[ibis-macro] Re: How would you model this On Die Termination? (continuation from Question on dividing up the Tx behavior thread)
- From: ckumar <ckumar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <Terry.Chen@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 06:48:00 -0800
I presume that you want ot put the slew limiter inside the ami for
convenience.
It should be really part of the circuit not ami.
If the memory portion of slew limiter (time constant etc) is really "tiny"
you may get away with approximating it in ami.
But I still think the best way to resolve it to compare it with circuit
simulation with and without hte slew limiter in the circuit for canonical
channels.
On Fri, 9 Mar 2012 09:28:24 -0500, "Chen, Terry" <Terry.Chen@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> Hi IBIS experts,
>
> I have been getting a ton of great feedbacks on why it may be a bad idea
> to model the TX driver with as an ideal output step function (b/c it
will
> not model the impedance mismatch and reflections properly). To clarify,
I
> have roughly sketched my TX output driver and the T-Coil "like" ODT
> structure, and attached it as a picture in order to serve as a point for
> further discussion. I have also sketched how I am "attempting" to model
it.
>
> So the question I have is:
>
> 1. How would you model this?
>
> 2. Can you do this using original IBIS 5.0 directives and still
get
> the frequency dependent effect of my ODT?
>
> I had (possibly mistakenly) thought that this is not possible with IBIS
> 5.0, so I proceeded down the path of factoring out the term and the
> parasitics as S4P.
>
> Regards,
> Terry Chen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IBIS Macro website : http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/macromodel_wip/
IBIS Macro reflector: //www.freelists.org/list/ibis-macro
To unsubscribe send an email:
To: ibis-macro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: unsubscribe
Other related posts:
