Starting SPB 23.1, in Allegro X PCB Editor and Allegro X Advanced Package Designer, you can align components by using offset mode. Earlier only spacing mode was available.

Follow these steps to Align Components using Offset Mode:

1. Set Application Mode to Placement Edit.
2. Drag the components that need to be aligned and right-click and choose Align Components.
3. Now, in the Options tab, you will notice Spacing Section with Equal Offset. You can equally and individually offset the components by using the +/- buttons for increment or decrement.

Have you ever encountered ERROR(SPMHNI-67) while importing logic? If yes, you might already know that you had to export libraries of the design and make sure that paths (devpath, padpath, and psmpath) include the location of exported files.  

Starting in SPB23.1, if you go to File > Import > Logic/Netlist and click on the Other tab, you will see an option, Reuse device files for existing components. 

After selecting this option, ERROR(SPMHNI-67) will no longer be there in the log file, because the tool will automatically extract device files and seamlessly use them for newly imported data. In other words, SPB_23.1 lets you reuse the device / component definitions already in the design without first having to dump libraries manually. An excellent improvement, don’t you think?  

Starting SPB 23.1, Allegro X APD lets you import/export the symbol and component properties by using Die Text-In/Out wizards. 

Exporting the symbol 

You can export the symbol by using File > Export > Die Text-Out Wizard. 

In the Die Text-Out Wizard window, you can see the newly added options, that is, Component Properties and Symbol Properties. 

This entire information including the properties will be saved in a text file. 

Importing the symbol 

You can import the same text file in Allegro X APD by using Die Text-In Wizard. 

Choose the text file you want to import. 

Symbol properties added in the text file will be visible in the Die Text-In Wizard window. 

hello, help me!

There are many change in the bump design. I want to design bump by APD.

The bump(die) is a stagger , create it by die generator. 

Because，the pin is not isometric. In order to RDL routing, so the bump is not isometric.

I move the symbol pin in APD symbol edit（as show in the picture）,  and selected symbol RBM write device file, write library symbol.

Export the bga text( bga text out) ,But the bump is not modified, the bump is still stagger.

Can you help me!

pitch2> pitch1

thanks

Hi，

There are mang components in BGA ball side of flipchip package.

Are there DFA check space of compont body or pin soldermask to BGA ball or BGA PAD or bga  soldermask in allegro APD?

I only find space of compont to compont in APD DFA. 

By default, a dielectric must separate each pair of conductor layers in the cross-section of a design. In rare cases, this does not represent the real, manufactured substrate.

If your design requires you to have conductor layers that are not separated by a dielectric (such as, for half-etch designs), there is a variable that needs to be set in Allegro X APD. You must set this by enabling the variable icp_allow_adjacent_conductors. This entry, and its location in the User Preferences Editor, are shown in the following image.

The Objects on adjacent conductor layers do not electrically connect together, automatically. A via must be used to establish the inter-layer connections.

When enabling this option, it is recommended to exercise caution because excluding dielectric layers from your cross-section can lead to inaccurate calculations, including the calculations for signal integrity and via heights. It is important that your cross-section accurately reflect the finished product to ensure the most accurate results possible. Any dielectric layers present in the manufactured part need to be in the cross-section for accurate extraction, 3D viewing, and so on.

Let us know your comments on the various designs that would require adjacent conductor layers.

Power and Ground rings are exposed rings of metal surrounding a die that supply power/ground to the die and create a low-impedance path for the current flow. These rings ensure stable power distribution and reduce noise. Allegro X Package Designer Plus has a utility called Power/Ground Ring Generator which lets you define and place one or more shapes in the form of a ring around a die.

 To run the PWR/GND Generator Wizard, go to Route > Power/Ground Ring Generator or type "pring wizard" in the APD command window to invoke the Wizard.

This Wizard lets you define and place one or more shapes in the form of a ring around a die. The Power/Ground Ring Wizard creates up to 12 rings (shapes) at a time. If you require more rings, you can run the Power/Ground Ring Wizard as many times as needed. This command displays a wizard in which you can specify:

• The number of rings to be generated
• The creation of the first ring as a die flag (Die flag is the boundary of the die like the power ring.)
  • If you create a die flag and the first ring is the same net as the flag, you can enter a negative distance to overlap the ring and the die flag.
• Multiple options for placement of the rings with respect to:
  • Origination point
  • Distance from the edge of the die
  • Distance from the nearest die pin on each die side
• The reference designator of the die with which the rings will be used
• The distance between rings
• The width of each ring
• The corner types on each ring (arc, chamfer, and right-angle)
• An assigned net name for each ring
• A label for each ring

The rings are basic in nature. For other shape geometries or split rings, choose Shape > Polygon or Shape > Compose/Decompose Shape from the menu in the design window.

Depending on the options selected, the Power/Ground Ring Wizard UI changes, representing how the rings will be created. Verify the Wizard settings to ensure that the rings are created as intended.

1. When the Power/Ground Ring Wizard appears, set the number of rings to 2, accept the other defaults, and click Next. You can set Create first ring as die flag to create a basic die flag.

         2. Define Ring 1 and the net associated with it.

              a) Browse and choose Vss in the Net Names dialog box.

            b) Click OK.

            c) Specify the label as VSS.

            d) Click Next.

             The first ring should appear in your design. It is associated with the proper net; in this case, VSS.

2. For the second ring, choose the net as Vdd and specify the label as VDD.
3. Click Next.
4. Click Finish in the Result Verification screen to complete the process.

The completed rings appear as shown below.

Now, when you click on Power and Ground Die Pin and add wirebonds, you will see that the wirebonds are placed directly on the Power and Ground rings.

DDR5 DIMM Architectures The DDR5 generation of Double Data Rate DRAM memories has experienced rapid adoption in recent years. In particular, the JEDEC-defined DDR5 Dual Inline Memory Module (DIMM) cards have become a mainstay for systems looking for high-density, high-bandwidth, off-chip random access memory[1]. Within a short time, the DIMM architecture evolved from an interconnected hierarchy of only SDRAM memory devices (UDIMM[2]) to complex subsystems of interconnected components (RDIMM/LRDIMM/MRDIMM[3]). DIMM Designs and Popular Verification Use Cases The growing complexity of the DIMMs presented a challenge for pre-silicon verification engineers who could no longer simply validate against single DDR5 SDRAM memory models. They needed to consider how their designs would perform against DIMMs connected to each channel and operating at gigahertz clock speeds. To address this verification gap, Cadence developed DDR5 DIMM Memory Models that encapsulated all of the architectural complexities presented by real-world DIMMs based on a robust, easy-to-use, easy-to-debug, and easy-to-reconfigure methodology. This memory-subsystem-in-a-single-instance model has seen explosive adoption among the traditional IP Developer and SOC Integrator customers of Cadence Memory Models. The Cadence DIMM models act as a single unit with all of the relevant DIMM components instantiated and interconnected within, and with all AC/Timing parameters among the various components fully matched out-of-the-box, based on JEDEC specifications as well as datasheets of actual devices in the market. The typical use-case for the DIMM models has been where the DUT is a DDR5 Memory Controller + PHY IP stack, and the validation plan mandated compliance with the JEDEC standards and Memory Device vendor datasheets. Unique Use Case for the DIMM Discrete Component Models Although the Cadence DIMM models have enjoyed tremendous proliferation because of their cohesive implementation and unified user API, the actual DIMM Models are built on top of powerful, flexible discrete component models, each of which was designed to stand on its own as a complete SystemVerilog UVM-based VIP. All of these discrete component models exist in the Cadence VIP Catalog as standalone VIPs, complete with their own protocol compliance checking capabilities and their own configuration mappings comprehensively modeling individual AC/Timing parameters. Because of this deliberate design decision, the Cadence DIMM Discrete Component Models can support a unique use-case scenario. Some users seek to develop IC Designs for the various DIMM components. Such users need verification environments that can model the individual components of a DIMM and allow them the option to replace one or another component with their Component Design IP. They can then validate that their component design is fully compatible with the rest of the components on the DIMM and meets the integrity of the overall DIMM compliance with JEDEC standards or Memory Vendor datasheets. The Cadence Memory VIP portfolio today includes various examples that demonstrate how customers can create DIMM “wrappers” by selecting from among the available DIMM discrete component models and “stitching” them together to build their own custom testbench around their specific Component Design IP. A Solution for Unique Component Scenarios The Cadence DDR5 DIMM Memory Models and DIMM Discrete Component Models can provide users with a flexible approach to validating their specific component designs with a fully populated pre-silicon environment. Augmented Verification Capabilities When the DIMM “wrapper” model is augmented with the Cadence DFI VIP[4] that can simulate an MC+PHY stack and offers a SystemVerilog UVM test API to the verification engineer, the overall testbench transforms into a formidable pre-silicon validation vehicle. The DFI VIP is designed as a combination of an independent DFI MC VIP and a DFI PHY VIP connected to each other via the DFI Standard Interface and capable of operating seamlessly as a single unit. It presents a UVM Sequence API to the user into the DFI MC VIP with the Memory Interface of the PHY VIP connected to the DIMM “wrapper” model. With this testbench in hand, the user can then fully take advantage of the UVM Sequence Library that comes with the DFI VIP to enable deep validation of their Component Design inside the DIMM “wrapper” model. Verification Capabilities Further Enhanced A possible further enhancement comes with the potential addition of an instance of the Cadence DIMM Memory Model in a Passive Monitor mode at the DRAM Memory Interface. The DIMM Passive Monitor consumes the same configuration describing the DIMM “wrapper” in the testbench, and thus can act as a reference model for the DIMM wrapper. If the DIMM Passive Monitor responds successfully to accesses from the DFI VIP, but the DIMM wrapper does not, then it exposes potential bugs in the DUT Components or in the settings of their AC/Timing parameters inside the DIMM wrapper. Debuggability, Interface Visibility, and Protocol Compliance One of the key benefits of the DIMM Discrete Component Models that become manifest, whether in terms of the unique use-case scenario described here, or when working with the wholly unified DDR5 DIMM Memory Models, is the increased debuggability of the protocol functionality. The intentional separation of the discrete components of a DIMM allows the user to have full visibility of the memory traffic at every datapath landmark within a DIMM structure. For example, in modeling an LRDIMM or MRDIMM, the interface between the RCD component and the SDRAM components, the interface between the RCD component and the DB components, and the interface between the SDRAM components and the DB components—all are visible and accessible to the user. The user has full access to dump the values and states of the wire interconnects at these interfaces to the waveform viewer and thus can observe and correlate the activity against any protocol violations flagged in the trace logs by any one or more of the DIMM Discrete Component Models. Access to these interfaces is freely available when using the DIMM Discrete Component Models. On the unified DDR5 DIMM Memory Models, a feature called Debug Ports enables the same level of visibility into the individual interconnects amidst the SDRAM components, RCD components, and DB components. When combined with the Waveform Debugger[5] capability that comes built-in with the VIPs and Memory Models offered by Cadence and used with the Cadence Verisium Debug[6] tool, the enhanced debuggability becomes a powerful platform. With these debug accesses enabled, the user can pull out transaction streams, chip state and bank state streams, mode register streams, and error message streams all right next to their RTL signals in the same Verisium Debug waveform viewer window to debug failures all in one place. The Verisium Debug tool also parses all of the log files to probe and extract messages into a fully integrated Smart Log in a tabbed window fully hyperlinked to the waveform viewer, all at your fingertips. A Solution for Every Scenario Cadence's DDR5 DIMM Memory Models and DIMM Discrete Component Models , partnered with the Cadence DFI VIP, can provide users with a robust and flexible approach to validating their designs thoroughly and effectively in pre-silicon verification environments ahead of tapeout commitments. The solution offers unparalleled latitude in debuggability when the Debug Ports and Waveform Debugger functions of the Memory Models are switched on and boosted with the use of the Cadence Verisium Debug tool. [1] Shyam Sharma, DDR5 DIMM Design and Verification Considerations , 13 Jan 2023. [2] Shyam Sharma, DDR5 UDIMM Evolution to Clock Buffered DIMMs (CUDIMM) , 23 Sep 2024. [3] Kos Gitchev, DDR5 12.8Gbps MRDIMM IP: Powering the Future of AI, HPC, and Data Centers , 26 Aug 2024. [4] Chetan Shingala and Salehabibi Shaikh, How to Verify JEDEC DRAM Memory Controller, PHY, or Memory Device? , 29 Mar 2022. [5] Rahul Jha, Cadence Memory Models - The Gold Standard , 15 Apr 2024. [6] Manisha Pradhan, Accelerate Design Debugging Using Verisium Debug , 11 Jul 2023.

Is there a way to generate coverage reports, not in ucd or any other format. I have written basic covergroup and passed arguments[-covoverwrite -cov_cgsample -cov_debuglog -coverage u] to the xrun command, however I don't see anything in sim directory, nor do I see anything in the logs indicating the covergroups have been hit. How can I confirm that cover groups are getting hit and essentially observe the bins. In Questa sim, you essentially get them as part of the log itself.

This is the 16th installment of The Rationalist, my column for the Times of India.

Steven Pinker, in his book Enlightenment Now, relates an old Russian joke about two peasants named Boris and Igor. They are both poor. Boris has a goat. Igor does not. One day, Igor is granted a wish by a visiting fairy. What will he wish for?

“I wish,” he says, “that Boris’s goat should die.”

The joke ends there, revealing as much about human nature as about economics. Consider the three things that happen if the fairy grants the wish. One, Boris becomes poorer. Two, Igor stays poor. Three, inequality reduces. Is any of them a good outcome?

I feel exasperated when I hear intellectuals and columnists talking about economic inequality. It is my contention that India’s problem is poverty – and that poverty and inequality are two very different things that often do not coincide.

To illustrate this, I sometimes ask this question: In which of the following countries would you rather be poor: USA or Bangladesh? The obvious answer is USA, where the poor are much better off than the poor of Bangladesh. And yet, while Bangladesh has greater poverty, the USA has higher inequality.

