You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When I run this example, the differential impedance value seems OK and the smith chart seems reasonable. It's roughly matching the results from the coupled microstrip line impedance calculator in kicad.
I noticed that when I change fab/stackup.json to use a thinner substrate (like in the case of a flex pcb) with a dielectric height of 35 um, I would expect to see a substantially smaller differential impedance. But instead, I'm seeing the impedances increase which doesn't seem right. Do I need to adjust the mesh in simulation.json for this case?
Here's what the impedance looks like with the thinner substrate:
--
Another question, I'm seeing these warnings when I run the example as-is. Is this expected?
[14:43:27][WARN] Port #-1 is defined twice on the board. Ignoring the second instance
[14:43:27][WARN] Port #0 is defined twice on the board. Ignoring the second instance
[14:43:27][WARN] Port #1 is defined twice on the board. Ignoring the second instance
[14:43:27][WARN] Port #2 is defined twice on the board. Ignoring the second instance
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I'm trying out the differential impedance example located here: https://github.com/antmicro/gerber2ems/tree/main/examples/differential
When I run this example, the differential impedance value seems OK and the smith chart seems reasonable. It's roughly matching the results from the coupled microstrip line impedance calculator in kicad.
I noticed that when I change fab/stackup.json to use a thinner substrate (like in the case of a flex pcb) with a dielectric height of 35 um, I would expect to see a substantially smaller differential impedance. But instead, I'm seeing the impedances increase which doesn't seem right. Do I need to adjust the
mesh
in simulation.json for this case?Here's what the impedance looks like with the thinner substrate:
--
Another question, I'm seeing these warnings when I run the example as-is. Is this expected?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: