• Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

about the credibility of circuit simulators

Status
Not open for further replies.

alec_t

Well-Known Member
Most Helpful Member
You are switching between two schematic versions. That has nothing to do with component layout (i.e the physical positioning of real-world components) :rolleyes:.
 

crutschow

Well-Known Member
Most Helpful Member
The schematic layout has absolutely no effect on the simulation results for the same schematic connections.
 

ci139

Active Member
GP(R)Solar_TEST-C.png , moving diode first :: GP(R)Solar_TEST-C_a.png , moving capacitor first :: GP(R)Solar_TEST-C_b.png ← pay attention to this , ha ha ha
-- the MP42B-py is .model MP42B-py ako:2N5087 PNP(... BF=80 ...) , .asc & .plt in a zip if there's a doubt i tweaked the images

The schematic layout has absolutely no effect on the simulation results for the same schematic connections.
exception makes the rule
 

Attachments

Last edited:

GromTag

Active Member
Curiosities as to what V1 with label net F3 is connected at circuit? Found ZLR at D1 Cathode, and an APP by resistor R5..

Just an wandering thought, are the power source associations not tied at the same principle construct within Spice itself? Have had instances with patterns deleted of designs that I no longer wanted to use that had spare power sources running with no connection that actually showed effort on its output from the main circuit, tho the placement of the components would differ from what I have seen in term, rare.

... or have you possibly stumbled onto Spice cheat codes that result in special functions, rather than square, X, L1, up, down, left, right, left, triangle, square? :eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

EE World Online Articles

Loading
Top