Indeed, take a look at the countries of the world measured by the Gini Index, which is that standard metric used to measure inequality, and you will find that USA, Hong Kong, Singapore and the United Kingdom all have greater inequality than Bangladesh, Liberia, Pakistan and Sierra Leone, which are much poorer. And yet, while the poor of Bangladesh would love to migrate to unequal USA, I don’t hear of too many people wishing to go in the opposite direction.

Indeed, people vote with their feet when it comes to choosing between poverty and inequality. All of human history is a story of migration from rural areas to cities – which have greater inequality.

If poverty and inequality are so different, why do people conflate the two? A key reason is that we tend to think of the world in zero-sum ways. For someone to win, someone else must lose. If the rich get richer, the poor must be getting poorer, and the presence of poverty must be proof of inequality.

But that’s not how the world works. The pie is not fixed. Economic growth is a positive-sum game and leads to an expansion of the pie, and everybody benefits. In absolute terms, the rich get richer, and so do the poor, often enough to come out of poverty. And so, in any growing economy, as poverty reduces, inequality tends to increase. (This is counter-intuitive, I know, so used are we to zero-sum thinking.) This is exactly what has happened in India since we liberalised parts of our economy in 1991.

Most people who complain about inequality in India are using the wrong word, and are really worried about poverty. Put a millionaire in a room with a billionaire, and no one will complain about the inequality in that room. But put a starving beggar in there, and the situation is morally objectionable. It is the poverty that makes it a problem, not the inequality.

You might think that this is just semantics, but words matter. Poverty and inequality are different phenomena with opposite solutions. You can solve for inequality by making everyone equally poor. Or you could solve for it by redistributing from the rich to the poor, as if the pie was fixed. The problem with this, as any economist will tell you, is that there is a trade-off between redistribution and growth. All redistribution comes at the cost of growing the pie – and only growth can solve the problem of poverty in a country like ours.

It has been estimated that in India, for every one percent rise in GDP, two million people come out of poverty. That is a stunning statistic. When millions of Indians don’t have enough money to eat properly or sleep with a roof over their heads, it is our moral imperative to help them rise out of poverty. The policies that will make this possible – allowing free markets, incentivising investment and job creation, removing state oppression – are likely to lead to greater inequality. So what? It is more urgent to make sure that every Indian has enough to fulfil his basic needs – what the philosopher Harry Frankfurt, in his fine book On Inequality, called the Doctrine of Sufficiency.

The elite in their airconditioned drawing rooms, and those who live in rich countries, can follow the fashions of the West and talk compassionately about inequality. India does not have that luxury.

The India Uncut Blog © 2010 Amit Varma. All rights reserved.
Follow me on Twitter.

This is the 21st installment of The Rationalist, my column for the Times of India.

When all political parties agree on something, you know you might have a problem. Giriraj Singh, a minister in Narendra Modi’s new cabinet, tweeted this week that our population control law should become a “movement.” This is something that would find bipartisan support – we are taught from school onwards that India’s population is a big problem, and we need to control it.

This is wrong. Contrary to popular belief, our population is not a problem. It is our greatest strength.

The notion that we should worry about a growing population is an intuitive one. The world has limited resources. People keep increasing. Something’s gotta give.

Robert Malthus made just this point in his 1798 book, An Essay on the Principle of Population. He was worried that our population would grow exponentially while resources would grow arithmetically. As more people entered the workforce, wages would fall and goods would become scarce. Calamity was inevitable.

Malthus’s rationale was so influential that this mode of thinking was soon called ‘Malthusian.’ (It is a pejorative today.) A 20th-century follower of his, Harrison Brown, came up with one of my favourite images on this subject, arguing that a growing population would lead to the earth being “covered completely and to a considerable depth with a writhing mass of human beings, much as a dead cow is covered with a pulsating mass of maggots.”

Another Malthusian, Paul Ehrlich, published a book called The Population Bomb in 1968, which began with the stirring lines, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.” Ehrlich was, as you’d guess, a big supporter of India’s coercive family planning programs. ““I don’t see,” he wrote, “how India could possibly feed two hundred million more people by 1980.”

None of these fears have come true. A 2007 study by Nicholas Eberstadt called ‘Too Many People?’ found no correlation between population density and poverty. The greater the density of people, the more you’d expect them to fight for resources – and yet, Monaco, which has 40 times the population density of Bangladesh, is doing well for itself. So is Bahrain, which has three times the population density of India.

Not only does population not cause poverty, it makes us more prosperous. The economist Julian Simon pointed out in a 1981 book that through history, whenever there has been a spurt in population, it has coincided with a spurt in productivity. Such as, for example, between Malthus’s time and now. There were around a billion people on earth in 1798, and there are around 7.7 billion today. As you read these words, consider that you are better off than the richest person on the planet then.

