Robert Boyd Node List Analysis Mathcad

Node List
Tolerance
Analysis
Enhancing SPICE
Capabilities
with Mathcad
Other Related Titles of Interest Include:
Tolerance Analysis of Electronic Circuits Using MATLAB

Robert R. Boyd, University of California, Irvine, California
ISBN: 0849322766
Tolerance Analysis of Electronic Circuits Using MATHCAD

Robert R. Boyd, University of California, Irvine, California
ISBN: 0849323398
The Electronics Handbook, Second Edition

Jerry Whitaker, Technical Press, Morgan Hill, California
ISBN: 0849318890
PSPICE and MATLAB for Electronics: An Integrated Approach

John O. Attia, Prairie View A&M University, Texas
ISBN: 0849312639
Electronics and Circuit Analysis Using MATLAB, Second Edition

John O. Attia, Prairie View A&M University, Texas
ISBN: 0849318920
Node List
Tolerance
Analysis
Enhancing SPICE
Capabilities
with Mathcad
Robert R. Boyd
Boca Raton London New York
A CRC title, part of the Taylor & Francis imprint, a member of the
Taylor & Francis Group, the academic division of T&F Informa plc.
Published in 2006 by
CRC Press
Taylor & Francis Group
6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300
Boca Raton, FL 33487-2742
© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

CRC Press is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group
No claim to original U.S. Government works
Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-8493-7028-0 (Hardcover)
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-8493-7028-1 (Hardcover)
Library of Congress Card Number 2005052136
This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reprinted material is
quoted with permission, and sources are indicated. A wide variety of references are listed. Reasonable efforts
have been made to publish reliable data and information, but the author and the publisher cannot assume
responsibility for the validity of all materials or for the consequences of their use.
No part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted, or utilized in any form by any electronic,
mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying, microfilming, and
recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the publishers.
For permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this work, please access www.copyright.com
(http://www.copyright.com/) or contact the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC) 222 Rosewood Drive,
Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400. CCC is a not-for-profit organization that provides licenses and registration
for a variety of users. For organizations that have been granted a photocopy license by the CCC, a separate
system of payment has been arranged.
Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only
for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Boyd, Robert (Robert R.)

Node list tolerance analysis : enhancing SPICE capabilities with Mathcad/ Robert R. Boyd.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-8493-7028-0 (alk. paper)
1. Electric circuits, Linear. 2. Analog electronic systems. 3. Electric circuit analysis. 4. Tolerance
(Engineering) 5. Mathcad. 6. SPICE (Computer file)
TK454.B66 2006
621.3815--dc22 2005052136
Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at

http://www.taylorandfrancis.com
Taylor & Francis Group and the CRC Press Web site at
is the Academic Division of Informa plc. http://www.crcpress.com
Preface
The purpose of this book is to provide an improved SPICE-like, worst-case analysis
(WCA) capability using Mathcad. To achieve more accurate WCA methods, a
SPICE-like netlist or node list method of nominal circuit analysis was developed
first. Subprogram routines were then added to perform tolerance analyses using
Root-Sum-Square (RSS), Extreme Value Analysis (EVA), and Monte Carlo Analysis
(MCA) in the DC, frequency, and time domains.
Note that “SPICE” is a generic term referring to the public domain software
developed by the University of California–Berkeley in the early 1980s. Several
companies were started after converting the Fortran code to C and adding a graphics
interface. These commercial versions are very capable in nominal circuit analysis
and, correspondingly, expensive.
There are many areas in SPICE WCA that range from nonexistent or weak
capability to erroneous analyses. Most if not all of these deficiencies still exist in
many commercial versions. These areas are:
• A 400-sample Monte Carlo limitation — not nearly enough for adequate

statistical confidence levels
• No RSS capability
• No direct method of handling asymmetric component tolerances, e.g.,
+2%, 4%
• No Fast Monte Carlo Analysis (FMCA) capability*
• No single-run method of tolerancing inputs
• No direct method of detecting nonmonotonic components, which cause
erroneous WCA outputs
• No AC frequency sweep sensitivity capability
• No predefined beta (skewed) or bimodal (gapped) distributions available
for MCA
In addition, the SPICE random number generator used for MCA repeatedly
supplies the same set of random numbers with each analysis run. To correct this, a
new seed must be supplied before each new run. (This is equivalent to having the
same 20 numbers come up every time in a Las Vegas keno game.) Some commercial
versions may have improved a few of these areas, as most companies want to make
a good product better.
All of these deficiencies have been addressed and corrected in the supplied
Mathcad software on the CD and demonstrated using many examples in this book.
For example, the number of Monte Carlo samples is now limited only by the amount
* Boyd, R., Tolerance Analysis of Electronic Circuits Using Mathcad, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1999,
p. 87.
of memory on the computer platform used. Those readers knowledgeable in statistics
know that in Monte Carlo analysis, more is better.
It is the author’s hope that this book will provide a much less expensive and
more accurate method of performing tolerance analysis of electronic circuits.
The Author
Robert R. Boyd was a technical instructor in the United States Air Force for 19
years. Upon his retirement in 1971, he enrolled at the University of New Mexico
and received a B.S.E.E. degree with honors in 1974. He was subsequently employed
in the aerospace industry, including 8 years with Hughes Aircraft Co., in analog
circuit design until 1993 and as a consultant until 2002. He taught courses in
tolerance analysis at the University of California Extension, Irvine, in 1998 and 1999.
He has authored two books, Tolerance Analysis of Electronic Circuits Using
MATLAB and Tolerance Analysis of Electronic Circuits Using Mathcad, both pub-
lished by CRC Press in 1999.
This page intentionally left blank
Acknowledgments
I would like to give my thanks and credit to the following people at Taylor &
Francis/CRC Press:
Engineering Editor, Nora Konopka – for her successful presentation of my
manuscript to the publishing committee and for pleasant email “conversation.”
Editorial Project Development Manager, Helena Redshaw – for her patience and
diligence in guiding me and the book material through to production.
Associate Editor, Allison Taub – for smoothing out the rough spots and helping
with the reviews.
Project Editor, Amber Stein – for putting up with my frequent changes to the
manuscript.
They have all been easy to communicate with and helped make the work of
writing this book less painful than it would have otherwise been; and all this in spite
of several hurricanes!
Robert Boyd
Placerville, CA
Table of Contents
PART I Nominal Analysis
Chapter 1 Introduction ........................................................................................3

1.1 Nominal Analysis.............................................................................................3
1.1.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................3
1.1.2 The NDS Method of Nominal Circuit Analysis..................................4
1.1.3 General Guidelines...............................................................................5
1.2 Introduction to Node List Circuit Analysis .....................................................6
1.2.1 Rules and Definitions...........................................................................6
Chapter 2 Passive Circuits...................................................................................9

2.1 Introduction to Node List Circuit Analysis (Part One)...................................9
2.2 Introduction to Node List Circuit Analysis (Part Two).................................16
2.3 All-Capacitive Circuit ....................................................................................21
2.4 All-Inductive Circuit ......................................................................................23
2.5 Twin-T RC Network ......................................................................................24
2.6 Broadband Pulse Transformer Model............................................................27
2.7 All-Capacitive Loops (ACL)..........................................................................30
2.8 All-Inductive Cutsets (ICS) ...........................................................................31
2.9 All-Capacitive Loop Example .......................................................................32
References................................................................................................................34
Chapter 3 Controlled Sources ...........................................................................35

3.1 Controlled (Dependent) Sources....................................................................35
3.1.1 Voltage-Controlled Current Source (VCCS) .....................................35
3.1.2 Current-Controlled Current Source (CCCS) .....................................35
3.1.3 Voltage-Controlled Voltage Source (VCVS) .....................................35
3.1.4 Current-Controlled Voltage Source (CCVS) .....................................36
3.1.5 CCVS to VCVS .................................................................................36
3.1.6 CCCS to VCCS..................................................................................36
3.1.7 Four Rules that Must be Observed....................................................37
3.2 Floating VCVS...............................................................................................38
3.3 Circuits with M > 1 .......................................................................................41
3.4 First-Order MOSFET Model .........................................................................44
3.5 VCVS and CCCS Example ...........................................................................46
3.6 Two Inputs, Three Outputs ............................................................................50
3.7 Third-Order Opamp Model............................................................................54
3.8 A Subcircuit Scheme .....................................................................................56
3.9 Subcircuit Opamp Model...............................................................................58
3.10 Fifth-Order Active Filter ................................................................................59
3.11 State Variable Filter........................................................................................60
3.12 Seventh-Order Elliptical Low-Pass Filter......................................................63
3.12.1 Stepping One Resistor Value .............................................................68
3.12.2 Stepping All Seven Capacitor Values ................................................71
3.13 Square Root of Frequency (+10 dB/decade) Circuit ....................................74
3.14 HV (200 V) Shunt MOSFET Regulator........................................................76
3.15 LTC 1562 Band-Pass Filter IC in a Quad IC................................................78
3.16 LTC 1562 Quad Band Filter IC.....................................................................79
3.17 BJT Constant Current Source — A Simple Linear Model Using the
NDS Method ..................................................................................................87
3.18 uA733 Video Amplifier..................................................................................89
References................................................................................................................95
Chapter 4 Leverrier’s Algorithm ......................................................................97

4.1 Numerical Transfer Function [1] ...................................................................97
4.2 Transfer Function Using Leverrier’s Algorithm for Twin-T
RC Network ..................................................................................................100
References..............................................................................................................101
Chapter 5 Stability Analysis ............................................................................103

5.1 Unity Gain Differential Amplifiers..............................................................103
5.2 Stability of LM158 Opamp Model..............................................................106
5.3 High-Voltage Shunt Regulator — Stability Analysis..................................109
Chapter 6 Transient Analysis ..........................................................................115

6.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................115
6.2 Switched Transient Analysis........................................................................118
6.3 N = 2 Switched Circuit Transient Response ...............................................120
6.4 Comparator 100-Hz Oscillator.....................................................................123
6.5 Transient Analysis of Pulse Transformer ....................................................127
6.6 Passive RCL Circuit Transient Analysis......................................................131
6.7 Mathcad’s Differential Equation Solvers.....................................................133
6.8 A Mathematical Pulse Width Modulator (PWM) .......................................135
6.9 Switching Power Supply Output Stage — Buck Regulator .......................137
6.10 State Space Averaging..................................................................................140
6.11 Simple Triangular Waveform Generator......................................................143
6.12 Quadrature Oscillator...................................................................................145
6.13 Wein Bridge Oscillator ................................................................................148
References..............................................................................................................149
Chapter 7 DC Circuit Analysis .......................................................................151
7.1 Resistance Temperature Detector (RTD) Circuit ........................................151
7.2 An Undergraduate EE Textbook Problem ...................................................152
7.2.1 Matrix Solution To Demonstrate the Utility of the
NDS Method ....................................................................................153
7.3 DC Test Circuit ............................................................................................154
7.4 Stacking VCVS’s and Paralleling VCCS’s..................................................158
7.5 DC Voltage Sweep (RTD Circuit) ...............................................................159
7.6 RTD Circuit — Step Resistor Value............................................................161
7.7 Floating 5-V Input Source ...........................................................................164
Chapter 8 Three-Phase Circuits .....................................................................167

8.1 Convert ∆ Floating Voltage Inputs to Single-Ended Y Inputs ....................167
8.2 Three-Phase NDS Solution..........................................................................170
8.2.1 Unbalanced Delta Load — Single-Ended Inputs on
A and B ............................................................................................170
8.2.2 Unbalanced Delta Load — Single-Ended Inputs on
A and C ............................................................................................172
8.3 Three-Phase Y — Unbalanced Load ...........................................................174
8.4 Three-Phase Y-Connected Unbalanced Load — Floating
Delta Input....................................................................................................177
8.5 Balanced Y- Load.........................................................................................181
References..............................................................................................................186
Appendix I ............................................................................................................187
Background Theory of NDS Method....................................................................187
A-I.1 Theory of NDS Method...............................................................................196
A-I.1.1 An AC Floating VCVS ..................................................................199
A-I.1.2 VCVS and CCCS...........................................................................203
PART II Tolerance Analysis
Chapter 9 Introduction ....................................................................................211

9.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................211
9.1.1 Tolerance Analysis of Circuits with Discrete Components ............211
9.1.2 Analysis Methods.............................................................................212
9.2 Some Facts about Tolerance Analysis .........................................................212
9.2.1 DC Analysis .....................................................................................212
9.2.1.1 Monte Carlo Analysis .......................................................213
9.2.2 AC Analysis .....................................................................................213
9.2.3 Transient Analysis ............................................................................217
9.2.4 Asymmetric Tolerances....................................................................217
References..............................................................................................................217
Chapter 10 DC Circuits .....................................................................................219

10.1 Resistance Temperature Detector (RTD) Circuit......................................219
10.2 A Note on Asymmetric Tolerances...........................................................221
10.3 Centered Difference Approximation — Sensitivities ...............................222
10.4 RTD Circuit Monte Carlo Analysis (MCA) .............................................224
10.5 RTD MCA with R4 Tolerance = 10%......................................................226
10.6 RTD Circuit Fast Monte Carlo Analysis (FMCA) ...................................227
10.7 A CASE FMCA Greater than EVA......................................................... 228
10.8 Tolerancing Inputs.....................................................................................231
10.9 Beta Distributions [4–6]............................................................................232
10.10 RTD MCA — Beta (Skewed) Distribution ..............................................234
10.11 MCA of RTD Circuit using Bimodal (Gapped)
Distribution Inputs.....................................................................................236
References..............................................................................................................239
Chapter 11 AC Circuits .....................................................................................241

11.1 Circuit Output vs. Component Value........................................................241
11.2 Exact Values of C1 Sensitivity .................................................................247
11.3 Multiple-Output EVA................................................................................248
11.4 Butterworth Low-Pass Filter Circuit.........................................................250
11.5 Butterworth Low-Pass Filter MCA...........................................................251
11.6 Butterworth Low-Pass Filter EVA ............................................................253
11.7 Butterworth Low-Pass Filter FMCA ........................................................254
11.8 Multiple-Feedback Band-Pass Filter (BPF) Circuit ................................255
11.9 Multiple-Feedback BPF MCA..................................................................256
11.10 Multiple-Feedback BPF EVA ...................................................................257
11.11 Multiple-Feedback BPF FMCA................................................................259
11.12 Switching Power Supply Compensation Circuit .....................................260
11.13 Switching Power Supply Compensation MCA ........................................261
11.14 Switching Power Supply Compensation EVA..........................................262
11.15 Switching Power Supply Compensation FMCA ......................................264
11.16 Sallen and Key Band-Pass Filter (BPF) Circuit.......................................265
11.17 Sallen and Key BPF MCA........................................................................266
11.17.1 Sallen and Key BPF — MCA with both Common and
Precision Tolerances ...................................................................267
11.18 Sallen and Key BPF EVA .........................................................................268
11.19 Sallen and Key BPF FMCA .....................................................................270
11.20 State Variable Filter Circuit .....................................................................271
11.21 State Variable Filter MCA ........................................................................272
11.22 State Variable Filter EVA..........................................................................273
11.23 State Variable Filter FMCA and MCA Combined...................................275
11.24 High-Q Hum Notch Filter Circuit ...........................................................276
11.25 High-Q Hum Notch Filter MCA ..............................................................278
11.26 High-Q Hum Notch Filter EVA................................................................279
11.27 High-Q Hum Notch Filter FMCA ............................................................280
11.28 LTC 1562 MCA ........................................................................................281
11.29 LTC 1562 EVA..........................................................................................282
References..............................................................................................................284
Chapter 12 Transient Tolerance Analysis ........................................................285

12.1 Transient MCA — Twin-T RC Network ...................................................285
12.2 Transient MCA — Multiple Feedback BPF ...............................................286
12.3 AC and Transient MCA — Bessel HPF .....................................................288
12.4 Transient MCA — State Variable Filter......................................................291
Chapter 13 Three-Phase Circuits ....................................................................295

13.1 Three-Phase Y-Connected Unbalanced Load MCA ....................................295
13.2 Three-Phase Y-Connected Unbalanced Load EVA .....................................297
13.3 Three-Phase Y-Connected Unbalanced Load FMCA..................................300
Chapter 14 Miscellaneous Topics......................................................................303

14.1 Components Nominally Zero.......................................................................303
14.2 Tolerance Analysis of Opamp Offsets .........................................................305
14.3 Best-Fit Resistor Ratios ...............................................................................309
14.4 Truncated Gaussian Distribution .................................................................311
14.5 LTC1060 Switched Capacitor Filter............................................................313
14.5.1 Design Procedure from the Data Sheet ...........................................313
Appendix II...........................................................................................................319
Summary of Tolerance Analysis Methods ............................................................319
DC ................................................................................................................319
AC.................................................................................................................319
Transient .......................................................................................................319
Table of Subprograms............................................................................................320
Part I Nominal Analysis Subprograms .......................................................320
Part II Tolerance Analysis Subprograms (Used with Part I
Subprograms) ..................................................................................320
In Case of Difficulty..............................................................................................320
Abbreviations .........................................................................................................321
Index......................................................................................................................323
TO MY WIFE LINDA
Forever and Always

Part I
Nominal Analysis
1 Introduction
1.1 NOMINAL ANALYSIS
The features of this analysis are:
• Loop or nodal analysis math is not required. It uses SPICE-like node lists.
• All four types of controlled (dependent) sources can be used.
• It has DC and AC multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO) capability.
• Maximum number of inputs: 10
• Maximum number of outputs: No limit (all circuit nodes)
• Transient (time-domain) analysis.
• Three-phase circuit analysis.
• DC, AC, three-phase, and transient tolerance analysis methods (discussed
in Part II).
1.1.1 INTRODUCTION
Using state space methods, the circuit DC, AC, and transient response can all be
obtained from the same initial analysis. Hence, there is an economy of effort that
makes it worthwhile to learn state space techniques. However, conventional state
space methods require an inordinate amount of circuit analysis algebra. This book
shows a SPICE-like method for creating state space arrays with minimal effort. The
numerical transfer function can also be a part of the solution using Leverrier’s
algorithm.
Hence, this method eliminates the algebra required for conventional circuit
analysis techniques as taught in some undergraduate electrical engineering curricu-
lums. The simple procedure entails creating node lists directly from the schematic,
very much similar to early commercial versions of SPICE. This original method is
called node list DC superposition (NDS).
The purpose of presenting this material in Part I is to provide easy SPICE-like
analysis methods for the working engineer if SPICE is not available owing to network
downtime, network queuing (owing to limited site licenses), or, as sometimes hap-
pens in smaller companies, simply has not been purchased.
Circuits of at least medium complexity can be simulated. (See Section 3.15 for
a circuit with a component count of 68.)
The primary goal, however, is to demonstrate correct tolerance analysis methods
(Part II). The prerequisite nominal circuit analysis NDS method along with numerous
examples is covered in Part I.
3
4 Node List Tolerance Analysis: Enhancing SPICE Capabilities with Mathcad
1.1.2 THE NDS METHOD OF NOMINAL CIRCUIT ANALYSIS

It is assumed that electrical engineers are somewhat familiar with matrix analysis
and state space methods; hence, the introductory material is not extensive. Familiarity
with these subjects and Mathcad is necessary.
As previously stated, a big advantage of state space analysis is that the DC
output, AC frequency response, transient response, and circuit transfer function
(using Leverrier’s algorithm) can all be obtained from one initial analysis.
Another advantage is that state space matrices or arrays are real, not complex.
Complex matrices obtained from loop or nodal analysis require a real array twice the
size of a complex array to obtain a solution. Hence, state space methods decrease
execution time for large arrays and increase solution accuracy. This becomes apparent
when it is recalled that the number of arithmetic operations required to find a deter-
minant is directly proportional to N!, where N is the dimension of the square array.
The matrix equations used in state space analysis are
dx dx
= Ax + Bu, y = Dx + Eu + G
dt dt
where A, B, D, E, and G are arrays; x, a column vector of the state variables; u, a

column vector of inputs; and y, the output. In most analyses, array G is a null (zero)
array. (For an example using the G array, see Section 12.3.) Taking the Laplace
transform of the first equation and substituting in the second gives the following
with G = 0:
y = D(sI – A)–1 Bu + Eu
where I is an identity matrix. In the NDS method, the input u is included in B and
E so that
y = D(sI – A)–1 B + E
The “state variables” are the capacitor voltages and inductor currents. Using N
as the order of the circuit (number of L’s and/or C’s), M as the number of inputs,
and K as the number of outputs, the arrays have the following dimensions (in {row
column} format):
Array Rows Columns

A N N
B N M
D K N
E K M
G K N
x N 1
u M 1
I N N
Introduction 5
Using dimensional notation, {row col}, y is {K N}{N N}{N M} + {K M} =

{K M}. Then, y is a transfer matrix with the dimensions {K M} or {output input}
Note that in multiplying matrices, the inner dimensions in {row col} order must
be the same. That is, if A is {N N} and B is {N M}, they cannot be multiplied as
BA because {N M}{N N}, the inner dimensions, do not match. But they can be
multiplied as AB = {N N}{N M}. The dimension of the product is the outside
dimensions of both, i.e., {N M}. Hence, the dimension of the product {K N}{N
N}{N M} is {K M}, which can be added to E = {K M} (The two arrays are then
said to be “conformable” for multiplication if the inner dimensions are the same,
and they are conformable for addition if the dimensions are equal.)
1.1.3 GENERAL GUIDELINES

The SPICE node list text format is Ref Desig From node To node
Component value. An example would be R3 6 9 10K. The node lists used
in the NDS method are arrays of the form [From node To node Ref Desig],
the component value having been specified prior to node list creation.
Node numbering must start with 1 and be in numerical sequence up to 89. Nodes
99, 98, …, 91, 90 are reserved for inputs, and node 0 is for ground. There is no
requirement for the resistor node list as to node sequence. That is, [4 5 R1] and
[5 4 R1] are both accepted. For the capacitor node list and the inductor node
list, however, the sequence must correspond to Kirchoff’s current law (KCL): current
flow from left to right and from top to bottom. Hence, [3 6 C1] will work, but
[6 3 C1] may give the wrong phase angle output and incorrect output polarity
in DC and transient analyses.
The open loop gain of opamps is set at 106 V/V or 120 dab. In the majority of
circuit examples, no opamp frequency rolloff is used. However an example is given
on how to create an opamp with rolloff using voltage-controlled voltage sources
(VCVSs) (see Section 3.7 and Section 3.8). The Mathcad file in Section 3.18
demonstrates how to embed the opamp rolloff models into circuits, much like
subcircuits in SPICE.
Component values should generally be kept within the bounds of 1E+12 and
1E–12. Numbers outside this range run the risk of excessively increasing the A
matrix condition number. This will cause solution accuracy to diminish. A guideline
that can be used is the number of decimal places of accuracy, which is 15 – log10
× (condition number). If a solution appears incorrect or unreasonable, the condition
number of matrix A should be checked using the Mathcad statement floor(15-
log(conde(A))).
The reference paths for the subprogram files are localized for the author’s
computer. In creating new files, the user must click on Insert, then on Reference,
and then enter the correct local path or go to Browse.
Two of the most important Mathcad subprogram files are named as follows:
For DC: dccomm42.mcd (creates A1 and B2 arrays)

For AC: comm42.mcd (creates A, B, D, and E arrays)
All of the necessary Mathcad subprograms are contained in the included CD.
There is no error trapping. Users must ensure that the node lists correctly represent
the circuit being analyzed and that all required input arrays are included.
The version of the software used is Mathcad 11.0. (Note that due to internal
bugs in Mathcad 8.0, some files will not run on that version. Intermediate versions
have not been tested.)
Some mathematical ability will be helpful for some advanced subjects such as
the theory of the NDS method (Appendix I), stability analysis, Leverrier’s algorithm,
and transient analysis.
1.2 INTRODUCTION TO NODE LIST CIRCUIT

ANALYSIS
The passive RCL circuit used to demonstrate the procedure is shown in the following
figure:
L3
R1 V1 C1 V2 R2 V3
Ein
R3 C2 L4
R4
1.2.1 RULES AND DEFINITIONS
Calculated using the Mathcad subprogram file comm42.mcd:

Ncap = number of capacitors
Nind = number of inductors
N = Ncap + Nind
M = number of independent inputs (= 1 here, but can be up to 10)
K = number of outputs (= 1, but can be up to U)
User input:
U = number of unknown nodes (= 3 here).
Y = output node (can be any or all of the three nodes V1, V2, or V3).
Number nodes sequentially from 1 to U (V1, V2, V3,…); 0 is ground.
Maximum value of U = 89.
Independent voltage input nodes are numbered from 99, 98, …, 90. (Note that
if only one input source is present, use 99 as the node number; if two inputs, use
99, 98; if three inputs, use 99, 98, 97, etc.)
Component reference designator sequence is optional. It can be R1, L2, Ra, Cx,
R301, etc. A sequential numbering has been used for convenience.
Introduction 7
For AC analysis, log frequency sweep:

BF = Beginning log frequency = 10BF Hz
ND = Number of decades from BF
PD = Points per decade
Total number of frequency points NP = ND·PD + 1
Linear frequency sweep
BF = Beginning frequency in Hz
LF = Last frequency in Hz
DF = Frequency increment
LF − BF
Total number of frequency points NP = +1
DF
Using the RCL circuit, creating the node lists is just as easy as in early versions
of SPICE. For the resistors, we create the array RR:
 99 1 R1 
 1 2 R 4 
RR = 
 2 3 R2 
 
 3 0 R3
The first column is one of the two nodes that the resistor is connected to, whereas
the second column is the other node. The last column is the reference designator
for the resistor, the value of which has been given previously.
For the capacitors, we create the array CC:
1 2 C1 
CC = 
 3 0 C2 
For the inductors, we similarly create the array LL:
 1 2 L3
LL = 
 3 0 L 4 
The inputs are listed in the array Ein as Ein = (99 1). The first number indicates
the node and the second, the amplitude in volts, which is usually set to 1. All
independent inputs are referenced to ground.
Because this circuit is passive with no controlled sources, this must be shown
for VCVSs as EE = 0. No Voltage-Controlled-Current (VCCS) is shown as GG = 0.
REFERENCES
1. Seminal information for the method was obtained from DeRusso, P.M., Roy, R.J.,
and Close, C.M., State Variables for Engineers, John Wiley, NY, 1965.
2 Passive Circuits
ANALYSIS (PART ONE)
Analysis with output plots.
Unit suffixes:
K := 103 u := 10–6 m := 10–3
L3
R1 V1 C1 V2 R2 V3
Ein
R3 C2 L4
R4
Component values:
R1 := 10 R2 := 100 R3 := 50·K R4 := 10·K

C1 := 0.1·u C2 := C1 f1 := 10·K f2 := 100·K
f1 and f2 are resonant frequencies for the values of L3 and L4.

Calculate L3 and L4:
1 1
L 3 := L 4 :=
( 2 ⋅ π ⋅ f1) ⋅ C1
2
( 2 ⋅ π ⋅ f 2 ) ⋅ C2
2
The eight inputs required for the subprogram comm42.mcd are: U, Y, EE, GG,
RR, CC, LL, and Ein (see previous definitions).
U := 3 Three unknown nodes.

Y := 3 Take the output from node 3, V3.
9
Set up node list arrays: Ein := (99 1) (Ein = 1 V at node 99)
 99 1 R1 
 1 2 R4  1 2 C1   1 2 L 3
RR : =   CC : =  LL : = 
 2 3 R2  3 0 C2   3 0 L 4 
 3 R 3
 0
EE := 0 (No VCVSs) GG := 0 (No VCCSs)
Insert reference for subprogram file comm42 to get state space arrays A, B, D,
and E:
→ Reference:C:\mcadckts\CaNL11\comm42.mcd
Display arrays:
 −91909.09 −90909.09 −1 × 10 7 0 
 −90909.09 −91109.009 0 −1 × 10 7 
A=
 394.78 0 0 0 
 
 0 39478.42 0 0 
 90909.09 
 90909.09 
B= 
 0 
 
 0 
D = (0 1 0 0)
E = (0)
DC Analysis
dx dx
In = Ax + B, the DC value is obtained by setting = 0. Then AX = −B and
dt dt
X = −A−1⋅B where the uppercase X is used for DC. Mathcad’s lsolve function
provides the solution. When B has more than one column, the explicit solution form
X = −A−1⋅B must be used.
X : = 1solve(− A, B)
VC1 VC 2 IL 3 IL 4
XT = ( 0 0 9.091 9.091) m
That is, IL3 = IL4 = 9.091 mA. The capacitors are short-circuited by the inductor.
Passive Circuits 11
DC output voltage at node Y: Y = 3 Vodc := D·X + E Vodc = (0)

DC node voltages (inductors open-circuited) Vdc := 1solve(A11, A14)
VdcT = (1 0.833 0.832)
Ein1,2 ⋅ R 3
Confirming the last entry in vector Vdc: = 0.832
R1 + R 2 + R 3 + R 4
AC Analysis
BF := 3 ND := 3 PD := 40 NP := ND·PD + 1 i := 1..NP
i −1
Li := BF + s := 2·π·10L· −1 cvi := D(si·I – A)–1·B + E
PD
180
Voi := db(cvi) ·arg(cvi)Vai :=
π
Note the two resonant frequency cusps at f1 and f2.
Output magnitude at node Y

0
Y=3
−20
Voi
dBV
−40
−60
−80
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
Li
Log freq(Hz)
Phase angle at node Y

180
150
120
90
Degrees
(Vai)1 60
30
0
−30
−60
−90
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
Li
Log freq(Hz)
 2
Now take the output from both nodes 2 (V2) and 3 (V3): Y :=  
 3
Call the subprogram comm42 again to get the new D and E arrays.
 −91909.091 −90909.091 −1 × 10 7 0 
 −90909.091 −91109.091 0 −1 × 10 7 
A=
 394.784 0 0 0 
 
 0 39478.418 0 0 
 90909.091
 90909.091
B= 
 0 
 
 0 
 −0.909 0.091 0 0 
D= 
 0 1 0 0
 0.909 
E=
 0 
Note that only D and E have changed.

Sample of cv (complex value) for one output: cv10 = (0.001 + 0.002i)
Dimension = {K M} = {1 1}
Get the new AC outputs and plot: cvi = D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E
 0.855 − 0.213i
Sample of cv for two outputs: cv10 = 
 0.001 + 0.002 i
Dimension = {K M} = {2 1}
Plot both:
Vo 2 i : = db ( cvi )1 
Vo 3i : = db ( cvi )2 
Passive Circuits 13

0
2
Y = ( 3)
−20
Vo2i
dBV
−40
Vo3i
−60
−80
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
Li
V2
Log freq(Hz)
V3
We can plot the ratio of V3 to V2 as follows:
 ( cvi )2  180  ( cvi )2 

Vo 32 i : = db   Va 32 i : = ⋅ arg  
 ( cvi )1  π  ( cvi )1 
Magnitude of V3/V2
0
−20
dBV
Vo32i −40
−60
−80
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
Li
Log freq(Hz)
Phase of V3/V2
180
120
60
Deg
Va32i 0
−60
−120
−180
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
Li
Log freq(Hz)
Introduction to NDS Method — SPICE Verification

VEin 99 0 AC 1
R1 99 1 10
R4 1 2 10K
R2 2 3 100
R3 3 0 50K
*
C1 1 2 0.1u
C2 3 0 0.1u
*
L3 1 2 2.533m
L4 3 0 25.33u
*
.PRINT AC V(2) V(3) VP(3) V(3,2) VP(3,2)
.AC DEC 50 1E3 1E6
.OPTIONS NOMOD NOECHO NOPAGE
.END
Extracting the data from the SPICE *.out file and plotting:
Fnom := READPRN(“c:\SPICEapps\datfiles\intro3.txt”) N := rows(Fnom)
N = 151 k := 1..N
Spice verification - magnitude

0
−20
db(Fnomk,2)
dBV
−40
db(Fnomk,3)
−60
−80
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
V2 log(Fnomk,1)
V3 Log freq(Hz)
Passive Circuits 15
Spice verification - phase angle

180
150
120
90
60
Fnomk,4
Deg
30
0
−30
−60
−90
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
log(Fnomk,1)
Log freq(Hz)
For further verification, we compare the accuracy of the A and B arrays obtained
from the NDS method to that obtained from the algebraic solution in Section 2.2.
Ax and Bx, shown in the following, are from that section.
 −1  1 1  −1 −1 
 C1 ⋅  R 4 + R1 + R 2  C1 ⋅ ( R1 + R 2 ) C1
0 
 
 −1 −1  1 1  −1 
 ⋅ +  0 
Ax :=  C 2 ⋅ ( R1 + R2) C2  R1 + R 2 R 3  C2 
 1 
 0 0 0 
 L 3 
 1 
 0 0 0 
 L4 
 −91909.09 −90909.09 −1 × 10 7 0 
 −90909.09 −91109.09 0 −1 × 10 7 
Ax = 
 394.78 0 0 0 
 
 0 39478.42 0 0 
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
A − Ax =  
0 0 0 0
0 0 
 0 0
 1 
 C1 ⋅ ( R1 + R 2 )   0
   90909.09 
 1   
90909.09   0
Bx :=   Bx =  B − Bx =  
 C2 ⋅ ( R1 + R 2 )   0   0
     0
0  0   
 
 0 

ANALYSIS (PART TWO)
K := 103 u := 10–6
The algebraic solution of a sample RCL circuit is given to show the amount of
labor saved using the NDS method. For those less mathematically inclined, the next
three pages can be skipped. The advantages of the NDS method can be seen just by
glancing at the amount of circuit analysis algebra given in the following:
L3
R1 V1 C1 V2 R2 V3
Ein
R3 C2 L4
R4
R1 := 10 R2 := 100 R3 := 50·K
R4 := 10·K C1 := 0.1·u C2 := C1
fl := 10·K f2 := 100·K
1 1
L 3 := L 4 :=
( 2 ⋅ π ⋅ f1) 2
⋅ C1 ( 2 ⋅ π ⋅ f 2 ) 2 ⋅ C2
Format goal: eL and iC on LH side; Ein, iL, and vC on RH side. Must only use
terms involving these unknowns. We thus need N = Ncap + Nind = 4 equations in
the following format including constant coefficients.
diL dvC
f(eL, iC) = g(iL, vC, Ein) in which e L = L ⋅ iC = C ⋅
dt dt
We first see that
eL3 = vC1 eL4 = vC2 (1)

Passive Circuits 17
which are in the correct format. Two more equations are needed.
KCL at node V1:
Ein − V1 V1 − V2
= iL 3 + iC1 + V1 − V2 = vC1 (2)
R1 R4
Substituting:
Ein − V1 v Ein v V1
= iL 3 + iC1 + C1 iC1 = − iL 3 − C1 − (3)
R1 R4 R1 R 4 R1
Not done yet; need to eliminate V1.

KCL at node V2:
vC1 V2 − V3
iL 3 + iC1 + =
R4 R2
We see that: V3 = vC2

Substituting and rearranging:
V2 vC 2 vC1
− − − iC1 − iL 3 = 0 (4)
R2 R2 R 4
Solving Equation 4 for V2:
vC1 ⋅ R 2
V2 = iL 3 ⋅ R 2 + vC 2 + + iC1 ⋅ R 2 (5)
R4
V1 = vC1 + V2 From Equation 2 (6)
Substituting Equation 5 into Equation 6
vC1 ⋅ R 2
V1 = vC1 + iL 3 ⋅ R 2 + vC 2 + + iC1 ⋅ R 2
R4
Collecting terms:
 R2 
V1 = vC1 ⋅  1 +  + vC 2 + iL 3 ⋅ R 2 + iC1 ⋅ R 2 (7)
 R4 
Substituting Equation 7 into Equation 3:

Ein v v  R 2  vC 2 iL 3 ⋅ R 2 iC1 ⋅ R 2
iC1 = − iL 3 − C1 − C1 ⋅  1 + − − −
R1 R 4 R1  R 4  R1 R1 R1
Collecting terms:
 R 2  Ein  R 2  vC 2  1 1 R2 
iC1 ⋅  1 +  = − iL 3 ⋅  1 +  − − vC1 ⋅  + +
 R1 R 4 R1 ⋅ R 4 
(8)
 R1  R1  R1  R1
From Equation 2: V2 = V1 − vC1

Repeating Equation 5:
vC1 ⋅ R 2
V2 = iL 3 ⋅ R 2 + vC 2 + + iC1 ⋅ R 2
R4
KCL at node V3:
V2 − V3 V3
= + iC2 + iL 4
R2 R3
Substituting V3 = vC2
−V2  1 1 
+ vC 2 ⋅  + + iC 2 + i L 4 = 0
R2  R 2 R 3 
Multiplying by –1:
V2  1 1 
− vC 2 ⋅  + − iC 2 − i L 4 = 0
R2  R 2 R 3 
Substituting Equation 5:
vC 2 vC1  1 1 
iL 3 + + + iC1 − vC 2 ⋅  +  − iC 2 − i L 4 = 0
R2 R 4  R2 R 3 
Rearranging to the correct format:
vC 2 vC1  1 1 
iC1 − iC 2 = − iL 3 − − + vC 2 ⋅  + + iL 4
R2 R 4  R 2 R 3 
or finally
Passive Circuits 19
vC 2 vC1
iC1 − iC 2 = − iL 3 + − + iL 4 (9)
R2 R 4
Create two {N N} arrays W and Q from Equation 1, Equation 8, and Equation

9. Fill in the coefficients from the LH sides for W, and for the RH sides for Q per
the column headings:
iC1 iC 2 eL 3 eL 4
 0 0 1 0
 0 0 0 1
 
W :=  R2 
 1 + R1 0 0 0
 
 1 −1 0 0
vC1 vC 2 iL 3 iL 4
 1 0 0 0
 0 1 0 0 

  1 1 R2  −1  R2  
Q :=  −  + +  − 1 +  0
  R1 R 4 R1 ⋅ R4  R1  R1  
 −1 1 
 −1 1
 R4 R3 
S is created from the only Ein term in the third equation: P is an {N N} diagonal
array in the same C and L order as W and Q.
 0 
 C1 0 0 0
 0 
   0 C2 0 0
S :=  1  P :=  
 R1   0 0 L3 0
   0 L 4 
 0 0
 0 
Now form A and B as follows: C:= (W·P)–1 A := C·Q B := C·S
 −91909.091 −90909.091 −1 × 10 7 0   90909.091

 −90909.091 −91109.091 3.492 × 10 −10 7
−1 × 10   90909.091
A= B= 
 394.784 0 0 0   0 
   
 0 39478.418 0 0   0 
Because the output is vC2, we place a 1 in the second column of the {K N} array
vC1 vC 2 iL 3 iL 4
D := ( 0 1 0 0)
Because there are no input terms Ein in the output: E := 0

Prior to this shortcut method [*], the algebra would have to continue as follows.
Isolating iC1 in Equation 8:
Ein vC 2  1 1 
iC1 = − iL 3 − − vC1 ⋅  +
 R 4 R1 + R 2 
(10)
R1 + R 2 R1 + R 2
dvC1
Because iC1 = C1 ⋅ , we get
dt
dvC1 − vC1  1 1  vC 2 i Ein

= ⋅ +  − − L3 + (11)
dt C1  R 4 R1 + R 2  C1 ⋅ ( R1 + R 2 ) C1 C1 ⋅ ( R1 + R 2 )
From Equation 9:
vC1 vC 2
iC 2 = i L 3 − i L 4 + − + iC1 (12)
R4 R3
Substituting Equation 10 into Equation 12:
vC1 vC 2 vC 2  1 1  Ein
iC 2 = i L 3 − i L 4 + − − iL 3 − − vC1 ⋅  +  +
R4 R3 R1 + R 2  R 4 R1 + R 2  R1 + R 2
– vC1  1 1  Ein
iC 2 = − vC 2 ⋅  + − iL 4 +
R1 + R 2  R1 + R 2 R 3  R1 + R 2
dvC 2
Again, because iC 2 = C2 ⋅
dt
dvC 2 − vC1 v  1 1  iL 4 Ein

= − C2 ⋅ +  − + (13)
dt C2 ⋅ ( R1 + R 2 ) C2  R1 + R 2 R 3  C2 C2 ⋅ ( R1 + R 2 )
From Equation 1 above, repeated here: eL3 = vC1 eL4 = vC2

Passive Circuits 21
diL 3 diL 3 vC1

eL 3 = L 3 ⋅ , = (14)
dt dt L3
Similarly:
diL 4 vC 2
= (15)
dt L4
Using Equation 11, Equation13, Equation14, and Equation15, the general form
dx
matrix equation = Ax + Bu becomes
dt
 dvC1   −1 ⋅  1 + 1  −1 −1 
   0 
 dt   C1  R 4 R1 + R 2  C1 ⋅ ( R1 + R 2 ) C1 
  
 dvC 2   −1 −1  1 1  −1   vC1 
⋅ +  0   
 dt   C2 ⋅ ( R1 + R 2 ) C2 R1 + R 2 R 3 
 C2  ⋅  vC 2 
 diL 3  =    iL 3 
   1
0 0 0  i 
 dt   L3   L4 
 diL 4   
  1
dt   0
L4
0 0 

 1 
 C1 ⋅ ( R1 + R 2 ) 
 
 1 
+
 C 2 ⋅ ( R1 + R 2 )  ⋅ Ein
 0 
 
 0 
2.3 ALL-CAPACITIVE CIRCUIT

u := 10–6
R3
R1 1 C1
2
Ein
C2
3
R2
R1 := 10 R2 := 100 R3 := 50 C1 := 0.1·u C2 := 0.5·u

U := 3 Y := 2 Ein := (99 1) Input 1 V at node 99.
 99 1 R1 
 1 2 C1 
RR :=  1 2 R 3 CC :=  LL := 0 (No induc-

 3
  2 3 C2 
0 R 2 
tors)
EE := 0 GG := 0 (No controlled sources.)
Get A, B, D, and E arrays from subprogram comm42.mcd:
 −290909.1 −90909.1
A=
 −18181.8 −18181.8 
 90909.1
B=
 18181.8 
D = ( −0.909 0.091)
E = ( 0.909 )
DC voltages at all U nodes in the order given by Vdc. If inductors are present,
they are open-circuited:
Vdc := lsolve(A11, A14) VdcT = (1 1 0)

 0
X := lsolve(–A,B) X= 
 1
Vodc := D·X + E Vodc = (1) DC output voltage at node Y given by Vodc.
Y=2
AC Analysis
BF := 3 ND := 3 PD := 40
i −1
i := 1..ND·PD + 1 Li := BF + s := 2·π·10L· −1
PD
cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E Voli := db(cvi)
180
Vai := ·arg(cvi)1
π
(Phase angle) Y=2
Passive Circuits 23
Magnitude at node Y Phase at node Y

0 10
−1
0
Degrees
dBV
Vo1i −2 Vai
−10
−3
−4 −20
3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6
Li Li
Log freq (Hz) Log freq (Hz)
2.4 ALL-INDUCTIVE CIRCUIT

u := 10–6 mA := 10–3
R3
R1 1 L1 2
Ein
L2
3
R2
R1 := 10 R2 := 100 R3 := 50 L1 := 220·u L2 := 330·u

U := 3 Y := 2 Ein := (99 1)
 99 1 R1 
 1 2 L1 
RR :=  3 0 R 2 LL := 

 1
  2 3 L 2 
2 R 3
CC := 0 (No capacitors)
EE := 0 GG := 0 (No controlled sources.)
 −2287272.7 227272.7 
A=
 151515.2 −484848.5 
 0 
B=
 3030.3
D = ( 50 −60 )
E = (1)
Vdc := lsolve(A11, A14) VdcT = (1 1 0) X := lsolve(–A, B)

 9.091 iL1
X= Vodc := D·X + E Vodc = (0.909)
 9.091 mA iL 2
AC Analysis
BF := 3 ND := 3 PD := 50
i −1
NP := ND·PD + 1 i := 1..NP Li := BF +
PD
s := 2·π·10L· −1 cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E Voli := db(cvi)
180
Vai := ·arg(cvi)1 Y=2
π
Amplitude at node Y Phase at node Y

0 10
5
−1
Degrees
Vo1i Vai
dBV
0
−2
−5
−3 −10
3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6
Li Li
Log freq (Hz) Log freq (Hz)
2.5 TWIN-T RC NETWORK
60-Hz Notch Filter

K :=103 u := 10–6 Meg := 106 m := 10–3
Passive Circuits 25
C2 V1 C3
R3
R4 R1 V2 R2 V3
V4
Ein
C1
R5
R1 := 267·K R2 := 267·K R3 := 133·K R5 := 10·Meg

R4 := 0.01 C1 := 0.02·u C2 := 0.01·u C3 := 0.01·u
U := 4 Y :=3 Ein := (99 1)
 4 2 R1 
 2 3 R2 2 0 C1  GG : = 0
 
RR :=  3 0 R5 CC : =  4 1 C2  LL : = 0
 1  
 0 R 3  3 1 C 3 EE : = 0
 99 4 R 4 
Resistor R4 is the output impedance of the external voltage source.

