cell, we do not have to update all the nport file destinations ?

Thanks in advance.

My Cadence Version: IC23.1-64b.ISR4.51

My Spectre version: 23.1.0.362.isr5

Hi *,

I am simulating a 32kHz high Q crystal oscillator with a pulse shaping circuit. I set up a PSS analysis using the Shooting Newton engine. I set a beat frequency of 32k and used the crystal output and ground as reference nodes. After the initial transient the amplitude growth was already pretty much settled such that the shooting iterations could continue the job.

My problem is: In 5...10% of my PVT runs the simulator detects a frequency divider in the initial transient simulation. The output log says:

Frequency divided by 3 at node <xxx>

The Estimated oscillating frequency from Tstab Tran is = 11.0193 kHz .

However, the mentioned node is only part of the control logic and is always constant (but it has some ripples and glitches which are all less than 30uV). These glitches spoil my fundamental frequency (11kHz instead of 32kHz). Sometimes the simulator detects a frequency division by 2 or 3 and the mentioned node <xxx> is different depending on PVT - but the node is always a genuine high or low signal inside my control logic.

How can I tell the simulator that there is no frequency divider and it should only observe the given node pair in the PSS analysis setup to estimate the fundamental frequency? I have tried the following workarounds but none of them worked reliably:

- extended/reduced the initial transient simulation time

- decreased accuracy

- preset override with Euler integration method for the initial transient to damp glitches

- tried different initial conditions

- specified various oscillator nodes in the analysis setup form

By the way, I am using Spectre X (version 21.1.0.389.ISR8) with CX accuracy.

Thanks for your support and best regards

Stephan

I get multiple results at the same frequency in a 3-tone simulation.

I try to determine the IP3 of a mixer. I have 3 large signal tones: 0.75 GHz, 1.25 GHz and 1.26 GHz.

At the IM3 frequency of 490 MHz I observe 4 results, see also the screenshot of the table output. The frequencies are exactly the same (even when I subtract 490 MHz by using xval() ).

Which of the values do I have to use to determine the correct IP3?

Is there an option to merge these results?

Hello everybody,

As you can find in the attached image, I am trying to simulate a Colpitts oscillator. However, using pss analysis it shows a high output power. 

My question is where is the problem of my structure or simulation setup?

Best,

Hello everyone,

I am trying to perform a load pull simulation of a transistor to verify some gain calculations I made using its S-parameters. Specifically, I have calculated the optimal conjugate impedances for the input and output to later calculate the power dissipated and transmitted in each stage of the transistor. Then, I only varied the output impedance and recalculated these powers, noticing that the power delivered to the load is lower.

Now, what I want to do is simulate this behavior using the Load Pull simulation. I have taken the model shown in the image, but I believe it is a linear model. My question is: if the chosen model is linear, is the load pull simulation accurate? In the calculations I made, nonlinearities are not considered. I don’t want to take nonlinearities into account.

In short, do you have any ideas on how to verify the calculations made with the transistor’s S-parameters through a load pull simulation?

Can you recommend any transistor model that is nonlinear and also has an S-parameter file?

Thank you very much in advance.

Hello everyone,

For my cross-coupled oscillator design, I have a problem with stability analysis. Based on my achieved results which are attached, where is my design problem?

Best,

https://ibb.co/bgKFP4N

https://ibb.co/3FGRLmV

https://ibb.co/pwSZDSF

Hi everyone,

I'm currently working on my thesis, which involves a beamformer system using CMOS 65nm technology. I'm trying to use the EMX tool for EM simulation but have encountered a few problems. Before diving into my questions about EMX, let me briefly explain how I conduct EM simulations with other software (ADS).

In ADS, I use the EM simulator with the Momentum microwave engine. However, my EM layout is quite large, and the mesh generated is extremely detailed, making it difficult to simulate the entire system. As a workaround, I divide the system into smaller parts and simulate each one individually. I've attached a snapshot of my setup, which includes an amplifier and a 1-to-2 Wilkinson power divider. I've separated these circuits and placed pins to facilitate EM simulations for each. I also placed ground pins at the boundaries of each circuit to connect them to the ground plane.

Here’s the link to the image (I'm unable to upload it due to an error): https://drive.google.com/file/d/13Qn4-DvMBj_K1JQLXrTWaWZ8uaLJr15u/view?usp=sharing

Now, moving on to EMX (version 6.3). For a maximum frequency of 31 GHz, I set the edge mesh = thickness = 0.4 µm (approximately the skin depth). However, when I simulate the circuit (amplifier + divider), the mesh on the ground plane becomes very dense, which makes running the simulation impossible due to excessive memory requirements. I reverted to my ADS approach and divided the circuit into two parts, placing ports to connect them. Unfortunately, EMX doesn't allow me to place multiple edge ports on the same edge for the ground plane, which has left me confused. Here are a couple of questions I have:

1. Is breaking the circuit into smaller parts a valid approach? Given the large ground plane, the mesh size for the ground is significant, making simulations challenging. Are there any methods to manage this issue?

2. Regarding the ground pins, why can't I place multiple edge ports to connect the ground planes of both circuits as I did in ADS? If this approach is incorrect, could you suggest alternative methods for simulating individual circuits and connecting them to estimate system performance?