Why is this? The answer lies in the title of Simon’s book: The Ultimate Resource. When we speak of resources, we forget that human beings are the finest resource of all. There is no limit to our ingenuity. And we interact with each other in positive-sum ways – every voluntary interactions leaves both people better off, and the amount of value in the world goes up. This is why we want to be part of economic networks that are as large, and as dense, as possible. This is why most people migrate to cities rather than away from them – and why cities are so much richer than towns or villages.

If Malthusians were right, essential commodities like wheat, maize and rice would become relatively scarcer over time, and thus more expensive – but they have actually become much cheaper in real terms. This is thanks to the productivity and creativity of humans, who, in Eberstadt’s words, are “in practice always renewable and in theory entirely inexhaustible.”

The error made by Malthus, Brown and Ehrlich is the same error that our politicians make today, and not just in the context of population: zero-sum thinking. If our population grows and resources stays the same, of course there will be scarcity. But this is never the case. All we need to do to learn this lesson is look at our cities!

This mistaken thinking has had savage humanitarian consequences in India. Think of the unborn millions over the decades because of our brutal family planning policies. How many Tendulkars, Rahmans and Satyajit Rays have we lost? Think of the immoral coercion still carried out on poor people across the country. And finally, think of the condescension of our politicians, asserting that people are India’s problem – but always other people, never themselves.

This arrogance is India’s greatest problem, not our people.

The India Uncut Blog © 2010 Amit Varma. All rights reserved.
Follow me on Twitter.

Read on to know about the Operating Point Parameters Summary window that gives you a one-stop view of the categorized and tabulated details on all operating point parameters in your design. This window improves your review cycle with its many benefits.(read more)

Allegro part of DPI does not support scaling above 150%

Hello. I am using Cadence 17.4 tools. When I open a package symbol (.dra) or board file (.brd) in Allegro that was created in an older version of the tool I get a message like this one (as expected):

"The design created using release 17.2 will be updated for compatibility with the current software..."

If I create a symbol or board file from scratch in the 17.4 tool then open it later, I get the same message. (always referring to version 17.2 which is the previous version I was using here).

So far this has not caused me any problems, but I would like to understand why it is doing this in case I have something setup incorrectly.

I only have version 17.4 installed. I am not exporting to a downrev version when I save (i.e. not using File->Export->Downrev design…) and in User Preferences->Drawing I don’t have anything selected for database_compatibility_mode. What else might I check?

FYI here is the tool version information that I see after selecting Help->About Symbol:

OrCAD PCB Designer Standard 17.4-2019 S012 [10/26/2020] Windows SPB 64-bit Edition

Thanks -Jason

Hi,

I have a LEF file with simple definitions of pad design which uses M8, M9, and AP layers. However, I failed to import the design with CIW > Import > LEF... as I encountered "ERROR: (OALEFDEF-90019): Ignoring the line 30 in the layer map file ... as it contains a syntax error. Each entry in the layer map file must have two values, LEFLayerName and OALayerNumber separated by a blank space." All lines in the file report the same OALEFDEF-90019 error.

The tech.layermap file looks like this:


# techLayer       techPurpose     stream# dataType

ref drawing 0 0
DNW drawing 1 0
PW drawing 2 0

Hi,

Do anyone know if it's possible in simvision waveform viewer to see a timestamp of where uvm_errors/$errors occurred in a simulation via post-processing? 

Cheers,

Antonio

I exported vplan to .odf file in vManager and after editing it I imported it to vManager. The vplan was expected to be synchronized and updated. However, nothing has changed to it. Does anyone know why?

Hello,

I have a question about toggle coverage.

In my case, there are many unused registers or wires that are affecting the toggle coverage score negatively.

Is it possible to automatically exclude registers or wires that are not used from toggle coverage?

My RTL code is as follows, Is it possible to automatically disable tb.top1.b and tb.top1.c without using an exclude file?

module top1;

  reg a;

  reg b;

  reg [31:0] c;

  initial

  begin

  #1 a=1'b0;

  #1 a=1'b1;

  #1 a=1'b0;

  end

endmodule

module tb;

  top1 top1();

endmodule

When posting code to the forums, copy from a text editor such as notepad, not from word or Outlook. Be sure to click the HTML tab BEFORE you paste your text.

Click on the "html" mode tab on your "reply" dialog box. Then wrap your text with like this:

pasted text

NOTE: Do not put a space in the I have done that here so it will show up as text. Also, be sure to click the HTML tab BEFORE you paste your text. This is how it will look when coded correctly pasted text

Hi everybody,

The attached package is a tiny code example with a demo for an upcoming Team Specman blog post about writing macros.

Hilmar

Hello,

 I am working in a digital design. The functional, post synthesis and post P&R without IO pads are all working fine, i.e., functionally and with clean timing reports "no setup/hold violations". I just added the IO pads to the same design, I had to change the timing constraints a bit for the synthesis but I have a clean design at SOC Encounter, i.e., clean DRC and clean timing reports "no setup/hold violations". However, when I perform simulation using the exported net-list from SOC Encounter together with SDF exported from the same tool, I got a lot of hold violations. Consequently, the design is not funcitioning.

Why and how I can overcome or trobleshoot this issue?

In waiting for your feedback and comments.

Regards.

Using the EMX solver, X-FAB design engineers can efficiently develop next-generation RF technology for the latest communication standards (including sub-6GHz 5G, mmWave, UWB, etc.), which are enabling technologies for communications and electric vehicle (EV) wireless applications. (read more)

With the latest release (Sigrity and Systems Analysis 2022.1 HF2) of Clarity  3D Solver, support for encrypted component models is now available. With this functionality, vendors that supply 3D components, such as connectors, can now merge their...(read more)

Hi, in EMX I'm trying to define the ports of a CPW line as suggested in one document of the support area (i.e. P1:Gright,Gleft). The EMX simulation works fine. When I generate the schematic, I get this:

Basically, the two ground ports of each end of the CPW are properly defined as a unique node (e.g. G2_1, G2_2). 

However, when I try a simulation I get this error: 

I hope you can help me. Thanks.

Hi,

In our design team, we're looking for a strategy to make all cell views self-contained. We are struggling to do so when nport devices are involved.

The nport file requires a full path, whereas what we need is a relative path to the current path of the cell in which we're using the nport.

I have browsed through the forums & cadence support pages, but could not find a solution.

1) There is a proposal from Andrew to add the file directory in ADE option "Simulation Files." :https://community.cadence.com/cadence_technology_forums/f/rf-design/27167/s-parameter-datafile-path-in-nport . This, however, is not suitable, because the cell is not self contained.

2) The new cadence version off DataSource "cellView" in nport options:

This however is not suitable for us due to two reasons:

i- Somehow we don't get this option in the nport cell (perhaps some custom modification from our PDK team)

ii- Even if we had this option, it requires to select the library, which again makes it unsuitable: We often copy design libraries for derivative products using "Hierarchical Copy" feature. And when the library is copied, the nport will still be pointing to the old library. Thus, it is still not self-contained.

In principle, it should not be difficult (technically) to point to a text file relative to the cell directory (f.ex we can make a folder under the same cell with name "sparFiles" & place all spar files under this folder), however it does not seem to be possible.

Could you perhaps recommend us a work-around to achieve our goal: making the cells which contain nport devices self-contained so that when we copy a cell, we do not have to update all the nport file destinations ?

Thanks in advance.

My Cadence Version: IC23.1-64b.ISR4.51

My Spectre version: 23.1.0.362.isr5

Hello everybody,

As you can find in the attached image, I am trying to simulate a Colpitts oscillator. However, using pss analysis it shows a high output power. 

My question is where is the problem of my structure or simulation setup?

Best,

Read through this blog to know more about the new Reliability Report view in Virtuoso ADE Assembler and Virtuoso ADE Explorer.(read more)

This blog introduces the new Voltus-XFi Custom Power Integrity Solution, a transistor-level EM-IR tool that enables designers to complete comprehensive analysis and debugging easily and quickly.(read more)

I am trying to figure out the most efficient workflow for adding test points. My use case involves adding ~100 or so SMT pads at the bottom for bed-of-nails ICT test that are required to be on a test point grid. A lot of the nets are on the top or from inner layers and so have to be brought to the bottom using stubs. I'm used to Xpediiton workflow of being able to set a test point padstack, set a test point grid, and then select a net, add the test point to the bottom layer on the grid with that net attached and then route the stub with gridless routing.

In Orcad, it seems I need to route the stub, switch layer pairs to be both bottom once I bring the stub to the bottom and then change the grid to be the test point grid and then add the test point on the grid. It requires a lot of clicks, very mistake prone requiring lots of oops and very slow for 100+ test points to be brought out at the bottom. 

I'm sure there is a better way that is used by folks with a lot of Orcad experience. Any suggestions?

Hello,

I have a sensitive trace on layer 2 and I would like to prevent any routing along or across it on adjacent layers (L1 and L3).

My idea was to use a route keepout shape on L1 and L3, however that also removed the ground pour on those layers and I would like to keep the ground pour.

Can I get around this somehow or should I use something else than route keepout?

Regards,

Filip

hello:

i place a symbol into my design.

on my design, i change the symbol property by unlocking the symbol and unfixing pins so that i can move pins on the symbol.

i move some pins on my design.

but when i export the symbol from my design, the symbol is not current but has the original pin location.

is there a way to retain the pin locations after moving pins on a symbol when exporting the symbol?

regards

masa

The traditional methods of power analysis lag by various shortcomings and challenges:

• Getting an accurate measure of RTL power consumption during design exploration
• Getting consistent power through the design progress from RTL to P&R.
• System-level verification tools are disconnected from the implementation tools that translate RTL to gates and wires.

