X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Virus-Scanned:	amavisd-new at cloud9.net
Date:	Thu, 1 Aug 2013 07:39:37 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Stuart Brorson <sdb AT cloud9 DOT net>
To:	"geda-user AT delorie DOT com" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] spice/subcircuit/pin order
In-Reply-To:	<CACPio-4wee8f7txMzikPJyRV3OLDt2bfwGCugWHWq8D-Ze1T8w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID:	<alpine.BSF.2.00.1308010736170.35826@earl-grey.cloud9.net>
References:	<CACPio-4wee8f7txMzikPJyRV3OLDt2bfwGCugWHWq8D-Ze1T8w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
User-Agent:	Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

My guess is that you are not using the pinseq attribute correctly.
Indeed, this line from the netlister:

> Found subcircuit.  Refdes = X1.2

suggests that you are using slotted parts.  Usage of the pinseq
attribute conflicts between the spice-sdb netlister and the way
slotted parts are handled.

If you haven't already, read up on how to creat SPICE netlists on the
HOWTO:

http://wiki.geda-project.org/geda:csygas

Stuart





On Thu, 1 Aug 2013, Nathan Stewart wrote:

> I'm trying to use the following model in circuit:
> http://www.onsemi.com/pub_link/Collateral/NDF02N60Z.SP3.TXT
>
> I don't see any errors, the netlister hooks it up. The simulation runs, But
> the pins are wrong, Gate is Drain, behaves as you'd expect it to given the
> wiring. (except for the part about exploding or punching the gate
> insulation :)
>
> I've swapped the pins in the symbol. I've swapped them in the model. But
> nothing appears to actually cause any behavior change.
>
> One thing I do notice however, is in the netlist, it looks like:
>
>   132 : ux3 7 drive 0 ndf02n60z
>
> It's refdes is X3, not UX3. All my other subcricuits with a refdes X look
> like this:
>
> 95 : .subckt opamp_3v3 1 2 81
>
> The subcircuits which work don't appear to require any DEVICE attribute,
> but for some reason it gets treated incorrectly. With verbose turned on,
> the netlister says:
>
> Make second pass through design and write out a SPICE card for each
> component found.
> --- checking package = X3
>    device = SUBCIRCUIT
> Found subcircuit.  Refdes = X3
> Found .MODEL with model-file and model-name for X3
> Checking prefix.  Package prefix =X
>                  correct prefix =U
>   nomunge mode = #f
>  different-prefix=#t
> We'll handle the file contents later . . .
>
>
> Now oddly enough, the two identical(symbol, the models are copies of one
> another and differ only by an internal Vcc)  opamp subcircuits appear to
> work but work differently.
>
> Found subcircuit.  Refdes = X1.2
> Found .SUBCKT with model-file and model-name for X1.2
> Checking prefix.  Package prefix =X
>                  correct prefix =X
>   nomunge mode = #f
>  different-prefix=#f
> We'll handle the file contents later . . .
>
> --- checking package = X2
>    device = unknown
> Found subcircuit.  Refdes = X2
> Model info not found in model file list.  No model attribute either.  Just
> write what we know.
>
>
> Can anyone shed some light on the different handling of these three
> subcircuits?
>

- Raw text -