5 Replies Latest reply on May 1, 2018 7:00 AM by robert_davies

    Do fractured parts and non fractured of the same part number need different DEVICE fields?

    tmiddleton

      I have a component that I have both a HETERO (fractured, split) device along with a version that is not split. What I don't understand it why they cannot have the same DEVICE.
      If they are, when I try to create a netlist I get Error 6318 Multiple symbols .... are inconsistent. and Error 6092: ... Bad hetero device ..., symbol...

      What I have for files is something like this

      foo.1 <= non-split version, DEVICE = foo

      foo_split_1.1   DEVICE cannot = foo, changed to foo_split, HETERO = foo_split_1,foo_split_2

      foo_split_2.1   DEVICE cannot = foo, changed to foo_split, HETERO = foo_split_1,foo_split_2

       

      Errors are something like this when they are the same DEVICE.

      This only on the non-split symbols

      Error 6318 Multiple symbols <partition>:foo device foo are inconsistent.

      And for the split (fractured) symbols:

      Error 6092: <boardname> Bad hetero device foo, symbol <partition>:foo_split_1

      Error 6092: ... Bad hetero device foo, symbol <partition>:foo_split_2

       

      Thanks

        • 1. Re: Do fractured parts and non fractured of the same part number need different DEVICE fields?
          robert_davies

          Is this a full part plus a split of gated parts (Hetero type 4) or a true split IC (Hetero Type 3)? If the former then all three symbols need to appear in the hetero declaration, an example would be for an AC244 defined as full part, half part and single gate: HETERO=AC244GATE,(AC244HALF),(AC244FULL)

          If it is a mixture of full part and some random split part then this isn't supported in a single package.

          1 of 1 people found this helpful
          • 2. Re: Do fractured parts and non fractured of the same part number need different DEVICE fields?
            tmiddleton

            I'm a little confused with the Hetero types and not that familiar with them (I read here: HETERO symbol types II and IV are not permitted in th eCentral Library and Integrated Workflow )

            So I believe this would be a Hetero type 4 then. It is two representations of the same part. It is a dual DQ Flip-Flop (similar to this http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/cd4013b.pdf  ) So in one version of the symbol it is  CD4013B.1 which is the whole symbol all pins. The fractured version is CD4013B_1.1 and CD4013B_2.1 Where _1 has DQ1 (Channel 1) and other pins (power, etc) and DQ2 has just the DQ2 pins (Channel 2). I wanted to have these both in the schematic and the layout team desired the DEVICE fields to be the same.
            So if I understand correctly, despite CD4013B.1 not being part of the fracture, it still needs to be in the HETERO field. So all three would then have a HETERO =CD4013B, CD4013B_1, CD4013B_2
            I'm not sure how the parenthesis work for this as well. What do they mean in your example above?
            Thank you,

            Tom

            • 3. Re: Do fractured parts and non fractured of the same part number need different DEVICE fields?
              robert_davies

              In this case you only need two symbols one for the full part and one symol to represent a half gate, for the half gate the pin numbers would be applied during packaging. As you point out Hetero 2 and Hetero 4 types are not currently supported in the integrated flow, this is more a  limitation on the PADS side than the library. Hetero type 4 support is being added in VX.2.4.

              Attached is a picture of the above gate (AC244) as represented in the netlist flow. Note the Parts=2 and Parts=8 properties on the half-gate and gate symbol. Also note that when built the half-gate has two pin numbers per pin separated by a comma, to represent each half. But when placed in the schematic only one set of pin numbers is placed down, so in the example the Enable Pin has 1,19 as pin numbers. The Parts=n property denotes the number of symbols that make up a full package. This is not needed in the integrated flow as the mapping between the symbol and footprint (decal) is handled in the library.

               

              Hetero4.png

               

              Until hetero type 4 support is added in the integrated flow you will need to decide whether to use the full-package symbol only or the half-package symbol only, or have different DEVICE names for each.

              1 of 1 people found this helpful
              • 4. Re: Do fractured parts and non fractured of the same part number need different DEVICE fields?
                tmiddleton

                Ok, Then you must use the SIGNAL field for Power and other miscellaneous signals? Is is possible to have a partial list? from your example above have a pin VCCbe pins 20, where it would only be on one symbol? Is there a risk to having 20,20 ? I'm not a big fan of using the SIGNAL field for parts where GND and VCC may not be the signals that are desired for those pins.

                Thank you for your responses.

                -Tom

                • 5. Re: Do fractured parts and non fractured of the same part number need different DEVICE fields?
                  robert_davies

                  As the example is for the netlist flow then everything must be defined on the symbol in order to package in layout. This is not the case in the Integrated flow. You only need to define the SIGNAL pins once per symbol despite there being 2 or 8 symbols for each part in the case of smaller hetero's. You can override the value of the SIGNAL property in the schematic should you need to, or define it to whatever your standard is. If you want to display the power and ground pins you may add them to the symbols or create a Hetero 2 to manage them, though Hetero 2 is not supported in the Central Library in PADS and it has limitations in PADS Pro and Xpedition.

                  I'm sure most of this information can be found on Support Center.

                  1 of 1 people found this helpful