pirate wrote on Jan 8th, 2010, 10:38am:a least periodic noise simulation is geting more and more popular and better undertsood
What on earth do you mean by "
a least periodic" ?
pirate wrote on Jan 8th, 2010, 1:20pm:At the circuit level that gives me a hint on the noise bandwidth [0; +1/2T] for a cyclostationary process.
You are misunderstanding.
Noise bandwidth of [0, +1/2T] has no relation to
cyclostationary process.
Even in "Pnoise(type=sources)", noises are treated as cyclostationary.
pirate wrote on Jan 8th, 2010, 1:20pm:tdnoise of Cadence Spectre is physics if not circuits to me.
tdnoise of Cadence Spectre is
Mathematics not Physics.
I mean results of "Pnoise(type=timedomain)" are virtual world where an ideal impulse sampling is assumed which is not realized physically,
while results of "Pnoise(type=sources)" are real world.
Again I don't know actual instruments which can evaluate noise as same manner as "tdnoise of Cadence Spectre".
pirate wrote on Jan 8th, 2010, 1:20pm:I have only done periodic noise, aka pnoise, (bda, cadence) simulations
Maybe you are misunderstanding.
Pnoise of BDA's Analog FastSPICE is a type of "Pnoise(type=sources)"
not "Pnoise(type=timedomain)".
Don't you confuse post processing theory of Transient Noise Analysis of BDA's Analog FastSPICE with Pnoise ?
http://www.designers-guide.org/Forum/YaBB.pl?num=1259714206/2#2Again I don't think noise analysis like "tdnoise of Cadence Spectre" is popular.