Any insights would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance for your help!

Hello Everybody

Recently, I want to design a high output Power Amplifier at 2.4GHz using TSMC 1P6M CMOS Bulk Process. I use its nmos_rf_25_6t transistor model to determine the approximate mosfet size

I use the most common Common-Source Differential Amplifier topology with neutralizing capacitor to improve its stability and power gain performance

Because I want to output large power, the size of mosfet is very large, the gate width is about 2mm, when I perform harmonic balance analysis, everything is alright, the OP1dB is about 28dBm (0.63Watt)

But When I perform Transient simulation, the magnitude of voltage and current waveform at the saturation point is too small, for voltgae, Vpeaking is about 50mV, for current, Ipeaking is about 5mA

I assume some reasons: the bsim4 model is not complete/ the virtuoso version is wrong (My virtuoso version is IC6.1.7-64b.500.21)/the spectre version is wrong (spectre version is 15.1.0 32bit)/the MMSIM version is wrong/Transient Simulation setting is wrong (the algorithm is select gear2only, but when I select other, like: trap, the results have no difference), the maxstep I set 5ps, minstep I set 2ps to improve simulation speed, I think this step is much smaller than the fundamental period (1/2.4e9≈416ps)

I have no idea how to solve this problem, please help me! Thank you very very much!

The ICADVM20.1 ISR26 and IC6.1.8 ISR26 production releases are now available for download.(read more)

The ICADVM20.1 ISR27 and IC6.1.8 ISR27 production releases are now available for download.(read more)

Hello,

I have a sensitive trace on layer 2 and I would like to prevent any routing along or across it on adjacent layers (L1 and L3).

My idea was to use a route keepout shape on L1 and L3, however that also removed the ground pour on those layers and I would like to keep the ground pour.

Can I get around this somehow or should I use something else than route keepout?

Regards,

Filip

I want to make an opening in the solder mask right above a trace that is acting like a guard ring. Do I really need to go and buy the Allegro Productivity Toolbox add-on for using the Cross-Copy tool for a basic operation like that??

/F

The default behaviour of Place replicate update is to select every new net item connected to the replicate module. This leads to an abundant number of clines, vias and shapes being selected, most of which I don't want to add to the replicate group. It is very tedious to unselect all these items and more often than not, I miss one or two items and then end up with a via or cline in a completely different place on the board or outside of the board.

Is there a way to change this rather annoying behaviour? I haven't found any way to disable it or to batch deselect everything the tool has decided to add to the replicate group.

The question has been asked before, but it didn't get any answers and the thread is now locked.

/F

Hai Community,

I have a PCB board which has multiple high speed nets and I want to perform the EMI and EMC checking.

Which Cadence tool should I use for checking the EMI and EMC coupling?

Regards,

Rohit Rohan

A more appropriate title for this blog could be “All Vehicles with ADAS Need the Midas Functional Safety Platform”.

EVs tend to have advanced driving assistance systems (ADAS) because they’re newer, but not all vehicles with ADAS are EVs!

Certifying Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) is a multifaceted process involving rigorous testing, validation, and regulatory compliance to ensure safety and reliability.
As ADAS technologies become increasingly sophisticated, the certification process is evolving to meet these challenges.

The ISO26262 standard provides the requirements to be met to attain safety certification for digital designs.

One of the key aspects of ADAS certification is functional safety. This includes:

• Ensuring the system operates as intended under all conditions, including failures.
• Adherence to standards like ISO26262.
• Rigorous testing to identify potential hazards and mitigate risks.

The Midas Safety Platform provides early-phase exploration of functional safety architectures and leverages native chip design data to perform accurate safety analysis efficiently.

The platform is a unified solution available across Cadence products, and with its modular architecture, it supports both embedded and standalone usage with the Cadence flow.

After extracting the design information, an output Midas database file contains the isolated DUT and provides the design components and their fault tolerances to various tools in the flow.

Conformal can easily verify design transformations that include necessary components like TMR for safety.

In these videos, we explore how to create reports for both Transient and Permanent faults.

Creating Detailed FMEDA in Midas (Video)

Creating Architectural FMEDA in Midas (Video) 

Also, read this blog post for additional motivation: What Is Zonal Architecture? And Why Is it Upending the Automotive Supply Chain?

What Next?

Join the Midas Safety Platform Introduction and the Functional Safety Implementation and Verification with Midas trainings and learn more about:

• Setting up and defining the USF file
• Using the Midas Safety Platform to create functional safety reports, and
• Midas integration with the Genus  Synthesis Solution, Innovus  Implementation System, and Conformal Equivalence Checker tools to implement functional safety

The online class is free for all Cadence customers with a Cadence Learning and Support Portal account. If you don’t have a Cadence Support account, go to Registration Help or Register Now and complete the requested information. For instructor-led training sessions "Live" or "Blended" please contact Cadence Training.

Please don't forget to obtain your Digital Badge after completing the training. Add your free digital badge to your email signature or any social media and networking platform to show your qualities and build trust, making you and your projects even more successful.

If you want to make sure you are always the first to know about anything new in training, then you can use the SUBSCRIBE button on the landing page to sign up for our regular training newsletters.