DC Analysis
 0.975  VC1
X := lsolve(–A, B) X =  1  VC 2 Vodc := D·X + E
 
 0.949  V
C3
Vodc = (0.949)
Ein1,2 ⋅ R 5
= 0.949 (Checks; same as Vodc.)
R 4 + R1 + R 2 + R 5
DC node voltages: Vdc := lsolve(A11, A14)
V1 V2 V3 V4
Vdc T = ( 0 0.975 0.049 1)
Note: The reader is encouraged to reverse 3 1 C3 to 1 3 C3 in the CC array and

note the polarity change of VC3 above. Sign changes in the D array cancel the VC3
sign change and the output Vodc polarity remains the same. In SPICE the state
variables X and the A, B, D, E arrays are not accessible. As will be seen later, access
to these arrays can be useful.
AC Analysis
BF := 0 LF := 100 NP := 100 (Linear frequency sweep)

LF − BF
DF := i := 1..NP + 1 Fi := BF + DF·(i – 1)
NP
DF = 1 s := 2·π·F· −1 cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E
180
Voli := db(cvi) Vai :=
·arg(cvi)
π
Note: Most math software and scientific calculators limit phase angles of com-
plex numbers to +/– 180 deg, or π+ to –π. SPICE phase angle outputs can be from
0 to + 360 (2 ) or 360 deg. For example, +300 deg is equivalent to –60 deg; –200
deg is equivalent to +160. Both are correct.
Output plots
Y=3
Magnitude at node Y
0
−20
dBV
Voi
−40
−60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Fi
Freq(Hz)
Phase at node Y
100
50
Deg
(Vai)1 0
−50
−100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Fi
Freq(Hz)
Passive Circuits 27
2.6 BROADBAND PULSE TRANSFORMER MODEL
K := 103 p := 10–12 u := 10–6 n := 10–9 m := 10–3
R6 6
C2
R1 1 R2 2 L1 3 R4 4 L3 5
Ein
C1 R3 R7 R5 C3
7 L2
R1 := 10 R2 := 1.5 R3 := 20·K R4 := 1.5 R5 := 1·K

R6 := 0.5 C1 := 20·p C2 := 5·p C3 := 20·p L1 := 1·u
L2 := 2·m L3 := 1·u R7 := 1
U := 7 Y := 5 Ein := (99 10) 10 Vac input.
 99 1 R1 
 1 2 R2
 
 3 0 R 3
 R 4 
RR :=  3 4
 5 0 R5
 
 1 6 R6
 3 7 R 7 
1 0 C1 
CC : =  6 5 C2 
 
 5 0 C 3
2 3 L1 
LL : =  7 0 L2
 
 4 5 L 3
EE : = 0
GG : = 0
L1 and L3 represent leakage inductance; L2 is the magnetizing inductance.
Insert subprogram file:
DC Analysis
X := lsolve(–A,B)
X Format: VC1 VC 2 VC 3 IL 1 IL 2 IL 3
X T = 1.999( 1, 201 0.7

798 0.8 0.799 7.98 × 10 −4 )
Vodc := D·X + E Vodc = (0.798)
Note that this DC analysis is certainly easier than deriving the following alge-
braic solution:
Ein1,2 ⋅ R 5
Vdc5 : =
 
 
1 + R1 + R 2  ⋅ (R 4 + R5)
 (R 4 + R5) ⋅ R 3 ⋅ R 7 

 R 3 ⋅ R 7 + ( R 4 + R 5 )(
⋅ R 3 + R 7 ) 
Vdc5 = 0.798
DC node voltages (inductors open-circuited):
Vdc := lsolve(A11, A14) VdcT = (10 10 0 0 0 10 0)
AC Analysis
BF := 2 ND := 6 PD := 30
i −1
i := 1..ND·PD +1 Li := BF + s := 2·π·10L· −1
PD
180
cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E rd :=
π
Voi := db(cvi) Vai := rd·arg(cvi)
Note flat response from about 1 KHz to 10 MHz.
Output amplitude at node Y
40
20
dBV
Voi 0
−20
−40
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Li
Log freq(Hz)
Passive Circuits 29
Phase at node Y
200
150
100
50
Degrees
(Vai)1 0
−50
−100
−150
−200
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Li
Log freq(Hz)
Broadband Pulse Transformer — SPICE Verification

*File: c:\SPICEapps\Cirtext\xformer.cir
VEin 99 0 AC 10
R1 99 1 10
R2 1 2 1.5
R3 3 0 20K
R4 3 4 1.5
R5 5 0 1K
R6 1 6 0.5
R7 3 7 1
*
C1 1 0 20p
C2 6 5 5p
C3 5 0 20p
*
L1 2 3 1u
L2 7 0 2m
L3 4 5 1u
*
.AC DEC 20 100 1E8
.PRINT AC V(5) VP(5)
.OPTIONS NOMOD NOPAGE NOECHO

.END
Extracting the data from the SPICE *.out file:
Fnom := READPRN(“c:\SPICEapps\datfiles\xformer.txt”)
N := rows(Fnom) N = 121 k := 1..N
Output amplitude at node Y

40
20
db(Fnomk,2)
dBV
−20
−40
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
log(Fnomk,1)
Log freq(Hz)
Phase at node Y
200
150
100
50
Degrees
Fnomk,3 0
−50
−100
−150
−200
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
log(Fnomk,1)
Log freq(Hz)
2.7 ALL-CAPACITIVE LOOPS (ACL)

In a physical circuit, two or more capacitors in parallel can occur, such as in power
supply decoupling circuits. However, in converting capacitors to ideal independent
voltage sources (which is done using this method of analysis), we end up with a
violation of Kirchoff’s laws. For example, in the circuit that follows:
E1 E2 E3
C1 C2 C3 + + +
− − −
Passive Circuits 31
If we assign arbitrary values to E1, E2, and E3, Kirchoff’s Voltage Law (KVL)
is violated around any of the three possible loops. If we assign the value of +1 V
to all three, because the resistance is zero, infinite current will flow around the loops
unless all assigned values of 1.0 have an infinite number of zeros after the decimal
point, e.g., if E1 – E2 = 10–9000 V divided by zero resistance is infinite current.
Another example of an ACL is:
C2
C1 C3
When converted to ideal voltage sources, KVL is again violated. For example,
if the arbitrary values were C1 = E1 = 10 V, C2 = E2 = 7 V, and C3 = E3 = 20 V,
KVL yields –10 + 7 + 20 = +17 V ≠ 0.
Every “real-world” capacitor has a small amount of series resistance, termed
equivalent series resistance (ESR). The cure in state space analysis of circuits with
ACLs is to place a small ESR resistor (≈ 0.01 Ω) in series with all (or all but one)
of the capacitors.
E1 E2 E3
+ + +
− − −
The cure
R1 R2 R3
2.8 ALL-INDUCTIVE CUTSETS (ICS)

A similar problem occurs with circuits having two or more inductors connected to
the same node. In this analysis method, the inductors become ideal current sources
connected to the same node, and we end up with a violation of Kirchoff's Current
Law (KCL), as shown in the following:
L1
I1 + −
L2 V1 L3
I2 + −
V1 I3 + −
Kirchoff’s Current Law at node V1 is I1 + I2 = I3. This law is violated regardless

of the values of I1, I2, and I3. The term cut set comes from circuit topology. If we
were to place a small “cookie cutter” at node V1, it would cut the wires of all three
inductors. Thus, we are cutting a set of inductor wires.
The cure is to place “de-Qing” resistors in parallel with at least one of the
inductors as shown in the following. The values to be used will depend on the
remainder of the circuit and the desired L/R time constants.
R1
I1 R3
+ −
The cure
I2 I3
+ − + −
V
R2
In defense of the NDS method, it should be stated that ACLs and/or ICSs will
cause any state space analysis method to fail if additional corrective steps are not
taken. See, for example, Intermediate Network Analysis, Shlomo Karni, Allyn &
Bacon, 1971.
2.9 ALL-CAPACITIVE LOOP EXAMPLE

K := 103 u := 10–6 m := 10–3 KHz := 103
R1 V1 C3 V2
Ein
R3
C1 C2
V3
L3
R1 := 1·K R2 := 0.1 R3 := 100

C1 := 1·u C2 := C1 C3 := C1 L3 := 25.33·m
U := 3 Y := 3 Ein := (99 1)
GG := 0 EE := 0 LL := (3 0 L3)
 99 1 R1
RR : = 
 2 3 R 3
1 0 C1 
CC : =  1 2 C 3
 
 2 0 C2 
Passive Circuits 33
Call reference subprogram:

A, B, D, and E are not returned. Due to the ACL, A is singular, i.e., the
determinant of A is zero, and the inverse of A is undefined.
Insert R2 to break ACL.
R1 V1 R2 C3 V3
Ein V2
C1 C2 R3
V4
L4
 99 1 R1 
RR : =  1 2 R 2
 
 3 4 R 3
1 0 C1 
CC : =  2 3 C 3
 
 3 0 C2 
U := 4 Y := 4 LL := (4 0 L3)
Reinsert subprogram for new node lists.
AC Analysis
BF := 2 ND := 2 PD := 50
i −1
i := 1..ND·PD + 1 Li := BF + s := 2·π·10L· −1
PD
cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E Voi := db(cvi)
Output at node Y
−20
−30
Voi
dBV
−40
−50
2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Li
Log freq(Hz)
Y=4
REFERENCES
1. R. Boyd, State Space Averaging with a Pocket Calculator, High Frequency Power
Conversion Conference Proceedings, Santa Clara, CA, 1990, p. 283.
3 Controlled Sources
3.1 CONTROLLED (DEPENDENT) SOURCES
3.1.1 VOLTAGE-CONTROLLED CURRENT SOURCE (VCCS)
SPICE convention: Gname Vp Vn Vcp Vcn Transconductance
The units of transconductance are amperes/volts = 1/ohms = siemens (or mhos,
for you old-timers).
Vp and Vn are the node connections of the current source in the circuit. Current
flows away from node Vp (into the + terminal of the source) and towards node Vn,
going out of the source. Vcp and Vcn are the + and controlling voltage nodes.
This convention is chosen because virtually all models of transistors and MOS-
FETs depict the current as flowing down and internally away from the collector or
drain terminal of the device.
Example: MOSFET drain current: Id = gm·Vgs = gm(Vg – Vs)
Here Vg and Vs are Vcp and Vcn, respectively. Because Id is dependent by
definition, it is unknown, as usually are Vg and Vs.
In MathCAD, GG = (Vp Vn Vcp Vcn Gain)
For a MOSFET, GG = (Vp Vn Vg Vs gm)
3.1.2 CURRENT-CONTROLLED CURRENT SOURCE (CCCS)

SPICE convention: Fname Vp Vn Controlling Current Gain
In the NDS analysis method, the controlling current is specified as I = f(V/R)
 Ein − V1 
Example: Ic = B ⋅ lb = B 
 R1 
3.1.3 VOLTAGE-CONTROLLED VOLTAGE SOURCE (VCVS)

SPICE convention: Ename Vp Vn Vcp Vcn Gain
As in VCCS, Vp and Vn are the + and connections of the source in the circuit,
and Vcp and Vcn are the + and controlling nodes.
Example: V1 V2 = k(V3 V4), or in SPICE Ename V1 V2 V3 V4 k
In MathCAD, EE = (Vp Vn Vcp Vcn Gain) = (V1 V2 V3 V4 k)
For an opamp, which is usually a single-ended output, Vo = Ao(Vcp Vcn),
where typically Ao = 106 V/V.
For an inverter, Vcp = 0. For a voltage follower, Vo is connected to Vcn and
35
Vo − AoVcp + AoVo = 0, Vo (1 + Ao ) = AoVcp
AoVcp Ao
Vo = = Vcp, since ≈1
1 + Ao 1+Ao
and in MathCAD as EE = (Vo 0 Vcp Vcn Ao) = (Vo 0 Vcp Vo Ao)
3.1.4 CURRENT-CONTROLLED VOLTAGE SOURCE (CCVS)

SPICE convention: Hname +V –V Controlling Current
Transresistance
The units of transresistance are volts/amperes = ohms.
Only two types are used in NDS method, the VCVS and the VCCS. Conversions
from the remaining two are easily accomplished as shown in the following subsec-
tions.
3.1.5 CCVS TO VCVS

To convert a CCVS to a VCVS, divide the controlling current nodes by the resistance
in the controlling current branch. (This “resistance” could be that of a printed circuit
board trace or wire, or a small current-sensing resistor.) Example: Assume the
controlling current Ic is through a resistor or resistance R2, which is connected to
nodes V2 and V1. Then
 V2 − V1  Rc
Vh = Rc ⋅ Ic = Rc  =
 R 2  R 2
(V2 − V1) Gain = Rc / R2
The gain is thereby converted from a “transresistance” in dimensions of ohms,

to a dimensionless gain.
MathCAD format: EE = (Vp Vn Vcp Vcn Gain) = (Vh 0 V2 V1
Rc/R2), which is very similar to the SPICE format.
3.1.6 CCCS TO VCCS

To convert a CCCS to a VCCS, divide the (dimensionless) gain by the resistance of
the “controlling current.” Example:
 Ein − V1  B
Ic = B ⋅ lb = B 
 R1  R1
= ( Ein − V1)
The controlling voltage is now Ein – V1, and the “gain,” with dimension 1/ohms
or “transconductance,” is B/R1.
In MathCAD format, GG = (Vp Vn Vcp Vcn Gain) = (Vp Vn Ein
V1 B/R1).
Controlled Sources 37
To repeat, the first input Ein is given the node number 99. For a second input,
Ein2 = 98, Ein3 = 97, etc., down to 90. For example, if Vp = 2, Vn = 1, Vcp = 99,
Vcn = 1, then GG = (2 1 99 1 B/R1).
3.1.7 FOUR RULES THAT MUST BE OBSERVED
1. The output of a controlled source cannot be connected directly to an

independent input source.
That is, EE = (99 0 2 1 gain) is not allowed. Input voltage
sources are specified, for example, as Ein = (99 5), the input
connected from node 99 to ground, with an amplitude of +5 V.
However, EE = (2 0 99 1 gain), one input being a controlling
node, Vcp or Vcn, is allowed. Here and as earlier, “99” represents any of
the nodes 99, 98, 97, … , etc., down to 90.
An independent source can be created by having Vcp = 99, 98, etc., and
Vcn = 0. For example, assume Ein = (99 5), and it is desired to
connect an independent 15-mA current source at an internal node V2 to
node V7. Then
GG = (2 7 99 0 0.015/5)
For an independent 15 V source at the same nodes:
EE = (2 7 99 0 15/5)
2. Vp in a VCVS is not allowed to be zero.
That is, the output nodes of a VCVS must always be (Vp 0) or (Vp Vn).
For example, EE = (0 2 3 0 gain) is not allowed. If a negative
output is desired, use EE = (2 0 3 0 – gain) or EE = (2 0
0 3 gain).
3. If a capacitor C or inductor L in the circuit being analyzed is connected
directly to an ideal input source, it must have an equivalent series resis-
tance (ESR) resistor in series between it and the source. That is CC =
(99 1 C1) or LL = (98 2 L1) are not allowed.
This will be a minor inconvenience as every real-world capacitor and
inductor has an ESR. Also, every real-world voltage source has some finite
internal source impedance which includes resistance. Hence, the simula-
tion will be more realistic with ESR included. If in doubt about what
value of ESR to use, use 0.01 Ω for capacitors and 0.05 Ω for inductors.
4. The nodes Vp or Vn of two or more VCVS’s (EE) must not be common.
That is
2 1 12 4 4
EE = 
2 0 3 4 2 
is not allowed. In the NDS method, this results in “node contention,” and
the solution will not be correct.
As in SPICE, every circuit must have at least one ground node (node 0).
3.2 FLOATING VCVS
K := 103 uF := 10–6 m := 10–3
R1 uV1 R3
V1 V2 V3
− +
Ein
C1 R2 C2 R4
R1 := 1·K R2 := 3·K R3 := 4·K R4 := 2·K

C1 := 0.01·uF C2 := 0.05·uF U := 3 Y := 3
180
u := 20 Gain of VCVS. rd :=
π
 99 1 R1 
 2 0 R2  1 0 C1 
RR : =   CC : = 
 2 3 R 3  3 0 C2 
 3 R 4 
 0
LL := 0 Ein := (99 2) GG := 0
VCVS equation: uV1 = V2 – V1 or V2 = V1·(1 + u)
Format: EE = (Vp Vn Vcp Vcn gain), then: EE := (2 1 1 0 u)
 −1.325 × 10 6 25000   200000 

A= B=
 105000 −15000   0 
D = (0 1) E = (0)
DC Analysis
X := lsolve(–A, B) XT = (0.174 1.217) Vodc := D·X + E

Vodc = (1.217)
DC node voltages:
Vdc := lsolve(A11, A14) VdcT = (0.174 3.652 1.217)

Check VCVS equation:
Vdc2 – Vdc1 = 3.478 u·Vdc1 = 3.478 Checks.
AC Analysis
BF := 2 ND := 5 PD := 20 Lit := ND·PD + 1 i :=1..Lit

i−1
Li := BF + s := 2·π·10L· −1 db(x) := 20·log(|x|)
PD
cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E Voi := db(cvi) Vai := rd·arg(cvi)
Plot marker: M1 := db(Vodc) Y=3
Magnitude at node Y
20
M1 0
−20
Voi
dBV
−40
−60
−80
2 3 4 5 6 7
Li
Log freq(Hz)
Phase at node Y
0
−45
Deg
(Vai)1 −90
−135
−180
2 3 4 5 6 7
Li
Log freq(Hz)
SPICE Verification — Floating VCVS

*File: c:\Spicapps\Cirtext\vcvs1c.cir
VEin 99 0 AC 2
R1 99 1 1K
C1 1 0 0.01u
R2 2 0 3K
R3 2 3 4K
C2 3 0 0.05u
R4 3 0 2K
*
EE 2 1 1 0 20; VCVS
.AC DEC 20 100 1E7
.OPTIONS NOPAGE NOMOD NOECHO
.END
Fnom := READPRN(“c:\SPICEapps\datfiles\vcvs1c.txt”)
N := rows(Fnom) N = 101 k := 1..N
Spice V3 magnitude
20
−20
db(Fnomk,2)
dBV
−40
−60
−80
2 3 4 5 6 7
log(Fnomk,1)
Log freq(Hz)
Spice V3 phase angle

0
−45
Fnomk,3
Deg
−90
−135
−180
2 3 4 5 6 7
log(Fnomk,1)
Log freq(Hz)
3.3 CIRCUITS WITH M > 1

The subprogram that constructs the A, B, D, and E arrays from the node lists also
counts the number of rows in the Ein array and assigns this value to M. In most
cases, the user is interested in the node voltages with all inputs active. In some cases,
however, the separate superposed contribution of each independent input may be
desired. Hence, there are two different subprograms to call, depending on the type
of output desired.
For DC, call dccomm42.mcd if the user wants all inputs active simultaneously.
(Most frequently used.)
Call dccomm42m.mcd if the separate contribution of each independent input,
M > 1, one at a time, is desired.
For AC, call comm42.mcd for all inputs active, and comm42m.mcd to separate
the node voltages due to the M > 1 inputs.
For a simple example, we use one “circuit” with M = 3 inputs and U = 3 unknown
nodes:
Ein1 Ein 2 Ein 3
 0.1 −0.01 0  1 0 0
A 3 : =  −0.01 0.2 −0.02  B3 : =  0 2 0
   
 0 −0.02 0.3   0 0 3
Ein1 Eiin 2 Ein 3
 10.05 1.01 0.1  V1

V3 : = A 3 ⋅ B3 V3 =  0.51
−1
10.12 1.01  V2
 
 0.03 0.67 10.07  V3
The aforementioned is what is returned if dccomm42m.mcd is called. The

separate contributions of each column (independent input) in B3 is given.
When this is not desired, calling dccomm42.mcd gives
 0.1 −0.01 0   1
A3 : =  −0.01 0.2 −0.02  B1 : =  2 
   
 0 −0.02 0.3   3
 11.16  V1
V1 : = A 3−1 ⋅ B1 V1 =  11.64  V2
 
 10.78  V3
We could get the same answer by adding the columns of V3, but this requires
additional statements in the worksheet.
i : = 1..3
V1i : = V3i,1 + V3i,2 + V3i,2 + V3i,3
 11.16 
V1 =  11.64 
 
 10.78 
For circuits in which M = 1, i.e., Ein array has one row, it does not matter which
subprogram is called. This applies only to those circuits with more than one input,
where Ein has more than one row and M > 1.
Example DC circuit with M = 2:
K := 103
R7
V99 R1 V1 R3 V2 R4 V3 R8
V98
Ein1 Ein2
R2 R5 R6
 99 15 
Ein : = 
 98 −5 
 99 1 1⋅ K  R1
 1 0 1⋅ K  R2
 
 1 2 1⋅ K  R3
 2 3 1 ⋅ K  R4
RR : = 
 2 0 10 ⋅ K  R5
 
 3 0 1⋅ K  R6
 1 3 1.5 ⋅ K  R7
 
 3 98 1⋅ K  R8
GG := 0 EE := 0 U := 3
Inputs separate. (M = 2)
→ Reference:C:\mcadckts\CaNL11\dccomm42.mcd
Va : = A1−1 ⋅ B2
Ein1 Ein 2
 5.3936 –0.6440  V1
Va =  3.4884 −1.1628  V2
 
 1.9320 −1.7979  V3
In SPICE, one of two inputs would have to be zeroed, which requires two runs
to get the same information as given earlier.
If M = 3, SPICE would require three runs, and so forth.
Inputs added. (M = 1)
Vb : = A1−1 ⋅ B2
 4.7496 
Vb =  2.3256 
 
 0.1342 
Va1,1 + Va1,2 = 4.7496 etc.

3.4 FIRST-ORDER MOSFET MODEL
K := 103 u := 10–6 n := 10–9 p := 10–12 mA := 10–3
Edd
R4
V4 R5 V5
M1 C3
R1 V1
Eg
R2
V2
C1
V3
R3
R1 := 4.99·K R2 := 1·K R3 := 10·K R4 := 4.99·K

R5 := 1.96·K C1 := 0.1·u C3 := 4.7·n
From MOSFET data sheet:

gm := 0.001 Edd := 200 Eg := 20
Nodes: V1 — Gate; V3 — Source; V4 — Drain
Model using VCCS:

C2 := 400·p
C2 represents the internal gate-source capacitance.
(Nonlinear in higher-order models.)
R1 V1 Edd
Eg R4
R2 V4 R5 V5
C2
V2
C1 + g1 C3
V3
−
R3
(VCCS g1 is drain current Id)

VCCS: gl = gm·Vgs = gm·(V1 – V3)
VCCS format:
GG = (Vp Vn Vcp Vcn gain)

GG := (4 3 1 3 gm)
Eg = 20 Edd = 200
 99 1 R1 
 1 2 R2
 
RR :=  3 0 R 3
 98 4 R 4 

 4 5 R 5 
2 3 C1 
CC : =  1 3 C2 
 
 5 0 C 3
 99 Eg 
Ein : = 
 98 Edd 
LL : = 0
U := 5
Y := 4
DC Analysis
VC1 VC2 VC3 DC voltages across C1, C2, and C3
X := –A–1·B XT := (1.82 1.82 190.93)
DC output:
Vodc := D·X + E Vodc = (190.93)
DC voltage at all nodes:
Vdc := A11–1·A14 VdcT = (20 20 18.128 190.93 1.82 × 10–3)

Drain current Id:
Vgs := Vdc1 – Vdc3 Vgs = 1.818 Id := gm·Vgs Id = 1.82mA

Id := Vdc6 Id = 1.82mA V4 := Edd – Id·R4 V4 = 190.93

= Vodc. Checks.
AC Analysis
BF := 2 ND := 4 PD := 25 Lit := ND·PD + 1 i := 1..Lit

i−1
Li := BF + s := 2·π·10L· −1 cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E
PD
Voi := |cvi|
Drain voltage V4
200
Y=4
150
Volts
Voi 100
50
0
2 3 4 5 6
Li
Log freq(Hz)
3.5 VCVS AND CCCS EXAMPLE
K := 103 u := 10–6 m := 10–3 mA := 10–3 n := 10–9
Hybrid-pi model of the Bipolar Junction Transistor (BJT).
C1
l1
R1 V1 R3 V4
Ein
R2
+ g1
R4 C2
−
V2
+
−
V3 R5
R1 := 100 R2 := 10 R3 := 40·K R4 := 2·K

R5 := 10 C1 := 80·n C2 := 5·n
Controlled source gains:
180
hre := 0.004 hie := 100 rd :=
π
 99 1 R1 
 1 2 R2
 
RR :=  1 4 R 3
 4 0 R 4 

 3 0 R 5 
 1 4 C1 
CC : = 
 4 0 C2 
LL : = 0
Ein : = ( 99 0.1)
U := 4
Y := 4
VCVS:
V2 – V3 = hre·(V1 – V4)
Format for EE:
EE = (Vc Vn Vcp Vcn gain)
then
EE := (2 3 1 4 hre)
Convert g1 CCCS to a VCCS.
Ein − V1 hie
g1 = hie ⋅ I1 I1 = g1 = ⋅ ( Ein − V1)
R1 R1
GG = ( Vp Vn Vcp Vcn gain )
 hie 
GG =  4 0 99 1 
 R1 
GG = ( 4 0 99 1 1 )
 −747812.5 −75000 
A=
 188040000 187900000 
 12500 
B=
 −19800000 
D = (0 1)
E = (0)
DC Analysis
X := lsolve(–A,B) XT = (24.226 –24.138) Vodc := D·X + E
Vodc = (–24.14) Vdc := lsolve(A11,A14)
VdcT = (0.09 0.09 –4.79 × 10–3 –24.14 0.01)
Igl := Vdc5 Igl = 12.67mA (Igl = current thru souce gl)
AC Analysis
BF := 1 ND := 7 PD := 20 i := 1..ND·PD + 1
i−1
Li : = BF + F := 10L s := 2·π·F· −1
PD
Voi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E Vai := rd·arg(Voi)
NDS results and SPICE verification:

Fnom := READPRN(“c:\SPICEapps\datfiles\vcvs_cccs4.txt”)
N := rows(Fnom) N = 141 k := 1..N
Hybrid-pi BJT Model
*File: vcvs_cccs4.cir
VEin 99 0 AC 0.1
R1 1 99 100
R2 1 2 10
R3 1 4 40K
R4 4 0 2K
R5 3 0 10
*
C1 1 4 80n
C2 4 0 5n
*
EE 2 3 1 4 0.004
* B = 100; Gain B/R1 = 1.0 in GG
GG 4 0 99 1 1
.AC DEC 20 10 1E8
.OPTIONS NOECHO NOPAGE NOMOD
.END
Magnitude at node Y
30
20
10
db(Fnomk,2)
dBV
0
db(Voi) − 4
−10
−20
−30
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Spice log(Fnomk,1), Li
Log freq(Hz)
NDS
Y=4
Traces are separated to show congruency.
Phase angle at node Y

80
40
0
Fnomk,3 −40
Deg
(Vai)1− 10 −80
−120
−160
−200
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
log(Fnomk,1), Li
Spice Log freq(Hz)
NDS
3.6 TWO INPUTS, THREE OUTPUTS
K := 103 n := 10–9 mA := 10–3
R1 V1 R2 V2 R3 V3 R4 V4 R5 V5 R6
Ein1 Ein2
C1 +
GG C2
+
EE C3
− −
V6 V7
R7 R8
R1 := 1·K R2 := 2·K R3 := 1·K R4 := 2·K R5 := 2.2·K

R6 := 2.2·K R7 := 1·K R8 := 1·K C1 := 20·n C2 := 4·n
C3 := 6·n
U := 7 Y := (1 3 5)T
Three outputs.
 99 100 
Ein := 
 98 50 
Gains:
gm := 10 a := 5
 99 1 R1 
 1 2 R2
 
 2 3 R 3
 3 4 R 4 
RR := 
 4 5 R5
 
 5 98 R6
 6 0 R 7
 
 7 0 R8
1 0 C1 
CC : =  3 0 C2 
 
 5 0 C 3
LL : = 0
For VCVS EE:
V4 – V7 = a·(Ein2 – V2) EE := (4 7 98 2 a) a=5
For VCCS GG:
gl = gm·(V3 – Ein1) GG := (2 6 3 99 gm) gm = 10
DC Analysis
X : = − A −1 ⋅ B
Vdc : = D ⋅ X + E
 22.03 
Vdc =  100.03 
 
 308.96 
 1
Y =  3
 
 5 
Vn : = 1solve ( A11, A14 )
V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 Ig1
Vn T = ( 22.03 – 133.92 100.03 567.93 308.96 311.92 – 351.66 0.331)
Igl := Vn8 Igl = 311.92mA
AC Analysis
BF := 3 ND := 3 PD := 40 i := 1..ND·PD + 1
i−1
PD
Sample of the three (complex) outputs:
 21.37 − 6.19 i   1
cv5 =  100.03 + 0 i  Y =  3
   
 308.92 – 1.14 i  5 
Vo1i = db ( cvi )1  Vo 2 i = db ( cvi )2  Vo 3i = db ( cvi ) 3 
SPICE Listing — Two In Three Out

*File: c:\SPICEapps\Cirtext\wizard.cir
VEin1 99 0 AC 100
VEin2 98 0 AC 50
*
R1 99 1 1K
R2 1 2 2K
R3 2 3 1K
R4 3 4 2K
R5 4 5 2.2K
R6 5 98 2.2K
R7 6 0 1K
R8 7 0 1K
*
C1 1 0 20n
C2 3 0 4n
C3 5 0 6n
*
GG 2 6 3 99 10
EE 4 7 98 2 5
.AC DEC 50 1E3 1E6
.PRINT AC V(1) V(3) V(5)
.OPTIONS NUMDGT 8
.END
Fnom := READPRN(“c:\SPICEapps\datfiles\wizard.txt”)
N := rows(Fnom) N = 151 k := 1..N
NDS and SPICE plots:
Spice V1 magnitude
32
30
db(Fnomk,2)
dBV
28
26
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
log(Fnomk,1)
Log freq(Hz)
NDS V1 magnitude
32
30
dBV
Vo1i
28
26
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
Li
Log freq(Hz)
Spice V3 magnitude
40.0028
40.0024
dBV
db(Fnomk,3)
40.0020
40.0016
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
log(Fnomk,1)
Log freq(Hz)
NDS V3 magnitude
40.0028
40.0024
Vo2i
dBV
40.0020
40.0016
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
Li
Log freq(Hz)
Spice V5 magnitude
50
49.6
db(Fnomk,4)
dBV
49.2
48.8
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
log(Fnomk,1)
Log freq(Hz)
NDS V5 magnitude
50
49.6
dBV
Vo3i
49.2
48.8
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
Li
Log freq(Hz)
3.7 THIRD-ORDER OPAMP MODEL

This model has two poles and one zero.
K := 103 uF := 10–6 pF := 10–12 MHz := 106 KHz := 103

R3
1 R1 2 3 R2 4 5 C3 6 7
+ EE1 + EE2 + EE3 + EE4

C1 C2 R4
− − − −
R1 := 100 R2 := 100 R3 := 100 R4 := 10
Pole frequencies:
pl := 100 p2 := 1·MHz
Zero frequency
1
zl := 100·KHz C1 := Cl = 15.915uF
2 ⋅ π ⋅ R1 ⋅ p1
1 1
C2 := C2 = 1591.549pF C 3 :=
2 ⋅ π ⋅ R 2 ⋅ p2 2 ⋅ π ⋅ R 3 ⋅ z1
C3 = 0.016uF U := 7 Y := 7 Ein := (99 1) Ao := 106
Third-stage transfer function:
1
s+
R 3 ⋅ C3 R3 ⋅ R4
F (s) = Rp :=
s+
1 R3 + R4
Rp ⋅ C 3
Zero Pole
 1   1 
log  =5 = 6.041
 2 ⋅ π ⋅ R 3 ⋅ C 3 
log 
 2 ⋅ π ⋅ Rp ⋅ C 3 
1 2 R1 
3 2 0 C1 
4 R2
RR :=   CC :=  4 0 C2  GG := 0
5 6 R 3  
 5 C 3
6 R 4 
6
 0
LL := 0
1 0 99 0 1 
3 0 2 0 1 
 
EE :=  R3  Note EE3 gain.
5 0 4 0 1+
R4 
 
7 0 6 0 Ao 
AC Analysis
BF := 1 ND := 6 PD := 25 i := 1..ND·PD + 1
i−1
PD
Voi := db(cvi)
Opamp open loop gain

140
120
100
Voi 80
dBV
60
40
20
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Li
Log freq(Hz)
Note zero at 105 Hz; and double pole at 106 = 1 MHz
3.8 A SUBCIRCUIT SCHEME

Opamp model using both inverting and noninverting inputs
K := 103 uF := 10–6 nF := 10–9 MHz := 106
Differential Amplifier
R2 5(Vo)
R1 6(Vn) 11
Ein1 2 − V−
R3 7(Vp) V+ 1
Ein2 3 + 4
R4
Use the linear two-pole opamp model on page 58.
R1 := 10·K R2 := 20·K R3 := 10·K R4 := 20·K

CC := 0 GG := 0 LL := 0
 99 6 R1 
 98 7 R 3  99 −1
RR :=   Ein := 
 6 5 R2  98 1 
 7 R 4 
 0
Vo := 5 Vn := 6 Vp := 7
Input nodes to subckt6.mcd
Y := Vo U=7
→ Reference:C:\mcadckts\CaNL11\subckt6.mcd
A1 := A B1 := B D1 := D E1 := E Save arrays.
Get response for opamp open-loop gain of Ao := 105 EE3,5 := Ao
A2 := A B2 := B D2 := D E2 := E Save new arrays.
AC Analysis
BF := 4 ND := 3 PD := 50 i := 1..ND·PD + 1
i −1
Li := BF + s := 2·π·10L· −1 cv1i := D1·(si·I – A1)–1·B1 + E1
PD
cv2i := D2·(si·I – A2)–1·B2 + E2
Magnitude at node Y
30
20
M1 Y=5
10
db(cv1i) 0
dBV
db(cv2i) −10
−20
−30
−40
4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7
Li
Ao = 10^6 Log freq(Hz)
Ao = 10^5
Note the difference in high-frequency response with Ao = 10^5.
3.9 SUBCIRCUIT OPAMP MODEL

MHz := 106
This file requires inputs from the “calling circuit” in order to provide solutions.
These inputs are Vp, Vn, and Vo.
Because Vo = V5 is common to the calling circuit, node numbers in the calling
circuit must start with V5.
Ra Rb
1 2 3 4
5
+ EE1 + EE2 +
C1 C2 EE3
− − −
f1 := 10 f2 := 1·MHz Ao := 106 Ra := 10 Rb := 10
1 1
Ca := Cb := Vo = V5
2 ⋅ π ⋅ Ra ⋅ f1 2 ⋅ π ⋅ Rb ⋅ f 2
1 2 Ra  2 0 Ca 
RR1 :=   CC1 := 
 3 4 Rb  4 0 Cb 
CA = CC1 if no capacitors in main circuit.
 1 0 Vp Vn 1  CA : = cc ← CC1 if CC = 0
EE :=  3 0 2 0 1  cc ← stack (CC, CC1) otherwisee
 
 Vo 0 4 0 Ao  cc
RR := stack(RR,RR1) CC := CA
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\Find_U.mcd
Find the maximum number of nodes U.
3.10 FIFTH-ORDER ACTIVE FILTER

High Pass
K := 103 u := 10–6 n := 10–9 Meg := 106 m := 10–3
C2 V5 V5 R6
C5
Ein V1 C1 V2 R3 V3 R4 V4 3 4
+ V6
R1 V+ 1
C3 C4
R2 R5 2 V−
−
11 R7
V7
R8
R1 := 0.01 R2 := 2·K R3 := 70·K R4 := 140·K R5 := 12·K

R6 := 2.7·K R7 := 3.2·K R8 := 10·K C1 := 0.03·u
C2 := 0.02·u C3 := 1.9·n C4 := 0.4·n C5 := 0.01·u
Ao := 106 U := 7 Y := 6
Resistor R1 (0.01 Ω) serves two purposes: (1) acts as an ESR resistor so that
C1 is not connected directly to independent input Ein, and (2) prevents an all-
capacitive loop via ground, C4, C5, C2, and C1, and the zero-output impedance of
Ein.
 99 1 R1 
 2 0 R2
  1 2 C1 
 2 3 R 3 2
 3 C2 
R 4 
5
4  
RR :=  CC :=  3 0 C 3
 4 R5 4 C 4 
0
   0
 6 5 R6  5 4 C5 
 6 7 R 7
 
 7 0 R8
Ein := (99 1) LL := 0 GG := 0
For the opamp: EE format:
EE = (Vp Vn Vcp Vcn gain)

V6 = Ao·(V4 – V7) EE := (6 0 4 7 Ao)
AC Analysis
BF := 2 ND :=2 PD := 50
i−1
i := 1..ND·PD + 1 Li := BF + s := 2·π·10L· −1
PD
cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E Voi := db(cvi) Y=6

10
0
−10
−20
dBV
Voi −30
−40
−50
−60
−70
2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4
Li
Log freq(Hz)
3.11 STATE VARIABLE FILTER
K := 103 n := 10–9
Ten outputs: V1 through V10.

R3
7
C1
R2 2
11 C2
− 3 4
2 V− R4
11 6
−
R1 1 V+ 1 2 V− R5
5 11
+ − 7
Ein 3 4 V+ 1 2 V−
+
3 4 V+ 1
+
3 4
R8
R6 R7 9
1 5 11
− 10
2 V−
R9 V+ 1
8
+
3 4
R10
7
R1 := 10·K R2 := 20·K R3 := 10·K R4 := 182·K

R5 := 2.2·K R6 := 20·K R7 := 10·K R8 := 100·K
R9 := 10·K R10 := 100·K C1 := 1.125·n C2 := C1
U := 10 Ao := 106 GG := 0 LL := 0
4 5 C1  180
CC :=  Ein := (99 1) rd :=
6 7 C2  π
Get all nodes:
Y := (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10)T
 99 1 R1 
 7 2 R2 
 
 2 3 R3  Opamps : Vp Vn Vcp Vcn Gain
 3 4 R 4 

 5 6 R5   3 0 1 2 Ao 
RR :=   5 0 0 4 Ao 
 1 5 R6  EE :=  
 5 9 R7  7 0 0 6 Ao 
   10 Ao 
 0 8 9
 9 10 R8 
 3 8 R9 
 
 8 7 R10 
Note that the DC Analysis has been omitted
AC Analysis
BF := 3 ND := 1 PD := 200 i := 1..ND·PD + 1
i−1
PD
 rows ( A) cols ( A)  2 2 N N

 rows (B) cols (B)   2 1 N M
  =  Format :  
 rows (D) cols (D)  10 2 K N
 rows (E ) cols (E )   10 1  K M 
 
K = number of outputs; M = number of inputs.
The dimensions of the complex output variable cv are always {K M}.

From the schematic, V1 = V2; V8 = V9; V4 and V6 ≈ zero; hence, we omit V2,
V9, V4, and V6.
Get magnitude (dBV) and phase (deg) for single or multiple outputs:
Vo : = for i ∈1..ND ⋅ PD + 1 if rows ( Y) = 0
vo i ← db ( cvi )
for i ∈1..ND ⋅ PD + 1 otherwise
for K ∈1..rows ( Y)
vo i,k ← db ( cvi )k 
vo
Vai := rd·arg(cvi)
V1, V3, V5
40
20
Voi,1 0
dBV
Voi,3
−20
Voi,5
−40
−60
3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4
Li
V1 Log freq(Hz)
V3
V5
V7, V8, V10

40
20
Voi,7
0
dBV
Voi,8
Voi,10 −20
−40
−60
3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4
Li
V7 Log freq(Hz)
V8
V10
3.12 SEVENTH-ORDER ELLIPTICAL LOW-PASS FILTER
K := 103 nF := 10–9
64
C1 11 11
− V13 − V14
2 V− 2 V−
R1 V12 R2 V1 R4 V5 R7 V6 V+ 1 R8 R13 V+ 1
V7 V11
+ +
Ein 3 4 3 4
11 C4 R9 C7 R14
−
2 V− V4 V4 V10 V10
V+ 1 R3
+
3 4 R6 R10 R12
C2 C3 R15
C5 C6
V2 V8
V3 V9
R5 R11
Node List Tolerance Analysis: Enhancing SPICE Capabilities with Mathcad
R1 := 19.6·K R2 := 196·K R3 := 1·K R4 := 147·K

R5 := 71.5 R6 := 37.4·K R7 := 154·K R8 := 110·K
R9 := 260 R10 := 740 R11 := 402 R12 := 27.4·K
R13 := 110·K R14 := 40 R15 := 960 C1 := 2.67·nF
C2 := C1 C3 := C1 C4 := C1 C5 := C1 C6 := C1
C7 := C1 Ao := 106 U := 14 Y := 14
 99 12 R1 
 12 1 R2 
 
 1 2 R3 
 1 5 R 4 

 2 0 R5   12 1 C1 
   3
 4 3 R6  2 C2 
 
 5 6 R7  6 3 C 3
  
RR :=  13 7 R8  CC :=  5 4 C 4 
 13 4 R9  9 8 C5 
   
 4 8 R10   11 9 C6 
   7
 8 0 R11 10 C 7 
 9 10 R12 
 
 7 11 R13
 14 10 R14 
 
 10 0 R15 
1 0 0 12 Ao 
EE :=  13 0 6 13 Ao  (opamps)
 
 14 0 11 14 Ao 
Ein := (99 1) LL := 0 GG := 0
The DC analysis has been omitted.
AC Analysis
BF := 2 ND := 2 PD := 100 i := 1..ND·PD + 1
i−1
PD
180
Voi := db(cvi) Vai := ·arg(cvi)
π
Equation of asymptote: Vbi := –210·log(10Li–3)
A 210 dB/decade rolloff with a seventh-order (140-dB Butterworth) circuit.

Elliptical Seventh-Order LPF — SPICE Verification

* File: c:\SPICEapps\Cirtext\Ellipt7.cir
* 5/06/05
VEin 99 0 AC 1
R1 99 12 19.6K
R2 12 1 196K
R3 1 2 1K
R4 1 5 147K
R5 2 0 71.5
R6 4 3 37.4K
R7 5 6 154K
R8 13 7 110K
R9 13 4 260
R10 4 8 740
R11 8 0 402
R12 9 10 27.4K
R13 7 11 110K
R14 14 10 40
R15 10 0 960
*
C1 12 1 2.67n
C2 3 2 2.67n
C3 6 3 2.67n
C4 5 4 2.67n
C5 9 8 2.67n
C6 11 9 2.67n
C7 7 10 2.67n
*
EE1 1 0 0 12 1E6
EE2 13 0 6 13 1E6
EE3 14 0 11 14 1E6
*
.AC DEC 100 100 10K
.END
Fnom := READPRN(“c:\SPICEapps\datfiles\Elliptf7.txt”)
N := rows(Fnom) N = 201 k := 1..N
Output at node Y
40
20
Voi + 5 0
dBV
Vbi −20
db(Fnomk,2) −40
−60
−80
2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4
Li, Li, log(Fnomk,1)
NDS
Log freq(Hz)
Asymptote
Spice V(14)
Traces separated to avoid overlay and show congruency.
Phase at node Y
200
100
(Vai)1
Deg
0
Fnomk,3 − 20
−100
−200
2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4
Li, log(Fnomk,1)
NDS
Log freq(Hz)
Spice VP(14)
3.12.1 STEPPING ONE RESISTOR VALUE
K := 103 nF := 10–9
For the schematic, see Section 3.12.
R1 := 19.6·K R2 := 196·K R3 := 1·K R4 := 147·K

R5 := 71.5 R6 := 37.4·K R7 := 154·K R8 := 110·K
R9 := 260 R10 := 740 R11 := 402 R12 := 27.4·K
R13 := 110·K R14 := 40 R15 := 960 C1 := 2.67·nF
C2 := C1 C3 := C1 C4 := C1 C5 := C1 C6 := C1
C7 := C1 Ao := 106 U := 14 Y := 14
New resistor values for R4:
Rx := (100 150 200 250)T·K Ndc := rows(Rx) Ndc = 4
 99 12 R1 
 12 1 R2 
 
 1 2 R3 
 1 5 R 4 

 2 0 R5   12 1 C1 
   3
 4 3 R6  2 C2 
 
 5 6 R7  6 3 C 3
  
RR :=  13 7 R8  CC :=  5 4 C 4 
 13 4 R9  9 8 C5 
   
 4 8 R10   11 9 C6 
   7
 8 0 R11 10 C 7 
 9 10 R12 
 
 7 11 R13
 14 10 R14 
 
 10 0 R15 
1 0 0 12 Ao 
EE :=  13 0 6 13 Ao  (Opamps)
 
 14 0 11 14 Ao 
Ein := (99 1) LL := 0 GG := 0
Collect all arrays into one multidimensional array VAB:

Vn(U, Y, EE, GG, RR, CC, LL, Ein ) : = for i ∈1..Ndc
RR 4 ,3 ← Rx i
AE ← G(U, Y, EE, GG, RR, CC, LL, Ein )
A i ← AE1
Bi ← AE 2
D i ← AE 3
E i ← AE 4
 A
 
 B
 
 D
 
 E 
Row 2 comment: Stuff new Rx values into R4.

Row 3 comment: Recompute and store the arrays.
(The G function comes from subprogram comm42.mcd previously called.)
VAB := Vn(U, Y, EE, GG, RR, CC, LL, Ein)
Note: Except for the second line in the Vn routine (given earlier), this routine,
the VAB statement (given earlier), and the Vo routine below are universal. That is,
they can be used to step values in column 3 of RR, CC, or LL and column 5 of GG
or EE in any AC circuit. Similar statements apply for stepping resistor values in
DC circuits.
AC Analysis
BF := 2 ND := 2 PD := 100 i := 1..ND.PD +1
i−1
Li := BF +
PD
Vo : = for k ∈1..Ndc
A ← ( VAB1 )k
B ← ( VAB2 )k
D ← ( VAB3 )k
E ← ( VAB4 )k
for i ∈1..ND ⋅ PD + 1
i −1
L i ← BF +
PD
si ← 2 ⋅ π ⋅ 10 L i ⋅ −1
cvk ,i ← D ⋅ ( si ⋅ I − A ) ⋅ B + E
−1
vo k ,i ← db ( cvk ,ii )
vo
Ndc different resistor values

40
20
Vo1,i
0
Vo2,i
dBV
Vo3,i −20
Vo4,i −40
−60
−80
2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6
Li
R4 = 100 K Log freq(Hz)
150 K
200 K
250 K
Ndc = 4
Note the scale change.
3.12.2 STEPPING ALL SEVEN CAPACITOR VALUES

K := 103 nF := 10–9
For the schematic, see Section 3.12.
R1 := 19.6·K R2 := 196·K R3 := 1·K R4 := 147·K

R5 := 71.5 R6 := 37.4·K R7 := 154·K R8 := 110·K
R9 := 260 R10 := 740 R11 := 402 R12 := 27.4·K
R13 := 110·K R14 := 40 R15 := 960 C1 := 2.67·nF
C2 := C1 C3 := C1 C4 := C1 C5 := C1 C6 := C1
C7 := C1 Ao := 106 U := 14
Step C1 through C7 from 1nF to 3 nF:
Cx := (1.8 2.2 2.6 3.0)T·nF Ndc := rows(Cx) Ndc = 4
 99 12 R1 
 12 1 R2 
 
 1 2 R3 
 1 5 R 4 

 2 0 R5   12 1 C1 
   3
 4 3 R6  2 C2 
 
 5 6 R7  6 3 C 3
  
RR :=  13 7 R8  CC :=  5 4 C 4 
 13 4 R9  9 8 C5 
   
 4 8 R10   11 9 C6 
   7
 8 0 R11 10 C 7 
 9 10 R12 
 
 7 11 R13
 14 10 R14 
 
 10 0 R15 
Y := 14 Ncap := rows(CC) Ncap = 7

1 0 0 12 Ao 
EE :=  13 0 6 13 Ao  (Opamps)
 
 14 0 11 14 Ao 
Ein := (99 1) LL := 0 GG := 0
Collect all arrays into one multidimensional array VAB:
Vn(U, Y, EE, GG, RR, CC, LL, Ein ) : = for i ∈1..Ndc
for j ∈1..Ncap
CC j,3 ← Cx i
AE ← G(U, Y, EE, GG, RR, CC, LL, Ein )
A i ← AE1
Bi ← AE 2
D i ← AE 3
E i ← AE 4
 A
 
 B
 
 D
 
 E 
Row 3 comment: Fill CC column 3 with the ith capacitor value.

