Bird 49 comments from HyperLynx

Hi IBIS,

  We did an engineering review of Bird 49 with the
following comments:

1) We will vote YES only if BIRD 48 is change to use SUB_MODEL
   since this bird requires BIRD 48 syntax.

2) While static and triggered forms of this BIRD seem well defined
   and straight forward the clocked mode looks very poorly defined
   and we will VOTE NO unless the clocked mode is removed or the
   documentation is improved to define how the clock relates to
   the pulse table. We were not able to determine how the clock
   timing relates to the pulse table.

3) There was a large amount of confusion when reading the "Analysis
   path that led to spec" section. It looks like some information
   critical to understanding this bird is embedded in this section and
   mixed with some obsolete syntax. The bird cannot be used without
   filter some information out of this section and putting it in the
   main syntax for the bird e.g. the usage rules for I=f(v-v_pulse(t))
   is not shown in the actual bird.
   We feel this bird is a no go until the usage wording is
   added to the specification section.

Best wishes:
Kellee
Matt
Steve
 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have a great day...
Kellee Crisafulli at HyperLynx
kellee@hyperlynx.com http://www.hyperlynx.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Thu Jun 4 14:55:05 1998