The Cadence Joules RTL Power Solution closes this gap by delivering time-based RTL power analysis with system-level runtimes, capacity, and high-quality estimates of gates and wires based on production implementation technology. The Cadence Joules RTL Power Solution is an RTL power analysis tool that provides a unified engine to compute gate netlist power and estimate RTL power. The Joules solution delivers 20X faster time-based RTL power analysis and can analyze multi-million instance designs overnight, with impressive accuracy within 15% of signoff power.

Moreover, it integrates seamlessly with numerous Cadence platforms, eliminating compatibility and correlation issues! In addition, the Joules RTL Power Solution GUI (Graphical User Interface) helps you analyze/debug the power estimation/results using several GUI capabilities.

Want to take a tour of this power estimation world? Gear up to attend the training class created just for you to dive deep into the entire flow and explore this exciting power estimation method/flow with hands-on labs in two days!

Training

In the Joules Power Calculator Training course, you will identify solutions and features for RTL power using Cadence Joules RTL Power Solution. You will set up and run the RTL power flow with Joules RTL Power Solution and identify Joules's Graphical User Interface (GUI) capabilities. The training also explores how you can estimate power using vectorless power, stimulus flow, RTL Stim to Gate flow, and replay flow, and also interfaces Joules with Cadence's Palladium Emulation Platform. You will estimate power at the chip level and understand how to navigate the design and data mining using Joules.

The training also covers power exploration features and how to analyze ideal power and ODC-driven sequential clock gating. You will identify low-activity registers at the clock gate. You will also identify techniques to analyze power, generate various reports, and analyze results through Joules GUI. The training covers multiple strategies to debug low stimulus annotation and how you can better correlate RTL power with signoff. You also identify Genus-Joules Integration. In addition, we ensure that your learning journey is smooth with hands-on labs covering various design scenarios.

Lab Videos

To start you on your exciting journey as an RTL power analysis expert, we have created a series of short channel lab videos on our Customer Support site: Lab Demo: Setting Up and Running Basic RTL Power Flow in Joules RTL Power Solution (Video). You can refer to each lab module's instructions in demo format. This will help accelerate your tool ramp-up and help you perform the lab steps more quickly if you are stuck. You might be a beginner in the RTL power analysis world, but we can help you sail through it smoothly.

What's Next?

Grab your badge after finishing the training and flaunt your expertise!

Related Training

• Genus Low-Power Synthesis Flow with IEEE 1801
• Low-Power Synthesis Flow with Genus Stylus Common UI

Related Blogs

• Do You Want to Flaunt Your Expertise? Grab the Digital Badge Today!
• Become Cadence Certified
• Let's Replay the Process of Power Estimation with the Power of 'x'
• Let's Discover the Secret to Enhance Design's PPAC in a Single Cockpit
• What's Inside Joules Graphical User Interface
• Joules – Power Exploration Capabilities

Power efficiency is a critical factor in the fast-evolving world of semiconductor design.

The IEEE 1801 standard, also known as UPF (Unified Power Format), was developed by the IEEE to address the intricate challenges associated with power management in contemporary semiconductor designs. This standard offers a uniform framework for defining power domains, power states, and power intent, ensuring consistency across diverse tools and phases of the design process. By utilizing UPF, you can precisely model and regulate power consumption, a critical aspect for battery-operated devices, high-performance computing, and energy-efficient designs.

The key concepts of IEEE 1801 are:

1. Power domains
2. Power states
3. Power gating and isolation
4. Power switches
5. Level shifters, isolation, and retention cells
6. Macro model

Based on these building blocks, you write the power intent of the design.

The power intent for the design includes identifying/implementing low-power strategies that provide a clear description of the power architecture of a design.

The power definitions can effectively manage power consumption and ensure the chip meets its power and performance requirements.

You can start by creating the Power Supply Network, which defines how power is supplied to the design's various power domains and logic cells.

What's the next step to build the file? How do you understand the various concepts related to IEEE 1801? How do you complete the rest of the power intent file?

Relax!

Gear up to attend the training class created just for you to dive deep into the entire format and explore this exciting power specification method/format with hands-on labs in one day!

Training

Fundamentals of IEEE 1801 Low-Power Specification Format Training

This course is a complete tutorial for understanding the fundamentals of IEEE 1801 low-power specification format concepts. You learn about IEEE 1801 power supply networks, ground ports and nets, creating and connecting supply ports/nets, power domain, power switch, power states, defining isolation and level shifter strategies, hierarchical IEEE 1801, and various versions of the IEEE 1801. You also explore how power intent information can be used for a design across various flow stages, such as functional verification, synthesis, logic equivalency checking, place-and-route, test, timing signoff, power integrity, and so forth, using Cadence^® tools.