Row 4 comment: Recompute the arrays for each new value and store.
VAB := Vn(U, Y, EE, GG, RR, CC, LL, Ein)
AC Analysis
Bf := 2 ND := 2 PD := 100 i := 1..ND·PD + 1
i−1
Li := BF +
PD
Vo : = for k ∈1..Ndc
A ← ( VAB1 )k
B ← ( VAB2 )k
D ← ( VAB3 )k
E ← ( VAB4 )k
for i ∈1..ND ⋅ PD + 1
i −1
L i ← BF +
PD
si ← 2 ⋅ π ⋅ 10 L i ⋅ −1
cvk ,i ← D ⋅ ( si ⋅ I − A ) ⋅ B + E
−1
vo k ,i ← db ( cvk ,ii )
vo
Four different values for C1 thru C7

40
20
Vo1,i
0
Vo2,i
dBV
−20
Vo3,i
Vo4,i −40
−60
−80
2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4
Li
C1 thru C7 = 1.8 nF Log freq(Hz)
2.2 nF
2.6 nF
3.0 nF
 1.8 
 2.2 
Cx =   nF
 2.6 
 3
 
3.13 SQUARE ROOT OF FREQUENCY

(+10 dB/DECADE) CIRCUIT
K := 103 u := 10–6 n := 10–9 p := 10–12 kHz := 103

Hz := 1
R1 V1 R2 V2 R3 V3 R4 V4 R5 V5
Ein
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5
V9
V5 R6 V6 R7 V7 R8 V8 R9 V9 R10 V10
C9
C6 C7 C8
V9
11
−
2 V−
V+ 1
+
3 4
R1 := 523 R2 := 1.54·K R3 := 3.16·K R4 := 6.19·K

R5 := 12.4·K R6 := 24.9·K R7 := 49.9·K R8 := 100·K
R9 := 200·K R10 := 49.9·K C1 := 330·p C2 := 680·p
C3 := 1.2·n C4 := 2.7·n C5 := 4.7·n C6 := 0.01·u
C7 := 0.022·u C8 := 0.039·u C9 := 22·p Ao := 106
Ein := (99 1) U := 10 Y := 10 GG := 0 LL := 0
db(x) := 20·log(|x|)
S1 : = 100 S1 = 10 db(S1) = 20
S2 : = 1000 S2 = 31.623 db(S2 ) = 30
S3 : = 10000 S3 = 100 db(S3) = 40
Hence, a slope of +10 dB/decade is the square root of frequency.

 99 1 R1 
 1 1 9 C1 
2 R2  2
  9 C2 
 2 3 R3   
 3 3 C 3
R 4 
9
 4 4 9 C 4 
 4 5 R5  
RR :=   CC :=  5 9 C5 
 5 6 R6   
 6 7 R7  6 9 C6 
  7 9 C7 
 7 8 R8   
 8 8 9 C8 
9 R9   9

 9
 10 C9 
100 R10 
EE := (10 0 0 9 Ao)
AC Analysis
BF := 0 ND := 6 PD := 20 i := 1..ND·PD +1
i−1
Li := BF + F := 10L
PD
Insert a non-inverting opamp gain stage after V10 with a gain of:
 118 ⋅ K 
dBG := 20 ⋅ log  1 + 
 8.5 ⋅ K 
dBG = 23.453 s := 2·π·F· −1 cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E

Voi := db(cvi) + dBG Vai := 10·log(Fi) Y = 10
Output at node Y
60
50
40
Voi
dBV
30
Vai
20
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Li
V10 Log freq(Hz)
+10 dB/dec
3.14 HV (200 V) SHUNT MOSFET REGULATOR
K := 103 n := 10–9 mA := 10–3
Ehv
R4 R10
R7 C1
V8 V1
V3
R8 M2
11
− C2
V7 2 V− R1 M1
Eref V1 V2 V6
V+ 1 V9
R5
+ V4
3 4 R2 R9 V5
R3
R6
R1 := 10K R2 := 10K R3 := 5.1K R4 := 51K R5 := 215K

R6 := 6878 R7 := 562K R8 := 10K R9 := 1.96K R10 := 0.01
C1 := 2.7n C2 := 4.7n Eref := 6.2 Ehv := 400 Y := 6 U := 10
LL := 0
From MOSFET data sheet: gm := 0.001
 99 7 R8 
 1 2 R1 
 
 2 0 R2 
 4 0 R 3 

 98 3 R4  8 1 C1 
RR :=   CC := 
 6 5 R5  3 9 C2 
 5 0 R6 
 
 7 8 R7 
 9 0 R9 
 
 988 10 R10 
 3 4 2 4 gm 
GG :=  Ao := 106 EE := (1 0 5 7 Ao) Opamp
 10 6 3 6 gm 
 99 Eref   99 6.2 
Ein :=  Two inputs, M = 2. Ein = 
 98 Ehv   98 400 
(Note: C1 and C2 are for stability purposes. See Section 5.3, page 107 for
analysis.)
DC Analysis
 −41.43 VC1
X := lsolve(–A,B) X =  Vodc := D·X + E Vodc = (200.01)
 200.91 VC 2
DC drain currents of MOSFETs M1 and M2:
Vdc := lsolve(A11,A14)
Id1 := Vdc11 Id2 := Vdc12 Id1 := 3.904mA Id2 := 0.901mA
AC Analysis
BF := 0 ND := 5 PD := 30
i−1
Lit := ND·PD + 1 i := 1..Lit Li := BF +
PD
s := 2·π·10L· −1 cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E Voi := |cvi|
log(20) = 1.3 200 V regulation is maintained up to about 20 Hz.
Output at V5
250
200
150
Volts
Voi
100
50
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Li
Log freq(Hz)
Due to the opamp, a short expression for the DC output is:

 R5 
Vo := Eref ⋅  1 + 
 R6 
Vo := 200.01
3.15 LTC 1562 BAND-PASS FILTER IC IN A QUAD IC
78
R21
R22
Node List Tolerance Analysis: Enhancing SPICE Capabilities with Mathcad

C2A
RIN1 RQ1 R1A C1A R5 R6 C2B
V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 RQ2 R1B C1B R7 R8
RIN2
V1 V8 V9 V10 V11 V12
Ein
11 11 11 V7
− − − 11 11 11
2 V− 2 V− 2 V− − − −
2 V− 2 V− 2 V−
V+ 1 V+ 1 V+ 1
+ + + V+ 1 V+ 1 V+ 1
3 4 3 4 3 4 + + +
3 4 3 4 3 4
To RIN3
R23
R24
C2C
RIN3 RQ3 R1C C1C R9 R10 C2D
V14 V15 V16 V17 V18 RQ4 R1D C1D R11 R12
RIN4
V13 V20 V21 V22 V23 V24
11 11 11 V19
− − − 11 11 11
2 V− 2 V− 2 V− − − −
2 V− 2 V− 2 V−
V+ 1 V+ 1 V+ 1
+ + + V+ 1 V+ 1 V+ 1
3 4 3 4 3 4 + + +
3 4 3 4 3 4
Vout
Opamp rolloff for the first four stages of this circuit is shown following. The
remaining stages have infinite bandwidth at gain Ao.
R13 R14 R15 R16

V25 V26 V27 V28 V29 V30 V31 V32
V2 V8
+ + + + + +
C3 C4 C6 C5
− − − − − −
R17 R18 R19 R20

V33 V34 V35 V36 V37 V38 V39 V40
V14 V20
+ + + + + +
C7 C8 C9 C10
− − − − − −
Output plot — see following Mathcad file. Resistor values for fo = 100 KHz
are from LTC data sheet [1]. Total circuit has 40 unknown nodes and 68 components.
See Section 3.16 following.
3.16 LTC 1562 QUAD BAND FILTER IC
K := 103 m := 10–3 u := 10–6 n := 10–9 p := 10–12
See Section 3.15 for a schematic of the four connected sections and the opamp
rolloff subcircuit.
First-stage resistor values for 100-KHz fo:
RIN1 := 42.2·K RQ1 := 42.2·K R21 := 10·K R1A := 10·K

C1A := 159.15·p C2A := C1A R5 := 10·K R6 := 10·K
Second-stage resistor values for 100-KHz fo:
RIN2 := 42.2·K RQ2 := 42.2·K R22 := 10·K R1B := 10·K

C1B := 159.15·p C2B := C1B R7 := 10·K R8 := 10·K
Third-stage resistor values for 100-KHz fo:
RIN3 := 42.2·K RQ3 := 42.2·K R23 := 10·K R1C := 10·K

C1C := 159.15·p C2C := C1B R9 := 10·K R10 := 10·K
Fourth-stage resistor values for 100-KHz fo:
RIN4 := 42.2·K RQ4 := 42.2·K R24 := 10·K R1D := 10·K

C1D := 159.15·p C2D := C1B R11 := 10·K R12 := 10·K
These component values were obtained from Reference 1.

Opamp frequency rolloff components:
R13 := 1 R14 := 1 R15 := 1 R16 := 1 R17 := 1

R18 := 1 R19 := 1 R20 := 1
Cx1 := 15.91·m Cx2 := 159·n (10-Hz and 1-MHz poles)
(Note: These poles, and Ao (given in the following), are estimates because the
vendor chose not to put this information in the data sheet.)
C3 := Cx1 C4 := Cx2 C5 := Cx1 C6 := Cx2 C7 := Cx1

C8 := Cx2 C9 := Cx1 C10 := Cx2
 Lao 
 
Ein := (99 1) Lao := 130 Ao := 10  20 
Component node lists:
LL := 0 GG := 0 Y := 20 U := 40
Quad 1 of 4 quads
 99 1 RIN1
 1 2 RQ1 
 
 2 3 R1A  1 2 C2 A 
RR1 := 
R 21 
CC := 
 6 1 3 4 C1A 
 4 5 R5 
 
 5 6 R6 
 25 0 0 1 1  1st opamp inv input.

 27 0 26 0 1  1st opamp 10 Hz pole
 
EE1 :=  2 0 28 0 Ao  1st opamp 1MHz pole
 4 0 0 3 Ao  2nd opamp, no roolloff

 6 0 0 5 Ao  3rd opamp, no rolloff
Quad 2 of 4
2 7 RIN 2 
7 8 RQ 2 
 
8 9 R1B  7 8 C2 B
RR 2 := 
R 22 
CC2 := 
 12 7 9 10 C1B 
 10 11 R7 
 
 11 12 R8 
 29 0 0 7 1  4th opamp inv input.

 31 0 30 0 1  4th opampp 10 Hz pole
 
EE 2 :=  8 0 32 0 Ao  4th opamp 1MHz pole
 10 0 0 9 Ao  5th opamp, no rolloff

 12 0 0 11 Ao  6th opamp, no rolloff
Quad 3 of 4
8 13 RIN 3
 13 14 RQ 3 
 
 14 15 R1C   13 14 C2C 
RR 3 := 
R 23 
CC 3 := 
 18 13  15 16 C1C 
 16 17 R9 
 
 17 18 R10 
 33 0 0 13 1  7th opamp inv input.

 35 0 34 0 1  7th opamp 10 Hz pole
 
 16 0 0 15 Ao  8th opam
mp, no rolloff

Quad 4 of 4
 14 19 RIN 4 
 19 20 RQ 4 
 
 20 21 R1D   19 20 C2 D 
RR 4 := 
R 24 
CC 4 := 
 24 19  21 22 C1D 
 22 23 R11 
 
 23 24 R12 
 37 0 0 19 1  10 th opamp inv input.

 39 0 38 0 1  10tth opamp 10 Hz pole
 
 22 0 0 21 Ao  11thh opamp, no rolloff

R and C’s for rolloff poles:
 25 26 R13   26 0 C3 
 27 28 R14   28 0 C4 
   
 29 30 R15   30 0 C5 
 31 32 R16   32 0 C6 
RR 5 :=  CC5 := 
 33 34 R17   34 0 C7 
   
 35 36 R18   36 0 C8 
 37 38 R19   38 0 C9 
   
 39 40 R 20   40 0 C10 
Stack into one array:
RR := stack(RR1,stack(RR2,stack(RR3,stack(RR4,RR5))))
CC := stack(CC1,stack(CC2,stack(CC3,stack(CC4,CC5))))
EE := stack(EE1,stack(EE2,stack(EE3,stack(EE4,CC5))))
 rows ( A) cols ( A)  16 16  N N

 rows (B) cols (B)   16 1 N M
  =  Format :  
 rows (D) cols (D)  1 16  K N
 rows (E ) cols (E )   1 1  K M 
 
AC Analysis
LF − BF
BF := 40·K LF := 180·K NP := 101 DF :=
NP
i := 1..NP + 1 Fi := BF + DF·(i – 1)
s := 2·π·F· −1 cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E voi := db(cvi)
Get SPICE output (see SPICE listing below)

Fnom := READPRN(“c:\SPICEapps\datfiles\ltc1562_nom.txt”)
N := rows(Fnom) N = 101 k := 1..N
LTC1562 output at node Y

30
20
10
0
Voi −10
dBV
−20
db(Fnomk,2) − 5
−30
−40
−50
−60
−70
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Fi Fnomk,1
,
NDS K K
Spice Freq(KHz)
SPICE plot separated by 5 dBV from NDS plot to show both. Also see Amplitude
Response plot in Reference 1.
Y = 20
SPICE listing for Itc1562.med

LTC1562 Analysis
* File: Itc1562A.cir
VEin 99 0 AC 1
*
* Quad 1 of 4 quads
*
RIN1 99 1 4.22K
RQ1 1 2 42.2K
R1A 2 3 10K
R21 6 1 10K
R5 4 5 10K
R6 5 6 10K
C1A 3 4 159.15p
C2A 1 2 159.15p
EE1 25 0 0 1 1
EE2 27 0 26 0 1
EE3 2 0 28 0 3.162E6
EE4 4 0 0 3 3.162E6
EE5 6 0 0 5 3.162E6
*
Quad 2
*
RIN2 2 7 42.2K
RQ2 7 8 42.2K
R1B 8 9 10K
R22 12 7 10K
R7 10 11 10K
R8 11 12 10K
C2B 7 8 159.15p
C1B 9 10 159.15p
EE6 29 0 0 7 1
EE7 31 0 30 0 1
EE8 8 0 32 0 3.162E6
EE9 10 0 0 9 3.162E6
EE10 12 0 0 11 3.162E6
*
* Quad 3
*
RIN3 8 13 42.2K
RQ3 13 14 42.2K
R1C 14 15 10K
R23 18 13 10K
R9 16 17 10K
R10 17 18 10K
C2C 13 14 159.15p
C1C 15 16 159.15p
EE11 33 0 0 13 1
EE12 35 0 34 0 1
EE13 14 0 36 0 3.162E6
EE14 16 0 0 15 3.162E6
EE15 18 0 0 17 3.162E6
*
Quad 4
*
RIN4 14 19 42.2K
RQ4 19 20 42.2K
R1D 20 21 10K
R24 24 19 10K
R11 22 23 10K
R12 23 24 10K
C2D 19 20 159.15p
C1D 21 22 159.15p
EE16 37 0 0 19 1
EE17 39 0 38 0 1
EE18 20 0 40 0 3.162E6
EE19 22 0 0 21 3.162E6
EE20 24 0 0 23 3.162E6
*
* R’s & C’s for opamp poles

*
R13 25 26 1
R14 27 28 1
R15 29 30 1
R16 31 32 1
R17 33 34 1
R18 35 36 1
R19 37 38 1
R20 39 40 1
C3 26 0 15.915M
C4 28 0 159.15n
C5 30 0 15.915M
C6 32 0 159.15n
C7 34 0 15.915M
C8 36 0 159.15n
C9 38 0 15.915M
C10 40 0 159.15n
*
.AC LIN 101 40000 180000
.PRINT AC V(20)
.END
3.17 BJT CONSTANT CURRENT SOURCE — A SIMPLE

LINEAR MODEL USING THE NDS METHOD
Constant Current Source Explanatory schematic

Ein Ein
R1
Ic R1
Q1 +
R4
−
V1
R4
V4 V4 V1
− +
D1
V3 Vbe
V2 V3 Ix Vd
R3 + + Iy
R2 R3
− −
V2
R2
K := 103 mA := 10–3 uA := 10–6 pA := 10–12 Ecc := 15

R1 := 10·K R2 := 1.4·K R3 := 300 R4 := 0.01
Ein := (99 Ecc) beta := 100 U := 4
Use Roe = 1/hoe = 50 K in linear model — simulates Early voltage.

Roe := 50K
 99 1 R1 
 2 0 R2 
  V2
RR :=  3 0 R3  Id = Ix + Iy =
 1 4 R 4 
R2

 99 3 Roe 
Ib flows through Vbe. The values of Ix and Iy are not needed, only Id.
Vbe initial guess:
Vbe := 0.6
Vbe refinement; see next page.
Vbe := 0.705
Match Vd
Vd := Vbe
 1  V2
1 2 2 0 Id =
 R2  R2
GG :=  
 99 beta   V1 − V4 
3 1 4 Ic = beta ⋅ Ib = beta ⋅ 
 R4   R 4 
 Vd 
1 2 99 0
 Ecc 
EE :=  
4 Vbc 
3 99 0
 Ecc 
V := Isolve (A1, B2)
 2.395 
 1.69 
Get node voltages from nodes 1 to U: k := 1..U Vk =  
 1.69 
 2.395 
 
Get VCCS currents set by GG: Ngg := rows (GG) n := 1..Ngg
 1.21 
Vn+ U =   ⋅ mA Isrc = 5.31 mA
 5.31
V2
Id := Id = 1.207mA Id := V5
R2
Id = 1.207 mA Id := V5 Checks.
Refine Vbe:
V1 − V4
ml := 0.068 b1 := 0.588 Ib := Ib = 53.15uA
R4
Isrc  Ib  V3
= 100 Vbe : = ml ⋅ log  + b1
 uA 
Vbe = 0.705 Ie :=
Ib R3
Ie = 5.63 mA Ic := le – lb Ic = 5.58 mA
Ecc − V3
Iroe := Iroe = 266.19uA Ic – Iroe = 5.31mA
Roe
Ecc − V1 V1 − V4 V2 Ecc − V1 V1 − v4 V2
= + = 1.26 mA + = 1.26 mA
R1 R4 R2 R1 R4 R2
Ib Id
Ib + Id = 1.26mA Checks.
3.18 uA733 VIDEO AMPLIFIER
K := 103 mA := 10–3 uA := 10–6 pA := 10–12
Also see NE592 Video Amplifier (http://onsemi.com)
Rs := 0.01 R1 := 2.4·K R2 := 2.4·K R3 := 50 R4 := 590

R5 := 50 R6 := 590 R7 := 1.1·K R8 := 1.1·K R9 := 7·K
Ein1 := 4.1 Ein2 := 4.0 Ein3 := 15 beta := 100 R10 := 7·K
Roe := 50·K (Simulates 1/hoe of transistors. Not shown on schematic.)
Rg := 20·K
Ein
R7 R8
Q5
R1 R2 V9 V16
Rs Q6
V8 V15
Q3 Q4
V4 V13 V1 Rs
Rs V1
V3
Rs V10 Out
Q1 Q2 V3
V1 V2
R9
R3 Out2
V5 V6 R5 V4 V11
Ein1 Rg R10
R4 R6 Ein2
I2 I3 I4
V7 + + +
+
I1 − − −
−
Current source values obtained from analysis on the previous page.

 99 Ein1 
I1 := 5.31·mA (R3 = 300) I2 := I1 Ein :=  98 Ein 2  U := 16
 
 97 Ein 3
I3 := 4.54·mA (R3 = 350) I4 := I3
Initialize Vbe: Vbe := (0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6)T
Vbe := (0.68 0.68 0.69 0.68 0.70 0.70)T
Vbe refinements; see next page.
 99 1 R3  R 3 external
 98 2 R5  R 5 external
 
 97 3 R1 
 97 4 R 2 

 5 7 R4 
 
 6 7 R6 
 97 8 R7 
 
 97 9 R8 
 3 10 R9 
 
 4 11 R10 
 
RR :=  4 13 Rs 
 3 14 Rs 
 
 9 16 Rs 
 8 15 Rs 
 
 5 6 Rg  Rg externall
 3 5 Roe 

 4 6 oe 
Ro
 
 8 12 Roe 
 9 12 Roe 
 
 97 10 Roe 
 97 11 Roe 
Vbe voltage sources
 Vbe1 
1 5 97 0
 Ein 3 
 
2 Vbe 2 
6 97 0
 Ein 3 
 Vbe 3 
 13 12 97 0 
EE := 
Ein 3 
 Vbe 4 
 14 12 97 0 
 Ein 3 
 Vbe 5 
 16 10 97 0
Ein 3 
 
 15 11 97 0
Vbe 6 
 Ein 3 
 I1 

7 0 97 0 Current source I1 (Ic = beta ⋅ Ib)
Ein 3 
 
 12 I2 
0 97 0 Current source I2, etc.
 Ein 3 
 I3 
 10 0 97 0 
 Ein 3 
 I4 
 11 0 977 0 
 Ein 3 
Q1 current source frrom V3 to V5,
 beta  Ein1–V1
 3 5 99 1
R 3  controlled by Ib =
GG :=   R3
 4 6 98 2
beta  Q22 current source from V4 to V6,
 R5  Ein2–V2
 beta 
controlled by Ib =
 8 R5
12 4 13
 Rs  Q3 current source from V8 to V12,
 beta  controlled by Ib = V4–V13 , etc
 9 12 3 14  Rs
 Rs 
 beta 
 97 10 9 16 
 Rs 
 beta 
 97 11 8 15 
Rs 
V := lsolve(A1,B2)
Get all node voltages from 1 to U:
k := 1..U Vnk := Vk
See the following.
Get VCCS currents set by GG:
Ngg := rows(GG) n := 1..Ngg Vin := Vn+U

ViT = (5.31 5.31 4.54 4.54 2.6 2.42 3.09 2.04 4.8 4.62)mA
Get base currents to refine Vbe:
Ein1 − V1
Ib1 : =
R3
Ein 2 − V2
Ib 2 : =
R5
V4 − V13
Ib 3 : =
Rs
V3 − V14
Ib 4 : =
Rs
V9 − V16
Ib 5 : =
Rs
V8 − V15
Ib 6 : =
Rs
IbT = (26.01 24.21 30.87 20.35 48.02 46.19)uA w := 1..rows(Ib)
From Vbe curve-fit data:
m1 :=0.068 b1 := 0.588
 Ib 
Vbe W : = ml ⋅ log  w  + b1
 uA 
VbeT = (0.68 0.68 0.69 0.68 0.70 0.70)
Copy to Vbe in the previous text.

Repeat if necessary.
(Converges very rapidly.)
NDS (Mathcad) Spice using 2N3904
 4.0987   4.0991 
 3.9988   3.9992 
   
 9.3186   9.3188 
 9.3286   9.32999 
   
 3.4187   3.4085 
   
 3.3188   3.3104 
 1.8023   1.7930 
   
 11.4909   11.4960  Vk
Vk =  Vspice : =  pe k : = −1
12.6208  12.6350  Vspice k
   
 11.9208   11.9280 
   
 10.7909   10.7900 
 8.6386   8.6342 
   
 9.3286   9.3299 
 9.3186   9.3188 
   
 11.4909   11.4960 
 12.6208   12.6350 
   
Percent error, each node
 −0.01
 −0.01
 
 −0.00 
 −0.01
 
 0.30 
 
 0.25 
 0.52 
 
 −0.04  min(pe) = −0.11%
pe =   %
−0.11 max(pe) = 0.52%
 
 −0.06 
 
 0.01 
 0.05 
 
 −0.01
 −0.00 
 
 −0.04 
 −0.11
 
SPICE Comparison of uA733 Video Amplifier Analysis

uA733 Video Ampl
* File: uA733_va.cir
VEin1 99 0 DC 4.1
VEin2 98 0 DC 4.0
VEin3 97 0 DC 15
*
R3 99 1 50; External input resistor
R5 98 2 50; External gain resistor
R1 97 3 2.4K
R2 97 4 2.4K
R4 5 7 590
R6 6 7 590
R7 97 8 1.1K
R8 97 9 1.1K
R9 3 10 7K
R10 4 11 7K
Rg 5 6 20K; External gain resistor
*
Rs1 4 13 0.01
Rs2 3 14 0.01
Rs3 9 16 0.01
Rs4 8 15 0.01
* Current sources
I1 7 0 DC 5.31mA
I2 12 0 DC 5.31mA
I3 10 0 DC 4.54mA
I4 I1 0 DC 4.54mA
*
* C B E
Q1 3 1 5 Q2N3904
Q2 4 2 6 Q2N3904
Q3 8 13 12 Q2N3904
Q4 9 14 12 Q2N3904
Q5 97 16 10 Q2N3904
Q6 97 15 11 Q2N3904
*
* Bf=416.4
.model Q2N3904 NPN(Is=6.734f Xti=3 Eg=1.11 Vaf=74.03
+Bf=416.4 Ne=1.259 Ise=6.734f Ikf=66.78m Xtb=1.5
+Br=.7371 Nc=2 Isc=0 Ikr=0 Rc=1 Cjc=3.638p Mjc=.3085
+Vjc=.75 Fc=.5 Cje=4.493p Mje=.2593 Vje=.75 Tr=239.5n
+Tf=301.2p Itf=.4 Vtf=4 Xtf=2 Rb=10)
*
OPTIONS NOMOD NOECHO NOPAGE
.END
NODE VOLTAGE NODE VOLTAGE NODE VOLTAGE NODE VOLTAGE
(1) 4.0991 (2) 3.9992 (3) 9.3188 (4) 9.3299

(5) 3.4085 (6) 3.3104 (7) 1.7930 (8) 11.4960
(9) 12.6350 (10) 11.9280 (11) 10.7900 (12) 8.6342
(13) 9.3299 (14) 9.3188 (15) 11.4960 (16) 12.6350
(97) 15.0000 (98) 4.0000 (99) 4.1000
REFERENCES
1. LTC1562 Data Sheet, p. 18, www.linear.com.
4 Leverrier’s Algorithm
4.1 NUMERICAL TRANSFER FUNCTION [1]
The transfer matrix G is a matrix of output/input transfer functions. It has the
dimensions {K M}, or {output input}. The desired numerical transfer function is an
element of the transfer matrix G. For example, output 1 / input 2 would be G12.
Leverrier’s algorithm finds both.
Note that in the following sequence, the symbol tr( ) indicates the trace of a matrix,
i.e., the sum of the diagonal elements. General subscripts are given in parentheses, but
specific ones are not. That is, FN – 1 is designated F(N – 1). However, F2 would be
designated by F2. This is to prevent double subscript sets in later equations.
For a given matrix A of dimension {N N}, the general sequence is:
I = identity(N)
− tr  A ⋅ F ( N − 1) 
F = (N – 1) = I T(N − 1) =
1
− tr  A ⋅ F ( N − 2 ) 
F = (N − 2 ) = A ⋅ F (N − 1) + T(N − 1) ⋅ I T(N − 2 ) =
2
− tr  A ⋅ F ( N − 3) 
F = (N − 3) = A ⋅ F (N − 2 ) + T(N − 2 ) ⋅ I T(N − 3) =
3

− tr ( A ⋅ F1)
F1 = A ⋅ F 2 + T2 ⋅ I T1 =
N −1
− tr ( A ⋅ F 0 )
F 0 = A ⋅ F1 + T1 ⋅ I T0 =
N
The numerator coefficients are then:
Y(N − 1) = D ⋅ F (N − 1) ⋅ B + E ⋅ T(N − 1)
Y(N − 2 ) = D ⋅ F (N − 2 ) ⋅ B + E ⋅ T(N − 2 )

Y1 = D ⋅ F1 ⋅ B + E ⋅ T1
Y0 = D ⋅ F 0 ⋅ B + E ⋅ T0
97
The output I / input J transfer function extracted from the {K M} transfer matrix
G is then:
E I J sN + Y ( N − 1)I J s N−1 + Y ( N − 2 )I J s N− 2 + + Y1I J s + Y0 I J

GI J (s) =
sN + T ( N − 1) sN−1 + T ( N − 2 ) sN− 2 + + T1s + T0
A simple example will help clarify the procedure. Let
 −1 0 0 1 0 0
   
A=0 −4 4  , I = 0 1 0
 0 −1 0   0 0 1 
in which N = 3
The trace of A = 5; the trace of I = 3.
Sequence is: F2 = I
4 0 0
− tr ( A ⋅ F 2 )  
T2 = = 5, F1 = A ⋅ F 2 + T2 ⋅ I =  0 1 4
1
 0 −1 5 
4 0 0
− tr ( A ⋅ F1)  
T1 = = 8, F 0 = A ⋅ F1 + T1 ⋅ I =  0 0 4
2
 0 −1 4 
− tr ( A ⋅ F 0 )
T0 = =4
3
The denominator of GI,J is then
D(s) = s3 + T2s2 + T1s + T0 = s3 + 5s2 + 8s + 4
Let the D, B, and E arrays be, with {K M} = {2 2}.
1 0
 −1 0 1   1 0
D= , B = 0 1 , E = 
0 0 1 0 1 
 1 −1
We compute the numerator of G using:

Leverrier’s Algorithm 99
5 −1
Y2 = D ⋅ F 2 ⋅ B + E ⋅ T2 = 
1 4 
9 −66 
Y1 = D ⋅ F1 ⋅ B + E ⋅ T1 = 
5 2 
4 −5 
Y0 = D ⋅ F 0 ⋅ B + E ⋅ T0 = 
4 −1 
The numerator of G is a matrix polynomial:
1 0  3 5 −1 2
N(s) = Es 3 + Y2s2 + Y1s + Y0 =  s +
1  4 
s
0 1
9 −6  4 −5 
+  s+
5 2 4 −1 
N (s)
G I,J =
D (s)
Then:
G1,2 =
(
− s 2 + 6s + 5 )
s 3 + 5s 2 + 8s + 4
and G2,2 is
s 3 + 4 s 2 + 2s − 1
G 2 ,2 = ,
s 3 + 5s 2 + 8s + 4
etc.
Another way to find D(s) is by using eigenvalues:
 −1 0 0  −2 
   
A=0 −4 4  , eigenvals( A) =  −2 
 0 −1 0   −1 
then
D(s) = (s + 1)(s + 2)(s + 2) = s3 + 5s2 + 8s + 4
A circuit example is given in Section 4.2.

4.2 TRANSFER FUNCTION USING LEVERRIER’S

ALGORITHM FOR TWIN-T RC NETWORK
→ Reference:C:\mcadckts\CaNL11\TwinT2.mcd
See schematic in Section 2.5.

Display A, B, D, and E arrays:
 −374.53 −187.27 −187.27   374.53 

A =  −374.53 −1136.41 −384.553 B =  1136.41
   
 −374.53 −384.53 −384.53  384.53 
D = (0 –1 –1) E = (1)
The {N N} identity matrix is obtained from the referenced subprogram:
1 0 0
I = 0 1 0
 
 0 0 1 
{K M} = {1 1} here.
Step 1
− tr ( A ⋅ F 2 )
F2 := I T2 := T2 = 1895.48
1
Y2 := D·F2·B + E·T2 Y2 = (374.53)
Step 2
− tr ( A ⋅ F1)
F1 := A·F2 + T2·I T1 := T1 = 718489.21
2
Y1 := D·F1·B + E·T1 Y1 = (140274.07)
Step 3
− tr ( A ⋅ F 0 )
F0 := A·F1 + T1·I T0 := T0 = 5.56 × 107
3
Y0 := D·F0·B + E·T0 Y0 = (5.27 × 107)
Leverrier’s Algorithm 101
Transfer function:
E ⋅ s 3 + Y2 ⋅ s2 + Y1 ⋅ s + Y0
G (s) :=
s 3 + T2 ⋅ s2 + T1 ⋅ s + T0
Compare the following plot with that of the twin-T network in Section 2.5:
Transfer function magnitude

0
−10
−20
dBV
db(G(si)) −30
−40
−50
−60
0 20 40 60 80 100
Fi
Freq(Hz)
REFERENCES
1. D.M. Wiberg, Schaum’s Outline Series, State Space and Linear Systems, McGraw-
Hill, 1971, p. 102.
5 Stability Analysis
5.1 UNITY GAIN DIFFERENTIAL AMPLIFIERS
The NDS Method can be used for stability analysis problems. Techniques illustrated
are, (1) Α and β slope intersection method, and (2) gain-phase plots of loop gain
Αβ. Several examples are contained in this chapter. (In control theory, the symbols
G and Η are used for Α and β respectively.)
K := 103 u := 10–6 p := 10–12 Meg := 106 Hz := 1 MHz := 106
Compensated unity gain differential amplifier
R2 R1
Ein1
11
R3 2 − V− V0
V+ 1
R5 C3 3 + 4
Ein2
R6
R1 := 30·K R2 := 30·K R3 := 100·Meg

R4 := 10·Meg (R4 internal to opamp)
R5 := 30·K R6 := 30·K
C3 := 0.01·u C4 := 5·p (Stray package capacitance)
Beta equivalent circuit (R4 and C4 internal to opamp)
Note that Vo becomes the input, or Ein.
R2 V1 R1
V0 (Ein)
R3
R4 C4
V2
C3
R5 V3
R6
103
By definition:
V1 − V3
Beta =
Ein
The inverse of this is:
Ein
InvBeta =
V1 − V3
For opamp poles:
f1 := 20·Hz f2 := 1·MHz ω1 := 2·π·f1 ω2 := 2·π·f2

180
rd := U := 3
π
 1
Y :=   Two outputs are V1 and V3
 3
 99 1 R1 
 1 0 R2
 
 1 2 R 3 2 3 C 3
RR := 
R 4 
CC := 
 1 3 1 3 C 4 
 3 0 R5
 
 3 0 R6
LL := 0 GG := 0 EE := 0 Ein := (99 1) One input.
AC Analysis
BF := 2 ND := 5 PD := 20 i := 1..ND·PD + 1
i −1
L i = BF + F := 10L s := 2 ⋅ π ⋅ F ⋅ −1 cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E
PD
For the opamp:
Ao
Ao := 105.5 Ao1i =
 si   si 
 1 +  ⋅ 1 + 
ω1   ω2 
V1i := (cvi)1 V3i := (cvi)2

Stability Analysis 105
 1
Recall that Y =   Vai := V1i – V3i
 3
Aold := A (for future reference)
This is with the compensation R3 and C3 (sometimes called the “beta killer”)
disabled by setting R3 = 100 Meg. To enable it, we now set R3 = 2K, RR3,3 := 2·K,
and call the reference template again to get the new A matrix value.
Anew := A
 −1 1   −50000 50000 
Aold =  6 Anew = 
 2000 −6.689 × 10   1 × 10 8
−1.067 × 10 8 
cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E V1i := (cvi)1 V3i := (cvi)2
Vbi := V1i – V3i
Net slope of intercept is >20 dB/decade implies unstable (R3 = 100 Meg).
Net slope of intercept = 20 dB/decade implies stable (R3 = 2 K).
With and without compensation

80
70
60
50
db(Aoli) 40
dBV
−db(Vai) 30
−db(Vbi) 20
10
0
−10
−20
2 3 4 5 6 7
Li
Aol Log freq(Hz)
R3 = 100 Meg
R3 = 2 K
Plot Loop Gain as a Gain–Phase Plot:

Loop gain is defined as (Aol)(Beta)
AB1i := db(Aoli·Vai) AB2i := db(Aoli·Vbi) φi := rd·arg(Aoli·Vai)
θi := rd·arg(Aoli·Vbi) φi := if(φi > 0, φi – 360, φi) θi := if(θ > 0, θi – 360, θi)
Zero crossover markers:

F1 := –192 F2 := –103
Phase margin (R3 = 100 Meg) = 180 + F1 = −12 implies unstable.

Phase margin (R3 = 2 K) = 180 + F2 = 77 implies stable.
Gain-phase plot
50
F2
F1
Gain (dBV)
AB1i
0
AB2i
−50
−230 −210 −190 −170 −150 −130 −110 −90
φi, θi
R3 = 100 Meg Phase angle (Deg)
R3 = 2 K
5.2 STABILITY OF LM158 OPAMP MODEL

In this section, the stability of an LM158 opamp model embedded in a feedback
circuit is analyzed.
Meg := 106 K := 103 U := 106 MHz := 106 N := 109 p := 1012
Original circuit Using LMI 58 model

R3 C1 V3 Rs R3 C1 V3 Rs
1.13 K 0.1 uF 1.13 K 0.1 uF

V1 V1 Ein
R2 R1 V2 R2 R1 (V2)
X
Ein 2.26 K 10 K Ein 2.26 K 10 K
11 V1 V2
LM158 model
2 −
LM158 opamp V−
V+ 1 R4 V4 R5 R6
+ V5 V6 V7 V8
3 4
C2 + C3 + C4 +
EE2 EE3
− − EE4 −
Feedback (beta) circuit
R3 C1 V3 Rs
1.13 K 0.1 uF
V1
R2 R1 (V2) Ein1
2.26 K 10 K
R1 := 10·K R2 := 2.26·K R3 := 1.13·K R4 := 99.47·Meg

R5 := 10 R6 := 10 C1 := 0.1·u C2 := 80·p C3 := 13.263·n
C4 := 7.958·n Rs := 0.01 Ao := 105 U := 8
 1
Y= 
 2
The feedback circuit consists of R1, R2, R3, and C1. The opamp model consists
of R4, C2, R5, C3, R6, C4, and VCVSs EE2 through EE4. When analyzing the
feedback factor beta, the output V2 becomes an input Ein1. For the opamp model,
inverting input V1 becomes a new input Ein1. f1, f2, and f3 are the three pole
frequencies (Hz) of the opamp model.
 1.3 
log ( f ) =  6.08 
1 1 1
f1 : = f2 : = f3 : =
2 ⋅ πR 4 ⋅ C2 2 ⋅ πR 5 ⋅ C 3 2 ⋅ πR 6 ⋅ C 4  
 6.3 
Ein := (99 1) LL := 0 GG := 0
 99 1 R1 
 1 0 R2
  3 1 C1 
 1 0 R 3 4
 C2 
R 4 
0
RR :=  99 4 CC :=  
6 0 C 3
 5 R5 8 C 4 
6
   0
 7 8 R6
 99 3 Rs 
5 0 4 0 1 
EE :=  7 0 6 0 1 
 
 2 0 8 0 Ao 
Aold := A Bold := B
Save arrays.
New value for C2

C2 := 250·p
Insert into CC array:

CC2,3 := C2
Call reference again with new value of C2:

New pole frequency f1:
 0.81
log ( f ) =  6.08 
1
f1 :=
2 ⋅ πR 4 ⋅ C2  
 6.3 
Anew := A Bnew := B
AC Analysis
BF := 0 ND := 7 PD := 20 i := 1..ND·PD + 1
i −1
L i = BF + s := 2 ⋅ π ⋅ 10 L ⋅ −1
PD
Vai := D·(si·I – Aold)–1·Bold + E Vai := (vai)1 A3i := (vai)2
180
Vbi := D·(si·I – Anew)–1·Bnew + E A4i := (vbi)2 rd :=
π
Loop gain:
AB1i := A3i·Vai AB2i := A4i·Vai φi := rd·arg(A3i·Vai)

αi := rd·arg(A4i·Vai) φi := if(φi > 0, φi – 360, φi) αi := if(αi > 0, αi – 360, αi)
Zero crossover markers:

F1 := –165 F2 :=–129
Phase margins:
PM1 := 180 + F1 PM1 = 15 PM2 := 180 + F2 PM2 = 51
Stability rule of thumb: Phase margin should be greater than 45°.
Gain-phase plot of loop gain AB

80
F1 F2
60
db(AB1i) 40
dBV
db(AB2i) 20
0
0
−20
−300 −250 −200 −150 −100 −50 0
φi, αi
C2 80 pF Deg
C2 250 pF
Opamp open loop gain and inverse beta

120
100
80
db(A4i)
60
dBV
db(A3i)
40
−db(Vai)
20
0
−20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Li
C2 250 pF
Log freq(Hz)
C2 80 pF
Inv Beta
Note: Net slope of intercept of Inv Beta with opamp Aol should be 20 dB/dec.
5.3 HIGH-VOLTAGE SHUNT REGULATOR —

STABILITY ANALYSIS
In this section, the stability analysis of the HV Shunt Regulator presented in Section
3.14 is given.
K := 103 nF := 10–9 Hz := 1 MHz := 106 V := 1
Ehv
R4 R10
R7 V8 C1 V10
V3
R8 M2
11
− C2
V7 2 M1 V6
Eref V− V1 R1 V2
V3
V+ 1 R5
3 + 4 V4 R9
R2 V5
R3
R6
R1 := 10·K R2 := 10·K R3 := 15·K R4 := 150·K

R5 := 215·K R6 := 6878 R7 := 562·K R8 := 14.7·K
R9 := 1.96·K Ehv := 400 Eref := 6.2 C1 := 2.7·nF
C2 := 4.7·nF
db(x) := 20·log(|x|)
Calculate poles, zeros, and critical gain points in dBV:
T1 := C1·(R7 + R8) T3 := R8·C1 T2 := C2·(R4 + R9)

T6 := R9·C2
Breakpoint (bp) of loop gain 1 (lg1):

1
F1 := F1 = 102.2 Hz LF1 := log(F1) LF1 = 2.01
2 ⋅ π ⋅ T1
First bp of lg2 (see plot marker):

1
F 2 := F1 = 222.8 Hz LF2 := log(F2) LF2 = 2.348
2 ⋅ π ⋅ T2
Second bp of lg2:
1
F 6 := F6 = 17.3 KHz LF6 := log(F6) LF6 = 4.24
2 ⋅ π ⋅ T6
BF := 0 ND := 7 PD := 20 i := 1..ND·PD +1
i −1
L i = BF + s := 2 ⋅ π ⋅ 10 L ⋅ −1
PD
Minor loop inverse beta (see the following derivation).
 s ⋅ T3 
1g1i := − db  i
 si ⋅ T1 + 1 
Major loop inverse beta
 s ⋅ T6 + 1 R 4 ⋅ R6 
1g 2 i : = – db  i ⋅ 
 si ⋅ T2 + 1 R 3 ⋅ ( R 5 + R 6 ) 
High-frequency gain of lg1
 R7 
G1 := db  1 +  G1 = 31.87
 R8 
High-frequency gain of lg2
 R 3 ⋅ (R 4 + R9) ⋅ (R5 + R6) 

G 4 := db   G4 = 47.96
 R 4 ⋅ R6 ⋅ R9 
Inverse betas & break points

80
70 LF2 LF6
60
G4
50
lg1i 40 G1
dBV
lg2i 30
20
10
0
−10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Li
Minor loop Log freq(Hz)
Major loop
Note: Net slope of intercept = 20 dB/dec.

Opamp DC open loop gain in V/V:
Ao := 106 Goa := db(Ao) Goa = 120

Foa := 30·Hz Foa = First opamp breakpoint.
ω1 := 2·π·Foa ω2 := 2·π·2·106 (Opamp poles)
 
 Ao 
Ao1i = db  
  1 + si  ⋅  1 + si  
   
ω1  

ω 2  

Opamp open loop gain:
 R 3 ⋅ (R5 + R6) 
IG 2 := db   IG2 = 10.17
 R 4 ⋅ R6 
G1 − IG 2
LF 3 := LF 2 + LF3 = 3.43
20
Goa − G1
LF 4 : = + log ( Foa ) LF4 = 5.88
20
Stability intercepts
130
120 LF3 LF4
110
100
90
80
Ao1i
70
lg1i 60 G4
lg2i 50
40 G1
30
20
10
0
−10
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7
Li
Opamp
Minor loop
Major loop
Note that at each intercept LF3 and LF4, the net slope is approximately 20
dB/decade, which implies stability.
Calculate loop gain GH:
si ⋅ R 7 ⋅ C1 + 1
F 7 i :=
si ⋅ R 8 ⋅ C1
1  R 4 ⋅ ( si ⋅ R 9 ⋅ C2 + 1)   R 6 
F 8 i := ⋅ ⋅ 
R 3  s i ⋅ C2 ( R 4 + R 9 ) + 1   R 5 + R 6 
 
180  − F 7 ⋅ F 8 ⋅ Ao 
GHi := db(F7i·F8i) + Ao1i PH I := ⋅ arg  i i

π   1 + si  ⋅  1 + si  
   
ω1  

ω 2  

M1 = 37
Gain vs. phase

200
M1
100
Gain
GHi
−100
0 20 40 60 80 100
phi
Deg
Note: phasemargin := M1
phasemargin := 37
Voltage divider R1, R2 not included.
Derivation of minor loop gain 1 (lg1) and major loop gain 2 (lg2):
R7 C1 Va
Ein = 1V 562 K 2.7 nF
R8
lg1 derivation 14.7 K
1V Vb C2 R5 Vc
− +
4.7 nF 215 K
lg1
+ Ebuff
R3 15 K R4 150 K R9 R6
−
1.96 K
6.878 K
lg2 derivation
Ebuff represents source follower M2.

Ig1 is the drain current of M1,
For lg1 derivation:
R8 s ⋅ R 8 ⋅ C1
Va = =
R8 + R 7 +
1 s ⋅ C1 ⋅ ( R 7 + R 8 ) + 1
sC1
For inverse, use –dBV

For lg2 derivation:
1⋅ V R 4 ⋅ ( s ⋅ R 9 ⋅ C2 + 1)
Ig1 current = ZL =
R3 s ⋅ C2 ⋅ ( R 4 + R 9 ) + 1
of Ig1
ZL 1 R 4 ⋅ ( s ⋅ R 9 ⋅ C2 + 1) Vb·R 6
Vb = = ⋅ Vc =
R 3 R 3 s ⋅ C2 ⋅ ( R 4 + R 9 ) + 1 R5 + R6
6 Transient Analysis
6.1 INTRODUCTION
One method of transient analysis is based on the following equation:
∆x
= Ax + Bu or ∆x = (Ax + Bu)·∆t
∆t
Because A and B are already known using the NDS method, the task is to
determine ∆t. If ∆t is too large, the solution will not be accurate. If ∆t is excessively
large, the solution will not converge. If too small, a longer-than-necessary execution
time may be required. The time increment ∆t generally should be less than the
smallest time constant in the A matrix. This should be used as a guide in selecting
the initial value of ∆t. Some adjustment may be required for circuits with very fast
and very slow time constants. A simple circuit is used as the first example.
R1 V1
Ein
R2 C1
R1 := 20·K R2 := 40·K C1 := 0.5·uF Ein := 4.5
The time constant of this circuit is easily found to be:
R1 ⋅ R 2
Rp :=
R1 + R 2
τ := Rp· C1 τ = 6.667 ms
To confirm this, KCL at the node V1 gives:
Ein − V1 V1
= + iC1
R1 R2
 1 1  Ein
iC1 = −V1 ⋅  + +
 R1 R 2  R1
115
dvC1
Noting that V1 = vC1 and substituting iC1 = C1 ⋅
dt
dvC1 − vC1  1 1  Ein

= ⋅ + +
 R1 R 2  R1 ⋅ C1
,
dt C1
which is in the state space form
dx
= Ax + Bu
dt
Then
−1  1 1  1
A := ⋅ +  B :=
C1  R1 R 2  R1 ⋅ C1
u := Ein A = –150 B = 100 u = 4.5
The time constant of A is
1
= 6.667 ms
A
which is τ as in the preceding text. We then chose ∆t = 1 ms < τ.

Using ∆x = (Ax + Bu)⋅∆t we initialize: Vc1 := 0 (can be an initial condition
other than zero)
∆Vc1 := (A·Vc1 +B·Ein)·∆t Vc1 = 0.45 Vc2 = ∆Vc1 +Vc1 Vc2 = 0.45
∆Vc2 := (A·Vc2 +B·Ein)·∆t Vc2 = 0.383 Vc3 = ∆Vc2 +Vc2 Vc3 = 0.832
Combining:
Vc2 := (A·Vc1 +B·Ein)·∆t + Vc1 Vc2 = 0.45

Vc3 := (A·Vc2 +B·Ein)·∆t + Vc2 Vc3 = 0.832
Setting the maximum number of iteration to kmax : = 50 and indexing

k := 2..kmax,
Vck : = (A·Vck-1 +B·Ein)·∆t + Vck-1
The total sweep time is: kmax⋅∆t = 50 ms, which should be sufficient because
5⋅τ = 33.33 ms.
Transient Analysis 117
We plot Vc and compare this to the continuous solution
Ein ⋅ Rp   −t  
F ( t ) := ⋅  1 − exp 
R1   Rp ⋅ C1  
t := 0, 0.005·ms..50·ms
Widening the span of k to include k = 1 (Vc1 = 0):
k := 1..kmax
Time plot
3
2
Vck
Volts
F(t)
1
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
.
k ∆t , t
ms ms
Time(ms)
Ein ⋅ Rp
The steady-state value is =3
R1
Note the lag of Vc behind the continuous time function F(t). We can decrease
this lag by decreasing Dt to 0.5 ms and by increasing kmax from 50 to 100 to
maintain the same sweep time:
50 ⋅ ms
∆t := 0.5·ms kmax := kmax = 100
∆t
k := 2..kmax (for computing)

Vc1 := 0 Vck := (A·Vck–1 + B·Ein·∆t + Vck–1
k := 1..kmax (for plotting)
Time plot
3
2
Vck
Volts
F(t)
1
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
k . ∆t , t
ms ms
Time(ms)
Further reduction of ∆t would result in the two plots approaching congruency.

The reader is encouraged to select larger values of ∆t and note the deleterious effect
on the solution.
As will be shown, this method applies irrespective of whether A and B are scalars
as in the preceding text or arrays.
6.2 SWITCHED TRANSIENT ANALYSIS

A more complicated example is now shown to further illustrate the utility of the
method.
R1 V1 R2 V2 C1 V3
Ein 1
Q1
R3 R4
2
R1 := 10·K R2 := 10·K R3 := 2·K R4 := 10·K

Qloff := 10·Meg Qlon := 0.5
(Q1 is a CMOS SPST switch.)
 1
C1 := 0.1·u U := 3 Y :=  2  Ein := (99 1)
 
 3
Analytical Q1off and Q1on time constants:
 R 3 ⋅ ( R1 + R 2 ) 
τ1 :=  R 4 +  ⋅ C1 τ1 = 1.182m
 R1 + R 2 + R 3 
 R2 ⋅ R 3 
τ 2 :=  R 4 +  ⋅ C1 τ2 = 1.167m
 R2 + R 3 
10 ⋅ R 3 ⋅ R 4
V3pk := V3pk = 0.769
R 3 ⋅ R 4 + ( R1 + R 2 ) ⋅ ( R 3 + R 4 )
 99 1 R1 
 1 0 Q1off 
 
RR :=  1 2 R2  CC:= (2 3 C1)
 2 0 R 3 

 3 0 R 4 
LL := 0 EE := 0 GG := 0
Aoff := A Boff := B Doff := D Eoff := E
Close sw Q1 RR2,3 := Q1on
Aon := A Bon := B Don := D Eon := E
Compare time constants:

1
t1 := t1 = 1.182m
Aoff
From above:
1
τ1= 1.182m t 2 := t2 = 1.167m
Aon
From above:
τ2 = 1.167m ∆t := 0.02·m Per := 20·m
 Per 
k max := floor 
 ∆t 
kmax = 1000 Ein := 10
Create input pulse from Mathcad’s unit step function φ(x):
pulse(x, w) := φ(x) – φ(x – w) bpf(x, f, w, Ein) := Ein·pulse(x – f, w)

Eapp(t) := bpf(t, 0.05·Per, 0.9·Per, Ein)
k := 2..kmax
Initialize: V11 := 0
Switch time: Sw := 0.45·kmax Sw·∆t = 9m
V1k := if(k < Sw, Aoff·V1k–1·∆t + Boff·Eapp(k·∆t)·∆t + V1k–1,

Aon·V1k–1·∆t + Bon·Eapp(k·∆t)·∆t + V1k–1)
Vok := if(k < Sw, Doff·V1k + Eoff·Eapp(k·∆t), Don·V1k + Eon·Eapp(k·∆t))
Input & output waveforms

1.5
Sw . ∆t
m V3pk
1
(Vok)2 − (Vok)3
0.5
(Vok)3
Volts
Eapp(k . ∆t) 0
10
–0.5 –V3pk
–1
0 5 10 15 20
k . ∆t
m
Vc1 Time(ms)
V3
(Input pulse)/10
6.3 N = 2 SWITCHED CIRCUIT TRANSIENT RESPONSE

In this section, a circuit with two capacitors (N = 2) with multiple time constants
and a synchronously switched inputs is analyzed.
K := 103 u := 10–6 Meg := 106 m := 10–3
R1 V1
Ein1
C1
R2 R3 R4
V2 V3
C2
1
Q1
2
Ein2
R1 := 10·K R2 := 10·K R3 := 20·K R4 := 100·K

Q1off := 10·Meg Q1on := 0.5 C1 := 0.02·u C2 := 0.5·u
U := 3 Y := (1 2 3)T
 99 1
Ein :=  LL := 0 GG := 0 EE := 0
 98 1
Two inputs.
To be changed to +25 V and −10 V later.
Switch Q1 OFF
 99 1 R1 
 1 2 R2 
  1 0 C1 
RR :=  2 98 Q1off  CC := 
 1 3 C2 
R 3 
0
 3
 1 0 R 4 
Aoff := A Boff := B Doff := D Eoff := E Save OFF arrays.
Switch Q1 ON RR3,3 := Qlon
Aon := A Bon := B Don := D Eon := E Save ON arrays.
1 1 1 1
tau1 : = tau 2 : = tau 3 : = tau 4 : =
max ( Aoff ) min ( Aoff ) max ( Aon ) min ( Aon )
tau1 := (400 124.9 400 76.9)u tau4 := 76.9 u
This is the shortest time constant; ∆t must be less than this.

Choose
 Per 2 
∆t := 50·u kmax := floor 
 ∆t 
Per1 := 20·m Per2 := 40·m
kmax = 800
pulse(x, w) := φ(x) – φ(x – w) bpf(x, f, w, Ein) := Ein·pulse(x – f, w)
Ein1 := 25 Ein2 := –10
Eapp1(t) := bpf(t, 0.05·Per1, 0.95·Per1, Ein1)
Eapp2(t) := bpf(t, 0.4·Per1, 0.95·Per1, Ein2)
 Eapp1( t ) 
Eapp( t ) : =   0.95·Per1 := 19m 0.5·Per1 = 10m
 Eapp 2( t )
k := 2..kmax
Initialize:
 0
V11 :=  
 0
Switch time:
Sw := 0.25·kmax Sw = 200 Sw·∆t = 10m

V1k := if(k < Sw, Aoff·V1k–1·∆t + Boff·Eapp(k·∆t)·∆t + V1k–1,
Aon·V1k–1·∆t + Bon·Eapp(k·∆t)·∆t + V1k–1)
Vok := if(k < Sw, Doff·V1k + Eoff·Eapp(k·∆t), Don·V1k + Eon·Eapp(k·∆t))
30
25
Sw . ∆t
20 m
(Vok)1
15
(Vok)3 10
Eapp(k . ∆t)1 5
Eapp(k . ∆t)2 0
–5
–10
–15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
k . ∆t
m
V1
V3
Ein1
Ein2
SPICE Verification
N=2 Switched Circuit Transient Response
*File: n2tran.cir
V1 99 0 PWL(0,0 1m,0 1.001m,25 19.99m,25 20m,0)
V2 98 0 PWL(0,0 7.99m,0 8m,-10 17.99m,-10 18m,0)
R1 99 1 10K
R2 1 2 10K
R3 1 3 20K
R4 1 0 100K
*
C2 3 0 0.5u
C1 1 0 0.02u
*
* Build separate switch control
*
V3 97 0 PWL(0,0 9.99m,0 10m,+5 47.99m,+5 48m,0)
RL 97 0 10K
SQ1 2 98 97 0 SMOD
.MODEL SMOD VSWITCH(RON=0.5 ROFF=10MEG VON=+5 VOFF=0)
.TRAN 0.1m 40m 0 50u
.PRINT TRAN V(99) V(98) V(1) V(3)
.END
Tnom := READPRN(“c:\SPICEapps\datfiles\n2tran.txt”)
N := rows(Tnom) N = 401 k := 1..N
Spice verification
30
25
20
Tnomk,2
15
Tnomk,3 10
Volts
Tnomk,4 5
Tnomk,5 0
–5
–10
–15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Tnomk,1
m
Ein1 Time(ms)
Ein2
V1
V3
6.4 COMPARATOR 100-HZ OSCILLATOR
K := 103 u := 10–6 Meg := 106 m := 10–3

V := 1 Hz := 1
LM339 comparator circuit Redrawn explanatory circuit
Ein
Ein R5 R5
C1 Vn +5V
Vn R4 Vc R3 Vp R1
R4
11 Ein
– 1
2 C1
V– Q1 R2
Vc
V+ 1
2
+
3 4
R1 Vp R3
Ein
+5V Q1 internal
R2
R1 := 100·K R2 := 100·K R3 := 100·K R4 := 5.75·K

R5 := 3.3·K Q1on := 150 Qloff := 10·Meg C1 := 1.15·u
Switch Q1 is the open-collector (OC) transistor output of an LM339 comparator.

Vn is the inverting input, and Vp is the noninverting input to the LM339. Hence,
when Vn > Vp, Q1 will be ON (switch closed), and when Vn < Vp, Q1 will be OFF
(switch open).
When power is applied (Ein = +5 V DC), C1 will charge up to a voltage greater
than Vp, closing switch Q1, and then discharging C1 towards a voltage less than
Vp, which opens the switch, and the cycle repeats. Hence, the output of the LM339
will go high (Q1 OFF) and low (Q1 ON) at a rate determined by the circuit time
constants. With the given, component values the frequency of oscillation is about
100 Hz.
From the plot in the following text, the falling edges of Vc are about 10 ms
apart, for a period of 100 Hz.
Note that max Vce(sat) is given on the LM339 data sheet as 0.25 V. This is
simulated by setting the ON resistance of Q1 to 150 Ω.
U := 3 Y := (1 2 3)T CC := (1 0 C1)
LL := 0 EE := 0 GG := 0 Ein := (99 5)
Note: Vn = V1 = VC1 = minus input to LM339, Vc = V2 = Vcollector, Vp = V3

= plus input to LM339.
 99 3 R1 
 3 0 R2 
 
 3 2 R3 
RR := 
 2 0 Q1off 
 99 2 R5 
 
 2 1 R4 
with switch Q1 OFF

Save OFF arrays.
Repeat with switch Q1 ON. RR4,3 := Q1on

Save ON arrays.
 Per 
∆t := 0.05·m kmax = floor 
 ∆t 
Per := 50·m
kmax = 100
pulse(x) := φ(x) (φ(x) is Mathcad’s unit step function.)
bpf(x, f, Ein) := pulse(x – f)
Eapp(t) := bpf(t, 0.005·Per,1)
Program Comments
Vo := V11 ← 0 Initialize
Vn1 ← 0
Vc1 ← 0
Vp1 ← 0
for k ∈ 2..kmax Iterate from 2
if Vn k −1 > Vp k −1 to kmax
V1k ← Aon ⋅ V1k −1 ⋅ ∆t + Bon ⋅ Eapp ( k ⋅ ∆t ) ⋅ ∆t + V1k −1 Q1 to switch ON
Vn k ← Don1 ⋅ V1k + Eon1 ⋅ Eapp ( k ⋅ ∆t )
Vc k ← Don 2 ⋅ V1k + Eon 2 ⋅ Eapp ( k ⋅ ∆t )
Vp k ← Don 3 ⋅ V1k + Eon 3 ⋅ Eapp ( k ⋅ ∆t )
otherwise
V1k ← Aoff ⋅ V1k −1 ⋅ ∆t + Boff ⋅ Eapp ( k ⋅ ∆t ) ⋅ ∆t + V1k −1 Q1 to swittch OFF
Vn k ← Doff1 ⋅ V1k + Eoff1 ⋅ Eapp ( k ⋅ ∆t )
Vc k ← Doff2 ⋅ V1k + Eoff2 ⋅ Eapp ( k ⋅ ∆t )
Vp k ← Doff3 ⋅ V1k + Eoff3 ⋅ Eapp ( k ⋅ ∆t )
 Vn 
 
 Vc 
 
 Vp 
Oscillator waveforms
5
|(Vo1)k| 3
Volts
|(Vo2)k| 2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
k . ∆t
Vn m
Vc Time(ms)
Oscillator waveforms
5
|(Vo1)k| 3
Volts
|(Vo3)k| 2
00 10 20 30 40 50
k . ∆t
m
Vn
Time(ms)
Vp
6.5 TRANSIENT ANALYSIS OF PULSE TRANSFORMER

ns := 10–9 ps := 10–12 MHz := 106
For the schematic, see Section 2. 6.
Insert AC circuit analysis file:
→ Reference:C:\mcadckts\CaNL11\xformerrs5.mcd
Y := (1 3 5)T
Insert subprogram file:
Time constants of A:
1 1  2.5 
tau1 : = tau 2 : = tau   ps
max ( A ) min ( A )  2.5 
Specify time parameters:

Choose ∆t < tau, ∆t := 2·ps Tper := 200·ns Npp := 200
m := 1..Npp
 Tper 
kmax := floor 
 ∆t 
kmax = 100000
 kmax 
rto := floor  Npp = number of plotting points.
 Npp 
Create delayed input pulse using Mathcad’s unit step function φ(x):
pulse(x, w) := φ(x) – φ(x – w)
bpf(x, f, w) := pulse(x – f, w) Eapp(t) := bpf(t, 0.02·Ter, 0.5·Tper)
Vo : = V11 ← ( 0 0)
T
0 0 0 0
for k ∈ 2..kmax
V12 ← A ⋅ V11 ⋅ ∆t + B ⋅ Eapp ( k ⋅ ∆t ) ⋅ ∆t + V11
Vx1 ← D ⋅ V11 + E ⋅ Eapp ( k ⋅ ∆t )
V11 ← V12
k
tx ←
rto
vo tx ← Vx1 if tx = floor ( tx )
vo
Delayed input pulse

1.2
1
0.8
Eapp(m. ∆t ⋅rto) 0.6
Volts
0.4
0.2
0
−0.2
0 50 100 150 200
m. ∆t ⋅rto
n
Time(ns)
Output at node Y
15
10
(Vom)1
Volts
(Vom)2 5
(Vom)3
0
–5
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
m. ∆t⋅rto
ns
V1
V3 Time(ns)
V5
 1
Length(Vo) = 200 Npp = 200 Y :=  3
 
 5 
Note the distortion on V3 and V5. Because the bandwidth is approximately 10

MHz (see Section 2.6), the rise or fall times of the input pulse should be greater than
ln ( 3)
Tr := Tr = 34.97ns
π ⋅ 10 ⋅ MHz
The rise or fall time used here is 10 ps.

SPICE Verification
TRANSFORMER PULSE RESPONSE
* File: xformer_tran.cir
VEin 99 0 PWL(0,0 4ns,0 4.012ns,10 104.012ns,10
104.022ns,0)
* 10ps rise & fall time; 100ns PW
* 4.012ns - 4ns = 0.012ns = 12ps; 10% to 90% = 10ps
*
R1 99 1 10
R2 1 2 1.5
R3 3 0 20K
R4 3 4 1.5
R5 5 0 1K
R6 1 6 0.5
R7 3 7 1
*
C1 1 0 20pF
C2 6 5 5pF
C3 5 0 20pF
*
L1 2 3 1uH
L2 7 0 2mH
L3 4 5 1uH
*
.TRAN 1ns 200ns 0ns 2ps
.PRINT TRAN V(99) V(1) V(3) V(5)
.OPTIONS ITL5=0
.END
Tnom := READPRN(“c:\SPICEapps\datfiles\xformer_tran.txt”)
N := rows(Tnom) N = 201 k := 1..N
Spice verification
15
10
Tnomk,3
Volts
Tnomk,4 5
Tnomk,5
0
–5
0 50 100 150 200
Tnomk,1
ns
V1
Time(ns)
V3
V5
6.6 PASSIVE RCL CIRCUIT TRANSIENT ANALYSIS

The same circuit was used in Section 2.1 (Introduction).
L3
R1 C1 R2
V1 V2 V3
Ein
C2 L4
R4 R3
R1 := 10 R2 := 100 R3 := 50·K R4 := 10·K

C1 := 0.1·u C2 := C1 L3 := 2533.03·u L4 := 25.3303·u
 99 1 R1 
 1 2 R4 1 2 C1  1 2 L 3
RR :=   CC :=  LL := 
 2 3 R2 3 0 C2  3 0 L 4 
 3 R 3
 0
Ein := (99 1) EE := 0 GG := 0 U := 3 Y := (1 2 3)T
1 1
= 25.33 u = 0.1 u
max ( A ) min ( A )
Select ∆t as:
∆t := 0.02·u
Set period:
 Tper 
kmax := floor 
 ∆t 
Tper := 100·u kmax = 5000
Create delayed input pulse as before:
pulse(x, w) := φ(x) – φ(x – w)

bpf(x, f, w) := pulse(x – f, w) Eapp(t) := bpf(t, 0.05·Tper, 0.5·Tper)
Pulse width = Tper (0.5) = 50 u
Instead of looking at the output voltage nodes Y, we have the option of looking
at the capacitor voltages and inductor currents using the following seeded iteration
method. V1 is the voltage across C1, V2 on C2, I3 is the current in L3, and I4 in L4.
k := 2..kmax
Initialize:
 V11   0 
   
 V21   0 
  :=  
 I31   0 
   
 I4   0 
1
Iterate:
 V1k   V1k −1   V1k −1 

     
 V2 k   V2 k −1   V2 k −1 
  := A ⋅   ⋅ ∆t + B ⋅ Eapp ( k ⋅ ∆t ) ⋅ ∆t +  
 I3k   I3k −1   I3k −1 
     
 I4   I4   I4 
k k −1 k −1
Output plots:
Input pulse and transients on C1 & C2

1.2
0.8
V1k
0.4
Eapp(k . ∆t)
Volts
0
5 . V2k
–0.4
–0.8
0 20 40 60 80 100
k . ∆t
u
V1 Time(us)
Input pulse
5 x V2
V2 is scaled by 5
Transient currents thru L3 & L4

15
12.5
10
I3k
Current (mA)
7.5
m
5
I4k
2.5
m
0
–2.5
–5
0 20 40 60 80 100
k . ∆t
u
I3 Time(us)
I4
6.7 MATHCAD’S DIFFERENTIAL EQUATION SOLVERS

Consider passive RCL circuits (compare with the NDS method).
For schematic and component values, see Section 6.6.
→ Reference:C:\mcadckts\CaNL11\LCtran.mcd
Transient Analysis Using rkfixed or Rkadapt Functions

Only step functions can be used. Pulse, ramp, and triangular input waveshapes
require use of the NDS transient analysis method.
Set time period T as:
T := 100·u
Set maximum number of time points:
kmax := 200
Initialize x and form the {N 1}array D(t,x) from elements of the A and B arrays
obtained from comm42.mcd.
 0  A1,1x1 + A1,2 ⋅ x 2 + A1,3 ⋅ x 3 + A1,4 ⋅ x 4 + B1 

   
 0  A 2,1x1 + A 2,2 ⋅ x 2 + A 2,3 ⋅ x 3 + A 2,4 ⋅ x 4 + B2 
x :=   D ( t, x ) : =  
 0  A 3,1x1 + A 3,2 ⋅ x 2 + A 3,3 ⋅ x 3 + A 3,4 ⋅ x 4 + B3 
   
 0   A x + A ⋅ x + A ⋅ x + A ⋅ x + B 
4 ,1 1 4 ,2 2 4 ,3 3 4 ,4 4 4
Call rkfixed:
Z := rkfixed(x, 0, T, kmax, D)
“rkfixed” uses a constant internally calculated ∆t. The Mathcad ordinary differ-
ential equation (ODE) solver “Rkadapt” uses a variable ∆t that can be faster because
∆t is large for slowly-varying outputs and small for fast-varying outputs. It is called
in the same manner as “rkfixed.”
Z : = Rkadapt(x, 0, T, kmax, D) n := 1..kmax
(Note: To verify identical outputs with rkfixed and Rkadapt, right-click on Z

statement, and then click “Disable Evaluation.” A black square will appear denoting
disabled. Then compare with the following plots.)
C1 & C2 voltage waveforms

1.2
0.8
Zn,2 0.4
Volts
5 . Zn,3 0
−0.4
−0.8
0 20 40 60 80 100
Zn,1
Vc1 u
Vc2 Time(us)
L3 & L4 inductor current

15
12.5
10
Zn,4
Current (mA)
7.5
mA
5
Zn,5 2.5
mA 0
−2.5
−5
0 20 40 60 80 100
Zn,1
u
L3
Time(us)
L4
Stiff ODEs can be defined as a large disparity between absolute minimum and
maximum values of the elements of the A matrix, i.e., very slow and very fast time
constants in the circuit (the slow ones are “stiff”). This circuit is not stiff, but the
pulse transformer model given earlier is, and the function rkfixed did not provide
the correct output. For stiff circuits, use “Stiffb” as follows: initialize and form the
{N N+1} Jacobian array function J(t,x) using the elements from the A matrix:
 0 0 A1,1 A1,2 A1,3 A1,4 

   
 0 0 A 2,1 A 2 ,2 A 2,3 A 2,4 
x :=   J ( t, x ) : =  
 0 0 A 3,1 A 3,2 A 3,3 A 3,4 
   
 0   0 A 4 ,1 A 4 ,2 A 4 ,3 A 4 ,4 
Call the function:
Z := Stiffb(x, 0, T, kmax, D, J)
Same output:
Compare these step input waveforms with the plots in Section 6.6.
C1 & C2 voltage waveforms

1.2
0.8
Zn,2 0.4
Volts
5 . Zn,3 0
−0.4
−0.8
0 20 40 60 80 100
Zn,1
u
Time(us)
6.8 A MATHEMATICAL PULSE WIDTH MODULATOR

(PWM)
us := 10–6 KHz := 103
This PWM will be used as the switching function for the power supply presented
in Section 6.9.
User inputs:
Fsw := 50·KHz Nper := 4 (number of periods)

1
Du := 0.5 (duty cycle) Per := Per = 20us
Fsw
 Nper ⋅ Per 
∆t := 0.1·us kmax : = floor  + 0.5  kmax = 800
 ∆t 
 Du ⋅ kmax   (1 − Du ) ⋅ kmax 
K2 : = floor  + 0.5  K1 : = floor  + 0.5 
 Nper   Nper 
K1 = 100 K2 = 100 kper := K1 + K2 kper = 200
po : = c ← 1
p1 ← 1
for k ∈ 2..kmax
p k ← 1 if  k ≥ 1 + ( c − 1) ⋅ kper  ∧  k ≤ K 2 + ( c − 1) ⋅ kper 
p k ← 0.05 otherwise
c ← c + 1 if k ≥ c ⋅ kper
k := 1..kmax
PWM output
1
Switch on/off
pok 0.5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
k . ∆t
us
Time(us)
Du = 0.25
PWM output
1
Switch on/off
pok 0.5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
k ⋅ ∆t
us
Time(us)
Du = 0.5
6.9 SWITCHING POWER SUPPLY OUTPUT STAGE —

BUCK REGULATOR
This section analyses the turn-on (start-up) transient of a switched-mode power
supply.
us := 10–6 uF := 10–6 uH := 10–6 Meg := 106
ms := 10–3 mV := 10–3 KHz := 10 3
Sw1 represents the switch internal to the pulse width modulator (PWM). Sw2
represents the flywheel diode.
When Sw1 is ON, Sw2 will be OFF, and vice versa. This section utilizes the
Pulse Width Modulator (PWM) of Section 6.8.
Sw1
Ein 1 2 V1 R1 V2 L1 V3
1
− R2 R3
Sw2
+ V4
2
C1
R1 := 0.3 R2 := 0.085 R3 := 38 C1 := 47·uF

L1 := 20·uH U := 4 Y := 3
User inputs:
1
Fsw := 50·KHz Nper := 20 Per := Per = 20us
Fsw
Du := 0.5 (50% duty cycle)
∆t = 1·us kmax : = floor  + 0.5  kmax = 400 Ein := (99 1)
 ∆t 
 Du ⋅ kmax   (1 − Du ) ⋅ kmax 
K2 : = floor  + 0.5  K1 := floor  + 0
 Nper   Nper 
kper := K1 + K2
Switch ON/OFF resistances:
Q1on := 1 Q1off := 10·Meg Q2on := 1 Q2off := 10·Meg

 99 1 Q1on 
 1 0 Q 2 off 
 
RR :=  1 2 R1  CC := (4 0 C1) LL := (2 3 L1)
 3 4 R 2 

 3 0 R 3 
EE := 0 GG := 0
Aon := A B := B Don := D Eon := E
Change switch positions:
RR1,3 := Q1off RR2,3 := Q2on
Aoff := A Boff := B Doff := D Eoff := E Ein := 15

Vo : = c ← 1
 0
Vc1 ←  
 0
Vo1 ← 0
p1 ← 1
for k ∈ 2..kmax
p k ← 5 if  k ≥ kper ⋅ ( c − 1) + 1 ∧  k ≤ K 2 + ( c − 1) ⋅ kper 
p k ← 0 otherwise
if p k = 5
Vc k ← Aon ⋅ Vc k −1 ⋅ ∆t + Bon ⋅ Ein ⋅ ∆t + Vc k −1
Vo k ← Don ⋅ Vc k + Eon ⋅ Ein
if p k = 0
Vc k ← Aoff ⋅ Vc k −1 ⋅ ∆t + Boff ⋅ Ein ⋅ ∆t + Vc k −1
Vo k ← Doff ⋅ Vc k + Eoff ⋅ Ein
 Vo 
 
p 
Pulse height is set to 5 V, see on the following plot.
K := 1..kmax M1 := Ein·Du M1 = 7.5
Theoretical output = M1 = input times duty cycle.

10
M1
|(Vo1)k|
5
(Vo2)k
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
k . ∆t
us
M3 := 7.42 M2 := 7.08
Ripple amplitude M3 – M2 = 340 mV
7.5
M3
|(Vo1)k|
7.25
(Vo2)k
M2
7
300 320 340 360 380 400
k ⋅∆t
us
6.10 STATE SPACE AVERAGING

State Space Averaging was developed by Dr. R.D. Middlebrook of the California
Institute of Technology in the early 1980’s. The concept itself is not difficult, but in
those days the difficult part was the amount of algebra one had to resort to in
obtaining the state space arrays. (See Section 1.1.1., Introduction, and Section 2.2).
The NDS method now provides a painless method of obtaining the state space
arrays, A, B, D, & E, greatly simplifying the process of State Space Averaging, as
will be seen in this section.
uF := 10–6 uH := 10–6 Meg := 106 us := 10–6 ms := 10–3
mV := 10–3 V := 1 R1 := 0.3 R2 := 0.085 R3 := 38
C1 := 47·uF L1 := 430·uH U := 6 Y := 6
V99 Vs
V1 V2 R1 V4 L1 V6
1 2 + −
Ein1 Sw1 1
Sw2 R2 R3
2 V5
Ein2 V98
+ V3 C1
−
−
+
+ Vf
User inputs:
 99 15 
Du := 0.63 Ein := 
 98 1 
Q1on := 0.001 Q1off := 10·Meg Q2on := 0.001 Q2off := 10·Meg

 99 1 Q1on 
 2 3 Q 2 off 
 
RR :=  2 4 R1  CC := (5 0 C1) LL := (4 6 L1)
 6 5 R 2 

 6 0 R 3 
1 2 98 0 Vs
GG := 0 Vs := 0.1 Vf := 0.7 EE := 
3 0 0 98 Vf 
Vs is switch drop (e.g., Vcesat)
Vf is diode forward drop.
RR1,3 := Q1off RR2,3 := Q2on
Averaging the arrays with duty cycle Du:
A := Du·Aon + (1 – Du)·Aoff B := Du·Bon + (1 – Du)·Boff

D := Du·Don + (1 – Du)·Doff E := Du·Eon + (1 – Du)·Eoff
Multiplying the state space arrays by the duty cycle (Du) and (1 – Du) as above,
is the essence of the State Space Averaging concept.
DC Analysis
 9.06  vC1
X := –A–1·B X=  Vodc := D·X Vodc = 9.056V
 0.24  i L1
Theoretical no-loss output:
Vt := Ein1,2·Du Vt = 9.45V
AC Analysis
BF := 2 ND := 2 PD := 40 i := 1..ND·PD + 1
i −1
L i := BF + s := 2 ⋅ π ⋅ 10 L ⋅ −1 cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E
PD
Voi := db(cvi) M3 := db(Vodc)
DC & AC buck converter output y/u

40
30
M3
20
Voi
dBV
10
−10
−20
2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Li
Log freq(Hz)
Compare results with conventional state space methods [1] [2]:
 R2 1  −1 − R1  1 −1 0
Q := 
− ( R1 + R 3) 
W :=  S1 := 
 −R 3 1 0 1 −1 0 
 Ein1,2 
 C1 0
u : =  Vs  P :=  C := (W·P)–1 A1 := C·C

 Vf 
  0 L1
 15 
0 0 −1
B1 := C·S1·U u =  0.1 S2 := 
 
 0.7  0 0 −1
B2 := C·S2·u A2 := A1
Compare arrays from conventional and NDS methods:

As := Du·A1 + (1 – Du)·A2 Bs := Du·B1 + (1 – Du)·B2

 −558.66 21229.11  −558.66 21229.11
As =  A=
 −2320.39 −894.91   −2320.39 −897.23 
 1.04 × 10 −12   0 
Bs =   B=
 21227.91   21227.91
6.11 SIMPLE TRIANGULAR WAVEFORM GENERATOR

This section shows the implementation of a simple triangular wave generator that
can be used as an input for transient analysis of other circuits. This analysis uses
the PWM given in Section 6.8.
K := 103 uF := 10–6 us := 10–6 Meg := 106 ms := 10–3 Hz := 1
C1
V2
2 1 V1 R1 11
Ein1 2 − V−
V3
V+ 1
2 1
Ein2 3 + 4
R1 := 10·K C1 := 0.05·uF U := 3 Y := 3 CC := (2 3 C1)

GG := 0 EE := (3 0 0 2 106) LL := 0
Switch is a SPDT CMOS type.
1
Fsw := 500·Hz Du := 0.5 Nper := 5 Per := Per = 2ms
Fsw
∆t := 5·us kmax : = floor  + 0.5  kmax = 2000
 ∆t 
 99 1  Du ⋅ kmax 
Ein :=  K2 : = floor  + 0.5 
 98 −1  Nper 
 (1 − Du ) ⋅ kmax 
K1 := floor  + 0 kper := K1 + K2
 Nper 
Q1on := 50 Q1off := 10·Meg kmax·∆t = 10 ms Einampl := 5

 1 2 R1 
RR :=  99 1 Q1on 
 
 98 1 Q1off 
→ Reference:C:\mcadckts\CanL11\comm42.mcd
Aon := A Bon := B Don := D Eon := E Bon = (1990)
RR2,3 := Q1off RR3,3 := Q1on
Aoff := A Boff := B Doff := D Eoff := E Boff = (–1990)
Vo : = c ← 1
Vc1 ← 0
Vo1 ← 0
p1 ← 1
Hi ← 4.8
Lo ← 0.2
for k ∈ 2..kmaax
p k ← Hi if  k ≥ kper ⋅ ( c − 1) + 1 ∧  k ≤ K 2 + ( c − 1) ⋅ kper 
p k ← Lo otherwise
Vc k ← Aon ⋅ Vc k −1 ⋅ ∆t + Bon ⋅ Einampl ⋅ ∆t + Vc k −1 if p k = Hi
Vc k ← Aoff ⋅ Vc k −1 ⋅ ∆t + Boff ⋅ Einampl ⋅ ∆t + Vc k −1 if p k = Lo
 Vc 
 
p 
k := 1..kmax
(switch position shown for reference)
Output at node Y
10
|(Vo1)k|
Volts
5
(Vo2)k
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
.
k ∆t
ms
Time(ms)
6.12 QUADRATURE OSCILLATOR

This section shows how the NDS transient analysis method can be used to analyze
oscillators. Since there is no independent inputs in oscillator circuits, we must provide
non-zero initial voltage conditions on the capacitors. This is illustrated below.
Hz := 1 K := 103 nF := 10–9 us := 10–6 ms := 10–3
C1
R1
11
V1 2 −
V− V2
V+ 1
3 + 4
R2
V3 4
3
+
V+ 1
C2 V−
2 V4
−
11
R3 C3
V5
V4
100 ⋅ nF
R1 := 10·K R2 := R1 R3 := R1 C1 := C2 := C1
2⋅π
4 1 R1  1 2 C1 
C3 := C1 U := 5 Y := 4 RR :=  2 3 R 2 CC :=  3 0 C2 
   
 0 5 R 3  4 5 C 3
Ao := 106 GG := 0 LL := 0 Ein := (99 0) Ein is a dummy variable here.
2 0 0 1 Ao 
EE := 
4 0 3 5 Ao 
 0
 
B =  0 D = (0 1 1) E = (0)
 
 0 
Because there is no independent input, B is a null array.
1 1  159.16 
tau1 : = tau 2 : = tau =   us ∆t := 5·us
max ( A ) min ( A )  159.15 
 V11   1
   
 V21  : =  1 Initial capacitor voltages = 1 V. kmax := 500
   
 V3   1
1
 V1k   V1k −1   V1k −1 

     
k := 2..kmax  V2 k  : = A ⋅  V2 k −1  ⋅ ∆t + B ⋅ ∆t +  V2 k −1 
     
 V3   V3   V3 
k k −1 k −1
 V1k 
 
Vo k := D ⋅  V2 k  Per := kmax·∆t Per = 2.5 ms
 
 V3 
k
Capacitor voltages
4
2
V1k
Volts
V2k 0
V3k
−2
−4
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
k ⋅ ∆t
us
V1 Time(us)
V2
V3
All values are initialized at 1 V as before.
M1 := 690 M2 := 1690 F := M2 – M1 F = 1000Hz
Output at node Y
5
M1 M2
Vok
Volts
−5
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
k⋅ ∆t
us
Time(us)
Verification of A matrix using algebraic method
 1 1 
0
 R1 R1    C1  
1 0 0  
−1 −1  
W :=  0 1 0 Q :=  0  P := diag   C2  
   R2 R2   
 0 1 
0  1    C 3 
 0 0 
 R3 
As := (W·P)–1·Q
 0 6283.185 6283.185 

As = −6283.185 −6283.185 0 
 
 0 6283.185 0 
 −0.006 6283.179 6283.179 

A =  −6283.179 −6283.185 0 
 
 0 6283.179 −0.006 
 −0 + 1000 i
eigenvals ( A )
Le := Le =  −0 − 1000 i |Le1| = 1000
2⋅π  
 −1000 
Eigenvalues indicate the frequency of oscillation (triple pole at 1000 Hz).
6.13 WEIN BRIDGE OSCILLATOR

This section shows one more example of oscillator transient analysis using the NDS
method.
K := 103 nF := 10–9 KHz := 103 us := 10–6
R5 R6
V1
11
2 − V−
V4
1
+ V+
3 4
V2 V3
C3 R1
C4 R2
R5 := 10·K R6 := 20·K ms := 10–3 fo := 10·KHz C3 := 10·nF

1
C4 := 10·nF R1 := R2 := R1 LL := 00 GG := 0
2 ⋅ π ⋅ fo ⋅ C 3
1 0 R 5
4 1 R 6
EE := (4 0 2 1 106) RR :=  
4 3 R1 
2 R 2 
 0
 3 2 C 3
CC :=  U := 4 Y := 4
 2 0 C 4 
(Ein is a dummy variable) Ein := (99 0)
 −62831.9 125663.1  0
A= B=  D = (0 3) E = (0)
 −62831.9 62831.3   0
No independent input, B = 0.
Per
∆t := 0.01·us Per := 500·us kmax := kmax = 50000
∆t
k := 2..kmax
There is no independent input; hence, an initial condition voltage to start the

oscillation must be given to one or both capacitors.
V11 := (1 1)T V1k := A·V1k–1·∆t + V1k–1

1
Vok := D·V1k = 100 us
10 ⋅ KHz
Output at node Y
4
3
2
1
Volts
Vok 0
−1
−2
−3
−4
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
k⋅ ∆t
us
Time(us)
Verification of A matrix (assumes ideal opamp):
 1 
−1 
0   C3  
 1 R2 
W :=  Q :=   P := diag    
 R1 0   −1 R6    C 4  
 R5 
As := (W·P)–1·Q
 −62831.9 125663.7   −62831.9 125663.1
As =  A=
 −62831.9 62831.9   −62831.9 62831.3 
The oscillation frequency is the geometric mean of the two eigenvalues:
 −0.283 + 62831.853i Le1 ⋅ Le 2

Le := eigevals(A) Le =   fo :=
 −0.283 − 62831.853i 2⋅π
fl = 10KHz
REFERENCES
1. R.D. Middlebrook, et al., Using Small Computers to Model and Measure Magnitude
and Phase of Regulator Transfer Functions and Loop Gain, Advances in Switched-
Mode Power Conversion, Vols I & II, TESLACo, 1983.
2. R. Boyd, State Space Averaging with a Pocket Calculator, Proceedings of High
Frequency Power Conversion Conference, Santa Clara, CA, 1990, p. 283.
7 DC Circuit Analysis
DC analysis has been demonstrated in the introductory RCL circuit (see Section
2.1). What follows are DC analyses that will further illustrate how to use the NDS
method.
7.1 RESISTANCE TEMPERATURE DETECTOR (RTD)

CIRCUIT
R8 V6 R9 V7 Eref
Eref
11 R2
R1
2 − V− R3
V1 R4
V+ 1
3 + 4
V3 11
V5
RT 2 − V−
V2 R5 V4 V+ 1
3 + 4
R6 R7
Eref
R1 := 4.53 R2 := 34.8 R3 := 132 R4 := 9.09 R5 := 9.09 R6 := 4.53

R7 := 27.4 R8 := 20 R9 := 20 RT := 1.915
Eref := 5
Values in kohms:
Opamp open loop gain:
Ao := 106
RTD value (RT) varies from 1 K (Vo is approximately –5 V at 0°C) to 2 K (Vo

is approximately +5 V at +260°C).
151
 7 1 R1 
 99 3 R2
 
 3 5 R 3
 1 3 R 4 

 2 4 R5 7 0 0 6 Ao 
RR :=   EE := 
 99 2 R6 5 0 4 3 Ao 
 4 0 R 7
 
 99 6 R8
 6 7 R9
 
 1 2 RT
U := 7 Y := 5 GG := 0 Ein := (99 Eref)
Note: For DC analysis, CC and LL component arrays are not required. Hence,
only six inputs, RR, EE, U, Y, GG, and Ein, are now required for the subprogram
dccomm42.mcd. Get A1 and B2 DC arrays, and solve for node voltages Vn.
Vn :=1solve(A1, B2)
V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7
(
Vn T = −0.535 1.07 0.803 0.803 4.326 5 × 10 −6 −5 )
Vo := VnY Vo = 4.326 Y=5
Note that nodes V3 (Vn3) and V4 (Vn4) are equal owing to the opamp, and that
node V6 is approximately zero as expected.
7.2 AN UNDERGRADUATE EE TEXTBOOK PROBLEM

Unit suffixes: V := 1 Amps := 1
All four types of controlled sources: VCVS, CCVS, CCCS, VCCS.
R7 EE1 V2 V3 EE2 V4 R3 V5 R2 V6
+ − + −
Ein R4
V1
R5 + GG1 + GG2 R1
− −
R6
R1 := 2 R2 := 2 R3 := 4 R4 := 3 R5 := 6 R6 := 2
R7 := 1 Ein := (99 24.5)
DC Circuit Analysis 153
The controlled source equations are as follows:
V6
EE1 = (VCVS) EE2 = 8.la (CCVS) Ia = GG1 := 6.la (CCCS)
R1
GG2 = 2·V6 (VCCS)
7.2.1 MATRIX SOLUTION TO DEMONSTRATE THE UTILITY OF THE

NDS METHOD
Igg1 is the current of GG1, Igg2 is GG2 current.
Note column headers for A.
V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 Igg1 Igg 2
 1 +
1
+
1 1
−
 1 +
1  0 0 0 0 0

 R5 R6 R7 R4  R4 R5  
 
 −1 −1 −1
0
1 1 1
+ 0 1
 R5 R4 R4 R5 R3 R3 
 1 −1 −1

 0 0 0 0 −1
 R3 R3 R1 
 1  1 + 1  
A :=  0 0 0 0 − 0 0
 R2  R1 R2  
 −8 
 0 0 1 −1 0 0 0
 R1 
 1 −1 0 0 0 −3 9 0
 
−6
 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
 R1 
 0 0 0 0 0 −2 0 1 
 Ein1,2 
 R7 
 
 0 
 0 
 
B :=  0  Vn := 1solve(A, B)
 0 
 
 0 
 0 
 
 0 
Vn T = (14.50 13.00 8.00 6.00 1.00 0.50 1.50 1.00 )

Using the NDS method:
1 2 6 0 3  6 
3 0 6 0
EE :=  8  GG :=  R1 
3 4 6 0   
 R1  5 0 6 0 2 
 6 0 R1 
 5 6 R2
 
 4 5 R 3
 R 4 
RR :=  2 3 U := 6
 1 3 R5
 
 1 0 R6
 99 1 R 7 
Vdc := 1solve(A1, B2)
VDC T = (14.5 13.0 8.0 6.0 1.0 0.5 1.5 1.0 )

Igg1 := Vdc7 Igg2 := Vdc8 Igg1 = 1.5 Amps Igg2 = 1 Amps
7.3 DC TEST CIRCUIT

This section exercised the NDS method using a DC circuit with multiple inputs and
four VCVS’s and three VCCS’s embedded in a resistive network. The solutions are
then compared to a SPICE simulation.
K := 103 mA := 10–3
R12 V10 R15 V11 V5 R5 V4 R6
− +
Ein4 (96) EE4 Ein3 (97)
+ R17
GG3
−
V14 R13
R16 R14
V13 + V12
GG1
−
R1 V1 V2 R2 V3 R3 V9 R4
− +
Ein1 (99) Ein2 (98)
EE3 +
R9 R7 GG2
−
V6 V7
+
EE2 R11
−
V8
+
EE1
−
R1 := 1·K R2 := R1 R3 := R1 R4 := R1 R5 := R1 R6 := R1
R7 := R1 R9 := R1 R11 := R1 R12 := R1 R13 := R1 R14 := R1
 99 5
 98 −3
R15 := R1 R16 := R1 U := 14 R17 := R1 EIN :=  
 97 8
 96 13 

 99 1 R1 
 2 3 R2 
 
 3 9 R3 
 9 98 R 4 

 5 4 R5 
 
 4 97 R6 
 3 8 0 4 0 10 
0 R7  6
  0 3 4 2
RR :=  2 6 R9  EE :=  
 7 2 1 12 4 4
R111 5 −2 
8
   11 4 0
 96 10 R12 
 
 4 12 R13
 12 0 R14 
 
 10 11 R15 
 13 0 R16 
 
 5 14 R17 
 14 3 12 0 0.02 
GG : =  7 9 3 0 0.04 
 
 13 10 96 0 0.01
Vn := 1solve(A1,B2)
p := 1..U Vndsp := Vnp
See SPICE listing in the following section.

