Weird Problem with Cadence...

This also addresses a message I posted a couple of days ago. I am trying to design an analog switch for a DRAM application.

The problem is "a drastic difference" in behavior when I used cadence tool to pspice. My schematic is a very simple test circuit where the gate of an NMOS is made logic low (-3 V). I am putting a value 100mV on one end of the NMOS switch (say, drain). A capacitor is connected to the other side of the switch with a value 1pF. Now, the problem is that, when I run transient analysis, I am seeing a voltage of about 90+ mV on the capacitor net. How is this possible? The transistor is turned off and I should ideally not see anything except leakage.

This was the issue when I used spectre simuation in cadence. I did the same experiment using Orcad pspice and it works as I expect it to. Before I was working with pspice, I thought it might be a leakage problem associated with the internal diode inside the MOSFET and to check that out, I put a transistor whose gate was connected to inverse clock, before the capacitor. In this setup, if the main transistor is on, then the other transistor is off. I did this to provide a low impedence path to the leakage, if any. So, when the main transistor or the switch is off, any leakage may flow through this low impedence path created by the second transistor and if the switch is on, the second transistor functions as open circuit and should not affect my circut. This setup works.

I am really surprised because, this logically baffles me. Further, how come Pspice gives me a different behavior (which I believe to be correct) in the first case?

Any help is greatly appreciated. I hope I have posed the question clearly.

Regards, Saran

Reply to
Saran
Loading thread data ...

Hi Ken,

It makes sense logically to me now. So, if I understand correctly, if there is _no_dc_path_ then the voltage I am seeing is actually not the voltage on the capacitor. I have to check my schematic and see if I did not goof things up. Will get back to you ASAP. Thanks a lot.

Regards, Saran

Reply to
Saran

In article , Saran wrote: [....]

Is there no DC path at all on the 1pF side of the FET?

If so: It is normal for spice programs to solve the DC problem first to set the starting point for the transient analysis. With no DC path, this can lead to a voltage appearing on the capacitor.

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net   forging knowledge
Reply to
Ken Smith

Hi Ken,

You were spot on! There was no DC path in the circuit on the 1pF side of the FET. Thanks a ton and I am sure I will not be so stupid next time :).

Cheers, Saran

Reply to
Saran

No, you made this circuit:

ASCII - ART

C1 NC---!!----GND 1pF

Some time back around the big bang, a charge was put onto C1 and who knows how much that was. Since there is no place for the charge to get away to, it is still there.

Most spices start off with all capacitances discharged and all inductances currents at zero and solve the DC problem. Many of them use tricks to make the solution come out. Circuits with positive feedback and the like can cause troubles for the straight forward attack on the issue.

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net   forging knowledge
Reply to
Ken Smith

Wow. That is interesting. Very informative. Thanks a lot.

Regs, Saran

Reply to
Saran

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.