Enhanced Package Models

Hello Kumar, and Fellow IBISans:

     Thank you for taking the time to write up your proposal. I do
have a couple of questions. First, in your example, did you really
mean for section #3 of pin A3 to couple to section --> #2 <-- of pin A5
or section #3 of Pin A5.

---------------------- your example

A1 Len = 0 L=1.2n / Len= 1.3 Matrix=3line MxPinOrder=(A1 A2 A3) /
    Len = 0.47 L=8.35n C=3.34p R=0.01 /
A2 Len = 0 L=1.4n / Len= 1.2 Matrix=3line MxPinOrder=(A1 A2 A3) /
    Len = 0.47 L=8.35n C=3.34p R=0.01 /
A3 Len = 0 L=1.4n / Len= 1.1 Matrix=3line MxPinOrder=(A1 A2 A3) /
    Len = 0 Matrix=2line MxPinOrder=(A3 A5) /
A4 Len = 0 L=1.2n / Len = 1.0 L=2nH / Len=0.47 L=8.35
    C=3.34p R=0.01/
A5 Len = 0 L=1.2n /
    Len = 0 Matrix=2line MxPinOrder=(A3 A5) /
    Len = 0.47 L=8.35n C=3.34p R=0.01 /

---------------------
     Second, it is not obvious to me what extra functionality
or problem you are trying to address by adding the matrix names and the
MxPinOrder keywords. In your example above you want to show coupling
between pins A1, A2 and A3, and also A3 coupling to A5. This can be
done by using the sparse matrix format as follows (using a capacitance
matrix for illustration):

[Capacitance Matrix] Sparse_matrix
[Row] 1
1 xxpF
2 yypF
3 zzpF
[Row] 2
2 aapF
3 zzpF
[Row] 3
3 bbpF
5 ccpF
[Row] 4
4 anothervaluepF
.
.
.
[Row] 5
5 stillanothervaluepF
.
.
.
and so on

     I get the feeling I am missing something in your explanation/example.
Please enlighten me.

              Best Regards,
              Stephen Peters
              Intel Corp.
Received on Mon Oct 16 16:12:22 1995