NDS SPICE
 2.8613   2.8613 
 −9.2842   −92842 
   
 −2.8539   −28539 
 6.0727   6.0727 
   
 7.1818   7.1818 
   
 −17.8532   −17.8530  Vnds
 174.8829   174.8800  pce := −1
Vnds p =   Vsp : =   Vsp
 60.7273   60.7270 
 −60.0048   −60.0050 
   
 81.1636   81.1640 
   
 19.3273   19.3270 
 3.0364   3.0364 
   
 −130.0000   −130.0000 
 −53.5455   −53.5450 
Percent error
 −0.001
 −0 
 
 −0 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 0.001 
 0.002 
pce =  
 0 
 −0 
 
 −0 
 
 0.001 
 −0.001
 
 0 
 0.001 
The last three entries (not shown) in Vn are the currents through GG1, GG2,
and GG3, respectively.
Igg1 := Vn15 Igg1 = 60.73 mA

Igg2 := Vn16 Igg2 = –114.16 mA
Igg3 := Vn17 Igg3 = 130 mA
SPICE Comparison
Testdc4a
VEin1 99 0 DC 5
VEin2 98 0 DC -3
VEin3 97 0 DC 8
VEin4 96 0 DC 13
R1 99 1 1K
R2 2 3 1K
R3 3 9 1K
R4 9 98 1K
R5 5 4 1K
R6 4 97 1K
R7 3 0 1K
R9 2 6 1K
R11 7 8 1K
R12 96 10 1K
R13 4 12 1K
R14 12 0 1K
R15 10 11 1K
R16 13 0 1K
R17 5 14 1K
*
EE1 8 0 4 0 10
EE2 6 0 3 4 2
EE3 2 1 12 4 4
EE4 5 11 4 0 -2
*
GG1 14 3 12 0 0.02
GG2 7 9 3 0 0.04
GG3 13 10 96 0 0.01
*

.END
**** SMALL SIGNAL BIAS SOLUTION TEMPERATURE =
27.000 DEG C
NODE VOLTAGE NODE VOLTAGE NODE VOLTAGE NODE VOLTAGE

(1) 2.8613 (2) -9.2842 (3) -2.8539 (4) 6.0727
(5) 7.1818 (6) -17.8530 (7) 174.8800 (8) 60.7270
(9) -60.0050 (10) 81.1640 (11) 19.3270 (12) 3.0364
(13) -130.0000 (14) -53.5450 (96) 13.0000 (97) 8.0000
(98) -3.0000 (99) 5.0000
VOLTAGE SOURCE CURRENTS

NAME CURRENT
VEin1 -2.139E-03
VEin2 -5.700E-02
VEin3 -1.927E-03
VEin4 6.816E-02
7.4 STACKING VCVS’s AND PARALLELING VCCS’s

This DC circuit shows that VCCS’s can be paralleled and VCVS’s can be connected
in series (stacked).
K := 103 mA := 10–3
R1 V1 R2 V2 R3
Ein1 GG2 GG1 Ein2

+ +
R4 R5
− −
V3
+
EE1
−
V4
+
EE2
−
R1 := 1·K R2 := R1 R3 := R1 R4 := R1 R5 := R1 U := 4
 99 1 R1 
 1 2 R2
 
RR :=  2 98 R 3
 1 0 R 4 

 2 3 R 5 
1 0 2 0 0.1 3 4 2 0 2  99 2
GG :  EE : =  Ein : 
1 0 3 0 0.2  4 0 1 0 3  98 −3
 0.5768 
 
 −06930 
 
 0.3444 
Vn := A1–1·B2 Vn =  
 1.7303 
 
 −0.0693
 
 0.0689 
Igg1 is the current in GG1, and Igg2, the current in GG2.
 −69.30 
Igg1 := Vn5 Igg2 := Vn6 Igg =  mA
 68.87 
7.5 DC VOLTAGE SWEEP (RTD CIRCUIT)

For the schematic and component values, see Section 7.1. (Get circuit data from
Section 7.1.)
→ Reference:C:\mcadckts\CaNL11\dctrd.mcd
Ein := (99 1)
Reset Ein to 1 V for new inputs u:
Sweep the DC input (always initialized at 1 V as mentioned earlier) from 4.8

V to 5.2 V in 0.1V increments:
u : = for j ∈1..5
j
u1, j ← 4.7 +
10
u
Vn := A1–1·B2·u k := 1..cols(u)
Display node Y:
Y=5
Input
 4.8 
 
 4.9 
 
u T =  5.0 
 
 5.1 
 
 5.2 
Output
 4.153 
 
 4.239 
 
Vn Y,k =  4.326 
 
 4.412 
 
 4.499 
Nominal value of u is 5.0 V
Display for all U nodes:
u = (4.8 4.9 5.0 5.1 5.2)
 −0.514 −0.525 −0.535 −0.546 −0.557 

 1.027 1.048 1.07 1.091 1.113 
 
 0.771 0.787 0.803 0.819 0.835 
 0.835 
Vn =  0.771 0.787 0.803 0.819
 4.153 4.239 4.326 4.412 4.499 
 −6 
 4.9 × 10 4.9 × 10 −6 5 × 10 −6 5.1 × 10 −6 5.2 × 10 −66 
 −4.8 −4.9 −5 −5.1 −5.2 
7.6 RTD CIRCUIT — STEP RESISTOR VALUE
R8 V6 R9 V7 Eref
Eref
11 R2
R1
2 − V− R3
V1 R4
V+ 1
3 + 4
V3 11
V5
RT 2 − V−
V2 R5 V4 V+ 1
3 + 4
R6 R7
Eref
R1 := 4.53 R2 := 34.8 R3 := 132 R4 := 9.09 R5 := 27.4

R6 := 4.53 R7 := 27.4 R8 := 20 R9 := 20 RT := 1.915
Values in kohms:
RTD value (RT) varies from 1 K (Vo is approximately –5 V at 0°C) to 2 K (Vo is
approximately +5 V at +260°C).
 7 1 R1 
 99 3 R2
 
 3 5 R 3
 1 3 R 4 

 2 4 R5 7 0 0 6 Ao 
RR :=   Ao := 106 EE := 
 99 2 R6 5 0 4 3 Ao 
 4 0 R 7
 
 99 6 R8
 6 7 R9
 
 1 2 RT
U := 7 Y := 5 GG := 0 Ein := (99 5)
Get A1 and B2 DC arrays, and solve for node voltages Vn.
vn := 1solve(A1, B2) Vo := VnY Vo = 4.326
Now, sweep RT value from 1 K to 2 K in 0.1 K increments.
RT := (1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2)T
Ndc := rows(RT) k := 1..Ndc
Vn ( U, EE, GG, RR, Ein ) : = for k ∈1..Ndc
RR10,3 ← RTk
AE ← G ( U, EE, GG, RR, Ein )
A1 ← AE1
B2 ← AE 2
vn k ← lsolve ( A1, B2 )
v5 k ← ( vn k )5
vr
The line RR10,3 ← RTk loads new values of RT into the RR array.
For the line AE ← G(U, EE, GG, RR, Ein); the G function is from the
dccomm42.mcd subprogram.
Plot:
V5 := Vn(U, EE, GG, RR, Ein)
Check linearity with straight line equation:
yk := 10(RTk – 1) – 5
Linearity delta
RTD Ckt linearity
5 0.3
3.75 0.2
2.5
0.1
V5k
Volts DC
1.25
Volts DC
yk − V5k
yk 0 0
−1.25 −0.1
−2.5
−0.2
−3.75
−5 −0.3
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
RTk RT (K Ohms) RTk RT (K Ohms)
The maximum linearity temperature error is
 260 ⋅ deg C 
maxerr : = 0.3 ⋅ V ⋅ 
 10 ⋅ V 
maxerr = 7.8 degC
We can step two resistor values simultaneously as shown here:

Step R4 and R5 from 8K to 10K in 0.2 K increments:
Ra := (8 8.2 8.4 8.6 8.8 9 9.2 9.4 9.6 9.8 10)T
Ndc := rows(Ra) k := 1..Ndc (Ra in kohms)
Vn ( U, EE, GG, RR, Ein ) : = for k ∈1..Ndc
RR 4 ,3 ← Ra k
RR 5,,3 ← Ra k
AE ← G ( U, EE, GG, RR, Ein )
A1 ← AE1
B2 ← AE 2
v5 k ← ( vn k )5
v5
Plot:
V5 := Vn(U, EE, GG, RR, Ein)
Marker for nominal values:
M1 := 9.09 M2 := 4.326
V5 vs. R4 & R5
8
M1
6
Volts DC
V5k
M2
4
2
8 8.5 9 9.5 10
Rak R4, R5 (K Ohms)
7.7 FLOATING 5-V INPUT SOURCE
K :=103
At times it may be desired to have an input voltage source floating. The restriction
of all Ein inputs being single-ended can be overcome as shown.
V6 R1 V1 R4 V2 R5
+ EE1 11 V5
− R2 2 − V−
V7 R3 R6 V4 V+ 1
V3 3 + 4
V99
R7
+
−
Ein
R1 := 1·K R2 := 20 R3 := 1·K R4 := 20·K R5 := 200·K

R6 := 20·K R7 := 200·K Ao := 106 U := 7 Y := 5
6 1 R1 
1 3 R2
 
7 3 R 3
 R 4 
RR :=  1 2 GG := 0 Ein := (99 1)
2 5 R5
 
3 4 R6
 4 0 R 7 
6 7 99 0 5 
EE := 
5 0 4 2 Ao 
V := 1solve(A1, B2)
VT = (–0.223 –0.247 –0.272 –0.247 –0.495 2.253 –2.747)
Input voltage:
V6 – V7 = 5 Vo := VY Vo = –0.495
Matrix solution:
 1 1 1 −1  1 1  
 R1 + R 3 + R 2 + R 4 R4
− +
 R 2 R1 + R 3 
0 0 
 
 −1 1 1 −1 
+ 0 0
 R4 R4 R5 R5 
 
Am :=   1  −1
0 
1 1 1 1
− + + +
  R 2 R1 + R 3 
0
R1 + R 3 R2 R6 R6 
 
 −1
0 
1 1
0 0 +
 R6 R6 R 7 
 − Ao 1 
 0 Ao 0
 5 
 R1 + R 3 
 
 0 
Bm :=  −5 
 
 R1 + R 3 
 0 
 0 

 −0.223 
 
 −0.247 
 
Vm := 1solve(Am, Bm) Vm =  −0.272  Vo := Vm5 Vo = –0.495
 
 −0.247 
 
 −0.495 
8 Three-Phase Circuits
8.1 CONVERT ∆ FLOATING VOLTAGE INPUTS TO
SINGLE-ENDED Y INPUTS
Circuits with single-ended inputs are easier to solve than those with floating inputs.
Setup:
pr(E, θ) := E·(cos(θ) + i·sin(θ))
180
(convert polar to rectangular) rd := (convert radians to degrees)
π
mp(x) := (|x| rd·arg(x)) (get magnitude and phase)
Line-to-line voltages are (in polar form):
A – B = 115<0
B – C = 115<–120
C – A = 115<120
(counterclockwise phase rotation ABC)

Convert from polar form to rectangular form:
EAB := pr(115, 0) EBC := pr(115, –120·deg) ECA := pr(115, 120·deg)

EAB := 115 EBC := –57.5 – 99.59i ECA := –57.5 + 99.59i
Find an equivalent phasor pair, i.e., line-to-neutral equivalent to line-to-line:
−1  E AB 
1 0
 
Am :=  0 1 0 Bm :=  E BC  Cm := 1solve(Am, Bm)
   
 −1 1 
0  E 
CA
 57.5 – 99.59 i 
Cm =  −57.5 – 99.59 i
 
 −0 
EA := Cm1 EB := Cm2 EC := Cm3
mp(EA) = (115 – 60) mp(EB) = (115 – 120)
|EA – EB| = 115 arg(EA – EB) = 0deg Hence equal to |EAB| = 115
arg(EAB) = 0deg A
|EB – EC| = 115 arg(EB – EC) = –120deg Hence equal to |EBC| = 115
arg(EBC) = –120deg B
167
|EC – EA| = 115 arg(EC – EA) = 120deg Hence equal to |ECA| = 115
arg(ECA) = 120deg C
and, thus, equivalent as seen by the load.

Subsequent circuit examples will verify this.
A second equivalent phasor pair is obtained from:
 E AB 
1 0 0
 
Am :=  0 1 −1 Bm :=  E BC  Cm := 1solve(Am, Bm)
   
 −1 1 
0  E 
CA
 115 
Cm : −5.68 × 10 −14 

 
 57.5 + 99.59 i 
mp(EA) = (115 0) mp(EC) = (115 60)
arg(EAB) = 0deg A
arg(ECA) = 120deg C
A third equivalent phasor pair is:
−1  E AB 
1 0
 
Am :=  0 1 −1 Bm :=  E BC  Cm := 1solve(Am, Bm)
   
 0 1 
0  E 
CA
 −0 
Cm : =  −115 
 
 −57.5 + 99.593i
mp(EB) = (115 180) mp(EC) = (115 120)
arg(EAB) = 0deg A
arg(ECA) = 120deg C
Three-Phase Circuits 169
Phasor pair A & B

90
120 150 60
150 100
30
50
180 0 0
210 330
240 300
270
A
B
Phasor pair A & C

90
120 150 60
150 100 30
50
180 0 0
210 330
240 300
270
A
C
Phasor pair B & C

90
120 150 60
150 100 30
50
180 0 0
210 330
240 300
270
B
C
8.2 THREE-PHASE NDS SOLUTION

8.2.1 UNBALANCED DELTA LOAD — SINGLE-ENDED INPUTS ON A
AND B
R5
EinA
+
4
−
R1 R2
1 3
C1 C2
R6 5 L2 2 R3 6
C
R4
+
EinB
−
R1 := 12 R2 := 10 R3 := 15 R4 := 0.01 R5 := 0.01 R6 := 0.01
R4 to R6 are line impedances.
1 20
F := 60 ω := 2·π·F s := ω ⋅ −1 C1 := L2 :=
12 ⋅ ω ω
 4 1 R1 
 4 3 R2
 
180  6 2 R 3 1 5 C1 
RR := 
R 5 
rd := CC :=  U := 6
π  99 4 3 6 C2 
 98 6 R4
 
 5 0 R6
 99 1
Y := (1 2 3 4 5 6)T Ein :=  LL := (2 0 L2)
 98 1
EE := 0 GG := 0
→ Reference:C:\mcadckts\CaNL11\comm42m.mcd
For three-phase circuits, comm42m.mcd must be used.

 rows( A) cols( A)  3 3 N N

 rows(B) cols(B)   3 2 N M
  =  Format :  
 rows(D) cols(D)  6 3 K N
 rows(E ) cols(E )   6 2  K M 
 

Complex input at A and B:
 3 ⋅i 
 0.5 − 2   −60  A
u : = 208 ⋅   rd ⋅ arg ( u ) = 
 3 ⋅ i  −120  B
 −0.5 − 
2 
cv := D·(s·I – A)–1·B·u + E·u
Get magnitude (V) and phase (deg) when Y is a scalar (one output) or a column
vector (multiple outputs):
mp : = if rows( Y) = 0
vo ← cv
ph ← rd ⋅ arg ( cv)
for k ∈1..rows( Y) otherwise
vo k ← cvk
ph k ← rd ⋅ arg ( cvk )
(Y vo ph )
 1   146.9   −105  
   166.3   −83.1  
 2     
  3  207.8   −119.9  
mp =    207.8   −60.1  
 4     
 5   0.1   −15.1  
     
 6   207.8   −119.9  
magφ(x) := (|x| rd·arg(x)) (convert rectangular to polar form).

The textbook given as Reference 1 answers using floating delta inputs:

cv4 − cv6
Iab := magφ(Iab) := (20.74 0.01) Text answer: 20.8A/_0 deg.
1
R2 +
ω ⋅ C2 ⋅ i
cv6 − cv5
Ibc := magφ(Ibc) := (8.32 – 173.09) Text answer: 8.32A/_–173.13 deg.
R 3 + ω ⋅ L2 ⋅ i
− cv4
Ica := magφ(Ica) := (12.25 164.93) Text answer: 12.26A/_165 deg.
1
R1 +
ω ⋅ C1 ⋅ i
8.2.2 UNBALANCED DELTA LOAD — SINGLE-ENDED INPUTS ON A AND C
R5
EinA
+
4
−
R1 R2
1 3
C1 C2
EinC R6 5 L2 2 R3 6
+
B R4
−
R1 := 12 R2 := 10 R3 := 15 R4 := 0.01 R5 := 0.01 R6 := 0.01
R4 to R6 are line impedances
180 1
rd := F := 60 ω := 2·π·F s := ω ⋅ −1 C1 :=
π 12 ⋅ ω
20  99 1
C2 := 1000 L2 := U := 6 Ein := 
ω  98 1
EE := 0 LL := (2 5 L2) GG := 0
 4 1 R1 
 4 3 R2 
 
 6 2 R3  1 5 C1 
RR :=   CC := 
 6 0 R4   3 6 C2 
 99 4 R 54 
 
 98 5 R6 
Y := (1 2 3 4 5 6)T (column vector)
For polyphase circuits, comm42m.mcd must be used.

Subprogram comm42.mcd will not work.
 rows( A) cols( A)  3 3 N N

 rows(B) cols(B)   3 2 N M
  =  Format :  
 rows(D) cols(D)  6 3 K N
 rows(E ) cols(E )   6 2  K M 
 

Complex input at A and C:
 1 
 0 A
u : = 208 ⋅  3 ⋅ i
 rd ⋅ arg ( u ) =  
 0.5 +   60  C
 2 
cv := D·(s·I – A)–1·B·u + E·u
Get magnitude (V) and phase (deg) when Y is a scalar or a column vector:
vo ← cv
vo k ← cvk
(Y vo ph )
 1   76.1   30.2  
   125   6.9  
 2     
  3  0.3   2 
mp =    207.7   0 
 4     
 5   208   60  
     
 6   0.3   2  
magφ(x) := (|x| rd·arg(x)) (Convert rectangular to polar form.)

The textbook given as Reference 1 answers using floating delta inputs:

cv4
Iab := magφ(Iab) := (20.77 0.01) Text answer: 20.8A/_0 deg.
1
R2 +
ω ⋅ C2 ⋅ i
− cv5
Ibc := magφ(Ibc) := (8.32 – 173.14) Text answer: 8.32A/_–173.13 deg.
R 3 + ω ⋅ L2 ⋅ i
cv5 − cv4
Ica := magφ(Ica) := (12.25 164.93) Text answer: 12.26A/_165 deg.
1
R1 +
ω ⋅ C1 ⋅ i
8.3 THREE-PHASE Y — UNBALANCED LOAD

Single-ended two-phase Y input at A and B.
R5
EinA V1
+
R1
−
V2
C1
R3 V4
R2 V3
EinC = 0 L1
EinB V5
+ R4
−
F := 1000 ω := 2·π·F s := ω·i R1 := 12 R2 := 20 R3 := 3

4 1
R4 := 0.01 R5 := 0.01 L1 := C1 := U := 5
ω ω ⋅ 16
180 1
Y := (1 2 3 4 5)T rd := dr :=
π rd
 99 1 R5
 1 2 R1 
 
RR :=  3 0 R2 CC := (2 3 C1) LL := (4 5 L1)
 4 3 R 3

 98 5 R 4 
 99 1
EE := 0 GG := 0 Ein := 
 98 1
pr(E,θ) := E·(cos(θ·dr) + i·sin(θ·dr)) (polar to rectangular conversion)

magφ(x) := (|x| rd·arg(x)) (rectangular to polar conversion)
 1 − 1.73205 ⋅ i 
u : = 100 ⋅  magφ(u1) = (200 –60)
 −1 − 1.73205 ⋅ i
magφ(u2) = (200 –120)
 rows( A) cols( A)  2 2 N N

 rows(B) cols(B)   2 2 N M
  =  Format :  
 rows(D) cols(D)  5 2 K N
 rows(E ) cols(E )   5 2  K M 
 
cv := D·(s·I – A)–1·B·u + E·u
vo ← cv
vo k ← cvk
(Y vo ph )
Node Magnitude Phase
 1   200   −60  
   236.9   −92.8  
 2     
mp =  3  130.1   −137.6  
   181.1   −139.9  
 4     
 5   199.8   −120  
 
cv1 − cv2
Im 1 : = magφ(Im1) = (10.696 29.55)
R1
cv3
Im 2 : = magφ(Im2) = (6.506 –137.64)
R2
cv4 − cv3
Im 3 : = magφ(Im3) = (17.102 –145.611)
R3
See SPICE comparison in the following text.
* SPICE Verification
* Convert to single-ended Y input on A & B; C = 0
* Same load as 3phasewye2 with floating delta input
*
VEinA 99 0 AC 200V –60
VEinB 98 0 AC 200V –120
*
R1 1 2 12
R2 3 0 20
R3 4 3 3
R4 98 5 0.01
R5 99 1 0.01
*
C1 2 3 9.947UF
L1 5 4 0.637MH
*
.AC LIN 1 1KH 1KH
.PRINT AC IM(R1) IP(R1)
.END
**** AC ANALYSIS TEMPERATURE = 27.000 DEG C
FREQ IM(R1) IP(R1)

1.000E+03 1.070E+01 2.954E+01
FREQ IM(R2) IP(R2)
1.000E+03 6.506E+00 –1.377E+02
FREQ IM(R3) IP(R3)
1.000E+03 1.710E+01 -1.456E+02
8.4 THREE-PHASE Y-CONNECTED UNBALANCED

LOAD — FLOATING DELTA INPUT
Same load as in Section 8.3.
V1
R5
R6 R1
V8 V9 V2
−
EinCA
+ C1
+ +
+ V4
− EinAB
R2
V7 R4 R3
V5 V3
R7
−
+
EinBC L1
+
V6
F := 1000 ω := 2·π·F s := ω·i R1 := 12 R2 := 20 R3 := 3

4
R4 := 0.01 R5 := 0.01 R6 := 0.01 R7 := 0.01 L1 :=
ω
1
C1 := U := 9 Y := (1 2 3 4 5)T
16 ⋅ ω
CC := (2 0 C1) LL := (3 6 L1)
Note generator polarities.
180 1
rd := dr := (radians–degree conversions)
π rd
8 1 R5
1 2 R1 
 
4 0 R2
 R 3
RR :=  3 0
5 4 R4
 
9 1 R6
 7 6 R 7 
Floating generators:
8 7 99 0 1  99 1
EE :=  6 5 98 0 1 Ein :=  98 1 GG := 0
   
 4 9 97 0 1  97 1
 rows( A)
cols( A)  2 2  N N
 rows(B)cols(B)   2 3 N M
  =  Format :  
 rows(D)cols(D)  5 2  K N
 rows(E )    K M 
 cols(E )   5 3 
pr(E,θ) := E·(cos(θ·dr) + i·sin(θ·dr)) (polar to rectangular conversion)

magφ(x) := (|x| rd·arg(x)) (rectangular to polar conversion)
u1 := pr(200,0) u2 := pr(200,–120) u3 := pr(200,120)
Create ∆-connected inputs.
 200 
u = −100 − 173.205 i
 cv := D·(s·I – A)–1·B·u + E·u
 
 −100 + 173.205 i
vo ← cv
vo k ← cvk
(Y vo ph )
 1   214   −23.6  
   171.2   −60.4  
 2     
mp =  3  51.3   −145.6  
   130.2   42.3  
 4     
 5   130.3  42.3  
 
Current through R1:
cv1 − cv2
I 1m : =
R1
Current through R2:
cv4
I 2m : =
R2
Current through R3:
cv3
I 3m : =
R3
Rectangular Form
I1m = 9.307 + 5.281i
I2m = 4.811 + 4.384i
I3m = –14.118 – 9.665i
Polar Form
magφ(I1m) = (10.701 29.571)
magφ(I2m) = (6.509 42.34)
magφ(I3m) = (17.11 –145.606)
SPICE solution is as follows:

* SPICE Verification
* Three phase floating delta input
VEinAB 8 7 AC 200V 0; + -
*R21 6 1 1M
VEinBC 6 5 AC 200V –120; + -
VEinCA 4 9 AC 200V 120; + -
*
R1 1 2 12
R2 4 0 20
R3 3 0 3
R4 5 4 0.01
R5 8 1 0.01
R6 9 1 0.01
R7 7 6 0.01
*
C1 2 0 9.947UF
L1 3 6 0.637MH
*
.AC LIN 1 1KH 1KH
.END
FREQ IM(R1) IP(R1)
1.000E+03 1.070E+01 2.956E+01
FREQ IM(R2) IP(R2)
1.000E+03 6.508E+00 4.233E+01
FREQ IM(R3) IP(R3)
1.000E+03 1.711E+01 -1.456E+02
8.5 BALANCED Y- LOAD

This section illustrates the single-ended input method (on phase A and phase B
inputs) with a balanced Y load. Answers are compared to a SPICE analysis of the
same circuit.
uF := 10–6 uH := 10–6 mH := 10–3 Meg := 106
R7 V1
EA C1
R1 R2
V4
V2 V3
C2 R3
L1
R9 L3 L2
V5 V9 V8 V10
EC = 0 R5 R10 R4
R6 C3 V6
V7
R8
EB
1
F := 60 ω := 2·π·F s := ω·i C1 := C2 := C1 C3 := C1
ω⋅8
3
L1 := L2 := L1 L3 := L1 R1 := 6 R6 := R1 R4 := 4
ω
R5 := R4 R3 := R1 R2 := R4 R7 := 0.001 R8 := R7 R9 := R7
 99 1
R10 := 1·Meg Y := (1 2 3 4 5 6)T Ein :=  U : = 10
 98 1
 1 2 R1 
 1 3 R2 
 
 4 6 R3 
 10 6 R 4 

180  9 5 R5 
rd := RR :=  
π  5 7 R6 
 99 1 R7 
 
 98 6 R8 
 5 0 R9 
 
 8 0 R10 
R10 eliminates an all-inductive cutset at node V8.
1 4 C1  3 8 L1 
CC :=  2 5 C2  LL :=  8 10 L 2 EE := 0 GG := 0
   
 6 7 C 3  8 9 L 3
magφ(x) := (|x| rd·arg(x))
 3 
 0.5 − 2 ⋅ i 
EA
u : = 200 ⋅   magφ(u1) = (200 –60)
 3 
 −0.5 − i EB
2 
magφ(u2) = (200 –120)
cv := D·(s·I – A)–1·B·u + E·u
 rows( A) cols( A)  6 6 N N

 rows(B) cols(B)   6 2 N M
  =  Format :  
 rows(D) cols(D)  6 6 K N
 rows(E ) cols(E )   6 2  K M 
 
Get magnitude and phase (deg) when Y is a scalar or a column vector:
vo ← cv
vo k ← cvk
(Y vo ph )
 1   200   −60  
   160   −96.9  
 2     
  3  108.9   −54.2  
mp =    82.1   −109.9  
 4     
 5   0   −70.6  
     
 6   200   −120  
Get currents:
cv1 − cv2 cv1 − cv3 cv4 − cv6

I 1m : = I 2m : = I 3m : =
R1 R2 R3
(Magnitude phase angle)
magφ(I1m) = (19.99 –6.88)

magφ(I2m) = (23.09 –66.88)
magφ(I3m) = (19.99 53.12)
See the following SPICE comparisons for both single-ended Y and floating delta
inputs.
SPICE Y input
SPICE Verification.
* File: Fig23_25p941y.cir
* Compare with Mathcad file Fig23_p941s.mcd
* Delta-Wye Load
* SINGLE ENDED Y INPUT
VEA 99 0 AC 200 -60
VEB 98 0 AC 200 -120
*
R7 99 1 0.001 ; ESR for input
R8 98 6 0.001
R9 5 0 0.001
*
R1 1 2 6
R2 1 3 4
R3 4 6 6
R4 6 10 4
R5 5 9 4
R6 5 7 6
R10 8 0 1MEG; Not required for SPICE. ICS compensated
for internally.
*
C1 1 4 331.573UF
C2 5 2 331.573UF
C3 6 7 331.573UF
*
L1 3 8 7.958MH
L2 10 8 7.958MH
L3 9 8 7.958MH
*
.AC LIN 1 60 60
.OPTIONS NOPAGE NOECHO NOMOD
FREQ IM(R1) IP(R1)
6.000E+01 1.999E+01 -6.877E+00
FREQ IM(R2) IP(R2)
6.000E+01 2.309E+01 -6.688E+01
FREQ IM(R3) IP(R3)
6.000E+01 1.999E+01 5.312E+01
SPICE ∆ Input
SPICE Verification.
* Compare with Mathcad file Fig23_p941s.mcd
* DELTA INPUT
VAB 100 98 AC 200 0; Floating Delta
RS 100 99 0.001; ESR
VBC 98 97 AC 200 -120; Floating Delta
VCA 97 99 AC 200 +120; Floating Delta
*
R7 99 1 0.001 ; ESR for input
R8 98 6 0.001
R9 97 5 0.001
*
R1 1 2 6
R2 1 3 4
R3 4 6 6
R4 6 10 4
R5 5 9 4
R6 5 7 6
R10 8 0 1MEG
*
C1 1 4 331.573UF
C2 5 2 331.573UF
C3 6 7 331.573UF
*
L1 3 8 7.958MH
L2 10 8 7.958MH
L3 9 8 7.958MH
*
.AC LIN 1 60 60
.OPTIONS NOPAGE NOECHO NOMOD
FREQ IM(R1) IP(R1)
6.000E+01 1.999E+01 -6.877E+00
FREQ IM(R2) IP(R2)
6.000E+01 2.309E+01 -6.688E+01
FREQ IM(R3) IP(R3)
6.000E+01 1.999E+01 5.312E+01
REFERENCES
1. Boylestad, Introductory Circuit Analysis, 7th ed., Macmillan Publishing Co., New
York, 1994, p. 946.
Appendix I
BACKGROUND THEORY OF NDS METHOD
The method evolves from writing the circuit equations after converting all capacitors
to ideal 1 V voltage sources and inductors to ideal 1 A current sources. We begin
with the passive RCL circuit used to introduce the method.
Original circuit:
L3
R1 V1 C1 V2 R2 V3
Ein
C2
R4 R3 L4
Note that for those less mathematically inclined, this appendix may be skipped
without loss of continuity.
Converted circuit:
I3
+ −
R1 V1 E1 V2 R2 V3
+ −
Ein L4
E2 +
+ −
R4 R3 −
Remembering that these are now known sources with values 1 V and 1 A, we
can write the circuit equations based on this configuration: The input voltage Ein is
also known and is usually set to 1 V, but can have other values. These are DC
equations; no AC or LaPlace equations in s are required.
DC circuit equations:
KCL at node V1 gives:
(Ein – V1)·G1 = (V1 – V2)·G4 + I3 + iC1
iC1 is the unknown current through capacitor C1, now the voltage source E1.
187
The G’s are the conductances of the resistors R. This is done to make the arrays
more compact.
Rearranging all unknowns on the left-hand side and knowns on the right-hand
side:
V1·(G1 + G4) – V2·G4 + iC1 = Ein·G1 – I3
The ideal current source I3 has the known value of 1 A, but we will retain the
reference designator temporarily for tutorial purposes. The same is done for I4 and
for the 1 V values of E1 and E2.
(V1 – V2)·G4 + iC1 + I3 = (V2 – V3)·G2
Rearranging:
–V1·G4 + V2·(G2 + G4) – V3·G2 – iC1 = 13
(V2 – V3)·G2 = V3·G3 + iC2 + I4 = 0
Rearranging:
–V2·G2 + V3·(G2 + G3) + iC2 = –I4
V1 – V2 = eL3
eL3 and eL4 are the unknown voltages across L3 and L4. This equation is then:
V1 – V2 – eL3 = 0
V3 = eL4 or V3 – eL4 = 0
For E1 and E2:
V1 – V2 = E1 V3 = E2
Next we set the component values:
K := 103 u := 10–6 m := 10–3 V := 1 A := 1 mA := 1

1 1 1 1
G1 := G2 := G 3 := G 4 := C1 := 0.1·u
10 100 50 ⋅ K 10 ⋅ K
C2 := C1 L3 := 2533.03·u L4 := 25.3303·u Ein := 1
Appendix I 189
Letting U = the number of unknown nodes, M the number of inputs (1 in this

case), and N the number of capacitors (1 V sources) and inductors (1 A sources),
the following matrices are created from the preceding equations. Note column
headings for coefficients: Matrix A1 contains the coefficients of the left-handed sides
of the preceding equations and has the dimensions {U+N U+N}.
U := 3 N := 4 M := 1
We form array A1 from left-hand sides of the preceding equations:

(Note column headings.)
V1 V2 V3 iC1 iC2 eL 3 eL 4
 G1 + G 4 −G 4 0 1 0 0 0
 −G 4 G2 + G 4 −G 2 −1 0 0 0
 
 0 −G 2 G2 + G 3 0 1 0 0
 1 −1 0 0 0 0 0 
A1 := 
 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
 
 1 −1 0 0 0 −1 0
 0 0 1 0 0 0 −1
From the equations:
V1·(G1 + G4) – V2·G4 + iC1 = Ein·G1 – I3

–V1·G4 + V2·(G2 + G4) – V3·G2 – iC1 = I3
–V2·G2 + V3·(G2 + G3) + iC2 = –I4
V1 – V2 = E1
V3 = E2
V1 – V2 – eL3 = 0
V3 – eL4 = 0
We next form {U+N N+M} array B2 for the right-hand sides of the preceding
equations and set the sources to their unity values:
E1 := 1 E2 := 1 I3 := 1 I4 := 1
E1 E2 I3 I4 Ein
 0 0 − I3 0 Ein ⋅ G1
 0 0 I3 0 0 
 
 0 0 0 − I4 0 
 0 
B2 :=  E1 0 0 0
 0 E2 0 0 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 
 0 0 0 0 0 
Note that every row and column of A1 must have at least one entry, and that
every column of B2 must have at least one entry.
We can now partition array A1 into four submatrices A11, A12, A21, and A22
as follows:
V1 V2 V3 iC1 iC2 eL 3 eL 4
 G1 + G 4 −G 4 0  1 0 0 0
A11 :=  −G 4 G2 + G 4 −G 2  A12 :=  −1 0 0 0
   
 0 −G 2 G 2 + G 3  0 1 0 0 
1 −1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0
A21 :=   A22 :=  
1 −1 0 0 0 −1 0
0 1  0 −1
 0  0 0
From the circuit, we see that current through C1 (E1) leaves node V1 and enters
node V2. If we mentally assign –1 for current leaving a node, and +1 for current
entering a node, and compare this to –A12:
 −1 0 0 0 V1
− A12 =  1 0 0 0 V2
 
 0 −1 0 0  V3
Because column 1 represents C1, the coding here tells us which nodes C1 is
connected to and the current polarity.
In the same manner, column 2 represents C2, and we can see without looking
at the schematic that C2 is connected from (–1) node V3 to ground.
We next split array B2 into four submatrices A13, A14, A23, and A24:
Appendix I 191
E1 E 2 I3 I4
 Ein ⋅ G1
0 −1 0
A14 :=  0 
0
A13 :=  0 0  

0 1
  0 
 0 0 0 −1
1 0 0 0  0
0 1 0 0  0
A23 :=   A24 :=  
0 0 0 0  0
0 0   0
 0 0  
Similar to A12, array A13, with column 3 and column 4 representing L3 and
L4, respectively, gives us the same information about these two components: which
nodes they are connected to and the current polarity, –1 leaving a node and +1
entering.
Repeating A12, A13, and A21
iC1 iC2 eL 3 eL 4 E1 E 2 I3 I4
1 0 0 0 0 0 −1 0
A12 =  −1 0 0 0 A13 =  0 0 1 0
   
 0 1 0 0   0 0 0 −1
V1 V2 V3
1 −1 0
0 0 1
A21 =  
1 −1 0
0 1 
 0
Next, we take the transpose (interchange rows and columns) of A12 and –A13
1 −1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
A12 T =   –A13T =  
0 0 0 1 −1 0
0 0  0 1 
 0  0
and we see that we can pull out the first two rows of A12T and the last two rows of
–A13T and, combining them, we have A21.
Ncap is the number of capacitors, and Nind is the number of inductors, so that
N = Ncap + Nind
For A22:
Ncap := 2 Nind := 2
iC1 iC2 eL 3 eL 4
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
A22 =  
0 0 −1 0
0 −1
 0 0
If the equations are taken in the order given earlier, we can see that the –1’s will
go in the locations shown. These –1’s will be at A22Ncap+1, Ncap+1 and A22N,N.
They represent the unity coefficients of eL3 and eL4.
E1 E 2 I3 I4
1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
A23 =  
0 0 0 0
0 0 
 0 0
The +1’s here are located at A231,1 and A232,2. They represent the values of E1
= +1 and E2 = +1.
Again, taking the equations in the order given earlier, A24 will always be an {N
M} array of zeros. (Matrices or vectors filled with all zeros are called null arrays.)
 0
 0
A24 =  
 0
 0
 
These procedures can be coded in software that will automate the construction
of these submatrices individually (see comm42.mcd or dccomm42.mcd). They then
can be formed into A1 and B2 as follows:
A1 := stack(augment(A11,A12), augment(A21,A22))
Appendix I 193
 0.1001 −0.0001 0 1 0 0 0
 −0.0001 0.0101 −0.01 −1 0 0 0
 
 0 −0.01 0.01 0 1 0 0
 −1 0 
A1 =  1 0 0 0 0
 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
 
 1 −1 0 0 0 −1 0
 0 0 1 0 0 0 −1
B2 := stack(augment(A13,A14), augment(A23,A24))
0 0 −1 0 0.1
0 0 1 0 0
 
0 0 0 −1 0
 0 
B2 =  1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0
 
0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 0 
Solving:
V := A1–1·B2
What is contained in V?
V is dimension {U+N N+M}
 0.0909 0.0909 0 0 0.9091

 −0.9091 0.0909 0 0 0.9091
 
 0 1 0 0 0 
 −0.0092 −0.0091 −1 0.0091
V= 0
 −0.0091 −0.0091 0 −1 0.0091
 
 1 0 0 0 0 
 0 1 0 0 0 
Concentrating on the top U = 3 rows of V:

V1,1 is the node voltage at node V1 due to E1 = 1, E2 = I3 = I4 = Ein = 0.
V1,2 is the node voltage at V1 with E2 = 1, E1 = I3 = I4 = Ein =0.
V1,3 is the V1 node voltage with I3=1, E1 = E2 = I4 = 0.
V1,4 is V1 with I4 =1, E1 = E2 = Ein =0 = I3 = 0.
V1,5 is V1 with Ein = 1, E1 = E2 = I3 = I4 = 0.
And correspondingly for row 2 (V2) and row 3 (V3)
Getting the R’s from the G’s:
R1 := G1–1 R2 :=G2–1 R3 := G3–1 R4 := G4–1
To check this:
Ein ⋅ R 2
V1,5 := V1,5 = 0.9091
R1 + R 2
R4 and R3 are shorted by inductors L3 and L4.
E1 ⋅ R1 E 2 ⋅ R1
V1,1 := V1,1 = 0.0909 V1,2 := V1,2 = 0.0909
R1 + R 2 R1 + R 2
and so forth.
Extracting the last N = 4 rows of V and calling it H:
H := submatrix(V, U + 1, U + N, 1, N + M)
 −0.0092 −0.0091 −1 0 0.0091

 −0.0091 −0.0091 0 −1 0.0091
H= 
 1 0 0 0 0 
 0 
 0 1 0 0
Row 1 is current iC1 with the five sources active one at a time as above.
− E1 −E2
H1,1 = H1,1 = –0.0092 H1,2 =
R 4 ⋅ ( R1 + R 2 ) R1 + R 2
R1 + R 2 + R 4
H1,2 := –0.0091 H1,3 := –I3 H1,3 = –1 H1,4 := 0
because I4 is shorted by E2 = 0.
Ein
H1,5 = H1,5 = 0.0091
R1 + R 2
Row 2 is iC2 with the five sources separately active; row 3 is eL3 and row 4 is
eL4 under the same circumstances.
We next form the {N N}diagonal array P, with C1, C2, L3, and L4 in that order.
Appendix I 195
 C1 0 0 0
 0 C2 0 0
P :=  
 0 0 L3 0
 0 L 4 
 0 0
which has same order as the columns of A12 and A22.

The next operation is to solve H and P simultaneously and label the result AB.
The array AB will have the dimensions {N N+M}. AB := P–1·H
 −91909.091 −90909.091 −1 × 10 7 0 90909.091

 −90909.091 −91109.091 0 −1 × 10 7
90909.091
AB = 
 394.784 0 0 0 0 
 
 0 39478.411 0 0 0 
In effect, we are dividing the top row of H by C1:
H1,1 H1,2
= −91909.091 = −90909.091 etc.
C1 C1
and dividing the second row of H by C2:
H 2,1 H 2 ,2
= −90909.091 = −91109.091 etc.
C2 C2
and, similarly, the third row by L3, and the fourth row by L4.
We now extract A from the first N columns of AB:
A := submatrix(AB, 1, N, 1, N)
and extract B from the last M columns of AB:
B := submatrix(AB, 1, N, N + 1, N + M)
 −91909.091 −90909.091 −1 × 10 7 0 
 −90909.091 −91109.091 0 −1 × 10 7
A=
 394.784 0 0 0 
 
 0 39478.411 0 0 
 90909.091
 90909.091
B= 
 0 
 
 0 
As for output arrays D and E, we extract these from row Y of V, where Y := 3.
D := submatrix(V, Y, Y, 1, N) D = (0 1 0 0)
The column labels of D are vC1, vC2, iL3, and iL4. Hence, the 1 in column 2 tells
us that the output is being taken directly from C2 or VY = V3. See the schematic.
E := submatrix(V, Y, Y, N + 1, N + M) E = (0)
A-I.1 THEORY OF NDS METHOD

A DC voltage-controlled voltage source (VCVS)
K := 103 mA := 10–3
lx
R1 EE1 R3
V1 V2 V3
− +
Ein
R5 R2 R4
R1 := 1·K R2 := 3·K R3 := 4·K R4 := 2·K R5 := 1.5·K Ein := 5
Nodal Equations Rearranged
Ein – V1 V1  1 1  Ein
= + Ix V1 ⋅  + + Ix =
R1 R5  R1 R 5  R1
V2 V 2 − V 3  1 1  V3
Ix = + V2 ⋅  + − − Ix = 0
R2 R3  R 2 R 3  R 3
V2 − V3 V3 −V2  1 1 
= + V3 ⋅  + =0
R3 R4 R3  R3 R4 
Appendix I 197
VCVS equation:
V2 – V1 = k·V3 V2 – V1 – k·V3 = 0 k := 2
Insert into arrays A1 (per column headings) and B2 (M = 1, so B2 has only one
column).
V1 V2 V3 Ix
 1 1   Ein 
+ 0 0 1
 R1 R 5   R1 
   
 1 1 −1
0 + −1 B2 :=  0 
A1 :=  R2 R 3 R3   0 
 −1 1 1   
 0 + 0  0 
 R3 R3 R4 
 −1 1 −k 0 
 1.579 
 4.737 
V := 1solve(A1,B2) V= 
 1.579 
 0.002 
 
Ix := V4 Ix = 2.368mA V2–V1 = 3.158 k·V3 = 3.158
VCVS equation checks.
Optimizing:
Add row 2 (Vp) to row 1 (Vn).
 1 1 1 1 −1 
+ + 0
 R1 R 5 R2 R 3 R3   Ein 
   R1 
 1 1 −1
0 + −1  
A1 :=  R2 R 3 R3  B2 :=  0 
 −1 1 1   0 
 0 + 0  
 R3 R3 R4   0 
 −1 1 −k 0 
 1.579 
 4.737 
V := 1solve(A1,B2) V= 
 1.579 
 0.002 
 
Now insert VCVS equation into row 2 (Vp), and then delete the fourth row and
fourth column.
 1 1 1 1 −1   Ein 
 R1 + R 5 +
R2 R 3 R3   R1 
   
A1 :=  −1 1 −k  B2 :=  0 
 −1 1 1   0 
 0 +   
R3 R3 R4 
 1, 579 
V := 1solve(A1,B2) V =  4.737 
 
 1.579 
Save A1: A1a := A1
Ix is missing, but the node voltages are the same. If needed, Ix can be found
from the node V1 equation.
Ein  1 1 
Ix : = − V1 ⋅  + Ix = 2.368 mA
R1  R1 R 5 
or from the node V2 equation:
 1 1  V3
Ix : = V2 ⋅  + − Ix = 2.368 mA
 R 2 R 3  R 3
Using the NDS method:
 99 1 R1 
 1 0 R5
 
RR :=  2 0 R2 U := 3 Ein := (99 5)
 2 3 R 3

 3 0 R 4 
GG := 0 EE := (2 1 3 0 k)
 1.579   0.002 0.001 −0 

V := 1solve(A1,B2) V =  4.737  A1a =  −1 1 −2 
   
 1.579   0 −0 0.001
 0.002 0.001 −0 
A1 =  −1 1 −2 
 
 0 −0 0.001
Appendix I 199
A-I.1.1 AN AC FLOATING VCVS

See Section 3.2 for NDS solution.
mA := 10–3 K := 103 uF := 10–6
lx
R1 uV1 R3
V1 V2 V3
− +
Ein
C1 C2
R2 R4
1 1 1 1
G1 := G 2 := G 3 := G 4 :=
1⋅ K 3⋅ K 4⋅K 2⋅K
C1 := 0.01·uF C2 := 0.05·uF u := 20 Ein := 2
U := 3 N := 2 M := 1
Resistances are converted to conductances to make the arrays more compact.

VCVS equation:
uV1 = V2 – V1
In the NDS method, this would be specified as:
EE = (Vp Vn Vcp Vcn Gain)
or
EE := (2 1 1 0 20)
Let Ix be the current through the VCVS, a fourth unknown in addition to the
U = 3 voltage nodes.
Temporarily increase U to add the unknown Ix.
U := 4
Circuit equations:
From schematic:
(Ein – V1)·G1 = Ix + iC1

Ix = V2·G2 + (V2 – V3)·G3
(V2 – V3)·G3 = iC2 + V3·G4
uV1 = V2 – V1
V1 = E1 = 1 V3 = E3 = 1
Rearranged:
V1·G1 + Ix + iC1 = Ein·G1

V2·(G2 + G3) – V3·G3 – Ix = 0
–V2·G3 + V3·(G3 + G4) + iC2 = 0
V2 – V1·(1 + u) = 0
Insert the coefficients of these equations into {U+N U+N} array A1 and {U+N
N+M} array B2. Note the column headers.
V1 V2 V3 Ix iC1 iC2
 G1 0 0 1 1 0
 0 G2 + G 3 −G 3 −1 0 0
 
 0 −G 3 G3 + G4 0 0 1
A1 := 
 − (1 + u ) 1 0 0 0 0 
 1 0 0 0 0 0
 
 0 0 1 0 0 0
E1 E 2 Ein
0 0 Ein ⋅ G1
0 0 

0
   C1  
0 0 0  P := diag    
B2 :=    C2  
0 0 0 
1 0 0 
 
0 1 0 
Note that it is important to keep the column order of A1 and B2 as shown when
inserting the equation coefficients into the arrays. Also note that column 5 and
column 6, iC1 and iC2, are in the same order as C1 and C2 in P, as are E1 and E2
in B2.
Get A, B, D, and E from A1 and B2 as before:
V := A1–1·B2
H := submatrix(V, U + 1, U + N, 1, N + M)
AB := P–1·H
Appendix I 201
 −1.325 × 10 6 25000   200000 

A= B=
 105000 −15000   0 
 0.174  Dc voltage on C1
X := 1solve(–A,B) X=
 1.217  Dc voltagee on C2
Reducing the order by the number of VCVSs can significantly decrease execution
time and increase accuracy in circuits with many opamps.
To reduce the order by 1:
Add row Vp (2) to row Vn (1). Zero out row Vp (2) and insert VCVS equation
V2 – V1(1 + u) = 0.
 G1 G2 + G 3 −G 3 1 0 0 0 Ein ⋅ G1
− 1 + u 0  0 0 
 ( ) 1 0 0

0

A1 :=  0 −G 3 G3 + G4 0 1 B2 :=  0 0 0 
  1
 1 0 0 0 0  0 0 
 0 0 1 0 0   0 1 0 
Reduce U by 1.
U := 3
The numerical values in A1 and B2 are:
 0.001 0.001 −0 1 0 0 0 0.002 

 −21 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
   
A1 =  0 −0 0.001 0 1 B2 =  0 0 0 
 1 0 0 0 0  1 0 0 
 
 0 0 1 0 0   0 1 0 
For programming purposes, we partition A1 into A11, A12, A21, and A22, as
follows.
A11 := submatrix(A1, 1, U, 1, U)
A12 := submatrix(A1, 1, U, U + 1, U + N)
A21 := submatrix(A1, U + 1, U + N, 1, U)
A22 := submatrix(A1, U + 1, U + N, U + 1, U + N)
 0.001 0.001 −0  1 0
A11 =  −21 1 0  A12 =  0 0
   
 0 −0 0.001  0 1 
1 0 0 0 0
A21 =  A22 = 
0 0 1  0 0 
Note that A21 is the transpose of A12.

Partition B2 into four subarrays:
A13 := submatrix(B2, 1, U, 1, N)
A23 := submatrix(B2, U + 1, U + N, 1, N)
A14 := submatrix(B2, 1, U, N + 1, N + M)
A24 := submatrix(B2, U + 1, U + N, N + 1, N + M
0 0  0.002 
1 0  0
A13 =  0 0 A14 =  0  A23 =  A24 =  

 0
   0 1   0
0   0 
We obtain the inductors-open (if present) DC node voltages using A11 and A14:
V1 V2 V3
Vdc := 1solve(A11, A14)
Vdc T = ( 0.174 3.652 1.217 )
If required, we can find DC value of Ix by adding the currents through R2 and R3.
Ix := Vdc2·G2 + (Vdc2 – Vdc3)·G3 Ix = 1.826mA
After creating these subarrays from the node lists the software program
comm42.mcd or comm42m.mcd, then finds A, B, D, and E as follows:
and
V := A1–1·B2 H := submatrix(V, U + 1, U + N, 1, N + M)
 −1.325 × 10 6 25000   200000 
A= B=
 105000 –15000   0 
We get D and E from V at output node:
Y := 3
D := submatrix(V, Y, Y, 1, N) D = (0 1)
E := submatrix(V, Y, Y, N + 1, N + M) E = (0)
Appendix I 203
A-I.1.2 VCVS AND CCCS

See Section 3.5 for NDS solution.
K := 103 u := 10–6 Meg := 106 mA := 10–3 uA := 10–6 mV := 10–3
l1 C1
R1 V1 R3 V4
Ein
+
g1 C2
R2 −
R4
V2
+
−
R5
V3
1 1 1 1 1
G1 := G2 := G 3 := G 4 := G5 :=
100 10 40 ⋅ K 2⋅K 10
C1 := 0.08·u C2 := 0.005·u a := 0.004 B := 100
N := 2 U := 4 + 2 Y := 4 M := 1 Ein := 100·mV
Ix is current through the VCVS (V2 – V3)

VCVS:
V2 – V3 = a·(Vcp – Vcn)
Controlling nodes:
Vcp = V1 Vcn = V4 –a·V1 + V2 – V3 + a·V4 = 0
Convert g1 CCCS to a VCCS.

Ein − V1
gl = B·I1 I1 =
R1
B
gl = ⋅ ( Ein − V1) = B ⋅ G1 ⋅ ( Ein – V1) gl + B·G1·V1 = B·G1·Ein
R1
From the schematic:
(Ein – V1)·G1 = (V1 – V2)·G2 + (V1 – V4)·G3 + iC1

(V1 – V2)·G2 = Ix
Ix = V3·G5
(V1 – V4)·G3 + iC1 = g1 + V4·G4 + iC2

V1 – V4 = E1 V4 = E2
Rearranged:
V1·(G1 + G2 + G3) – V2·G2 – V4·G3 + iC1 = Ein·G1

–V1·G2 + V2·G2 + Ix = 0
V3·G5 – Ix = 0
–V1·G3 + V4·(G3 + G4) – iC1 + iC2 + g1 = 0
Insert coefficients into A1 and B2:
V1 V2 V3 V4 Ix gl iC1 iC2
 G1 + G 2 + G 3 −G 2 0 −G 3 0 0 1 0
 −G 2 G2 0 0 1 0 0 0
 
 0 0 G5 0 −1 0 0 0
 −G 3 0 0 G3 + G4 0 1 −1 1 
A1 := 
 −a 1 −1 a 0 0 0 0
 
 B ⋅ G1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
 1 0 0 −1 0 0 0 0
 
 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
E1 E 2 Ein
0 0 Ein ⋅ G1 
0 0 0 
 
0 0 0    C1  
0 0 0  P := diag    
B2 :=     C2  
0 0 0 
 
0 0 B ⋅ G1 ⋅ Ein 
1 0 0 
 
0 1 0 
Add row 2 and row 3; insert row 5 (VCVS equation) in row 2; delete row 5 and
column 5:
U := 5
Appendix I 205
V1 V2 V3 V4 g1 iC1 iC2
 G1 + G 2 + G 3 −G 2 0 −G 3 0 1 0
 −a 1 −1 a 0 0 0
 
 −G 2 G2 G5 0 0 0 0
 −G 3 0 0 G3 + G4 1 −1 1 
A1 := 
 B ⋅ G1 0 0 0 1 0 0
 
 1 0 0 −1 0 0 0
 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 
0 0 Ein ⋅ G1 
0 0 0 
 
0 0 0 
 
B2 :=  0 0 0 
0 0 B ⋅ G1 ⋅ Ein 
 
1 0 0 
 0 1 0 
We partition A1 and B2 as before:
A11 := submatrix(A1, 1, U, 1, U)
A12 := submatrix(A1, 1, U, U + 1, U + N)
A21 := submatrix(A1, U + 1, U + N, 1, U)
A22 := submatrix(A1, U + 1, U + N, U + 1, U + N)
 0.11 −0.1 0 −0 0 1 0
 −0.004 1 −1 0.004 0 0 0
   
A11 =  −0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0 A12 =  0 0
 −0 0 0 0.001 1   −1 1 
 
 1 0 0 0 1   0 0 
1 0 0 −1 0 1 0 0 −1 0
A12 T =  A21 = 
0 0 0 1 0  0 0 0 1 0 
0 0
A22 = 
0 0 
Again note that A12T is identical to A21. With no inductors (Nind = 0), A22 is
merely an {N N} null array.
And similarly for B2:
A13 := submatrix(B2, 1, U, 1, N)
A14 := submatrix(B2, 1, U, N + 1, N + M)
A23 := submatrix(B2, U + 1, U + N, 1, N)
A24 := submatrix(B2, U + 1, U + N, N + 1, N + M
0 0  0.001
0 0  0 
    1 0  0
A13 =  0 0 A14 =  0  A23 =  A24 =  
0 0 1 
 0   0 
 
 0
 0 0   0.1 
A24 is always an {N M} null array. The row–column order of A1 is:
V1, V2, ..., V(U), g1, g2, ..., g(Ngg), iC1, iC2, ..., iC(Ncap),
eL1, eL2, ..., eL(Nind).
The row order of B2 will be the same as A1; the column order of B2 will be:
E1, E2, ..., E(Ncap), I1, I2, ..., I(Nind), Ein1, Ein2, ..., Ein(M).
U is increased in the subprogram comm42.mcd to U + Ngg.

During this process, A11 and A14 can be used to find the inductors-open (if
present) DC node voltages and current g1.
Vdc := 1solve(A11,A14)
VdcT = (0.087 0.092 –4.789 × 10–3 –24.138 0.013)
V1 := Vdc1 V1 = 87.33mV
V2 :=Vdc2 V2 = 92.11mV
and so forth.
g1 := Vdc5 gl = 12.675mA
Once the partitioned arrays are created by the program comm42.mcd or

comm42m.mcd, A1 and B2 are created as:
and
And A, B, D, and E are obtained as before:
V := A1–1·B2 H := submatrix(V, U + 1, U + N, 1, N + M) AB := P–1·H
Appendix I 207
D := submatrix(V, Y, Y, 1, N) E := submatrix(V, Y, Y, N + 1, N + M)
 −747812.5 −750000   12500 
A= B=
 188040000 187900000   −19800000 
D = (0 1) E = (0)
See Section 3.5 and compare the arrays.

Part II
Tolerance Analysis
9 Introduction
9.1 INTRODUCTION
Most of the tolerance analysis examples given here are passive or idealized opamp
circuits. Discrete devices such as BJTs and MOSFETs, except for some linear first-
order models, are not emphasized. The reason for this is as follows.
9.1.1 TOLERANCE ANALYSIS OF CIRCUITS WITH DISCRETE

COMPONENTS
In well-designed opamp circuits, the opamp can be considered ideal. (Thirty years
ago this would not have been possible with opamps such as the uA709. But modern-
day opamps, which have bandwidths up to 400 MHz, offsets measured in nV and
pA, and with negligible error, can be taken as ideal.) However, in circuits with
discrete components such as MOSFETs and BJTs, a problem arises.
Volumes have been written describing discrete device model parameters. Indeed,
the forte of the commercial versions of SPICE is using these models for nominal
circuit analysis. (See Reference 1, for example.) However, to the author’s knowledge,
no one has published data on worst-case tolerances of model parameters such as
reverse beta or other parameters as described in the following text.
A typical BJT, 2N2222A, has the following SPICE model with 27 constants:
.MODEL 2N2222 NPN(Is=14.34f Xti=3 Eg=1.11 Vaf=74.03

Bf=255.9 Ne=1.307
+ Ise=14.34f Ikf=.2847 Xtb=1.5 Br=6.092 Nc=2 Isc=0
Ikr=0 Rc=1
+ Cjc=7.306p Mjc=.3416 Vjc=.75 Fc=.5 Cje=22.01p
Mje=.377 Vje=.75
+ Tr=46.91n Tf=411.1p Itf=.6 Vtf=1.7 Xtf=3 Rb=10)
In this model, Bf is hfe or the forward beta DC gain; Br, the reverse beta; Vaf,
the Early voltage; and so forth (see reference 1).
If an analyst wanted to do a worst-case analysis on a circuit using one or more
of these devices, he or she might vary hfe from the data sheet minimum and
maximum, taking the device operating point into account. However, there is no data
available that describes how other parameters such as Vaf vary from transistor to
transistor, given 1000 2N2222’s, for example. Is the Early voltage dependent on hfe
in some way? That is, if we arbitrarily change hfe, do we have to change Vaf by
211
some amount? Is it independent? If so, by what percentage and in which direction

does it vary?
It appears that nobody has done the work of putting a statistically significant
number of these devices on a curve tracer or embedded them in test circuits and
extracted the data.
To do a worst-case analysis that truly reflects the minimum and maximum
performance of circuit boards with one or more 2N2222’s in the design, we must
have statistics on all 27 parameters, just as we have statistics (tolerances) on passive
components such as resistors. For a DC analysis, we may not need to know how
the AC and switching parameters such as Cjc, Cje, Tr, and Tf vary, but we certainly
need to know how the DC parameters vary from transistor to transistor. Hence, trying
to make an accurate prediction of the worst-case performance of circuits with discrete
devices is a dubious if not futile exercise.
9.1.2 ANALYSIS METHODS

Included here are the worst-case analysis methods of root sum square (RSS) and
extreme value analysis (EVA). Circuit types for which these methods will give
incorrect results include band-pass and band-reject filters and any circuit in which
nonmonotonic components are present. In some cases, however, valuable economic
and technical information can be obtained about circuit performance by analyzing
sensitivities; they are included for this reason.
Monte Carlo analysis (MCA) will produce realistic results for virtually any
circuit that has a reasonably accurate and stable mathematical model. The proviso
is that a large number of samples must be used. The larger the sample, the more
accurate the results. A rule of thumb is to use no less than 1000 samples.
9.2 SOME FACTS ABOUT TOLERANCE ANALYSIS

9.2.1 DC ANALYSIS
There are two types of EVA: (1) sensitivity-based analysis and (2) analysis based
on all possible tolerance combinations. The second type has a somewhat awkward
label, fast Monte Carlo analysis (FMCA) [2].
Sensitivity-based EVA uses the signs of the component sensitivities to determine
which combination of signs will yield the maximum output and then reverses those
signs to obtain the minimum output. The FMCA method examines all possible 2Nc
combinations, where Nc is the number of components, and selects the maximum
and minimum from this set. This method can get cumbersome when Nc is large.
For example, in a circuit with 15 components, there are 215 = 32,768 combinations,
or circuit solutions, that must be performed.
Both types of EVA give the same answers in the majority of cases (circuits).
One simple exception is the following balanced bridge:
Introduction 213
Ein
R1 R2
R5
V1 V2
R3 R4
When the nominal value of R1 = R2 = R3 = R4, sensitivity-based EVA, when

perturbing R5 (multiplying R5 by 1 + dpf = 1.0001), will not show a change in
output because V1 – V2 = 0. The contribution of R5 will be included when all 25
= 32 tolerance combinations are examined using FMCA. The author has come across
two other DC circuits in which this occurs. Needless to say, there are others. SPICE
uses the sensitivity-based method. A true and complete EVA, however, requires that
FMCA also be performed if the circuit has a small-to-medium component count to
include inputs.
9.2.1.1 Monte Carlo Analysis
MCA uses random number generators (RNGs) to obtain various random distribu-
tions, the most common of which are the uniform and normal (Gaussian) distribu-
tions. The normal distribution is used to approximate RSS analyses, whereas the
uniform distribution will generate wider tolerance bands between RSS and EVA.
Uniform RNGs create random numbers, rn, between zero and one, or 0 < rn <
1. Using a component tolerance of ±5%, rn creates the random component with
tolerance range T = 10%(rn) – 5%. Then, T varies from –5% < T < +5%
No good uniform RNG will ever come up with exactly 0 or exactly 1, no matter
how many samples are taken. With a unique random tolerance 0.95R < R < 1.05R
assigned to each of, say, Nc = 6 components (using the aforementioned 5% example),
the odds of obtaining a set of random component values that will approach one
extreme or the other are very high. As Nc increases, the odds sharply increase.
Hence, MCA will never duplicate EVA results. But with a large enough number of
samples, it will provide tolerance bands that will be greater than those of RSS but
less than those of EVA. This will later be empirically demonstrated by examples
(for example, see Section 10.4).
9.2.2 AC ANALYSIS
The considerations for DC circuits are applicable to AC circuits also. One additional
aspect is nonmonotonic components. That is, increasing the value of a component
(within its tolerance range) causes the output to both increase and decrease in
different portions on the frequency band. Monotonic components will result only in
either increasing or decreasing the output, not both.
Circuits with nonmonotonic components are usually band-pass or band-stop
filters or any circuit in which the output increases and decreases across the frequency
band. Circuits such as Butterworth low-pass and high-pass filters will usually contain
only monotonic components.
SPICE uses a sensitivity-based EVA that does not take monotonicity into
account. A 500-Hz multiple-feedback active band-pass filter will be used as a case
in point.
C2
R3
R1 C1 11
Ein 2 − V− V3
V1 V2
R2 V+ 1
+
3 4
The public domain SPICE listing for EVA analysis is given along with the incorrect
results:
Band-pass Filter WCA
VEin 99 0 AC 1
R1 99 1 RA 6.34K
R2 1 0 RA 80.6
R3 3 2 RA 127K
C1 1 2 CA 0.1uF
C2 3 1 CA 0.1uF
E1 3 0 0 2 1E6
* As in Mathcad, an ideal VCVS is used.
*.MODEL RA RES(R=1 DEV/GAUSS=0.667%)
*3 sigma = 2%
*.MODEL CA CAP(C=1 DEV/GAUSS=3.333%)
*3 sigma = 10%
.MODEL RA RES(R=1 DEV/UNIFORM=2%)
.MODEL CA CAP(C=1 DEV/UNIFORM=10%)
.WCASE AC V(3) MIN VARY DEV
*.WCASE AC V(3) MAX VARY DEV
*.WCASE AC V(3) YMAX VARY DEV
.AC LIN 100 400 600
Introduction 215
.PRINT AC V(3)
.END
Plotting the results from the SPICE *.out file:
Spice AC “.WCASE” results

15
Anomk,2 10
Volts
Ahik,2
Alok,2
5
0
400 425 450 475 500 525 550 575 600
Anomk,1
Nom Freq(Hz)
EVA Hi
EVA Lo
One can see there is definitely something amiss here. The algorithm that SPICE
uses takes sensitivities at only two frequencies, 400 Hz and 501 Hz, in this circuit.
The correct method of EVA will take sensitivities across the entire frequency band,
from 400 Hz to 600 Hz. Doing this in Mathcad [3] or MATLAB results in the
following plot:
Nominal & EVA output

15
446 Hz
568 Hz
10
Volts
0
400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600
Freq(Hz)
These results are somewhat better, but not good enough to get the whole picture.
FMCA (which SPICE is not capable of) gives the following plot:
FMCA of BPF
11.465 15
446 568 Vfpk
10
Vfhii
Voi
5
1.102
0
400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600
400 Fi 600
Nine of the 32 possible tolerance combinations yield the extrema shown in the
preceding plot. We still get the worst-case center frequencies of 446 Hz and 568
Hz, but what about at, say, 480 Hz? Is this the maximum amplitude we will get at
this frequency? The answer is no, and the MCA plot clearly shows this superimposed
on the FMCA results:
11.465 15
447 568
Vpk
10
Voi
Vmaxi
Vfhii
5
1.102 0
400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600
400 Fi 600
The number of samples used here was Nk = 1000. As Nk is increased, the skirts
of the tolerance band creep out toward the FMCA extremes. Diminishing returns
are at work here because using Nk = 10,000 does not move the skirts much farther.
As implied previously, the skirts will never be congruent with the FMCA extremes,
no matter how large Nk is. This is true of any AC or DC circuit by the very nature
of uniform distribution RNGs.
Introduction 217
9.2.3 TRANSIENT ANALYSIS

Time-domain tolerance analysis requires that MCA be used. Many, if not most,
transient analyses results involve a transitory damped ringing oscillation wherein
EVA and RSS analyses give incorrect answers.
9.2.4 ASYMMETRIC TOLERANCES

Asymmetric tolerances occur regularly in some commercial and most military appli-
cations. This is due to some components having asymmetric tolerances at room
temperature (e.g., aluminum electrolytic capacitors), but more frequently due to
asymmetric temperature ranges. For example, on the International Space Station,
temperature requirements were from –60ºC to (∆T = –85) to +50ºC (∆T = +25).
SPICE has no convenient way to specify asymmetric tolerances (and no RSS
capability). The Mathcad programs in this book can easily accommodate asymmetric
tolerances.
REFERENCES
1. Ian Getreu, Modeling the Bipolar Transistor, Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR.,
1976.
2. Boyd, R., Tolerance Analysis of Electronic Circuits Using Mathcad, CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL, 1999, p. 87.
3. Boyd, R., Tolerance Analysis of Electronic Circuits Using Mathcad, CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL, 1999, p. 44.
10 DC Circuits
10.1 RESISTANCE TEMPERATURE DETECTOR (RTD)
CIRCUIT
In this section, the DC RSS and EVA limits of the following circuit are shown.
R8 V6 R9 V7 Eref
Eref
11 R2
− R1
2 V− R3
V1 R4
V+ 1
3 + 4
V3 11
2 − V− V5
RT
V2 R5 V4 V+ 1
3 + 4
R6 R7
Eref
R1 := 4.53 R2 := 34.8 R3 := 132 R4 := 9.09 R5 := 9.09

R6 := 4.53 R7 := 27.4 R8 := 20 R9 := 20 RT := 1.915
Values given in kohms:
Ao := 106
 7 1 R1 
 99 3 R2
 
 3 5 R 3
 1 3 R 4 

 2 4 R5 7 0 0 6 Ao 
RR :=   EE :=  U := 7
 99 2 R6 5 0 4 3 Ao 
 4 0 R 7
 
 99 6 R8
 6 7 R9
 
 1 2 RT
Y := 5 GG := 0 Ein := (99 5)
219
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\dccomm42.mcd
Calculate “real-world” asymmetric tolerances as decimal percentages.
Tinit := 0.001 Tlife := 0.002 ppm := 10–6 TC1 := 50·ppm

TC2 := 25·ppm Thi := Tinit + Tlife + 35·TC1 Tlo := –Tinit – Tlife – 80·TC1
Trhi := 8.1·10–4 Trlo := –Trhi Treflo := –0.02 – 80·TC2
Trefhi := 0.02 + 35·TC2 p := 1..9 T1,p := Tlo T2,p := Thi T1,10 := Trlo
T2,10 := Trhi T1,11 := Treflo T2,11 := Trefhi
Display asymmetric tolerance array T:

R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7

T=
 0.475 0.475 0.475 0.475 0.475 0.475
R7 R8 R9 RT Eref
−0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.081 −2.2 

%
0.475 0.475 0.475 0.081 2.0875 
Call RSS/EVA WCA subprogram.
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\dcwa.mcd
SensT = (–2.41 3.68 0.81 –4.13 –0.82 –2.11 0.89 –2.7 2.7 4.09 1)
Tolerance array T and sensitivities are in the same order as the RR array, i.e.,
the normalized sensitivity of R4 is –4.13 %/%, Eref sensitivity is 1 %/%, etc.
 4.1277   3.7379 
Vrss =  V Veva =  V Va = 4.3433V
 4.5589   4.9848 
Va is the average output, not the nominal output. With symmetric tolerances, the
nominal output Vo and the average output Va would be the same (see Section 10.2).
∆rss := Vss2 – Vrss1 ∆eva :=Veva2 – Veva1

∆rss = 0.431 ∆eva = 1.247
As expected, the tolerance spread of RSS is less than EVA.

Note that when using the reference program dcwca.mcd, the user must supply
the complete tolerance array T as shown in the preceding text. This facilitates using
asymmetric tolerances. In other programs, the user supplies only the symmetric
tolerances, namely, resistor tolerance Tr, capacitor tolerance Tc, and the inductor
tolerance Ti, and in some cases, the input voltage source tolerance Te.
DC Circuits 221
10.2 A NOTE ON ASYMMETRIC TOLERANCES

The NOS method of handling a symmetric tolerances is described in this section.
Example:
Ra = 1000
For Ra, let the asymmetric tolerances be:
T1 := – 0.01 T2 := 0.03
The average value of the two asymmetric tolerances plus one is Mr:
T2 + T1
Mr := 1 + Mr = 1.0100
2
For symmetric tolerances, Mr = 1.0000

Statistically, the average value of Ra is no longer 1000; it is:
Rb := Mr·Ra Rb = 1010
Ra has the limits:
Ra1 := Ra·(1 + T1) Ra1 = 990 Ra2 := Ra·(1 + T2) Ra2 = 1030
Because the asymmetric tolerance is Ra1 = 990 and Ra2 = 1030, the symmetric
tolerance of these two extremes about the average value Rb is:
T2 − T1
Tv := Tv = 1.98% Rb1 := Rb·(1 – Tv) Rb2 := Rb·(1 + Tv)
2 ⋅ Mr
Symmetric vs. asymmetric
0.5
Ra Rb
0.4
0.3
Bin height
0.2
0.1
0
970 980 990 1000 1010 1020 1030 1040
R value (Ohms)
Symmetric
Asymmetric
Ra = 1000 Rb = 1010 Ra1 = 990 Rb1 = 990

Ra2 = 1030 Rb2 = 1030
Normally distributed inputs will yield a Gaussian curve of Rb, as shown in the
preceding figure. By definition, there is no Gaussian curve for a resistor with a mean
of 1000 and –1%, +3% tolerances. But there is one with exactly the same tolerance
range (40 Ω) averaged about Rb.
The components with asymmetric tolerances are then given a new average value
with symmetric tolerances, from which the EVA and RSS values are calculated.
From statistics:
(
If F = g(x1,x2,…,xn), then F = g x1 , x 2 , …, x n )
where the overbars indicate average value. The average output Va is then calculated
with these average values, whereas the nominal output Vo is calculated using the
nominal component values. These calculations are used in the routines for Ta, Va,
and Vrss in the subprogram dcwca.mcd.
10.3 CENTERED DIFFERENCE APPROXIMATION —

SENSITIVITIES
The following demonstrates a more accurate method of calculating numerical deriv-
atives and sensitivities [1].
True
derivative
Fore shot
Better
approximation
Back shot
The example function used here is two resistors with a parallel resistance of Rp
= 75Ω. A third resistor R3 is added to make Rp slightly less than 75Ω at Rp = 74.8Ω.
First, we determine the value of R3 required for Rp = 74.8Ω, and then a more
accurate sensitivity of R3 is calculated using the centered difference method:
R1 ⋅ R 2
R1 := 100 R2 := 300 = 75 Rp := 74.8
R1 + R 2
Solving for R3:
1
H ( Rp, R1, R 2 ) := R3 := H(Rp,R1,R2) R3 = 28050
1 1 1
EQHERE − −
Rp R1 R 2
The required value of R3 for Rp = 74.8.

DC Circuits 223
We find the numerical derivative of H with respect to Rp as follows:
dpf := 0.0001 Q := 1 + dpf B := 1 – dpf
(dpf = derivative perturbation factor)
Rr := H(Rp·Q,R1,R2) (fore shot) Rr = 29143

This is equivalent to y + ∆y = f(x + ∆x) in calculus.
Rr := H(Rp·B,R1,R2) (back shot) Rb = 27036

Equivalent to y – ∆y = f(x – ∆x)
Then 2·∆y = f(x + ∆x) – f(x – ∆x)
∆y f ( x + ∆x ) − f ( x − ∆x )
The approximate derivative is then = instead of the
∆x 2 ⋅ ∆x
∆y f ( x + ∆x ) − f ( x ) Rr − Rb
usual = , which here is D := D = 140822
∆x ∆x 2 ⋅ Rp ⋅ dpf
 1 1 
The exact derivative dr3 = dR3/dRp is with Ra := Rp ⋅  +
 R1 R 2 
1 Ra
dr 3 := + is dr3 = 140625
(1 − Ra ) (1 − Ra )2
x dy
Normalized sensitivities are defined as S = ⋅ and are in (dimensionless)
y dx
Rp ( Rr − Rb ) Rr − Rb
units of %/%. Then Sr = ⋅ =
R 3 2 ⋅ Rp ⋅ dpf 2 ⋅ R 3 ⋅ dpf
The centered difference approximation method gives:
Rr − Rb
Sr = Sr = 375.525
2 ⋅ R 3 ⋅ dpf
The exact sensitivity is:
Rp ⋅ dr 3
Sre := Sre = 375
R3
Just using the fore shot:
Rr − R 3
Su := Su = 389.57
R 3 ⋅ dpf
Percentage error:
Su Sr
− 1 = 3.89% − 1 = 0.14% ,
Sre Sre
which is much more accurate.
10.4 RTD CIRCUIT MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS (MCA)

For the schematic, see Section 10.1. Call circuit information from Section 10.1.
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\wca_mcd\dctdwca.mcd
The same asymmetric tolerances are used:

R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7

T=
 0.475 0.475 0.475 0.475 0.475 0.475
R7 R8 R9 RT Eref
−0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.081 −2.2 

%
0.475 0.475 0.475 0.081 2.0875 
Nk := 20000 nb := 30 nb = number of histogram bins.
Call normal and uniform DC MCA subprograms.
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\dc_mca_un.mcd
Vrss and Veva from Section 10.1 are:
 4.3258   Nominal 
 4.3440   Norm_mean 
   
 4.0482   Norm_min 
 4.6576   Norm_max 
     4.1277   3.7379 
Vstat =  0.2159   Norm_3σ  Vrss =   Veva =  
     4.5589   4.9848 
 4.3439   Unif_mean 
 3.9365   Unif_min 
   
 4.8538   Unif_max 
 0.3750   Unif_3σ 
DC Circuits 225
Histogram - uniform dist input

0.12
Veva1 Veva2
0.08
Bin height
pvnh
E(binnh)
0.04
0
3.7 3.8 3.9 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 5
binnh volts DC
Unif dist
Ideal Guassian dist
Histogram - normal dist input

0.12
Vrss1 Vrss2
0.08
pvnh
Bin height
E(binnh)
0.04
0
3.7 3.8 3.9 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 5
binnh volts DC
Norm dist
Ideal Guassian dist
Note the difference in the two outputs. The normal distribution is very close to
RSS values. The uniform distribution, although wider than RSS, does not and will
not approach EVA values no matter how large Nk is.
The reason the output is approximately normal when all components have a
uniform distribution is because of the central limit theorem from statistics [3]. When
this occurs, the ratio of 3σU to 3σN averages 3 [2].
To show that EVA may be an unrealistic analysis for circuit specification limits,
the following plot shows uniform distribution input MCA extremes (minimum and
maximum) with increasing Nk compared to EVA limits (Veva) in percent. For
Veva1 Veva 2
example, at 5%, the MCA voltage extremes are Vmc1 : = Vmc 2 : =
1 − 0.05 1.05
 3.9346   3.7379 
Vmc =   Veva =  
 4.7474   4.9848 
Percent MCA vs EVA vs Nk

10
8
6
4
Dnav1,r 2
Percent
0
Dnav2,r
−2
−4
−6
−8
−10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
r+1
Nk = 10^(r + 1)
Note that at Nk = 1 million samples, the percentage deviation is still not close
to zero.
(These ten plotting points are the average of seven.)
10.5 RTD MCA WITH R4 TOLERANCE = 10%

Call circuit information from Section 10.1.
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\caNLwca11\dcrtdwca.mcd
T1,4 := –0.1 T2,4 := 0.1
Set R4 at 10% tolerance.

Nk := 20000 number of MCA samples
nb := 30 nb = number of histogram bins.
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\dc_mca_un.mcd
By no means will all DC circuits have a normal distribution output with a uniform
distribution input. If one component has a large sensitivity and tolerance, it will tend
to dominate, and the output will be more uniform in appearance. As an example,
assigning a tolerance of ±10% to R4 (sensitivity 4.13 %/% being the largest), the
following histogram results:
(Note scale changes.)
DC Circuits 227
R4 tolerance 10%
0.08
0.06
Bin height
pvnh
0.04
E(binnh)
0.02
0
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7
binnh volts DC
Unif dist
Ideal guassian dist
10.6 RTD CIRCUIT FAST MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS

(FMCA)
For the schematic, see Section 10.1. Call circuit data from Section 10.1.
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\CaNLwca11\dcrtdwca.mcd
Call the FMCA subprogram:
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\dc_fmca.mcd
U=7 Nf := 211 Nf = 2048
The output shown in the following text is the minimum and maximum voltage
at all U nodes and using all Nf possible tolerance combinations.
Because there are ten resistors and one reference voltage in the RTD circuit, Nf
has the value shown in the preceding text.
Min Max
 −0.603 −0.4711  Node V1

 1.0038 1.1379 
 
 0.7516 0.8569 
 0.8569 
Va =  0.7516
 3.7379 4.9848  Node V5
 −6 
 4.8328 × 10 5.1648 × 10 −6 
 −5.1648 −4.8328  Node V7
As before, we select the output voltage:
Y=5
 3.7379 
Vfmca := (VaT)〈Y〉 Vfmca =  
 4.9848 
From the previous EVA (Section 10.1):
 3.7379 
Veva =  
 4.9848 
Hence, no difference between EVA and FMCA is found in this circuit. This is
not true for all DC circuits.
10.7 A CASE FMCA GREATER THAN EVA

Another circuit in which the FMCA limits are greater than the EVA limits is analyzed
in this section.
K : = 103 V := 1
R1 V1 RF
E1
R3 11 V3
2 − V−
R2 V2 V+ 1
E2 3 + 4
R4
R1 := 1·K RF := 10·K R2 := 1·K R3 := 10·K R4 := 10·K

E1 := 4·V E2 := 4·V U := 3 Y := 3 EE := (3 0 2 1 106)
 99 1 R1 
 98 2 R2
   99 E1 
RR :=  1 0 R 3 Ein :=  GG := 0
 2  98 E 2 
 0 R 4 
 3 1 RF 
DC Circuits 229
 3.636 
 
V := 1solve(A1, B2) V =  3.636  V3 := VY V3 = 3.636
 
 3.636 
Tr := 0.01 Te := 0.05
 − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Te − Te 
T := 
 Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Te Te 
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\dcwca.mcd
S1 := Sens
S1T = (1.00001 –1.09091 –1 1.09091 –0.00001 –11 12)
Approximate sensitivities are obtained using the centered difference approxima-

tion (CDA) method.
RSS/EVA results:
 0.6756   −0.7733
Vrss =  Veva = 
 6.597   7.8958 
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\dc_fmca.mcd
 3.448 3.825 
Va =  3.448 3.825  c := 1..2 Vfmcac := VaY,c
 
 −0.773 7.983
 −0.7733  −0.7733
Vfmca =  Veva = 
 7.9831   7.8958 
Vfmca 2
pce := −1 pce = 1.106%
Veva 2
Although the difference is only 1.1%, there is no guarantee that this will always
be the case.
Exact Sensitivities for Comparison
   1 1  
 E 2 ⋅ 1 + R1 ⋅  +   
Vo :=
RF 
⋅  R 3 RF  − E1 Vo = 3.636
R1  1+
R2 
 R4 
 
Derivatives and exact sensitivities:
− RF ⋅  E 2 ⋅ R 4 − E1 ⋅ ( R 2 + R 4 )  R1
dR1 := Sens1 := ⋅ dR1
R12 ⋅ ( R 2 + R 4 ) Vo
  1 1 
− E 2 ⋅ RF ⋅ R 4 ⋅ 1 + R1 ⋅  + 
  RF R 3   R2
dR 2 := Sens 2 : = ⋅ dR 2
R1 ⋅ ( R 2 + R 4 )
2
Vo
− E 2 ⋅ RF ⋅ R 4 R3
dR 3 : = Sens 3 : = ⋅ dR 3
R 32 ⋅ ( R 2 + R 4 ) Vo
  1 1 
1 + R1 ⋅  RF + R 3  
E 2 ⋅ RF ⋅ R 2   R4
dR 4 := ⋅ Sens 4 : = ⋅ dR 4
R1 ( R 2 + R 4 )2 Vo
E 2 ⋅ R 4 ⋅ ( R1 + R 3) − E1 ⋅ R 3 ⋅ ( R 2 + R 4 ) RF
dRF := Sens 5 : = ⋅ dRF
R1 ⋅ R 3 ⋅ ( R 2 + R 4 ) Vo
− RF E1
dE1 : = Sens 6 : = ⋅ dE1
R1 Vo
 1 1 
1 + R1 ⋅  +
RF  RF R 3  E2
dE 2 : = ⋅ Sens 7 : = ⋅ dE 2
R1 R2 Vo
1+
R4
Compare approximate and exact values:
ppm := 10–6
SensT = (1 –1.0909091 –1 1.0909091 0 –11 12)
which are the exact sensitivities.
S1T = (1.00001 –1.0909091 –0.999999 1.0909091 –0.000011 –11 12)
which are approximate values obtained using CDA.

The difference in parts per million:

Ec := ( Sens − S1)
EcT = (–10.01 0 –0.99 –0.009 11 6.15 × 10–6 –6.267 × 10–6) ppm
DC Circuits 231
10.8 TOLERANCING INPUTS

K := 103
This example shows the necessity of applying tolerances to independent inputs when
M > 1.
The difference between EVA and RSS computations with the inputs at zero
tolerance and again at 5% tolerance are shown in the following text. Note that there
is no direct or convenient method of tolerancing inputs in SPICE.
R1 RF
V1
E1
R3 V3
− 11
2 V−
R2 V2 V+ 1
+
E2 3 4
R4
R1 := 1·K RF := 10·K R2 := 1·K R3 := 10·K R4 := 10·K

E1 := 4·V E2 := 4·V U := 3 Y := 3 EE := (3 0 2 1 106)
 99 1 R1 
 98 2 R2
   99 E1 
RR :=  1 0 R 3 Ein :=  GG := 0
 2  98 E 2 
 0 R 4 
 3 1 RF 
 3.636 
V := 1solve(A1,B2) V =  3.636  V3 := VY V3 = 3.636
 
 3.636 
R1 R2 R3 R4 RF E1 E 2
 − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr 0 0 Tr := 0.02
T := 
 Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr 0 0 
Both inputs (last two columns) at zero tolerance.
SensT = (1 –1.091 –1 1.091 –0 –11 12)
Note the very high sensitivities for inputs E1 and E2.
V1r := Vrss V1e := Veva
We repeat with the inputs given a tolerance of Te := 0.05.

 − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Te − Te 
T := 
 Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Te Te 
Call the wca reference function again:
V2r := Vrss V2e := Veva

 3.484   3.321
V1r =  V1e =  Inputs 0% tolerance.
 3.789   3.930 
 0.673  −1.008 
V2 r =   V2 e =  Inputs +/– 5% tolerance.
 6.600   7.970 
Note that the V2r and V2e tolerances spreads (Te = 5%) are much wider than
those of V1r and V1e (Te = 0%).
10.9 BETA DISTRIBUTIONS [4–6]

Beta functions can be used in Mathcad to generate skewed random distributions.
These skewed input distributions are then used as MCA inputs and output histograms
examined. First, Beta functions are mathematically described and plotted by the y
programming sequence below.
n := 1..100
y : = for k ∈1..7
s1 ← k + 1
s2 ← 10 – s1
π
∫ sin ( x ) ⋅ cos ( x )
2⋅s1−1 2⋅s 2 −1
Bk ← 2 ⋅
2
dx
0
for n ∈1..101
n −1
x←
100
x s1−1 ⋅ ( x − 1)
s 2 −1
y s1,nn ←
Bk
y
DC Circuits 233
Beta functions, y(s1, n)

4
y2,n 3
y4,n
y5,n
2
y6,n
y8,n
1
0
0 50 100
s1 = 2 n
s1 = 4
s1 = 5
s1 = 6
s1 = 8
Among other things, beta functions have been used to describe manpower-
loading forecasts for new projects or contracts. “Front loaded,” s1 = 2; “rear loaded,”
s1 = 8.
Beta (Skewed) Distributions

Uses Mathcad’s built-in “rbeta” function.
nb := 50 q := 1..nb + 1 nh := 1..nb Nk := 30000

s1 := 2 z := rbeta(Nk,s1,10 – s1) σ2 := stdev(z) BH := max(z) BL := min(z)
BH − BL
intv := bin2q := BL + intv·(q – 1) pb2 := hist(bin2,z)
nb
BH − BL
nb
BH − BL
nb
Beta distributions (smoothed)

2000
1500
pb5nh
pb4nh
1000
pb2nh
500
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
bin5nh, bin4nh, bin2nh
s1 = 5
s1 = 4
s1 = 2
σ2 = 0.122 σ4 = 0.148 σ5 = 0.151
Note the increase in the standard deviation σ as s1 increases.
10.10 RTD MCA — BETA (SKEWED) DISTRIBUTION

For the schematic, see Section 10.1. Call circuit data from Section 10.1:
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\CaNLwca11\dctrdwca.mcd
The same tolerances are used:
 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7

T=
 0.475 0.475 0.475 0.4
475 0.475 0.475
−0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.081 −2.2 

%
0.475 0.475 0.475 0.081 2.087 
Overwrite R4 tolerance at 10%:
T1,4 := –0.1 T2,4 := 0.1
(disabled when not used)

For beta distributions skewed left:
s1 := 2 (see Section 10.9)

nb := 30 (number of histogram bins) Nk := 20000
DC Circuits 235
Call beta distribution subprogram dc_beta.mcd:
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\dc_beta.mcd
With original tolerances:

R4 10%
 4.3258  Nominal  4.3258 
 4.3409  Average  5.3857 
   
Vstat =  4.1377  Min Vstat =  3.3089  Vavg := Vstat2
 4.5474  Max  6.3131
   
 0.1551 3σ  1.3997 
Note that the beta distribution output is not skewed to the left as is the input.
This is due to the central limit theorem from statistics, with all rv’s approximately
equally weighted.
Nk = 20000
Output Histogram-beta (skewed) Input

0.12
Vavg
0.1
0.08
Bin height
pvnh
0.06
E(binnh)
0.04
0.02
0
4 4.05 4.1 4.15 4.2 4.25 4.3 4.35 4.4 4.45 4.5 4.55 4.6
binnh Volts DC
Histogram
Ideal gaussian
With R4 10% tolerance again, the beta distribution output is skewed to the right,
whereas the input is beta-skewed to the left.
This is due to the large-tolerance high-sensitivity resistor (R4, –4.13 %/%)
dominating the output. Because the sensitivity is negative, the output is skewed
opposite to the input. As with the uniform distribution input given earlier (see Section
10.4), the output will approach the normal (Gaussian) only when the random vari-
ables are approximately equally weighted. Also, note the expected change of the
horizontal-axis scale.
With R4 10% tolerance

0.12
Vavg
0.1
0.08
Bin height
pvnh 0.06
0.04
0.02
0
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7
binnh volts DC
From the preceding histogram, a principle of statistics, “The mean does not
equal the mode” is illustrated.
10.11 MCA OF RTD CIRCUIT USING BIMODAL

(GAPPED) DISTRIBUTION INPUTS
These distributions will occur when vendors prescreen components for tighter
tolerances.
For the schematic, see Section 10.1. Call circuit data from Section 10.1:
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\CaNLwca11\dcrtdwca.mcd
The same tolerances are used:
 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.7

T=
 0.475 0.475 0.475 0.4
475 0.475 0.475
−0.7 −0.7 −0.7 −0.081 −2.2 

%
0.475 0.475 0.475 0.081 2.087 
Create “gapped” Normal distribution input:

Set gap width equal to 0.5 on either side of zero.
sp := 0.5 nb := 30 Nk := 20000
DC Circuits 237
z := k ← 0
while k < Nk
y ← sin ( 2 ⋅ π ⋅ rnd (1) ) ⋅ −2 ⋅ ln ( rnd (1) )
if ( y < −sp ) ∨ ( y > sp )
k ← k +1
zk ← y
z
q := 1..nb + 1 nh := 1..nb VL := min(z) VH := max(z)
VH − VL
intvz := binzq := VL + intvz·(q– 1) pz := hist(binz,z)
nb
The expression for y is known as the Box–Muller transformation for normal

distributions [7].
Bimodal (gapped) input

3000
2000
pznh
1000
0
−4 −2 0 2 4
binznh
Apply gapped inputs to all Nc = 10 components of the RTD circuit using

subprogram dc_gap.mcd:
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\Ref_files_v11\dc_gap.mcd
Note that the bimodal output in the following text is approximately normal and
not gapped as is the input. This is due to the central limit theorem from statistics,
with the rv’s approximately equally weighted.
 4.3258  Nominal
 4.3419  Average
 
Nk = 20000 Vstat =  4.0302  Min
 4.6878  Max
 
 0.2690  3σ
Gapped Input - R4 Original Tolerance

0.16
0.14 Vstat2
0.12
pvnh 0.1
Bin Height
E ( binnh) 0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
3.8 3.9 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8
binnh
Volts DC
Bimodal Dist
Ideal Normal
Set R4 tolerance at 10%, and call the dc\_gap subprogram again:
T1,4 := –0.1 T2,4 := 0.1
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\Ref_files_v11\dc_gap.mcd
R4 10% tolerance.
 4.3258  Nominal
 4.3597  Average
 
Vstat =  2.0577  Min
 7.1057  Max
 
 2.2509  3σ
DC Circuits 239
Gapped Input - R4 +/-10%

0.16
0.14 Vstat2
0.12
pvnh 0.1
Bin Height
E ( binnh) 0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7
binnh
Volts DC
Bimodal Dist
Ideal Normal
Note the larger horizontal scale. The larger tolerance on R4 causes the output
distribution to be much wider. As in the case of the beta distribution inputs, the gap
is now evident because the gapped R4 distribution dominates.
In terms of volts DC, the gap width is k := 1..2
Vgap k := Vstat 2 +
( −1)k ⋅ sp ⋅ Vstat 5  3.985 
Vgap =  V
3  4.735 
REFERENCES
1. S.C. Chapra, R.P. Canale, Numerical Methods for Engineers, 3rd ed, McGraw-Hill,
Boston, MA, 1998, p. 93.
2. R. Boyd, Tolerance Analysis of Electronic Circuits Using Mathcad, CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL, 1999, p. 188.
3. H. Arkin and R. R. Colton, Statistical Methods, Barnes & Noble COS, New York,
1970, p. 144.
4. Abramowitz and Stegun, Handbook of Mathematical Functions, Dover, New York,
1970, p. 258.
5. Erwin Kreyszig, Advanced Engineering Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, New York,
2nd ed, 1968, p. 714.
6. M. Spiegel, Advanced Mathematics for Engineers & Scientists, Schaum’s Outline
Series, New York, p. 211.
7. Eric W. Weisstein, Box-Muller Transformation, From http://mathworld.wolfram.com/
Box-Muller Transformation.html.
11 AC Circuits
11.1 CIRCUIT OUTPUT VS. COMPONENT VALUE
In this section the definition of monotonicity is given and illustrated with the DC
circuit shown in the schematic below. Then on page 243, an example of non-
monotonicity in an AC circuit is given for comparison.
Examine the components for monotonicity:
V := 1 K := 103
Definition of monotonicity:
A function or series is monotonic increasing if X1 ≤ X2 ≤ X3, etc.
Example:
1.0, 2.0, 2.0, 2.5, 2.6, 2.601, ...
A function or series is monotonic decreasing if X1 ≥ X2 ≥ X3, etc.

Example: 9.0, 9.0, 8.8, 8.7, 8.7, 8.69, ...
We examine the component slopes (derivatives) of a DC differential amplifier

by stepping two resistor values, R1 and R2:
R1 1 R2
Ein2 11
2
2 − V−
R3 3 V+ 1
Ein1 3 + 4
R4
Ein1 := 1 Ein2 := 1 Ao := 106 R1 := 1·K R2 := 10·K R3 := 1·K

 99 Ein1 
R4 := 10·K Ein :=  EE := (2 0 3 1 Ao)
 98 Ein 2 
 98 1 R1 
 1 2 R2
RR :=   U := 3 GG := 0
 99 3 R 3
 3 R 4 
 0
241
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\dcomm42.mcd
Vn := 1solve(A1,B2) VnT = (0.909 20 0.909)V
Vary R1 and R2 from 80 to 120%:
ml := 0.8 m2 := 1.2 W := 500 k := 1..W + 1

m 2 − m1
A K := ⋅ ( k − 1) + m1
W
Component multiplier:
A1 = 0.8 AW+1 = 1.2
Vn ( U, EE, GG, RR, Ein ) : = for k ∈1..W + 1
RR1,3 ← R1 ⋅ A k Vaary R1
AE ← G ( U, EE, GG, RR, Ein ) AE routine from
A1 ← AE1 dccomm42.mcd
B2 ← AE 2
v2 a k ← ( vn k )2
RR1,3 ← R1
for k ∈1..W + 1 Restore R1 to
RR 2,3 ← R 2 ⋅ A k nominal value
AE ← G ( U, EE, GG, RR, Ein ) Vary R2
A1 ← AE1
B2 ← AE 2
v2 a k ← ( vn k )2
 v2 a 
 
 v2 b 
V2a := Vn(U, EE, GG, RR, Ein)1 V2b := Vn(U, EE, GG, RR, Ein)2
AC Circuits 243
Plot of output vs. component value change:
R1 R2
25 25
V2ak 20 V2bk 20
15 15
0.8 0.9 1 1.1 8 9 10 11 12
R1·Ak R2 ·Ak
K K
Hence, resistors are monotonic in virtually all DC circuits because DC circuits

are functions of R and/or 1/R.
They can be nonlinear as R1. They can be bipolar but remain monotonic.
Find the component slope for multiple-feedback-band pass filter (BPF) capacitor
C1:
uF := 10–6 R1 := 6366.2 R2 := 80.5 R3 := 127324

C2 := 0.1·uF C1 := 0.1·uF
Plot the output of the BPF at four constant frequencies (F1) while varying only
C1.
F1 := (470 480 490 500)T e := 1..rows(F1)

S1 := 2 ⋅ π ⋅ F1 ⋅ −1
Instead of the NDS method, it is quicker to use the BPF transfer function:
s
G ( R1, R 2, R 3, C1, C2, s ) : = R1 ⋅ C1
s  1 1  1  1 1 
s2 + ⋅ +  + ⋅ + 

R 3 C1 C2 R 3 ⋅ C1 ⋅ C2 R1 R 2 

Clvk := C1·Ak Vary C1 80% to 120%

V1k,e := |G(R1, R2, R3, C1vk, C2, sle)|
C1 varied from 0.08 uF to 0.12 uF

15
V1k,1
10
V1k,2
V1k,3
5
V1k,4
0
0.08 0.1 0.12
C1vk
470 Hz uF
480 Hz
490 Hz
500 Hz
Frequency is constant for each trace. Only C1 varies.

Next, we find the C1 slopes (derivatives) for the frequencies of 470 through 500
Hz to show the relationship between bipolar sensitivities and nonmonotonic com-
ponents. These slopes are measured at the nominal value of C1, 0.1 uF, as shown
by the plot vertical gridline. Note the slope gets steeper (at the 0.1 vertical grid line)
from 470 to 480 to 490, and is zero for 500 Hz.
h := 0.5·W + 1 h = 251
x2 := C1vh+1 x2 = 0.10008uF x1 := C1vh x1 := 0.1uF
∆x := x2 – x1 y2 := V1hh+1,1 y2 = 3.735V y1 = V1h,1
y1 = 3.716V ∆y := y2 – y1
Approximate derivative:
∆y V
= 239.51
∆x uF
Sensitivity:
x1 ∆y
⋅ = 6.45
y1 ∆x
Continuing:
y2e := V1h+1,e y1e := V1h,e ∆ye := y2e – y1e

 6.45 
x1 ∆y e  8.41 
Sensle := ⋅ Sens1 =  
y1e ∆x  9.35 
 −0.24 
 
AC Circuits 245
New set of frequencies, from 510 Hz to 530 Hz:
F2 := (510 520 530)T e := 1..rows(F2) S2 := 2 ⋅ π ⋅ F 2 ⋅ −1

V1k,e := |G(R1, R2, R3, C1vk, C2, s2e)|
C1 varied from 0.08 uF to 1.2 uF

15
Output of BPF (volts)
V1k,1
10
V1k,2
V1k,3
5
0
0.08 0.1 0.12
C1vk
510 Hz uF
520 Hz Capacitance(uF)
530 Hz
Frequency is constant for each trace. Only C1 varies.
y2e := V1h+1,e y1e := V1h,e ∆ye := y2e – y1e

 −10.16 
x1 ∆y e
Sens2 e := ⋅ Sens2 =  −9.56 
y1e ∆x  
 −7.76 
Plot all seven sensitivities:
Sens := stack(Sens1, Sens2) F := stack(F1,F2)
Hence, bipolar sensitivities indicate nonmonotonic components.

Do not use EVA, RSS, or FMCA tolerance analysis. Results will be erroneous.
Use MCA.
Sensitivities vs. frequency

15
10
5
Sens
%/%
−5
−10
−15
460 470 480 490 500 510 520 530 540
F
Freq(Hz)
If more frequency points were used, this plot would duplicate the sensitivity
plot of C1 shown in the BPF EVA, Section 11.10.
As shown, bipolar sensitivities indicate the presence of nonmonotonic components.
Hence, nonmonotonicity can be detected by calculating the normalized sensitivities,
which is part of the normal tolerance analysis procedure given here.
EVA, RSS, or FMCA should not be used if nonmonotonic components are
present. The magnitude of the errors is a function of the maximum magnitudes of
the bipolar sensitivities. For circuits such as the Butterworth low-pass filter, the
errors may be negligible. If in doubt, use MCA.
Some quotes from the literature on monotonicity are germane:
From Improving the Manufacturability of Electronic Designs,[2] “Nonparametric

boundary analysis … selects only those components in the tails of the distributions —
the combinations most likely to cause yield problems — for a complete circuit simu-
lation. An important constraint is that the functions … must be approximately mono-
tonic… the author conjectures that the vast majority of practical circuit designs are
approximately monotonic.” (Present author’s note: Guessing is not necessary now.)
From Spence and Soin [1]: “Unfortunately, there is no straightforward procedure for
testing whether monotonicity is obeyed.” (Present author’s note: True in 1988; not
true in 1999.)
From PSPICE user’s manual on worst-case analysis: “Worst-case (.WCASE) analysis

… will show the true worst-case results when the collating function is monotonic with
all tolerance combinations. Otherwise, there is no guarantee. Usually you cannot be
certain if this condition is true, but insight into the operation of the circuit may alert
you to possible anomalies.” (Present author’s note: Now you can be certain that this
condition [nonmonotonicity] is true by looking for bipolar sensitivities. See the EVA
of the band-pass filter [Section 11.10] for an example of “no guarantee.”)
AC Circuits 247
11.2 EXACT VALUES OF C1 SENSITIVITY

In this section the exact expression for the sensitivity of C1 is calculated and plotted
for comparison with the rough plot just shown on page 246 and the sensitivity plots
in Section 11.10, page 258.
fo := 500 wo := 2·π·fo Q := 20 BF := 400 LF := 600

LF − BF
NP := 100 DF := i := 1..NP Fi := BF + DF·(i –1)
NP
ωi := 2·π·fi
From Reference 3,
SC1 ( ω ) : =
( )
ω 2 ⋅  2 ⋅ Q 2 ⋅ wo 2 − ω 2 + wo 2 
2
(
2 ⋅ Q ⋅ wo − ω2 2
)+ω 2
⋅ wo 2 
[1] F36 = 470 SC1 ( ω 36 ) = 6.60

F41 = 480 SC1 ( ω 41 ) = 8.69
Sensitivity of C1
10
8
6
4
2
SC1(ωi)
%/%
0
−2
−4
−6
−8
−10
400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600
Fi
Freq(Hz)
Value at ω = ωo:
SC1(wo) = 0.5
Zero-crossing frequency:
1
fz := fo ⋅ 1 + fz = 500.31
2 ⋅ Q2
Peak amplitudes with Q:
k := 1..8 Qk := 5·(k – 1) + 5 Vc1a k :=

( Q k )2
( )
4 ⋅ Q2
k
−1
Vc1Q := augment(Q, Vc1a)
Peak magnitude of C1 sensitivity in %/%:
 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 
Vc1Q T = 
 2.51 5.01 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.55 20 
Note that the peak magnitude of C1 sensitivity is approximately Q/2.
11.3 MULTIPLE-OUTPUT EVA

An example is the third-order Butterworth low-pass filter.
uF := 10–6 K := 103
R1
V1
Ein C1 C2
V2 11
2 − V−
V4
V+ 1
R2
3 + 4
R3
V3
C3
1
R1 := 1·K R2 := 1·K R3 := 1·K ⋅ uF
C1 :=
2⋅π
C2 := C1 C3 := C1 U := 4 Ein := (99 1)
 99 1 R1  1 2 C1 
RR :=  2 3 R 2 CC :=  1 4 C2 
   
 4 3 R 3  3 0 C 3
LL := 0 GG := 0 EE := (4 0 0 2 106)
BF := 2 ND := 2 PD := 50
AC Circuits 249
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\comm42.mcd
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\TolArray.mcd
Call the wca function acwcalog.mcd with Y = 1, and store as Veva1.
Y := 1
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\acwcalog.mcd
Vev11 := MPeva1 Vev12 := MPeva2 Y := 4
Vev21 := MPeva1 Vev22 := MPeva2 Y := 3
Veva31 := MPeva1 Veva32 := MPeva2
EVA for V1
10
0
db[(Veva12)i] −10
dBV
db[(Veva11)i] −20
−30
−40
2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Li
EVA Hi V1 Log freq(Hz)
EVA Lo V1
EVA for V4
10
db[(Veva22)i] −10
dBV
db[(Veva21)i] −20
−30
−40
2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Li
EVA Lo V4
EVA for V3
10
db[(Veva32)i] −10
dBV
db[(Veva31)i] −20
−30
−40
2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Li
EVA Lo V3
11.4 BUTTERWORTH LOW-PASS FILTER CIRCUIT

The schematic and components are given here. The various worst-case analyses,
MCA, EVA, and FMCA, will refer to this circuit via a subprogram call.
R2 C1
R1
11
2 − V− V3
Ein V1 R3 V2
C2 V+ 1
3 + 4
Unit suffixes:
K := 103 uF := 10–6 nF := 10–9

R1 := 1.43·K R2 := 14.3·K R3 := 9.09·K C1 := 2·nF
AC Circuits 251
C2 := 0.1·uF U := 3 Y := 3 Ein := (99 1)

 99 1 R1 
3 2 C1 
RR :=  3 1 R 2 CC := 

 1
 1 0 C2 
2 R 3
LL := 0 GG := 0 EE := (3 0 0 2 106)
11.5 BUTTERWORTH LOW-PASS FILTER MCA

For the schematic and component values, see Section 11.4. Call that circuit for data
via a reference subprogram:
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\wca_mcd\bwlpf_ckt.mcd
Next, call comm42 to get the state space arrays A, B, D, and E:
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\Ref_files_v11\comm42.mcd
Specify the component tolerances before calling the tolerance array subprogram:
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
Variables:
Tr — resistor tolerances in decimal percentage
Tc — capacitor tolerances in decimal percentage
Ti — inductor tolerances in decimal percentage (set to zero if there are no
inductors)
Te — input (Ein) tolerance
Nk — number of Monte Carlo samples
For single inputs (M = 1), Te can be set to zero as the output extremes can be
later multiplied by a nonzero 1 + Te if desired.
Te should not be set to zero when M > 1, because the sensitivities are no longer
1.0 %/%
Call tolerance array subprogram TolArray:
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\Ref_files_v11\TolArray.mcd
Display tolerance array T as a check:

The tolerances are in the order RR, CC, LL (if any) and Ein.
R1 R2 R3 C1 C2 Ein
Tr Tr Tr Tc Tc Te
 −0.02 −0.02 −0.02 −0.1 −0.1 0

T=
 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.1 0.1 0 
Specify log AC frequency sweep and number of Monte Carlo samples Nk:
BF := 2 ND := 2 PD := 50 Nk := 2000
Call the AC MCA subprogram:
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\Ref_files_v11\mcalog.mcd
Create plots:
Note the plot parameters — MPmca (for magnitude/phase MCA) column 1 is
the output due to uniform distribution inputs; column 2 is for the normal distribution.
Nk = 2000 Y=3
Uniform MCA at node Y

25
20
15
db[(MPmca1,1)i] 10
5
db[(MPmca2,1)i]
dBV
0
db[(MPmca3,1)i] −5
−10
−15
−20
−25
2 2.25 2.5 2.75 3 3.25 3.5 3.75 4
Li
Unif MCA Lo Log freq(Hz)
Nom
Unif MCA Hi
AC Circuits 253
Normal MCA at node Y

25
20
15
db[(MPmca1,2)i] 10
5
db[(MPmca2,2)i]
dBV
0
−10
−15
−20
−25
2 2.25 2.5 2.75 3 3.25 3.5 3.75 4
Li
Norm MCA Lo Log freq(Hz)
Nom
Norm MCA Hi
11.6 BUTTERWORTH LOW-PASS FILTER EVA

See Section 11.4 for the schematic. The calculation sequence is the same as that of
MCA except for the last analysis subprogram called.
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
BF := 2 ND := 2 PD := 50
Call EVA analysis subprogram for log frequency sweep.
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\Ref_files_v11\acwcalog.mcd
Plot sensitivities:
Note the slight bipolarity of R2 and C2 sensitivities — more on this later.
Sensitivities, R1, R2, R3 Sensitivities, C1, C2

1 0.5
Sensi,1 0
0 Sensi,4
%/%
%/%
Sensi,2 −0.5
Sensi,5
Sensi,3 −1
−1
−2 −1.5
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Li Li
R1 Log freq(Hz) C1 Log freq(Hz)
R2 C2
R3
Y=3
EVA at node Y
25
20
15
10
db[(MPeva1)i] 5
dBV
db[(MPeva2)i] 0
db[(MPa1)i] −5
−10
−15
−20
−25
2 2.25 2.5 2.75 3 3.25 3.5 3.75 4
Li
EVA Lo Log freq(Hz)
EVA Hi
Nom
This plot is virtually the same as the uniform MCA plot in Section 11.5.
11.7 BUTTERWORTH LOW-PASS FILTER FMCA

See Section 11.4 for the schematic. The calculation sequence is the same as that of
MCA except for the last analysis subprogram called.
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
AC Circuits 255
BF := 2 ND := 2 PD := 50
Call FMCA analysis subprogram for log frequency sweep.
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\Ref_files_v11\fmcalog.mcd
Y=3
FMCA at node Y
25
20
15
10
db[(MPfmca1)i] 5
dBV
db[(MPfmca2)i] 0
db[(MPfmca3)i] −5
−10
−15
−20
−25
2 2.25 2.5 2.75 3 3.25 3.5 3.75 4
Li
FMCA Lo Log freq(Hz)
Nom
Norm Hi
Because the sensitivities are not significantly bipolar, there is no discernible

difference between (uniform input) MCA, EVA, and FMCA.
11.8 MULTIPLE-FEEDBACK BAND-PASS FILTER (BPF) CIRCUIT

A Multiple-Feeback Band-Pass filter circuit is now used for another example. This
band-pass filter has a center frequency of 500 Hz, and Q of 20. The same calculation
sequence as in Section 11.7 for the Butterworth low-pass filter will be performed.
C2 R3
R1 C1
11
2 − V− V3
Ein V1 V2
R2 V+ 1
3 + 4
K :=103 uF := 10–6 Hz := 1 V := 1
R1 := 6.34·K R2 := 80.6 R3 := 127·K C1 := 0.1·uF

C2 := C1 U := 3 Y := 3 Ein := (99 1)
 99 1 R1 
1 2 C1 
RR :  1 0 R 2 CC :=  LL := 0

 3
 3 1 C2 
2 R 3
GG := 0 EE := (3 0 0 2 106)
11.9 MULTIPLE-FEEDBACK BPF MCA

See Section 11.8 for the schematic and component values. The same calculation
sequence (except for the last subprogram) is called.
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\wca_mcd\mfb_ckt.mcd
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
Display T for tutorial purposes:
R1 R2 R3 C1 C2 Ein
 −0.02 −0.02 −0.02 −0.1 −0.1 0

T=
 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.1 0.1 0 
This can be overwritten by an asymmetric T array if desired:
 −0.02 −0.02 −0.03 −0.05 −0.05 0

T=
 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.15 0.15 0 
Specify linear frequency sweep and Nk:
BF := 400 LF := 600 DF := 2 Nk := 2000
Call the MCA analysis subprogram for linear frequency sweep.
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\Ref_files_v11\mcalin.mcd
Extreme center frequency markers from EVA analysis:
M1 := 447 M2 := 568 Y=3 Nk = 2000

AC Circuits 257

12
M1 M2
10
(MPmca3,1)i 8
(MPmca2,1)i
Volts
6
(MPmca1,1)i
4
0
400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600
Fi
Uniform MCA Hi Freq(Hz)
Nominal
Uniform MCA Lo
F41 = 480Hz (MPmca3,1)41 = 10.794V
This is to be compared with the EVA at this same 480-Hz frequency of 3.38 V
(see Section 11.10) and the FMCA value of 7.73 V (Section 11.11). Hence, MCA
gives the best answer.
Normal MCA at node Y

12
M1 M2
10
(MPmca3,2)i 8
(MPmca2,2)i
Volts
6
(MPmca1,2)i 4
2
0
400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600
Fi
Normal MCA Hi Freq(Hz)
Nominal
Normal MCA Lo
F41 = 480 (MPmca3,2)41 = 10.586V
The normal distribution maximum is at 480 Hz.
11.10 MULTIPLE-FEEDBACK BPF EVA

sequence except for the last subprogram is called.
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
Specify linear frequency sweep:
BF := 400 LF := 600 DF := 2
Call the EVA analysis subprogram for linear frequency sweep.
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\acwcalin.mcd
Sensitivities, R1, R2, R3 Sensitivities, C1, C2

10 10
Sensi,1 5 5
Sensi,4
Sensi,2
%/%
%/%
0 0
Sensi,5
Sensi,3 −5
−5
−10 −10
400 450 500 550 600 400 450 500 550 600
Fi Fi
R1 Freq(Hz) C1 Freq(Hz)
R2 C2
R3
With the exception of R1, note the significant bipolarity of the aforementioned
sensitivities.
Extreme center frequency markers for symmetric tolerances:
M1 := 447 M2 := 568
EVA Outputs
12
M1 M2
10
(MPeva1)i 8
(MPeva2)i
Volts
6
(MPa1)i
4
0
400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600
Fi
Freq(Hz)
AC Circuits 259
This plot indicates that maximum amplitudes will only be obtained at 447 and
568 Hz. What about at, say, 480 Hz?
F41 = 480Hz (MPeva2)41 = 3.38V
Is 3.38 V the maximum this circuit will ever see at 480 Hz? The answer is no.
See the FMCA analysis in Section 11.11.
11.11 MULTIPLE-FEEDBACK BPF FMCA

sequence as in Section 11.8, except for the last subprogram, is called.
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
Specify linear frequency sweep:
BF := 400 LF := 600 DF := 1
(1-Hz increments)
Call FMCA analysis subprogram for linear frequency sweep.
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\Ref_files_v11\fmcalin.mcd
Y=3
Extreme center frequency markers:
M1 := 447 M2 := 568
480-Hz amplitude marker:
M3 := 7.73·V
Band pass filter FMCA

14
12 M1 M2
10
(MPfmca1)i M3
8
Volts
(MPfmca2)i
6
(MPfmca3)i
4
2
0
400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600
Fi
FMCA Lo Freq(Hz)
Nom
FMCA Hi
F81 = 480 (MPfmca3)81 = 7.73V

Peak responses are shown here for 9 of the 32 possible tolerance combinations.
This analysis says that 7.73 V is the maximum we will ever see at 480 Hz. This
obviously contradicts the EVA, where 3.38 V was predicted as the maximum ampli-
tude. The FMCA, although showing interesting plots, is also incorrect.
For the best answer, see the previous MCA (Section 11.9).
11.12 SWITCHING POWER SUPPLY COMPENSATION CIRCUIT

A switching power supply compensation circuit is now used for a third example.
Again, the same calculation sequence as in Section 11.7 for the Butterworth low-
pass filter will be perfomed.
K := 103 Meg := 106 u := 10–6 n := 10–9 p := 10–12
C4
R3 V4 C2 R5 V6 C3
R1 L1 V2 R4 V5 R6
Ein V1
11 V7
R2 RL
2 − V−
V3
V+ 1
C1
3 + 4
R1 := 0.2 RL := 9 R2 := 0.01 R3 := 4.99·K R4 := 100·K

R5 := 100·K R6 := 1·Meg C1 := 47·u C2 := 1·n C3 := 1·n
C4 := 100·p L1 := 180·u U := 7 Y := 7 LL := (1 2 L1)
Ein := (99 1)
AC Circuits 261
 99 1 R1 
 2 3 R2
  3 0 C1 
 2 0 RL  4
 C2 
R 3 
5
RR :=  2 4 CC :=   GG := 0
6 7 C 3
 2 R4 5 C 4 
5
   7
 5 6 R5 
 5 7 R 6 
Ao := 106 EE := (7 0 0 5 Ao)
11.13 SWITCHING POWER SUPPLY COMPENSATION

MCA
For the schematic and component values, see Section 11.12. Call data from that
circuit.
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\wca_mcd\srcmod_ckt.mcd
Component tolerances:
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0.2 Te := 0
Display tolerance array T from TolArray.mcd:
Tr
 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −10
T=
 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 10
Tc Ti Te
−10 −10 −10 −20 0

%
10 10 10 20 0 
Tolerance array T in RR, CC, LL, and Ein order.
R1 R2 RL R3 R4 R5 R6 C1 C2 C3 C4 L1 Ein
BF : = 2 ND : = 2 PD : = 40 Nk : = 2000
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\Ref_files_v11\mcalog.mcd
Y=7
Uniform & normal MCA at node Y

20
15
db[(MPmca3,1)i] 10
db[(MPmca2,1)i] 5
dBV
db[(MPmca1,1)i] 0
−15
−20
2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4
Li
Uniform MCA Hi Log Freq(Hz)
Nominal
Uniform MCA Lo
Normal MCA Lo
Normal MCA Hi

EVA
See Section 11.12 for the schematic. Call circuit data from that file:
KHz = 103
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0.2 Te := 0
BF := 2 ND := 2 PD := 50
Notch marker: Mn := 3.23

AC Circuits 263
Plot sensitivities on same vertical scale:
R1, R2, RL, R3 R4, R5, R6, C1

2 2
Mn Mn
Sensi,1 1 Sensi,5 1
Sensi,2 0 Sensi,6
%/%
%/%
0 0
Sensi,3 Sensi,7
Sensi,4 Sensi,8
−1 −1
−2 −2
2 3 4 2 3 4
R1 Li R4 Li
R2 R5
RL R6
R3 C1
C2, C3, C4, L1

2
Mn
1
Sensi,9
0
Sensi,10
%/%
0
Sensi,11
Sensi,12
−1
−2
2 3 4
C2 Li
C3
C4
L1
Note that C1 and L1 are significantly bipolar and, therefore, nonmonotonic. Also
note that in the following plot, there is a notch in the EVA Hi trace, which is due
to the nonmonotonicity of C1 and L1. Hence, the EVA is incorrect in the vicinity
of the notch.
The notch is at
Mn = 3.23 fnotch := 10Mn fnotch = 1.698KHz

Y=7
EVA at node Y
20
Mn
15
10
db[(MPeva2)i] 5
db[(MPeva1)i]
dBV
0
db[(MPa1)i] −5
−10
−15
−20
2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4
Li
EVA Hi Log Freq(Hz)
EVA Lo
Nom

FMCA
For the schematic see Section 11.12. Call circuit data from that file.
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0.2 Te := 0
Specify component tolerances.
BF := 2 ND := 2 PD := 50
Specify AC log frequency sweep.
Call AC FMCA subprogram.
Y=7
AC Circuits 265
FMCA at Node Y
20
15
10
db (MPfmca3)i 5
dBV
db (MPfmca2)i 0
db (MPfmca1)i 5
10
15
20
2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4
Li
Log Freq (Hz)
FMCA Hi
Nom
FMCA Lo
11.16 SALLEN AND KEY BAND-PASS FILTER (BPF)

CIRCUIT
This circuit will show an unusual response to MCA with common component
tolerances but not with precise component tolerances. An explanation for this anom-
aly will be given.
uF := 10–6 K := 103
R2
R1 V1 C2 V2 4
3
+ V4
Ein V+ 1
C1 V−
R3 2 −
V3 11
R4 R5
R1 := 15.8·K R2 := 5.11·K R3 := 2.61·K R4 := 3.32·K R5 := 13.3·K

C1 := 0.1·uF C2 := C1 U := 4 Y := 4 Ein := (99 1)
 99 1 R1 
 4 1 R2
  1 0 C1 
RR :=  2 0 R 3 CC :=  LL := 0
 3 1 C2 
R 4 
2
 0
 4 3 R 5 
GG := 0 EE := (4 0 2 3 106)
11.17 SALLEN AND KEY BPF MCA

See Section 11.16 for the schematic and component values. Call subprograms per
previous sequences:
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\wca_mcd\bpfs&k_ckt.mcd
The MCA outputs are first given using precision tolerances and then with
common tolerances:
Precision tolerances:
Tr := 0.002 Tc := 0.01 Ti := 0. Te := 0
R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 C1 C2 Ein
 −02 −02 −02 −02 −02 −1 −1 0

T= %
 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 1 1 0 
Displayed in percentage.
Specify linear frequency sweep and Nk:
BF := 400 LF := 600 DF := 1 Nk := 2000
Call MCA analysis subprogram for linear frequency sweep.
Precision tolerances
10
(MPmca3,1)i 8
6
Volts
(MPmca2,1)i
4
(MPmca1,1)i
2
0
400 425 450 475 500 525 550 575 600
Fi
MCA Hi Freq(Hz)
Nom
MCA Lo
AC Circuits 267
Note that the center frequency of 500 Hz does not vary. Only the amplitude
varies.
Change to common tolerances:
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1
Call tolerance array subprogram again:
 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −10 −10 0
T= %
 2 2 2 2 2 10 10 0 
Call MCA subprogram again.
Note change of vertical scale!
Nk = 2000
Common tolerances
1500
1200
(MPmca3,1)i
900
Volts
(MPmca2,1)i
600
(MPmca1,1)i
300
0
400 425 450 475 500 525 550 575 600
Fi
MCA Hi Freq(Hz)
Nom
MCA Lo
See the following text for an explanation of what causes the MCA spikes with
common tolerances.
11.17.1 SALLEN AND KEY BPF — MCA WITH BOTH COMMON

AND PRECISION TOLERANCES
This circuit is designed for a center frequency fo of 500 Hz, a peak gain of 10 V/V,
and a Q of 10.
Two output plots were shown. The first is with precision resistor tolerances of
0.2% and capacitor tolerances of 1%.
Compare this plot with the second one, which uses common tolerances of 2%
and 10% for resistors and capacitors, respectively. The common tolerance plot
becomes “pathological” in that there are numerous spikes in the output. The reason
for this can be found by looking at the transfer function for this circuit.
The standard form of the band-pass transfer function is:
N1s
G (s) =
s2 + D1s + D 0
in which for this circuit,
1  1 2 R5  R 4 + R5
D1 =  + −  and N i =
C1 R1 R 3 R 2 ⋅ R 4 R1 ⋅ R 4 ⋅ C1
N1
The peak gain is given by Gpk = . Obviously, if D1 is ever zero or close to
D1
it, Gpk will “blow up.”
1 2 R5
D1 will be zero when + = .
R1 R 3 R 2 ⋅ R 4
By assigning tolerance multipliers of 0.982 for R2, 0.9816 for R4, and 1.02 for
R5 (all at or within the ±2% tolerance), it will be found that D1 = 0.166, N1 =
3267.56, and Gpk = 19,688 or about 85 dBV. Given Nk Monte Carlo samples, it
can be seen from the second plot that there are many more random tolerance
combinations that will cause Gpk to become extremely high.
Hence, the culprit here is the minus sign in D1, for which the analog circuit
designer should be wary of in band-pass filter circuits using this topology.
Because of the random nature of MCA, the size of the spikes will be different
for each run.
It was stated in the introduction to Part II that Monte Carlo analysis (MCA) will
produce realistic results for virtually any circuit that has a reasonably accurate and
stable mathematical model. Because one term (D1) of the transfer function can
become negative, this causes unstable roots in the right-half s-plane. Hence, with
the common tolerances, this circuit does not qualify.
The reader is cautioned that in using the NDS method, this instability would not
have been foreseen. Hence, the transfer functions G(s) still serve a useful purpose
and should be examined when any erratic circuit analysis behavior is observed.
11.18 SALLEN AND KEY BPF EVA

See Section 11.16 for the schematic and component values.
AC Circuits 269
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
BF := 400 LF := 600 DF := 2
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\Ref_files_v11\acwcalin.mcd
R1 is the middle trace in the following plot.

Sign-change markers:
M1 := 456 M2 := 554
Sensitivities, R1 thru R5
Sensitivities, C1 & C2
20
10
Sensi,1 M2
10 M1
5
Sensi,2
Sensi,6
Sensi,3 0 0
Sensi,7
Sensi,4
Sensi,5 −10 −5
−20 −10
400 450 500 550 600 400 450 500 550 600
R1 Fi Fi
C1
R2 C2
R3
R4
R5
The following large ugly gap is caused by the sign changes of C1 and C2
sensitivities. Note markers M1 and M2.
Again, nonmonotonic components = bipolar sensitivities, and EVA results are
rendered meaningless.
EVA output at node Y

20
M1
M2
15
(MPeva1)i
Volts
(MPeva2)i 10
(MPa1)i
5
0
400 425 450 475 500 525 550 575 600
Fi
EVA Lo Freq(Hz)
EVA Hi
Nom
11.19 SALLEN AND KEY BPF FMCA

See Section 11.16 for the schematic and component values.
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
BF := 400 LF := 600 DF := 2
Y=4
FMCA at node Y
80
(MPfmca3)i 60
(MPfmca2)i 40
Volts
(MPfmca1)i
20
0
400 425 450 475 500 525 550 575 600
Fi
FMCA Hi Freq(Hz)
Nom
FMCA Lo
Number of components in this circuit including the input:

Nc := 8
AC Circuits 271
With common tolerances, some of the 2Nc = 256 tolerance combinations will
cause Gpk (FMCA Hi) to be large.
11.20 STATE VARIABLE FILTER CIRCUIT

This circuit is used to show the affects of increasing the number of Monte Carlo samples
Nk. It will be shown that Nk and the tolerance band are of course directly proportional,
but nonlinear. For example, doubling Nk does not double the width of the tolerance band.
K := 103 n := 10–9
V7 R3
C1
V2
R2 11 V4 C2
− V3
2 V− R4 11 V5 V6
−
R1 V1 V+ 1 2 V− R5 11
+ − V7
Ein 3 4 V+ 1 2 V−
3 + 4 V+ 1
3 + 4
R8
V9
V1 R6 V5 R7 11 V10
−
2 V−
R9 V8 V+ 1
+
3 4
R10 V7
R1 := 10·K R2 := 20·K R3 := 10·K R4 := 182·K R5 := 2.2·K

R6 := 20·K R7 := 10·K R8 := 100·K R9 := 10·K R10 := 100·K
C1 := 1.125·n C2 := C1 U := 10 Y := 10 Ao := 106 LL := 0 GG := 0
 99 1 R1 
 7 2 R2 
 
 2 3 R3 
 3 4 R 4 

 5 6 R5  4 5 C1 
RR :=   Ein := (99 1) CC := 
 1 5 R6  6 7 C2 
 5 9 R7 
 
 9 10 R8 
 3 8 R9 
 
 8 7 R10 
 3 0 1 2 Ao 
5 0 0 4 Ao 
EE :=  
7 0 0 6 Ao 
 10 Ao 
 0 8 9
11.21 STATE VARIABLE FILTER MCA

For the schematic and component values see Section 11.20.
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\wca_mcd\ieeesvrs_ckt.mcd
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −10 −10 0
T=  2  %
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 10 10 0
LF − BF
BF := 3000 LF := 7000 NP := 100 DF := Nk := 2000
NP
The following plots show the effects of increasing Nk on the tolerance bands.
Extreme center frequency markers from EVA 11.22:
M1 := 4388 M2 := 5795
Nk = 20 Y = 10
140
M1 M2
120
(MPmca1,1)i 100
80
Volts
(MPmca2,1)i
60
(MPmca3,1)i
40
20
0
3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000
Fi
MCA Lo Freq(Hz)
Nom
MCA Hi
AC Circuits 273
Nk = 200

140
M1 M2
120
(MPmca1,1)i 100
80
Volts
(MPmca2,1)i
60
(MPmca3,1)i 40
20
0
3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000
Fi
Freq(Hz)
Nk = 2000

140
M1 M2
120
(MPmca1,1)i 100
80
Volts
(MPmca2,1)i
60
(MPmca3,1)i 40
20
0
3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000
Fi
Freq(Hz)
11.22 STATE VARIABLE FILTER EVA

For the schematic and component values, see Section 11.20.
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
BF := 3000 LF := 7000 DF := 20
Sensitivities Sensitivities
10 10
Sensi,2 5 5
Sensi,11
Sensi,3
%/%
0 Sensi,12 0
%/%
Sensi,4
Sensi,13
Sensi,5 −5 −5
−10 −10
3 4 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 7
Fi Fi
K K
R2 Freq(KHz) C1 Freq(KHz)
R3 C2
R4 Ein
R5
The preceding plots show that 6 of the 13 components are nonmonotonic. Ein
sensitivity is +1 as expected.
Extreme center frequency markers:
M1 := 4388 M2 := 5795
EVA at node Y
140
120 M1 M2
100
(MPeva2)i
80
Volts
(MPeva1)i
60
(MPa1)i
40
20
0
3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000
Fi
EVA Hi Freq(Hz)
EVA Lo
Nom
The “spike” at 5 KHz is caused by the asynchronous polarity change of the

nonmonotonic components.
From the zoomed sensitivity plots below, all zero crossovers do not take place
at the same frequency.
AC Circuits 275
Sensitivities Sensitivities
10 10
Sensi,2 5 5
Sensi,3 Sensi,11
%/%
%/%
Sensi,4 0 0
Sensi,12
Sensi,5
−5 −5
−10 −10
4.9 4.95 5 5.05 4.9 4.95 5 5.05
Fi Fi
K K
R2 Freq(KHz) C1 Freq(KHz)
R3 C2
R4
R5
Hence, at 5.00 KHz to 5.02 KHz, the polarity of the sensitivities are not changing
sign together. This causes the EVA process, which detects sensitivity sign changes,
to show a different magnitude in this 20-Hz frequency band.
11.23 STATE VARIABLE FILTER FMCA AND MCA

COMBINED
For the schematic and component values see Section 11.20.
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
BF := 3000 LF := 7000 DF := 20 Nk := 2000
FMCA & MCA at node Y

140
120
100
(MPmca3,1)i
80
Volts
(MPfmca2)i
60
(MPfmca3)i
40
20
0
3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000
Fi
MCA Hi Freq(Hz)
Nom
FMCA Hi
Another telltale sign of nonmonotonic components is that MCA is greater than

FMCA. This occurs at about 5400 Hz, as the following plot shows.
FMCA & MCA (Zoomed)

140
(MPmca3,1)i
Volts
(MPfmca2)i 120
(MPfmca3)i
100
4000 4500 5000 5500 6000
Fi
Freq(Hz)
11.24 HIGH-Q HUM NOTCH FILTER CIRCUIT

The following circuit has an extremely sharp notch. This notch would be very
difficult to realize on a circuit board due to temperature drift of the components. In
spite of this, the circuit is interesting to analyze and show the response to component
tolerance variation.
K := 103 nF := 10–9
AC Circuits 277
RS
R7 RB V10
V5
C1
11
−
2 V− V6 R9 V7 R10 V8 4
3 +
V+ 1 V+ 1
3+ 4 C2 2 V−
FNOTCH
−
R1 R2 11
V4 V9
1K
R3 R4
Ein
11
−
2 V−
V+ 1
QNOTCH 3+
4
R6A V3 R6B V9
R1 := 4.73·K R2 := 100·K R3 := 100·K R4 := 200·K R6 := 100·K

R7 := 100·K R8 := 4.99·K R9 := 681·K R10 := 681·K Rs := 0.01
C1 := 3.9·nF C2 := C1
a := 0.01 (Qnotch (R6) pot setting factor can be set from 0.01 to 0.99.)
R6A := a·R6 R6B := (1 – a)·R6
U := 10 Y := 9 Ao := 106 Ein :=(99 1)
 99 4 R1 
 4 0 R2 
 
 99 1 R3 
 1 2 R 4 

 3 0 R 6 A
   10 8 C1 
RR :=  3 9 R 6B CC :=  LL := 0 GG := 0
 5 2 7 C2 
0 R7 
 
 5 6 R8 
 6 7 R9 
 
 7 8 R10 
 
 99 10 Rs 
2 0 3 1 Ao 
EE :=  6 0 4 5 Ao 
 
 9 0 8 9 Ao 
11.25 HIGH-Q HUM NOTCH FILTER MCA

Get circuit data.
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\wca_mcd\hiqhum_ckt.mcd
Get A, B, D, and E state space arrays.
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
Component tolerances in decimal percent
Display tolerance array T:
 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −2 −10 −10 0
T=   %
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 10
0 10 0
BF := 50 LF := 70 DF := 0.1 Nk := 2000
The following plot shows both uniform and normal minimums.
Y=9
MCA at node Y
−10
−30
db[(MPmca1,1)i]
−50
db[(MPmca2,1)i]
dBV
db[(MPmca1,2)i]
−90
−110
50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70
Fi
Uniform MCA Lo Freq(Hz)
Nominal
Uniform MCA Hi
Normal MCA Lo
AC Circuits 279
11.26 HIGH-Q HUM NOTCH FILTER EVA

See Section 11.19 (MCA) for schematic.
Get circuit data
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\wca_mcd\hiqhum_ckt.mcd
Get A, B, D, & E state space arrays
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
Component tolerances in decimal percent
BF := 50 LF := 70 DF := 0.1
C1 sensitivity C2 sensitivity
200 200
100 100
Sensi,12 Sensi,13
%/%
%/%
0 0
−100 −100
−200 −200
54 56 58 60 62 64 66 54 56 58 60 62 64 66
Fi Fi
Hz Hz
Note the extreme bipolarity. Also note that Vo approaches zero at F = 60 Hz.
Hence, dividing by Vo here causes the sensitivities to be very large.
Extreme notch frequency markers:
M1 := 53.5 M2 := 68.3
Y=9
EVA at node Y
−10
Y=9
−30 M1 M2
db[(MPeva1)i]
−50
db[(MPeva2)i]
dBV
−70
db[(MPa1)i]
−90
−110
50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70
Fi
EVA Lo Freq(Hz)
EVA Hi
Nom
11.27 HIGH-Q HUM NOTCH FILTER FMCA

→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\wca_fmcd\hiqhum_ckt.mcd
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
→ Reference:C:\crc_book_ms\Ref_files_v11\tolArray.mcd
BF := 50 LF := 70 DF := 0.1
EVA notch markers:
M1 := 53.5 M2 := 68.3
Y=9
AC Circuits 281
FMCA at node Y
−10
M1 M2
−30
db[(MPfmca1)i]
−50
db[(MPfmca2)i]
dBV
db[(MPfmca3)i] −70
−90
−110
50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70
Fi
FMCA Lo Freq(Hz)
Nom
FMCA Hi
11.28 LTC 1562 MCA

See Part I (Section 3.15) for a schematic of the four connected sections and opamp
rolloff subcircuit. Component count = 68.
→ Reference:C:\mcadckts\CaNL11\ltc1562.mcd
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0 Nk := 2000
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\tolArray.mcd
Markers for EVA extreme center frequencies (see Section 11.29):
M1 := 87 M2 := 116 Y = 20
LTC 1562 MCA at node Y

30
20
M1 M2 Y = 20
10
db[(MPmca3,1)i] 0
dBV
−20
db[(MPmca1,1)i]
−30
−50
−60
−70
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Fi
K
Uniform MCA Hi Freq(KHz)
Nominal
Uniform MCA Lo
Normal MCA Hi
11.29 LTC 1562 EVA

In this section an Extreme Value Analysis (EVA) of the 68-component LTC 1562
circuit is performed. The EVA markers M1 and M2, used in the previous section,
are calculated here for MCA comparison.
→ Reference:C:\mcadckts\CaNL11\ltc1562.mcd
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0 Te := 0
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\tolArray.mcd
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\acwcalin.mcd
AC Circuits 283
Some (Bipolar) sensitivities

4
Sensi,3 2
%/%
Sensi,6 0
Sensi,39
−2
−4
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Fi
K
R1A Freq(KHz)
R6
C2D
M1 := 87 M2 := 116
These are the extreme frequency markers.

Y = 20
EVA at node Y
30
20
M1 M2
10
0
db[(MPeva1)i]
−10
dBV
db[(MPeva2)i] −20
db[(MPa1)i] −30
−40
−50
−60
−70
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Fi
K
EVA Lo Freq(KHz)
EVA Hi
Nom
REFERENCES
1. Spence and Soin, Tolerance Design of Electronic Circuits, Addison-Wesley, Woking-
ham, England, 1988, p. 31.
2. Improving the Manufacturability of Electronic Designs, IEEE Spectrum, June 1999,
p. 70.
3. Boyd, R., Tolerance Analysis of Electronic Circuits Using MATLAB, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, FL., 1999, p. 115.
12 Transient Tolerance
Analysis
12.1 TRANSIENT MCA — TWIN-T RC NETWORK
Tolerance analysis in the time domain is explored in this and subsequent sections.
The first circuit analyzed is a passive 60-Hz notch filter.
C2 V1 C3
V4
R5
Rs
R1 V2 R3
V3
Ein
C1 R7
K := 103 u := 10–6 Meg := 106 m := 10–3 R1 := 265·K

R3 := 265·K R5 := 133·K R7 := 10·Meg Rs := 0.01 C1 := 0.02·u
C2 := 0.01·u C3 := 0.01·u U := 4 Y := 3 Ein := (99 1)
 99 2 R1 
 2 3 R 3 2 0 C1 
 
RR :=  1 0 R5 CC :=  4 1 C2  GG := 0
 3  
 0 R 7   1 3 C 3
 99 4 Rs 
LL := 0 EE := 0
See Part I for a review of the nominal Mathcad transient analysis method.
1 1
= 877.78 u = 5.3m ∆t := 50·u Tper := 80·m
min ( A ) max ( A )
Tper
kmax := Nk := 500
∆t
285
Note that ∆t is << 878us because of output spikes. Create an input pulse using
Mathcad’s unit step function Φ(x):
pulse(x, w) := φ(x) – φ(x – w) bpf(x, f, w) := pulse(x – f, w)

Eapp(t) := bpf(t, 0.01·Tper, 0.5·Tper)
Tr := 0.05 Tc := 0.01 Ti := 0
(Input tolerance Te not used for transient analysis.)
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\tranlin.mcd
MCA at node Y
1
(Vnj)1 Y=3
vminj
Volts
vmaxj 0.5
Eapp(j⋅ ∆t)
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
j⋅ ∆t
m
Nom Time(ms)
MCA Lo
MCA Hi
Input
Y=3
12.2 TRANSIENT MCA — MULTIPLE FEEDBACK BPF

The Multiple Feedback Bandpass Filter, previously analyzed in the frequency
domain in Section 11.8, is now examined to show the effects of component variation
in response to a pulse input. The first plot shows the MCA for Nk = 10, while the
second shows the response variation for Nk = 1000; Nk being the number of
samples.
C2 R3
R1 C1 11
− V3
Ein
V1 V2 2 V−
R2 V+ 1
3 + 4
K := 103 uF := 10–6 us := 10–6 ms := 10–3 C1 := 0.1·uF C2 := C1

R1 := 6.34·K R2 := 80.6 R3 := 127·K U := 3 Y := 3 Ein := (99 1)
Transient Tolerance Analysis 287
 99 1 R1 
1 2 C1 
RR :=  1 0 R 2 CC :=  LL := 0 GG := 0

 3
 3 1 C2 
2 R 3
EE := (3 0 0 2 106)
1 1
= 12.68 ms = 7.964 us ∆t := 5·us Tper := 5·ms
min ( A ) max ( A )
Create a delayed input pulse using Mathcad’s unit step function Φ(x):

Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.01 Ti := 0 Nk := 1000
Nk = 10
1.2
0.8
(Vnj)1
0.4
vminj
Volts
0
vmaxj
Ein1,2 . Eapp(j ·∆t) −0.4
−0.8
−1.2
0 1 2 3 4 5
j · ∆t
ms
Nom Time(ms)
Min
Max
Pulse input
Nk = 1000
1.2
0.8
(Vnj)1
0.4
vminj
Volts
0
vmaxj
Ein1,2 . Eapp(j ·∆t) −0.4
−0.8
−1.2
0 1 2 3 4 5
j · ∆t
ms
Nom Time(ms)
Min
Max
Pulse input
Initial output is negative because of the inverting opamp.
12.3 AC AND TRANSIENT MCA — BESSEL HPF

The next circuit chosen to illustrate transient tolerance analysis is a Bessel highpass
filter. A nominal AC analysis is also given here, as well as an example of using the
G array introduced in Section 1.1.2.
K := 103 u := 10–6 n := 10–9 Hz = 1 MHz := 106 p := 10–12
V3 R1
R4 C2
V1 C1 V2 C3 V4 3 4 V5
+
Ein V+ 1
R2 R3 2 V−
−
11
V6 R5 V7 V8 R6 V9 V5
EE1 EE2 EE3

+ C4 + C5 +
− − −
Controlled sources EE1 through EE3 model the opamp of the Bessel highpass
filter.
R1 := 52·K R2 := 75·K R3 := 287·K R4 := 0.01 R5 := 1·K R6 := 1·K

C1 := 1.55·n C2 := C1 C3 := C1 fp1 := 100·Hz fp2 := 1·MHz
1 1
C 4 := C5 := U := 9
2 ⋅ π ⋅ fp1 ⋅ R 5 2 ⋅ π ⋅ fp 2 ⋅ R 6
Y := 5 Ein := (99 1)
 3 5 R1 
 2 1 2 C1 
0 R2 2
  3 C2 
 4 0 R 3  
RR :=  CC :=  3 C 3
R 4 
4 LL := 0 GG := 0
 99 1 7 0 C 4 
 6 7 R5 
   9 0 C5 
 8 9 R6
Vp : = 4 6 0 Vp Vn 1 
Ao := 10 6 EE :=  8 0 7 0 1 
Vn : = 5  
 5 0 9 0 Ao 
BF := 2 ND := 6 PD := 25 NP :=ND·PD + 1 i := 1..NP
i −1
L i := BF + s := 2 ⋅ π ⋅ 10 L ⋅ −1 cvi := D·(si·I – A)–1·B + E
PD
Voi := db(cvi) fo := 1000·Hz log(fo) = 3
Asymptote equation:
Vmi := 60·log(10Li–3)
20
0
Voi
dBV
–20
Vmi
–40
–60
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Li
Log freq(Hz)
Note gain peaking and rolloff due to opamp.
Transient MCA:
1 1
= 80.6 p = 159.155 n ∆t := 50·p Tper := 500·n
min ( A ) max ( A )
Tper
kmax := Nk := 200
∆t

Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.01 Ti := 0 Nk := 1000
Transient response MCA at node Y
2
(Vnj)1 1
vminj
Volts
0
vmaxj
Eapp(j ·∆t)
−1
−2
0 100 200 300 400 500
j · ∆t
n
Nom Time(ms)
Min
Max
Pulse input
Nk = 200 Y=5
Verification of state space arrays:
 R2 −R2 0  1 0 0  Ein1,2 
W :=  0 R1 R 3 − R1 Q := ( −1) ⋅  1 1 0 S : =  Ein1,2 
     
 0 0 R 3   1 1 1   Ein 
1,2
 1   C1  
S =  1 P := diag   C2   C := (W·P)–1 A := C·Q B := C·S
   
 1   C 3 
D := (0 0 0) E := 0
Use G array:
Because V4 = V5 = Vo = iC3·R3 (Ideal opamp)
F := (0 0 R3) G := F·P G = (0 0 444.85)u
I := identity(3) cvi := (D + G·A)·(si·I – A)–1·B + E + G·B
Vai := 20·log(|cvi|)
20
0
Vai
–20
Vmi
−40
−60
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Li
Ideal output
Asymptote
The previous plot shows the response with an ideal opamp with no frequency
rolloff or gain peaking.
12.4 TRANSIENT MCA — STATE VARIABLE FILTER

Here the state variable filter, previously analyzed in the frequency domain in Section
11.20, is used again to show the oscillatory, ringing response to a pulse input. The
tolerance bands of this oscillatory response due to component value variation are
also shown.
K := 103 n := 10–9 u := 10–6 m := 10–3
V7 R3
C1
V2
R2 11 V4 C2
− V3
2 V− R4 11 V5 V6
−
R1 V1 V+ 1 2 V− R5 11
+ − V7
Ein 3 4 V+ 1 2 V−
3 + 4 V+ 1
3 + 4
R8
V9
R6 R7 11
V1 V5 V10
−
2 V−
R9 V8 V+ 1
+
3 4
R10
V7
R1 := 10·K R2 := 20·K R3 := 10·K R4 := 182·K

R5 := 2.2·K R6 := 20·K R7 := 10·K R8 := 100·K
R9 := 10·K R10 := 100·K
C1 := 1.125·n C2 := C1 U := 10 Y := 10 Ao := 106
 99 1 R1 
 7 2 R2 
 
 2 3 R3 
 3 4 R 4 

 5 6 R5  4 5 C1 
RR :=   Ein := (99 1) CC := 
 1 5 R6  6 7 C2 
 5 9 R7 
 
 9 10 R8 
 3 8 R9 
 
 8 7 R10 
 3 0 1 2 Ao 
5 0 0 4 Ao 
LL := 0 GG := 0 EE :=  
7 0 0 6 Ao 
 10 Ao 
 0 8 9
1 1
= −2.475 u = 409.501u ∆t := 1·u
min ( A ) max ( A )
kmax := 2000 Tper := kmax·∆t

Eapp(t) := bpf(x, 0.01·Tper, 0.5·Tper)
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.01 Ti := 0 Nk := 300 Tper = 2m
Transient output at node Y

