On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 2:52 PM, al davis wrote:
It is important to developers that the unstable distros DO
package the development branch, to test it and provide feedback.
Hamish and Chitlesh, how about it?
Ok, I'll try to update Fedora's gnucap this weekend.
I've taken over the ownership
On Tuesday 21 September 2010, Rubén Gómez Antolí wrote:
Gnucap 2009.12 is so stable, why not released?
(In several days, I think even ask at debian maintainer to
include snapshots, at least, in experimental branch of
Debian.)
The problem is with the build system.
I spent most of January
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 08:52:26AM -0400, al davis wrote:
On Tuesday 21 September 2010, Rub?n G?mez Antol? wrote:
Gnucap 2009.12 is so stable, why not released?
(In several days, I think even ask at debian maintainer to
include snapshots, at least, in experimental branch of
Debian.)
Thanks for all the replies everyone, but I think I should have started
with something a little simpler and built off that. Now I can't even
model a simple AC source in series with a resistor...I tried to do it in
straight gnucap and eliminate gschem to try to narrow down the culprit.
Attached
On Tuesday 21 September 2010, Chris Cole wrote:
I get a normal sine wave output,
but when the frequency increases, the wave changes
considerably and starts to turn into a triangle wave...I'm
not sure what I'm doing wrong, but this is strange.
In the tran command (tran 10m 10 1) you asked it
On Tuesday 21 September 2010, Chris Cole wrote:
I get a normal sine wave output,
but when the frequency increases, the wave changes
considerably and starts to turn into a triangle wave...I'm
not sure what I'm doing wrong, but this is strange.
In the tran command (tran 10m 10 1) you
In this case, the solver will not need to add extra steps internally.
You specified a sin generator, whose output is a simple function of
time, and a resistor. The whole circuit is memoryless. At 60Hz, the
period is just 16.6ms. With a 10ms step size, of course you're going
to see an aliased
.
- Original Message
From: Chris Cole cle...@gmail.com
To: geda-user@moria.seul.org
Sent: Tue, September 21, 2010 12:27:30 PM
Subject: Re: gEDA-user: very backward time step?
On Tuesday 21 September 2010, Chris Cole wrote:
I get a normal sine wave output,
but when the frequency
On Tuesday 21 September 2010, Matthew Wilkins wrote:
You're specifying a 10 ms step size (first parameter in the
tran command), and it looks like that's what you're
getting. The period of a 60 Hz sine wave is 16.6 ms, so
you're getting fewer than 2 samples per cycle. Try changing
the step
Subject: Re: gEDA-user: very backward time step?
On Tuesday 21 September 2010, Matthew Wilkins wrote:
You're specifying a 10 ms step size (first parameter in the
tran command), and it looks like that's what you're
getting. The period of a 60 Hz sine wave is 16.6 ms, so
you're getting fewer than 2
On Tuesday 21 September 2010, Matthew Wilkins wrote:
It seems like the values that he gave (10m 10 1) could be
interpreted either way, but in the plot image it shows
about 15 data points between the times 4.9219 and
5.0781. That seems to correspond to 10 ms times steps, no?
Could be ...
one
On 09/21/2010 01:56 PM, al davis wrote:
On Tuesday 21 September 2010, Matthew Wilkins wrote:
It seems like the values that he gave (10m 10 1) could be
interpreted either way, but in the plot image it shows
about 15 data points between the times 4.9219 and
5.0781. That seems to correspond to
Hello all:
El 20/09/10 20:29, John Doty escribió:
On Sep 20, 2010, at 11:48 AM, al davis wrote:
[...]
With 0.35, I had to make gmin=100u.
With the latest, it worked fine as is.
Al, I think it would really help if you made a release. All of the distros are
stuck at 0.35,
so that's
On Friday 17 September 2010, Chris Cole wrote:
I'm trying to do a very simple power supply simulation with
gschem and I'm not getting very far.
I'm trying to do a bridge rectification of a 24 VAC supply to
DC current. I'm able to do a transient analysis for 10
iterations before I get:
On Sep 20, 2010, at 11:48 AM, al davis wrote:
As usual, John Doty is wrong.
Gee, I try to help the guy, and insert what I think is a reasonable disclaimer
( this is a gnucap question, not a gschem question. But if the tran command in
gnucap is like the SPICE tran command, ...), show him an
Hi all,
I'm trying to do a very simple power supply simulation with gschem and
I'm not getting very far.
I'm trying to do a bridge rectification of a 24 VAC supply to DC
current. I'm able to do a transient analysis for 10 iterations before I get:
very backward time step
convergence failure,
On Sep 17, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Chris Cole wrote:
I'm trying to do a very simple power supply simulation with gschem and I'm
not getting very far.
Well, this is a gnucap question, not a gschem question. But if the tran command
in gnucap is like the SPICE tran command, you're specifying a
17 matches
Mail list logo
