RE: Re[2]: Connector spec swathing

Mikkail,

Did I say you should directly provide a full matrix? Absolutely not. My
original request that started this whole thread is simply that the mapping
from swath to full matrix to be clearly defined and perhaps provided by the
parser.

Repeated: I am not saying "Don't use the swath" !!!

Chris Rokusek
Innoveda

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mikhail Khusid [mailto:Mikhail_Khusid@notes.teradyne.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 11:29 AM
> To: Chris Rokusek
> Cc: IBIS Mailing list
> Subject: RE: Re[2]: Connector spec swathing
>
>
> Chris,
>
> Whether a connector company can make a full matrix model of a connector
> depends more on the connector than the tools. In fact, if a connector is
> complicated enough to warrant several L and C sections, and if a connector
> has many pins, providing a full matrix model can be very unpractical.
>
> As a representative of the connector company where a 570 pin connector
> is considered a small one, I can assure you that it's impossible for me
> to generate dozens of 570x570 matrices. Furthermore, I doubt that any
> simulator will be able to solve a problem with full matrices of that size.
> Doing a swath method allows me to generate reasonable size matrices,
> up to 30x30, which should respresent sufficient couplings inside
> the connector, and thus is an effective way to simulate the connector
> behavior in reasonable time.
>
> Lastly, I agree with Kellee that a standard should probably include
> a description of a "golden" way to generate a full matrix model
> out of a swath,
> however, I would welcome simulator companies attempts to avoid using
> this method for every connector.
>
> Michael Khusid
> Teradyne Connection Systems
> http://www.teradyne.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Chris Rokusek" <crokusek@innoveda.com> on 06/15/2000 12:27:55 PM
>
> To: "IBIS Mailing list" <ibis@eda.org>
> cc: (bcc: Mikhail Khusid/NNH/Teradyne)
> Subject: RE: Re[2]: Connector spec swathing
>
>
>
>
> Gus,
>
> Given that some companies actually do possess the tools to create Full
> Matrix connectors (& packages) accurately and efficiently and given that
> simulators MUST come up with algorithms to reduce this full
> matrix (perhaps
> efficiently with an accuracy tradeoff), simulator companies are
> just trying
> to avoid extra work in having to write two algorithms that do very similar
> things--one to expand the swath to arbitrary pins and one to
> reduce the full
> matrix to arbitrary pins. Many of us prefer to solve the most
> general/accurate problem first (Full Matrix).
>
> I don't think we're saying "don't use the swath", I think all we're saying
> is provide us with a recommended algorithm (and perhaps build it into the
> parser) for expanding the swath into a full matrix so that each simulator
> can potentially get the same answer for the most general case. It seems
> like that would keep everybody happy.
>
> Chris Rokusek
> Innoveda
>
<snip>
Received on Thu Jun 15 12:05:38 2000