Multisim & PSPICE - using MOSFETs

[ER Yost]

Hello,

I was wondering if anyone here has experience with modelling MOSFETs on
PSPICE and Multisim. As a student, I've been used to using PSPICE 9.1
Schematics to model and simulate circuits. However, I only have the
evaluation version, and need more than 10 transistors in my circuit. I
also have Multisim available to me, but PSPICE and Multisim seem to be
very different in the way the MOSFET models operate. I took a rather
uncomplicated N & PMOS from PSPICE and have gotten nowhere in Multisim.


I'm wondering if anyone here has experience with trying to translate
between the two programs, especially using transient analyses or the
scopes that Multsim provides. Thank you.

 

[Jim Thompson]

Hello,

I was wondering if anyone here has experience with modelling MOSFETs on
PSPICE and Multisim. As a student, I've been used to using PSPICE 9.1
Schematics to model and simulate circuits. However, I only have the
evaluation version, and need more than 10 transistors in my circuit. I
also have Multisim available to me, but PSPICE and Multisim seem to be
very different in the way the MOSFET models operate. I took a rather
uncomplicated N & PMOS from PSPICE and have gotten nowhere in Multisim.


I'm wondering if anyone here has experience with trying to translate
between the two programs, especially using transient analyses or the
scopes that Multsim provides. Thank you.

What MOS model LEVEL=[a number goes here] is it?

...Jim Thompson

 

[ER Yost]

What MOS model LEVEL=[a number goes here] is it?

So far, in Multisim I've used level 1 virtual enhancement mode MOS as
well as two power MOSFETs (P and N-channel) that come with the student
version - one by Motorola, one by International Rectifier - I think one
is a level 1, the other is a level 3. Power MOS isn't the right
application for my research, but it at least it will give me an idea of
what is going on for a few periods before giving me a timestep error
(right now I have the relative tolerance at 0.01 and ITL4 at 100, which
Multisim recommended for timestep errors).

Another thing I'm trying to figure out in general is how to establish
the channel resistance in the model since I'm looking into energy
dissipation.

 

[Helmut Sennewald]

Hello,

I was wondering if anyone here has experience with modelling MOSFETs on
PSPICE and Multisim. As a student, I've been used to using PSPICE 9.1
Schematics to model and simulate circuits. However, I only have the
evaluation version, and need more than 10 transistors in my circuit. I
also have Multisim available to me, but PSPICE and Multisim seem to be
very different in the way the MOSFET models operate. I took a rather
uncomplicated N & PMOS from PSPICE and have gotten nowhere in Multisim.

Hello ER Yost,

have you ever heard of LTspice. It's practically free, unlimited
and highly compatible to PSPICE on the netlist level. Your MOSFETs
will work with LTspice if they work with PSPICE.

http://www.linear.com/designtools/softwareRegistration.jsp

There is also a user group.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LTspice/messages

I'm wondering if anyone here has experience with trying to translate
between the two programs, especially using transient analyses or the
scopes that Multsim provides. Thank you.

People should be aware that the GUIs of real instruments are mostly
compromises because of limitations in the measurement hardware,
limitations of the display, knobs and the cursor control.
Why want you go with the second choice? I wonder.

It's much more efficient and powerful to work with pure xy-diagrams
in the waveform viewer of PSPICE(Probe), LTspice and many other SPICEs.

Best regards,
Helmut

 

[ER Yost]

have you ever heard of LTspice. It's practically free, unlimited
and highly compatible to PSPICE on the netlist level. Your MOSFETs
will work with LTspice if they work with PSPICE.

Actually, yes, I downloaded LTspice yesterday and it has been very
helpful. I've been able to build bigger circuits and get good feedback.

However...

With the research that I am doing this summer, it will be extremely
important to be as accurate as possible. You can Google "quantum-dot
cellular automata" (QCA) if you'd like - I'm doing research for Notre
Dame (1st hit). The circuit that I am building isn't really to help the
QCA project itself, but to provide a concrete example of how QCA is
going to be more energy efficient than typical circuits today.

People should be aware that the GUIs of real instruments are mostly
compromises because of limitations in the measurement hardware,
limitations of the display, knobs and the cursor control.
Why want you go with the second choice? I wonder.

It's much more efficient and powerful to work with pure xy-diagrams
in the waveform viewer of PSPICE(Probe), LTspice and many other SPICEs.

I need something more accurate than LTSpice. Sure, PSPICE or Multisim
aren't perfect, but they're pretty close. I'd love it if I could get a
good enough version of PSPICE to have more than 10 transistors, because
I have more experience with that. But, for now, I'd love to be able to
use Multisim since it will give me enough computing power to do it.

Nothing against LTSpice. It's definitely saved me time. It just won't
be up to par in the end.

Thanks,

ERY

 

[Jim Thompson]

Actually, yes, I downloaded LTspice yesterday and it has been very
helpful. I've been able to build bigger circuits and get good feedback.

However...

With the research that I am doing this summer, it will be extremely
important to be as accurate as possible. You can Google "quantum-dot
cellular automata" (QCA) if you'd like - I'm doing research for Notre
Dame (1st hit). The circuit that I am building isn't really to help the
QCA project itself, but to provide a concrete example of how QCA is
going to be more energy efficient than typical circuits today.


I need something more accurate than LTSpice. Sure, PSPICE or Multisim
aren't perfect, but they're pretty close. I'd love it if I could get a
good enough version of PSPICE to have more than 10 transistors, because
I have more experience with that. But, for now, I'd love to be able to
use Multisim since it will give me enough computing power to do it.

Nothing against LTSpice. It's definitely saved me time. It just won't
be up to par in the end.

Thanks,

ERY

I don't think there's actually any issue with LTSpice accuracy as long
as you don't use some of its speed-up gimmicks.

But Level=1 and Level=3 models suck the big lemon.

Your issues probably lie there as well as with your inexperience with
Spice engines and how to set time-steps.

(I've been using PSpice since it was on DOS ;-)

...Jim Thompson

 

[ER Yost]

I don't think there's actually any issue with LTSpice accuracy as long
as you don't use some of its speed-up gimmicks.

But Level=1 and Level=3 models suck the big lemon.

Your issues probably lie there as well as with your inexperience with
Spice engines and how to set time-steps.

(I've been using PSpice since it was on DOS ;-)

Humbled I am.

Until you mentioned it, I didn't really realize that I could set the
MOS models in LTspice. Duh.

Although I still don't get why my basic SPICE model wasn't consistent
between programs, I might as well give LTspice my undivided attention
and leave it at that.

Thanks,

ERY

 

[Helmut Sennewald]

Actually, yes, I downloaded LTspice yesterday and it has been very
helpful. I've been able to build bigger circuits and get good feedback.

However...

With the research that I am doing this summer, it will be extremely
important to be as accurate as possible. You can Google "quantum-dot
cellular automata" (QCA) if you'd like - I'm doing research for Notre
Dame (1st hit). The circuit that I am building isn't really to help the
QCA project itself, but to provide a concrete example of how QCA is
going to be more energy efficient than typical circuits today.


I need something more accurate than LTSpice.

Hello ERY,

LTspice has normally "data compression" enabled. It's like a lossy
data compression of the raw-file. You should switch it off.

..options plotwinsize=0

With this command, LTspice will beat PSPICE and others regarding
accuracy by decades!
Sorry that this compression setting isn't so obvious for new users.

Best regards,
Helmut