David,
I assume you are talking about an on-die blocking cap, as opposed to a
blocking cap in the package or board interconnect.
For an on-die blocking cap, one can to do this is an on-die s-parameter,
or just assume it does not exists since a blocking cap is a short at
frequencies of interest in AMI modeling.
The new interconnect BIRD will allow you to define blocking caps in either
the on-die interconnect, or package interconnect.
I assume that there are other EDA tools besides ours that allow the user
to define package and on-die subckts that are either s-parameter or SPICE
(IBIS-ISS) subckts that contain blocking caps.
Does this answer your question?
Walter
-----Original Message-----
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Banas
Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2016 10:14 AM
To: Bob Ross <bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: Terminator still illegal for AMI?
Thanks, Bob!
What is, currently, the preferred way of representing a d.c. blocking
capacitor in the signal path of a Rx model, assuming I'm okay with a
lumped element representation?
Thanks,
-db
On Apr 3, 2016, at 7:04 AM, Bob Ross <bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi David,a
Yes, Terminator is illegal. According to the [Algorithmic Model]/[End
Algorithmic Model] Usage Rules (Section 10.1):
Usage Rules: The [Algorithmic Model] keyword must be positioned within
[Model] section and it may appear only once for each [Model] keyword
in a .ibs file. It is not permitted under the [Submodel] keyword or
in [Model]s which are of Model_type Terminator, Series or Series_switch.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Banas
Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2016 6:38 AM
To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] Terminator still illegal for AMI?
Hi all,
Is Terminator still an illegal model type for AMI Rx models?
Thanks,
-db