Labs

We ensure that your learning journey is smooth with hands-on labs covering various design scenarios.

Lab Videos

Now, the exciting part is that to help you further, we have created engaging videos of the training labs. You can refer to the lab module's instructions in demo format at https://support.cadence.com.

Lab Demo: Checking Power Supply Network in IEEE 1801 format and Running IEEE 1801 Quality Checks using Conformal Low Power

Lab Demo: Checking Power Intent for The Macro Connections in IEEE 1801 Format And Running IEEE 1801 Quality Checks using Conformal Low Power 

Online Class

Here is the course link.

Get ready for the most thrilling experience with Accelerated Learning!

The more you know, the faster you go!

Grab the cycle  or hike it, based on your existing knowledge.

Take the quiz and increase your learning pace!!

What's Next?

Grab your Badge after finishing the training and flaunt the expertise you have built up. 😊

Ready to take a tour of this power specification world? Let's help you enroll in this course.

We organize this training for you as a "Blended" or "Live" training. Please reach out to Cadence Training for further information. If you want to ensure you are always the first to know about anything new in training, you can use the SUBSCRIBE button on the landing page to sign up for our regular training newsletters.

Related Short Training Bytes/Videos

Enhance the learning experience with short videos:

Genus Synthesis Solution: Video Library

 Joules RTL Power Solution: Video Library

Related Training

 Low-Power Synthesis Flow with Genus Synthesis Solution

Genus Low-Power Synthesis Flow with IEEE 1801

Related Blogs

It's the Digital Era; Why Not Showcase Your Brand Through a Digital Badge! - Digital Design - Cadence Blogs - Cadence Community

Relax in Summer with Cooler IC chips and Ice-Cream! Do you want to Explore the Recipe? - Digital Design - Cadence Blogs - Cadence Community

Power Is HOT and Touches Everything and Everybody! But the Challenge Is To Deal With Low Power During Design Synthesis; How? - Digital Design - Cadence Blogs - Cadence Community

Binge on Chip Design Concepts this Weekend! - Digital Design - Cadence Blogs - Cadence Community

Emerging states must re-orientate their investment efforts to increasingly target those with an outsized social impact

The UN Sustainable Development Goals aim to end global poverty, but poorer countries are struggling to hit them. More help from richer countries is crucial, writes Mazdak Rafaty.

Serbia’s minister of finance, Siniša Mali, explains why the country is one of Europe's economic stars, and how its FDI levels have risen on the back of this.

Serbia’s 15 free zones are driving forward an ongoing flurry of foreign investment in the country’s buoyant manufacturing scene, especially in automotives.

Continued African development could hinge on public finance reforms.

Escalation in protests across the globe in 2019 are forecast to persist into the new decade, according to Verisk Maplecroft report.

Global FDI flows recorded a marginal 1% fall in 2019, but the value of announced greenfield investment projects plummets by 22%.

The US has the world’s strongest soft power, while China and Russia are rising in influence, according to a recent ranking from Brand Finance.

Steve Armitage, general manager of destination at Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development explains why the New Zealand city’s international profile is growing so fast.

Mohammad Nafees Zakaria, Pakistan’s UK high commissioner, talks about his country’s potential for foreign investors.

Uruguay-based Zonamerica has successfully expanded into Colombia and China, and is now looking to export its model to other parts of Asia and Africa.

We are currently in a state of heightened business and economic disruption and sociopolitical activism, which only looks set to intensify. 

President Obrador aims to mobilise billions in public and private investment to create an alternative to the Panama Canal along the Tehuantepec corridor. 

Covid-19 crisis has laid bare the weaknesses of global value chains around the world

A Porsche Taycan 4 and revised GTS model join the 2025 lineup The Porsche Taycan is now available in 13 different versions When they arrive in 2025 the Taycan 4 will cost $105,295 while the GTS will cost $149,895 The 2025 Porsche Taycan received an engineering-focused refresh that improved range and efficiency, the benefits of which are now being...

The updated 2025 Porsche Taycan family boasts 13 members A new Taycan 4 and revised Taycan GTS have been revealed The Taycan GTS benefits from a 100-hp boost over the outgoing model Porsche in February unveiled a mid-cycle refresh for its Taycan, which has been introduced for the 2025 model year in the U.S. However, not every model in the Taycan...

The 2025 Volkswagen Golf R's output increases to 328 hp A manual transmission remains off the table for all Golfs, including the R The Golf R gains a larger touchscreen and more LED lighting Volkswagen has an updated 2025 Golf R headed to showrooms early next year, and on Tuesday the automaker confirmed some of the specifications for the U.S...