4
\$\begingroup\$

I've been trying to run some relatively simple simulations but am running into strange behavior, which I've narrowed down to using the non-ideal capacitor parameters in LTSpice (in both an old and an up to date version). This is what I'm running:

The problematic simulation

And this is the result I'm getting:

Simulation Results

I don't understand what's happening at the 500MHz mark, why is the current suddenly increasing again?

Here's the contents of the LTSpice ASC file:

Version 4
SHEET 1 2036 680
WIRE 1232 -320 1152 -320
WIRE 1568 -320 1488 -320
WIRE 1568 -304 1568 -320
WIRE 1152 -208 1152 -320
WIRE 1232 -208 1232 -320
WIRE 1488 -208 1488 -320
WIRE 1568 -208 1568 -224
WIRE 1568 -112 1568 -144
WIRE 1152 -16 1152 -128
WIRE 1232 -16 1232 -144
WIRE 1488 -16 1488 -128
WIRE 1568 -16 1568 -32
FLAG 1152 -16 0
FLAG 1488 -16 0
FLAG 1568 -16 0
FLAG 1232 -16 0
SYMBOL Misc\\signal 1152 -224 M0
WINDOW 123 24 132 Left 2
WINDOW 39 0 0 Left 0
SYMATTR Value2 AC 1
SYMATTR InstName V1
SYMBOL cap 1216 -208 R0
SYMATTR InstName C1
SYMATTR Value 10µ
SYMATTR SpiceLine Rser=10m Lser=10n
SYMBOL Misc\\signal 1488 -224 M0
WINDOW 123 24 132 Left 2
WINDOW 39 0 0 Left 0
SYMATTR Value2 AC 1
SYMATTR InstName V2
SYMBOL cap 1552 -208 R0
SYMATTR InstName C2
SYMATTR Value 10µ
SYMBOL res 1552 -320 R0
SYMATTR InstName R1
SYMATTR Value 10m
SYMBOL ind 1552 -128 R0
SYMATTR InstName L1
SYMATTR Value 10n
SYMATTR SpiceLine Rser=0
TEXT 1224 56 Left 2 !.ac dec 1000 1 10G
\$\endgroup\$
0

1 Answer 1

9
\$\begingroup\$

I think LTspice adds a nonzero parallel capacitance to capacitors when you set the series inductance to a nonzero value. If you set C1's parallel capacitance to 0, the second resonance should disappear.

\$\endgroup\$
3
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Yes. This seems to be an LTspice thing- most other flavo[u]rs of SPICE just don't have the series inductance option (hence no need for a fix). Here, Mike Engelhardt explains why he didn't implement series inductance in QSPICE even though he did in LTspice. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 5 at 15:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ Sneaky basterds! That does indeed fix it, and the commend from @Spehro'speff'Pefhany explains why. Very helpful, thank you to both of you. :) \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 6 at 10:38
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @DavidKoster If you get a chance, then please accept the answer as shown here: meta.stackexchange.com/a/5235 \$\endgroup\$
    – Ste Kulov
    Commented Nov 11 at 20:01

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.