[ibis-macro] Re: Analog Buffer model - the User's viewpoint
- From: David Banas <DBanas@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "'twesterh@xxxxxxxxxx'" <twesterh@xxxxxxxxxx>, 'IBIS-ATM' <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:18:25 -0800
Specifically, how would they want to set up and run simulations? The answer,
in SiSoft's opinion, is to specify values for control parameters that
correspond as closely to the actual hardware as possible.
I would offer one slight twist: I think what they really want is to be able to
manipulate the AMI model simulation control in a way that is analogous to the
use model of the hardware, which their chip design tool presents them with.
That use model, of course, can be very different than the actual hardware
itself.
-db
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Todd Westerhoff
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 1:03 PM
To: IBIS-ATM
Subject: [ibis-macro] Analog Buffer model - the User's viewpoint
All,
One of my colleagues here brought up a good point today - how the end-user
interacts with the model.
How do we expect that the user wants to interact with an IBIS-AMI model?
Specifically, how would they want to set up and run simulations? The answer,
in SiSoft's opinion, is to specify values for control parameters that
correspond as closely to the actual hardware as possible. Obviously a deep and
broad subject, of which I want to comment only on one small slice: how it
relates to analog modeling.
Let's assume we have a model where the output impedance (static impedance, as
Scott defined it) varies considerably depending on the TX output swing setting.
We expect that the user wants controls that lets them set the output swing and
EQ settings in a way where the mapping to hardware settings is obvious, with
the model/simulator figuring out to configure the details of the model.
Chances are, the analog model to be used will change as a function of the
output swing and EQ settings selected. If we're using subcircuit (as proposed
by BIRD 116) or Touchstone (as proposed by BIRD 144) methods, either the
equivalent circuit parameters (BIRD 116), or the Touchstone file selection
(BIRD 144) will have to change, depending on how the user sets the input
controls. I believe BIRD 116 & dependency tables can fulfill this requirement,
but I'm not sure that BIRD 144 (as currently proposed) can do this.
Todd.
--
Todd Westerhoff
VP, Software Products
SiSoft
6 Clock Tower Place, Suite 250
Maynard, MA 01754
(978) 461-0449 x24
twesterh@xxxxxxxxxx
www.sisoft.com<http://www.sisoft.com/>
"It doesn't matter what you've heard
Impossible is not a word
It's just a reason
For someone not to try"
-Kutless
________________________________
Confidentiality Notice.
This message may contain information that is confidential or otherwise
protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or
copying of this message, or any attachments, is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail,
and delete the message and any attachments. Thank you.
Other related posts:
