JayOcad
New Member
Offline
Posts: 8
|
Thanks for all the guidance on this website and documents- with regards to conservative and non-conservative systems/ signal-flow systems, I had a question about potential signal-flow versus flow signal-flow.
Are there any differences between a signal flow system with a discipline defined with potential Efield only, versus a discipline defined with flow Efield only? If their access, idt, ddt, and all other definitions are exactly the same, does using a "flow" nature differ from using a "potential" nature?
I read in the AMS manuals that in a potential signal-flow system, there is no conservation of charges and, and no sum of *flows* condition (KFL not enforced), but is there a sum of potentials condition in a potential signal-flow system? i.e. If I model Electric field with the "potential" nature declaration, and I need it to disregard conservation/ KPL, is that valid? In a circuit loop with device d1, d2, d3.., does the solver/Spectre try to enforce that the sum of the Electric field across d1,d2,d3.. = 0?
Conversely in a flow signal-flow system, where no potential is defined, I read there is no condition on sum of potentials, does this mean there is neither KPL nor KFL when Spectre sees that only a flow nature is defined? Or is only KPL not enforced and KFL is still enforced(and then Efield is a flow nature, then the Efield into a node must equal the Efield out of a node?).
Thanks for the help, Best regards, J
|