15
10
(Vnj)1
5
vminj
Volts
0
vmaxj
–5
10 . Eapp(j · ∆t)
−10
−15
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
j·∆t
m
Nom Time(ms)
Min
Max
Input pulse x 10
Y = 10 Nk = 300
13 Three-Phase Circuits
LOAD MCA
uH := 10–6 uF := 10–6
Single-ended two-phase Y input on A and B as before.
R5
V1
+ EinA
R1
−
V2
C1
R3 V4
R2 V3 L1
EinC= 0
V5
EinB + R4
−
R1 := 12 R2 := 20 R3 := 3 R4 := 0.01 R5 := 0.01
L1 := 636.62·uH C1 := 9.947·uF
 99 1
Ein :=  CC := (2 3 C1) LL := (5 4 L1)
 98 1
EE := 0 GG := 0 U := 5 Y := 3
 99 1 R5
 1 2 R1 
 
RR :=  3 0 R2
 4 3 R 3

 98 5 R 4 
BF := 2 ND := 3 PD := 40 Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0.2 Te := 0.05
295
Unif := 1
Unif = 1 calls uniform distribution; Unif = 0 calls normal distribution.
Nk := 1000
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\3ph_ac_mcalog.mcd
Display input amplitude and phase:

 100 − 173.205 i 
u= |u1| = 200 rd·arg(u1) = –60 deg
 −100 − 173.205 i
|u2| = 200 rd·arg(u2) = –120 deg
Nk = 1000
MCA magnitude
200
(Vmca1)i 150
Volts
(Vmca2)i
100
(Vmca3)i
50
0
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Li
MCA Lo Log freq(Hz)
Nom
MCA Hi
MCA phase angle

−50
−70
(Vmca4)i
−90
(Vmca5)i
Deg
(Vmca6)i −110
−130
−150
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Li
Log freq(Hz)
MCA Lo
Nom
MCA Hi

LOAD EVA
deg := 1 uH := 10–6 uF := 10–6
See Section 13.1 for the schematic.
R1 := 12 R2 := 20 R3 := 3 R4 := 0.01 R5 := 0.01
L1 :=636.62·uH C1 := 9.947·uF U := 5 Y := 3
1
fo := fo = 2000 log(fo) = 3.3
2 ⋅ π ⋅ L1 ⋅ C1
 99 1
CC := (2 3 C1) LL := (5 4 L1) Ein := 
 98 1
 1 2 R1 
 3 0 R2
 
EE := 0 GG := 0 RR :=  4 3 R 3
 98 5 R 4 

 99 1 R 5 
BF := 2 ND := 3 PD := 40
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0.2 Te := 0.05
Te = input (Ein) tolerance.
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\3ph_ac_evalog.mcd
 100 − 173.205 i 
u= |u1| = 200 rd·arg(u1) = –60 deg
 −100 − 173.205 i
|u2| = 200 rd·arg(u2) = –120 deg
M1 := 3.34 M2 := 3.55
(Plot markers)
Magnitude sensitivities
2
M1 M2
Sensi,1 1
Sensi,2 0
%/%
Sensi,3 −1
−2
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Li
R1 Log freq(Hz)
R2
R3
Note bipolarity and zero crossing of sensitivities at M1 and M2.
3
M1 M2
2
Sensi,6 1
%/%
Sensi,7 0
−1
−2
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Li
Log freq(Hz)
C1
L1
3
M1 M2
2
Sensi,8 1
%/%
Sensi,9 0
–1
–2
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Li
EinA Log freq(Hz)
EinB
The sensitivity plot of EinA and EinB requires some comment: If Ein were
 99 1 
changed to Ein :=  , i.e., EinB at node 98 = 0, the sensitivity of EinA
 98 0 
would +1 across the entire frequency band, or any frequency band.
But, because there are two inputs, one via the capacitor C1 (EinA) and the
second via the inductor L1 (EinB), the sensitivity of each varies with frequency.
Because C1 becomes a short at high frequency, the sensitivity of EinA goes from
zero to +1 as the frequency is increased. Because L1 becomes open at high frequency,
it does just the opposite, namely, the sensitivity goes from +1 to zero, and conversely
for low frequencies.
Hence, when there is more than one input (M > 1), the tolerance analysis answers
cannot merely be multiplied by 1 + Te, as they can for the M = 1 case. Thus, input
tolerances become significant when M > 1.
Te = 0.05
EVA magnitude
200
M1 M2
150
(MPeva1)i
Volts
(MPeva2)i 100
(MPa1)i
50
0
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Li
Log freq(Hz)
EVA phase angle

−50
M1 M2
−70
(MPeva3)i −90
(MPeva4)i
Deg
−110
(MPa2)i
−130
−150
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Li
Log freq(Hz)

LOAD FMCA
deg := 1 uH := 10–6 uF := 10–6
Single-ended two phase Y input as before. For the schematic, see Section 13.1.
R1 := 12 R2 := 20 R3 := 3 R4 := 0.01 R5 := 0.01
1
L1 := 636.62·uH C1 := 9.947·uF fo := fo = 2000
2 ⋅ π ⋅ L1 ⋅ C1
 99 1 R5
 1 2 R1 
 
log (fo) = 3.3 RR :=  3 0 R2 CC := (2 3 C1)
 4 3 R 3

 98 5 R 4 
 99 1
LL := (5 4 L1) Ein :=  EE := 0 GG := 0
 98 1
U := 5 Y := 3
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\comm42m.mcd
BF := 2 ND := 3 PD := 40
Tr := 0.02 Tc := 0.1 Ti := 0.2 Te := 0.05
→ Reference:C:\mcadwca\wcaref11\3ph_ac_fmcalog.mcd
 100 − 173.205 i 
u= |u1| = 200 rd·arg(u1) = –60 deg
 −100 − 173.205 i
|u2| = 200 rd·arg(u2) = –120 deg
FMCA magnitude
200
150
(Vfmca1)i
Volts
(Vfmca2)i 100
(Vfmca3)i
50
0
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Li
FMCA Lo Log freq(Hz)
Nom
FMCA Hi
FMCA phase angle

−50
−70
(Vfmca4)i
−90
(Vfmca5)i
Deg
(Vfmca6)i −110
−130
−150
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Li
Log freq(Hz)
14 Miscellaneous Topics
14.1 COMPONENTS NOMINALLY ZERO
Section 14.1 is background information for tolerance analysis of opamp offsets given
in Section 14.2.
mV := 10–3
Let the function be:
G(A, B, C) := (A + B)·C
Let the nominal component values be:
A := 0 B := 0 C := 20
Then
Vo := G(A, B, C) Vo = 0
Let the tolerances of the components be:
Va := 0.02 Vb := 0.01 Tc := 0.03
The tolerances of A and B are in component units, e.g., Volts; the tolerance of
C is in %. The tolerances of A and B cannot be in percentages, because X% of zero
is zero.
The derivatives of Vo wrt the components are:
da := C db := C dc := A + B
Formal definition of RSS, the variance:
Var := (da·A·Va)2 + (db·B·Vb)2 + (dc·C·Tc)2 Var = 0
We cannot use this form because A = B = 0. 3σA is Va, not the product of A
and Va. Hence,
Var := (da·Va)2 + (db·Vb)2 + (dc·C·Tc)2 Var = 0.200

Vs := Var Vs = 0.447
303
RSS:
 −Va −Vb − Tc 
Nc := 3 T :=  dpf := 0.0001 p := 1..Nc
 Va Vb Tc 
 0.0001 0 0 
Q := dpf·identity(Nc) Q= 0 0.0001 0 
 
 0 0 0.0001
 2
Vrp := G[Qp,1, Qp,2, C·(Qp,3 + 1)] Vr =  2  mV
 
 0 
Vr contains the nonnormalized sensitivities. It cannot be normalized, because

the nominal value of Vo = 0. The RSS values are:
Vrss : =
1
dpf
⋅ ∑ (Vr ⋅ T
p
p 2 ,p )2 Vrss = 0.447
This is the same as the formal definition Vs.
MCA
w := 1..Nc Nk := 30000 zw := rnorm(Nk, 0, 1)
(Mathcad’s normal distribution function)
k := 1..Nk
Normally distributed random tolerances:
T2,w − T1,w
Trn k ,w = ⋅ ( z w )k + 3 + T1,w
6
Vmcak := G[Trnk,1, Trnk,2, C·(Trnk,3 + 1)] Vavg := mean(Vmca)
Vavg = 0.407 mV Vsm := 3·stdev(Vmca) Vsm = 0.449
The value Vsm = 0.449 is very close to the value of Vrss = 0.447. Hence, this
is another example of how MCA with normal distribution inputs very closely approx-
imates RSS. By repeating the MCA ten times, for example, Vs will show an average
closer to Vrss = 0.447.
EVA
m :=1..2 Mm,p := if(m = 1, if(Vrp < 0, T2,p, T1,p), if(Vrp ≥ 0, T2,p, T1,p))
Miscellaneous Topics 305
 −0.02 −0.01 −0.03

M=
 0.02 0.01 0.03 
 −0.582 
Vevm := G[Mm,1, Mm,2, C·(Mm,3 + 1)] Vev =  
 0.618 
FMCA
Nf := 2Nc Nf = 8 m := 1..Nf Rew,m := m – 1

 Re 
Re w+1,m : = floor  w,m  Drw,m := Rew,m – 2·Rew+1,m
 2 
0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
Dr =  0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1
 
 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
Binary array counting from 0 to Nf – 1.

Tf is all eight possible tolerance combinations based on binary array Dr:
Tfw,m := if(Drw,m = 0, T1,w, T2,w)

 −0.02 0.02 −0.02 0.02 −0.02 0.02 −0.02 0.02 
Tf =  −0.01 −0.01 0.01 0.01 −0.01 −0.01 0.01 0.01
 
 −0.03 −0.03 −0.03 −0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Vfm := G[Tf1,m, Tf2,m, C·(Tf3,m + 1)]
 min ( Vf )   −0.618   −0.582 
Vfmca : =   Vfmca : =  Vev =  
 max ( Vf )  0.618   0.618 
VfT = (–0.582 0.194 –0.194 0.582 –0.618 0.206 0.618)
Hence, FMCA is correct in choosing Vf5 = –0.618 as the minimum and not
Vf1 = –0.582 as in EVA.
Why did FMCA produce a slightly wider tolerance band than EVA?
 2
Hint: Vr =  2  mV .
 
 0 
14.2 TOLERANCE ANALYSIS OF OPAMP OFFSETS

Input sources nominally zero.
K := 103 nA := 10–9 mV := 10–3
R1 R2
V1
Vos
V2 11 V4
+ − −
lb1 2 V−
+
V+ 1
−
+
3 4
R3
V3
lb2
+
R4
−
R1 := 10·K R2 := 200·K R3 := 10·K R4 := 200·K

Ib := 100·nA los := 20·nA Vos := 5·mV
(LM156 data sheet)
Maximum offsets:
los los
Ib1 := Ib − Ib 2 := Ib +
2 2
Ib1 = 90nA Ib2 = 110nA
The Resistor tolerance is Tr := 0.02
Ein := (99 1) Ao := 106 U := 4 Y := 4
Under the broad assumption that the average value of Vos = 0 and that the
average bias currents are half of the maximum:
Vos := 0
1 0 R1 
1 4 R2 4 0 3 2 Ao 
RR :=   EE := 
3 0 R 3 1 2 99 0 Vos
3 R 4 
 0
 Ib1 
1 0 99 0
 2 
GG :=  
3 Ib 2 
0 99 0
 2 
Vn := 1solve(A1, B2) VnY = –2mV

Ig1 := Vn5 Ig1 = 45nA Ig2 := Vn6 Ig2 = 55nA
(bias currents)
Neither the NDS method nor SPICE is designed for tolerance analysis with
nominal zero value components.
Hence, we must resort to “manual” methods.
Circuit function:
 Ib1 ⋅ R1 ⋅ R 2 Ib 2 ⋅ R 3 ⋅ R 4   R2 
G ( R1, R 2, R 3, R 4, Vos, Ib1, Ib 2 ) : =  Vos + −  ⋅ 1 + 
 R1 + R 2 R3 + R4   R1 
Reset Vos to maximum:
Vos := 5·mV
Tolerance array T:
 − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr −Vos 0 0 
T := 
 Tr Tr Tr Tr Vos Ib1 Ib 2 
Nc := cols(T) Nc = 7 p := 1..Nc
RSS
dpf := 0.0001 Q := dpf·identity(Nc)
Again, under the assumption that the average value of Vos = 0 and that the
average bias currents are half of the maximum:
 Ib1 Ib 2 
Va : =  R1, R 2, R 3, R 4, 0, ,  Va = –2mV
 2 2 
This confirms the aforementioned NDS answer.

Nonnormalized sensitivities:
Vrp := G[R1·(Qp,1 + 1), R2·(Qp,2 + 1), R3·(Qp,3 + 1), R4·(Qp,4 + 1),

Qp,5, Qp,6, Qp,7]
VrT = (0 0 0 0 0.002 20 –20)
T
 Ib1 Ib 2 
Ta :=  Tr Tr Tr Tr Vos  m := 1..2
 2 2 
( −1)m ⋅  −106 
∑ (Vr ⋅ Ta )
2
Vrssm := p p Vrss =   mV
dpf p  106 
MCA
w := 1..Nc Nk := 30000 zw := rnorm(Nk, 0, 1)

(normal distribution)
k := 1..Nk
T2,w − T1,w
Tn k ,w := ⋅ ( z w )k + 3 + T1,w
6
Vmk = G[R1·(Tnk,1 + 1), R2·(Tnk,2 + 1), R3·(Tnk,3 + 1), R4·(Tnk,4 + 1),
Tnk,5, Tnk,6, Tnk,7]
Vavg := mean(Vm) Vavg = –2mV Vsm := (–1)m·3·stdev(Vm)
 −106 
Vs =   mV
 106 
Compare this with RSS.
EVA
1 
Mm,p := if[(m) = 1, if(Vrp < 0, T2,p, T1,p), if(Vrp ≥ 0, T2,p, T1,p)] m= 
 2
Vevam := G[R1·(Mm,1 + 1), R2·(Mm,2 + 1), R3·(Mm,3 + 1), R4·(Mm,4 + 1),
Mm,5, Mm,6, Mm,7]
 −127 
Veva =   mV
 123 
FMCA
Nf := 2Nc Nf = 128 k := 1..Nf

 Re 
Rew,k := k – 1 Re w+1,k : = floor  w,k 
 2 
Drw,k := Rew,k – 2·Rew+1,k Tfw,k := if(Drw,k = 0, T1,w, T2,w
Vmfk := G[R1·(Tf1,k + 1), R2·(Tf2,k + 1), R3·(Tf3,k + 1), R4·(Tf4,k + 1),
Tf5,k, Tf6,k, Tf7,k]
 −132 
Vfmca1 := min(Vmf) Vfmca2 := max(Vmf) Vfmca =   mV
 127 
A slightly wider tolerance band than EVA is obtained.
14.3 BEST-FIT RESISTOR RATIOS

Find the best parallel resistor values for Rp out of all the 96 or 192 resistor value
combinations (choice 1), find the best noninverting gain values for gain Gp (choice
2), find the best inverting gain values for gain –Gn (choice 3), or find the best voltage
divider values for gain D (choice 4).
Choose B:
B = 48 (2% values), or B = 96 (1% values), or B = 192 (0.1% values).

B := 96
Required functions:
frac(x) := x – trunc(x) Lx(x) := round(B·log(x))

 x
trunc   frac x  
Rx ( x ) : = 10  B
⋅ round  10  B  , 2 
 
User input:
(choice = 1, or choice = 2, or choice = 3, or choice = 4) choice := 2

Rp := 55.86 Gp := 9.56 Gn := –3.861 D := 0.26
(example inputs for choices 1 to 4.)

Rv : = E ← 10 6
for m ∈1..B + 1
R1x ← Rx ( B + m )
if choice = 1
R1x ← Rx ( Lx ( Rp ) + m )
Rp ⋅ R1x
R2t ←
R1x − Rp
R1x
R2t ← if choice = 2
Gp − 1
R1x
−Gn
R1x ⋅ D
1− D
R 2 x ← Rx ( Lx ( R 2 t ) )
E1 ← R 2 x − R 2 t
if E1 < E
E ← E1
R1 ← R1x
R 2 ← R 2x
 R1 
 
 R 2
 11.8 
Rv =  
 1.37 
Use appropriate decade values.

Rv1 ⋅ Rv2
Ans := R ← if choice = 1
Rv1 + Rv2
Rv1
R ←1+ iff choice = 2
Rv2
− Rv1
R← if choice = 3
Rv2
Rv2
R← if choice = 4
Rv1 + Rv2
Ans = 9.613 Gp = 9.560
Percentage error:
Ans
pce := 1 − pce = —0.56%
Gp
Changing B to 192 yields pce = 0.
Using a “convenient value” method:
10 Gpx
Gpx : = 1 + Gpx = 9.696 pce := 1 − pce = –1.42%
1.15 Gp
14.4 TRUNCATED GAUSSIAN DISTRIBUTION

In this distribution, Gaussian probability densities less than –3σ and greater than 3σ
are rejected. It does not use transcendental functions as does the Box–Muller form
(see Reference 1) and is hence faster. This could be useful in manufacturing yield
analyses to simulate using all in-spec components.
R := k ← 1
while k ≤ Nk
x1 ← 2 ⋅ rnd (1) − 1
x 2 ← 2 ⋅ rnd (1) − 1
w ← x1 ⋅ x1 + x 2 ⋅ x 2
if w < 1
−2 ⋅ 1n ( w )
w←
w
y 2 ← w ⋅ x1
if ( y 2 > −3) ∧ ( y 2 < 3)
y1k ← y 2
k ← k +1
y1
Create histogram:
nb := 30 Nk := 30000 q := 1..nb + 1 nh := 1..nb

VL := min(R) VH := max(R) VL = –2.995 VH = 2.988
VH − VL
intv := binq := VL + intv·(q – 1) pr := hist(bin,R)
nb
Vs := stdev(R) Vavg := mean(R) Vavg = 0.012
3·Vs = 2.966 E(R) := Nk·intv·dnorm(R, Vavg, Vs)
3000
3.Vs
−3.Vs
2000
prnh
E(binnh)
1000
0
−5 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 5
binnh
Histogram
Ideal Gaussian
14.5 LTC1060 SWITCHED CAPACITOR FILTER

MCA with one and three stages
K := 103 Hz := 1 KHz := 103
There are times when no circuit topology is available to construct the node list
arrays. An example is the LTC1060 switched capacitor filter. Here, we must rely on
information from the data sheet to perform a worst-case analysis. The diagram from
the vendor’s data sheet is shown in the following.
R4
R3
R2 N S1A BP LP
3 (18) 5 (16) 2 (19) 1 (20)
R1
VIN 4 – –
+
(17) ∑ ∫ ∫
+ –
SA/B TLC1060-MO006
6 15 1/2 LTC1060
V–
fCLK R2 R3 R2
f0 = ;Q= ;H = –R2/R1; H0BP = –R3/R1; H0LP = –R4/R1
100(50) R4 R2 R4 0HP
Mode 3: 2nd order filter providing highpass, bandpass, lowpass.
14.5.1 DESIGN PROCEDURE FROM THE DATA SHEET
2 ⋅ π ⋅ fc
fo := 640·Hz Q1 := 100 H := 1 fc := 51·KHz wc :=
50
H ⋅ R1 ⋅ wo wc ⋅ Q1 ⋅ R 2
wo := 2·π·fo R1 := 412·K R 2 := R 3 :=
Q1 ⋅ wc wo
2
 wc 
R 4 := R 2 ⋅ 
 wo 
R2 = 2.585K R3 = 412K R4 = 6.566K
AC Analysis
LF − BF
BF := 560 LF := 720 NP := 160 i := 1..NP + 1 DF :=
NP
Fi := BF + DF·(i – 1)
Tr := 0.02 Resistor tolerance 2%
Twc := 0.075 Switching frequency tolerance 7.5%
Construct component vector X and tolerance array T:
X := (R1 R2 R3 R4 wc)T
 − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Twc 
T := 
 Tr Tr Tr Tr Twc 
Magnitude function:
X5 ⋅ X2 ⋅ ω
G ( X, ω ) : =
X1
 ( X 5 )2 ⋅ X 2
2
  X ⋅ X ⋅ω2
 − ω2  +  5 2 
 X4   X3 
Convert to rad/sec: ω := 2·π·F
MCA
V1i := G(X, ωi) Nominal output.

Nc := length (X) w := 1..Nc Nk := 4000 k := 1..Nk
Tnw,k := (T2,w – T1,w)·rnd (1) + T1,w + 1
Random tolerance array, dim {Nc Nk} Uniform distribution.
BWw,k := Xw·Tnw,k Random component array, dim {Nc Nk}
Vck,1 := G(BW〈k〉,ωi) Random output array, dim {Nk NP + 1}
Vmca1i := max(Vc〈i〉) The maximums of the output array at each of NP +
1 frequencies.
Three stages
Q3 := 51.1096
Design for overall Q of 100 for the three stages.
H ⋅ R1 ⋅ wo wc ⋅ Q 3 ⋅ R 2
R1 := 412·K R 2 := R2 = 5.058K R 3 :=
Q 3 ⋅ wc wo
2
 wc 
R 4 := R 2 ⋅ 
 wo 
R3 = 412 K R4 = 12.847 K
R5 := R1 R6 := R2 R7 := R3 R8 := R4
Same values for second stage.
R9 := R1 R10 := R2 R11 := R3 R12 := R4
Same values for third stage.
X := (R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10 wc)T
Magnitude function for the three stages
X13 ⋅ X 2 ⋅ ω
G 3 ( X, ω ) : = a ←
X1
 ( X13 )2 ⋅ X 2
2
  X ⋅ X ⋅ω2
 − ω 2  +  13 2 
 X4   X3 
X13 ⋅ X 6 ⋅ ω
X5
b←
 ( X13 )2 ⋅ X 6
2
  X ⋅ X ⋅ω2
 − ω 2  +  13 6 
 X8   X7 
X13 ⋅ X10 ⋅ ω
X9
c←
 ( X13 )2 ⋅ X10
2
  X ⋅ X ⋅ω2
 − ω 2  +  13 10 
 X12   X11 
Tf ← a ⋅ b ⋅ c
 − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr − Tr – Twc 
T :=  
 Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Tr Twc 
V3i := G3(X, ωi) Nominal output for three stages.

Nc := length(X) w := 1..Nc
Tnw,k := (T2,w – T1,w)·rnd (1) + T1,w + 1
BXw,k := Xw·Tnw,k
Vck,1 := G3(BW〈k〉,ωi)
Vmca3i := max(Vc〈i〉)
EVA markers:
M1 := 580.3·Hz M2 := 701.9·Hz
Bandpass Filter MCA

1.2
M1 M2
1
V1i
0.8
Vmca1i
Volts
0.6
Vmca3i
V3i 0.4
0.2
0
560 580 600 620 640 660 680 700 720
Fi
Freq (Hz)
Nom_1
1 Stage MCA
3 Stage MCA
Nom_3
Nk = 4000
This plot illustrates an important principle of statistical tolerance analyses.

The question may well be asked as to why one stage with 5 components or
variables has a wider frequency tolerance band than three stages with 13 variables.
Also, note that the amplitude of the three stages shows a higher variance than the
single stage, but the average is lower.
D0 wc 2 ⋅ R 2
The center frequency in Hz is given by fo = , in which D01 = for
2⋅π R4
wc 2 ⋅ R 6 wc 2 ⋅ R10
the first stage, D0 2 = for the second, and D0 3 = for the third stage.
R8 R12
Due to the separate tolerances on R2 through R12, each of these fo’s will be different
for one frequency sweep, and different again for subsequent Nk frequency sweeps
because of new random tolerances assigned by the Monte Carlo process.
When ω2 = D01, the first term in the transfer function denominator radical
R3
becomes zero, and the peak gain is given by Gpk = , but D02 and D03 in the
R1
second and third stages will not equal ω2, and the denominators here will be larger,
pulling down the average peak gain of the three combined stages. The nominal peak
gain is:
R 3 R 7 R11
G 3pk := ⋅ ⋅ G3pk = 1
R1 R 5 R 9
A numerical example will help illustrate.

N1 ⋅ s
In the transfer function G ( s ) =
s2 + D1 ⋅ s + D0
wc ⋅ R 2
N1 := N1 = 78.7
R1
wc ⋅ R 2
D1 := D1 = 78.7
R3
Assume the following random values for wc, R2, R4, ... , R12:
R2 := R2·(1.015) R4 := R4·(0.998) R6 := R6·(1.006) R8 := R8·(0.991)

R10 := R10·(0.993) R12 := R12·(0.982) wc := wc·(1.071)
Then:
wc R2
f1 := ⋅ f1 = 691.3Hz
2 ⋅ π R4
wc R6
f 2 := ⋅ f2 = 690.6Hz
2 ⋅ π R8
wc R10
f 3 := ⋅ f3 = 689.3Hz
2 ⋅ π R12
Use nominal values for the other components and convert to rad/sec:
ω1 := 2·π·f1
N1 ⋅ ω1
Tfa :=
2
 wc 2 ⋅ R 2 2
 R 4 − ω1  + ( D1 ⋅ ω1)
2
N1 ⋅ ω1
Tfb :=
2
 wc 2 ⋅ R 6 2
 R 8 − ω1  + ( D1 ⋅ ω1)
2
N1 ⋅ ω1
Tfc :=
2
 wc 2 ⋅ R10 2
 R12 − ω1  + ( D1 ⋅ ω1)
2
Tfa = 1 Tfb = 0.995 Tfc = 0.953 Tf := Tfa·Tfb·Tfc Tf = 0.948

Tfa = 1, but the product of all three is less.
As to the wider center frequencies for the single stage, the chances of wc, R2,
and R4 having random values approaching the minimum and maximum center
frequencies are much greater than the likelihood of wc, R2, R4, R6, R8, R10, and
R12 all having one set of random values for an extreme center frequency. The larger
variance, not the mean, of the three-stage gain is again due to the larger number of
components involved.
Showing that the overall Q for the three stages is 100:
 1 
Q1 = 100 M 3 := fo ⋅  1 − M3 = 636.8
 2 ⋅ Q1 
 1  1
M 4 := fo ⋅  1 + M4 = 643.2 M5 :=
 2 ⋅ Q1  2
0.9
0.8
V3 i M5
0.7
0.6
0.5
630 632 634 636 638 640 642 644 646 648 650
Fi
 100 
Q =  100 
fo
Q2 :=
M4 – M3  
 51.11
REFERENCES
1. www.taygeta.com/random/gaussian.html.
Appendix II
SUMMARY OF TOLERANCE ANALYSIS METHODS
DC
It has been demonstrated that the conventional sensitivity-sign-based method of
extreme value analysis (EVA) does not always yield the “extreme values.” Hence,
the fast Monte Carlo analysis (FMCA) method must be used to guarantee accurate
and reliable output tolerance spreads. However, this method may not be practical
for large DC circuits because the number of required iterations is 2Nc, where Nc is
the number of components. For small-to-medium-sized circuits, however, it is the
preferred method. Normal distribution input MCA can be used to closely approxi-
mate RSS tolerance bands (Nk > 5000 as a guideline) but not for EVA or FMCA,
as has been empirically demonstrated.
AC
With AC circuits that have nonmonotonic components, RSS, EVA, and FMCA
methods become unreliable and should not be used. Hence, prudence dictates that
these methods should not be used for any AC circuit. That leaves MCA as the method
of choice. A large number of samples of Nk must be used to obtain tolerance bands
greater than those in RSS but less than those in EVA, using uniform distribution
inputs. As in DC circuits, the normal (Gaussian) distribution will approximate the
RSS 3 σ values for monotonic circuits. A rule of thumb is to use no less than Nk
= 1000 samples for large circuits and Nk greater than 10,000 for small circuits.
TRANSIENT
Several examples of transient Monte Carlo analysis have been given. The author has
discovered that EVA, RSS, or FMCA methods, when applied to transient analysis,
yield erroneous results. This is due to the bipolar sensitivities encountered with
oscillatory waveforms, which many RC and RCL circuits exhibit. Hence, MCA is
once again the recommended method.
The execution time is a direct function of kmax (the total number of time
increments), Nk (number of Monte Carlo samples), and N (the total number of
capacitors and inductors in the circuit). The number N determines the dimensions
of the A matrix to be {N N}, which, of course, has a direct effect on execution
time.
319
TABLE OF SUBPROGRAMS
PART I NOMINAL ANALYSIS SUBPROGRAMS
Lin or Log
File Namea Function Frequency Comments
comm42 AC Nominal Either

comm42m AC Nominal Either Superposed outputs for M > 1
dccomm42 DC Nominal N/Ab
dccomm42m DC Nominal N/A Superposed outputs for M > 1
FindU Finds total number of circuit nodes N/A Optional use
PART II TOLERANCE ANALYSIS SUBPROGRAMS (USED WITH PART I

SUBPROGRAMS)
Lin or Log
File Namea Function Frequency Comments
acwcalin AC EVA Lin Sensitivity outputs included

acwcalog AC EVA Log Sensitivity outputs included
dc_beta DC N/A Uses Mathcad rbeta functions
dc_fmca DC FMCA N/A
dc_gap DC N/A Uses bimodal input distributions
dc_mca DC MCA N/A Histogram outputs; normal and uniform
distributions
dcwca DC EVA N/A EVA and sensitivity outputs
fmcalin AC FMCA Lin
fmcalog AC FMCA Log
mcalin AC MCA Lin Normal and uniform distribution inputs
mcalog AC MCA Log Normal and uniform distribution inputs
TolArray T Array N/A Creates symmetric tolerance array T
tranlin TA N/A Transient analysis; pulse input
3_ph_ac_evalog 3-Phase EVA Log Sensitivity outputs included
3_ph_ac_fmcalog 3-Phase FMCA Log Magnitude and phase outputs
3_ph_ac_mcalog 3-Phase MCA Log Magnitude and phase outputs
a All have the file extension mcd.
b Not applicable.
For required inputs, see example worksheet files.
IN CASE OF DIFFICULTY
A checklist if comm42.mcd will not return A, B, D, and E:
1. Check nodes for sequence, i.e., they must be 1, 2, 3, 4, …, U. Make sure

no node numbers are skipped or omitted.
Appendix II 321
2. The input source node sequence must be in descending order from 99,
98, …, 90.
3. Check that U is the same as the maximum number of nodes in the circuit.
4. Make sure that Y is at least one of the nodes in the circuit.
5. For AC, make sure that RR, CC, LL, U, Y, Ein, EE, and GG are all created
or set to zero as required.
6. For DC, make sure that RR, U, Y, Ein, EE, and GG are all created or set
to zero.
7. U, Y, RR, and Ein must all be nonzero.
8. Make sure that all the node numbers in RR, CC, LL, EE, Ein, and GG
exist in the circuit and are connected properly.
9. Ensure that autocalculate is ON (Tools, Calculate). As a check, press
CTRL + F9.
10. Check for all-capacitive loops and all-inductive cutsets.
11. Check for at least one ground (node 0) in the circuit (also a SPICE
requirement).
12. Ensure that none of the four rules of circuit construction given on p. 37
are being violated.
ABBREVIATIONS
BPF Band-pass filter

BJT Bipolar junction transistor
dpf Derivative perturbation factor
EVA Extreme value analysis
FMCA Fast Monte Carlo analysis
HPF High-pass filter
HV High-voltage
LPF Low pass filter
MCA Monte Carlo analysis
MFB Multiple feedback
MOSFET Metal-oxide semiconductor field effect transistor
RNG Random number generator
RSS Root sum square
rv Random variable
TA Tolerance analysis
TTA Transient tolerance analysis
WCA Worst-case analysis (a generic term that includes EVA, RSS, FMCA,
and MCA)
Index
A All-inductive circuits, 23 to 24
All-inductive cutsets, see ICS
A and ß slope intersection method, 103 to 105 Amplifiers, video (uA733), 89 to 95, 212
AC analysis Asymmetric tolerances, 217, 221 to 222
ACLs, 33 to 34
all-capacitive circuits, 22 to 23
all-inductive circuits, 23 to 24 B
broadband pulse transformer models, 28
fifth-order active filter, 60 Balanced Y-load, 181 to 186
floating VCVSs, 39 Bessel HPF, AC and transient MCA, 288 to 291
HV (200 V) shunt MOSFET regulator, 77 Beta distributions [4-6], 232 to 234
LTC 1562 quad band filter IC, 83 Bimodal (gapped) distribution inputs, 236 to 239
MOSFET model (first-order), 46 Bipolar junction transistors, see BJTs
output plots, 11 to 13 BJTs (bipolar junction transistors), 46 to 47, 87
seventh-order elliptical low-pass filters, 65, 69 to 88, 211 to 212
to 70, 72 to 73 Broadband pulse transformer models, 27 to 30
Buck regulator, switching power supply output
square root of frequency (+10dB/decade)
stage, 137 to 140
circuits, 75
Butterworth low-pass filter circuits, 250 to 255
State Space Averaging, 142
state variable filters, 62
subcircuits schemes, 57 to 58
third-order opamp models, 56
C
tolerance analysis, 213 to 216 CASE FMCA greater than EVA, 228 to 230
twin-T RC networks, 26 CCCS (current-controlled current source), 35, 36
two inputs, three outputs, 51 to 37
unity gain differential amplifiers, 104, 108 to CCVS (current-controlled voltage source), 36
109 Centered difference approximation —
VCVS example, 48 sensitivities, 222 to 224
AC and transient MCA — Bessel HPF, 288 to 291 Circuit output vs. component value, 241 to 246
AC circuits, tolerance analysis, 241 to 284 Circuits, discrete components, 211 to 212
Butterworth low-pass filter circuits, 250 to 255 Circuits with M<1, 41 to 43
circuit output vs. component value, 241 to 246 CI sensitivity, exact values, 247 to 248
CI sensitivity, exact values, 247 to 248 Comparator 100-Hz oscillator, 123 to 127
high-Q hum notch filter circuits, 276 to 281 Component value vs. circuit output, 241 to 246
LC 1562, 281 to 283 Constant current source model, 87 to 88
multiple-feedback BPF circuits, 255 to 260 Controlled sources, nominal analysis, 35 to 95
multiple output EVA, 248 to 250 BJT constant current source model, 87 to 88
Sallen and Key BPF circuits, 265 to 271 circuits with M<1, 41 to 43
state variable filter circuits, 271 to 276 dependent, 35 to 37
switching power supply compensation fifth-order active filters, 59 to 60
circuits, 260 to 265 first-order MOSFET model, 44 to 46
AC floating VCVS (voltage controlled voltage floating VCVS, 38 to 41
current), 199 to 202 HV (200 V) shunt MOSFET regulator, 76 to
ACLs (all-capacitive loops), 30 to 31, 32 to 34 77
Algorithms, Leverrier’s, 97 to 101 LTC 1562 band-pass filter IC in a quad IC, 78
All-capacitive circuits, 21 to 23 to 79
All-capacitive loops, see ACLs LTC 1562 quad band filter IC, 79 to 86
323
seventh-order elliptical low-pass filters (see E

Seventh-order elliptical low-pass
filters) Equivalent series resistance, see ESR
square root of frequency (+10dB/decade) ESR (equivalent series resistance), 31
circuits, 74 to 75 EVA (extreme value analysis), 212 to 215, 217
state variable filters, 60 to 63 Butterworth low-pass filters, 253 to 254
subcircuit schemes, 56 to 58 high-Q hum notch filters, 279 to 280
third-order opamp models, 54 to 56 LC 1562, 282 to 283
two inputs, three outputs, 50 to 54 less than CASE FMCA, 228 to 230
uA733 video amplifier, 89 to 95
multiple-feedback BPFs, 257 to 259
VCVS,CCCS examples, 46 to 49
Sallen and Key BPFs, 268 to 270
Conversions
state variable filters, 273 to 275
CCCS to VCCS, 36 to 37
switching power supply compensation, 262 to
CCVS to VCVS, 36
264
D floating inputs to single-ended Y, 167 to 169
Extreme value analysis, see EVA
Current-controlled current source, see CCCS
D F
DC analysis Fast Monte Carlo analysis, see FMCA

broadband pulse transformer models, 28 Fifth-order active filters, 59 to 60
floating VCVSs, 38 to 39 First-order MOSFET model, 44 to 46
HV (200 V) shunt MOSFET regulator, 77 Floating 5-V input source, 164 to 165
MOSFET model (first-order), 45 to 46 Floating delta input, Y-connected unbalanced
output plots, 9 to 11 load, 177 to 181
State Space Averaging, 141 to 142 Floating VCVSs (voltage-controlled voltage
tolerance analysis, 212 to 213 sources), 38 to 41
twin-T RC networks, 25 FMCA (fast Monte Carlo analysis), 212 to 213,
two inputs, three outputs, 51 216
VCVS example, 48 Butterworth low-pass filters, 254 to 255
DC circuit analysis, nominal, 151 to 165 high-Q hum notch filters, 280 to 281
floating 5-V input source, 164 to 165 and MCA, state variable filters, 275 to 276
problem, textbook, 152 to 154 multiple-feedback BPFs, 259 to 260
RTD circuit, 151 to 152 RTDs (resistance temperature detectors), 227
RTD circuit, step resistor value, 161 to 163 to 228
stacking VCVSs and paralleling VCCSs, 158 Sallen and Key BPFs, 270 to 271
to 159 switching power supply compensation, 264 to
test circuit, 154 to 158 265
voltage sweep (RTD circuit), 159 to 160
DC circuits, tolerance analysis, 219 to 239
asymmetric tolerances, 221 to 222 G
beta distributions [4-6], 232 to 234
CASE FMCA greater than EVA, 228 to 230 Gain-phase plot, plot loop gain as, 105 to 106
centered difference approximation-- Gapped (bimodal) distribution inputs, 236 to 239
sensitivities, 222 to 224
MCA of RTD, bimodal (gapped) inputs, 236
to 239 H
RTD circuits, 219 to 220, 224 to 228, 234 to
236 High-Q hum notch filter circuits, 276 to 281
tolerancing inputs, 231 to 232 High-voltage shunt regulators, 109 to 114
Dependent controlled sources, 35 to 37 Histograms, output, 232
Differential equation solvers, Mathcad, 133 to 135 HV (200 V) shunt MOSFET regulators, 76 to 77
Discrete component circuits, 211 to 212 Hybrid-pi model, BJTs, 46 to 47
Index 325
I N
ICS (all-inductive cutsets), 31 to 32 N=2 switched circuit transient response, 120 to
123
NDS (node list DC superposition) method
K BJT, 87 to 88
definition, 3 to 5
KCL (Kirchoff’s Current Law), 31 solution, three phase circuits, 170 to 174
Kirchoff’s Current Law, see KCL stability, 103
Kirchoff’s Voltage Law, see KVL NDS (node list DC superposition) method theory,
KVL (Kirchoff’s Voltage Law), 30 to 31 187 to 207
AC floating VCVS, 199 to 202
background theory, 187 to 196
L VCVS and CCCS, 203 to 207
LC 1562, 281 to 283 Node list circuit analysis, 6 to 21
Leverrier’s algorithm, 97 to 101 algebraic solution, passive circuits, 16 to 21
LM158 (opamp model), 106 to 109 output plots, passive circuits, 9 to 16
Low-pass filters, seventh-order elliptical, see rules and definitions, 6 to 8
Seventh-order elliptical low-pass Node list DC superposition, see NDS
filters Nominal circuit analysis, 3 to 8
LTC 1562 band-pass filter IC in a quad IC, 78 to Nonmonotonic components, 213 to 214
79 Numerical derivatives, 222 to 224
LTC 1562 quad band filter IC, 79 to 86 Numerical transfer function, Leverrier’s
algorithm, 97 to 99
M
O
Mathcad’s differential equation solvers, 133 to
135 OC (open-collector) transistor output, 124
Mathematical pulse width modulator, see PWM ODE (ordinary differential equation) solver
Matrix solution, 153 to 154 (Mathcad), 134 to 135
MCA (Monte Carlo analysis) One resistor value, stepping, 68 to 70
Butterworth low-pass filters, 251 to 253 Opamp model (LM158), 106 to 109
high-Q hum notch filters, 278 Open-collector, see OC
inputs, 232 Ordinary differential equation, see ODE
LC 1562, 281 to 282 Output histograms, 232
multiple-feedback BPFs, 256 to 257 Output plots, 9 to 16
RTD, beta (skewed) distribution, 234 to 236
RTD, bimodal (gapped) inputs, 236 to 239
RTD, R4 tolerance=10%, 226 to 227 P
Sallen and Key BPFs, 266 to 268
state variable filters, 272 to 273 Paralleling VCCSs and stacking VCVSs and, 158
switching power supply compensation, 261 to to 159
262 Passive circuits, nominal analysis, 9 to 34
transient, 285 to 288, 291 to 293 ACLs, 21 to 23, 30 to 34
Monotonic components, 213 algebraic solution, 16 to 21
Monte Carlo analysis, see MCA all-inductive circuits, 23 to 24
MOSFET circuits, 211 to 212 broadband pulse transformer models, 27 to 30
MOSFET model (first-order), 44 to 46 ICS, 31 to 32
MOSFET regulator, HV (200 V) shunt, 76 to 77 output plots, 9 to 16
Multiple-feedback BPF (band-pass filter) circuits, twin-T RC networks, 24 to 26
255 to 260 Passive RCL circuits, 131 to 133
Multiple feedback BPFs (band-pass filters), 286 Plot loop gain as gain-phase plot, 105 to 106
to 288 Pulse transformer, 127 to 130
PWM (mathematical pulse width modulator), 135 Step-resistor value, RTD circuit, 161 to 163
to 137, 143 Stiff ODEs (ordinary differential equations), 135
Subcircuit schemes, 56 to 58
Switched circuit (N=2) transient response, 120 to
Q 123
Switching power supply compensation circuits,
Quadrature oscillator, 145 to 147 260 to 265
Switching power supply output stage--Buck
regulator, 137 to 140
R
Random number generators, see RNGs
RCL circuits, 16 to 21, 131 to 133
T
Resistance temperature detector, see RTD Test circuit, DC circuit analysis, 154 to 158
Rkadapt functions, 133 to 134 Third-order opamp models, 54 to 56
rkfixed functions, 133 to 134 Three-phase circuits, nominal analysis, 167 to 186
RNGs (random number generators), 213 balanced Y-load, 181 to 186
Root sum square, see RSS conversion, D floating inputs to single-ended
RSS (root sum square), 212, 213, 217 Y, 167 to 169
RTD (resistance temperature detector) circuits, NDS solution, three phase, 170 to 174
151 to 152, 159 to 163, 219 to 220
Y-connected unbalanced load--floating delta
RTD (resistance temperature detector) circuits,
input, 177 to 181
MCA, 224 to 226, 236 to 239
Y-unbalanced load, three phase, 174 to 177
RTD (resistance temperature detector) FMCA,
Three-phase circuits, tolerance analysis, 295 to
227 to 228
301
RTD (resistance temperature detector) MCA, beta
Time-domain tolerance analysis, 217
(skewed) distribution, 234 to 236
Tolerance analysis, introduction, 211 to 217
RTD (resistance temperature detector) MCA,
Tolerancing inputs, 231 to 232
R4tolerance=10%, 226 to 227
Transfer function, Leverrier’s algorithm, 97 to 101
Rules, four, 37
Transient analysis, 115 to 149
Rules and definitions, 6 to 8
comparator 100-Hz oscillator, 123 to 127
Mathcad’s differential equation solvers, 133
to 135
S
N=2 Switched circuit transient response, 120
Sallen and Key BPF (band-pass filter) circuits, to 123
265 to 271 passive RCL circuits, 131 to 133
Sensitivities, 222 to 224, 247 to 248 pulse transformers, 127 to 130
Seven capacitor values, stepping, 71 to 73 PWM (mathematical pulse width modulator),
Seventh-order elliptical low-pass filters, 63 to 73 135 to 137
one resistor value, stepping, 68 to 70 quadrature oscillators, 145 to 147
seven capacitor values, stepping, 71 to 73 simple triangular waveform generators, 143 to
Simple triangular waveform generator, 143 to 145 145
Slope intersection method, 103 to 105 State Space Averaging, 140 to 143
SPICE node list text format, 5 switched transient analysis, 118 to 120
Square root of frequency (+10dB/decade) circuits, switching power supply output stage--Buck
74 to 75 regulator, 137 to 140
Stability analysis, 103 to 114 tolerance analysis, 217
high-voltage shunt regulator, 109 to 114 Wein bridge oscillator, 148 to 149
opamp model (LM158), 106 to 109 Transient tolerance analysis, 285 to 293
unity gain differential amplifiers, 103 to 106 AC and transient MCA --Bessel HPF, 288 to
Stacking VCVSs and paralleling VCCSs, 158 to 291
159 transient MCA--multiple feedback BPF, 286
State Space Averaging, 140 to 143 to 288
State variable filter circuits, 271 to 276 transient MCA--state variable filter, 291 to
State variable filters, 60 to 63, 291 to 293 293
Index 327
transient MCA--twin-T RC network, 285 to VCVSs (voltage-controlled voltage sources),

286 CCCSs (current controlled current
Twin-T RC networks, 24 to 26, 100 to 101, 285 sources), 46 to 49, 203 to 207
to 286 Video amplifiers (uA733), 89 to 95
Two inputs, three outputs, 50 to 54 Voltage-controlled current sources, see VCCSs
Voltage-controlled voltage sources, see VCVSs
Voltage sweep (RTD circuit), 159 to 160
U
uA733 video amplifier, 89 to 95
Unbalanced delta loads, single-ended inputs, 170
W
to 174
Wein bridge oscillator, 148 to 149
Unity gain differential amplifiers, 103 to 106
V Y
VCCSs (voltage-controlled current sources), 35, Y-connected unbalanced load--floating delta

148 to 149 input, 177 to 181
VCVSs (voltage-controlled voltage sources), 5, Y-unbalanced load, three phase, 174 to 177
35 to 36, 38 to 41

Robert Boyd Node List Analysis Mathcad

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Robert Boyd Node List Analysis Mathcad

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Node List

Tolerance Analysis of Electronic Circuits Using MATLAB

Tolerance Analysis of Electronic Circuits Using MATHCAD

The Electronics Handbook, Second Edition

PSPICE and MATLAB for Electronics: An Integrated Approach

Electronics and Circuit Analysis Using MATLAB, Second Edition

Boca Raton London New York

© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Boyd, Robert (Robert R.)

Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at

• A 400-sample Monte Carlo limitation — not nearly enough for adequate

PART I Nominal Analysis

Chapter 1 Introduction ........................................................................................3

Chapter 2 Passive Circuits...................................................................................9

Chapter 3 Controlled Sources ...........................................................................35

Chapter 4 Leverrier’s Algorithm ......................................................................97

Chapter 5 Stability Analysis ............................................................................103

Chapter 6 Transient Analysis ..........................................................................115

Chapter 8 Three-Phase Circuits .....................................................................167

PART II Tolerance Analysis

Chapter 9 Introduction ....................................................................................211

Chapter 10 DC Circuits .....................................................................................219

Chapter 11 AC Circuits .....................................................................................241

Chapter 12 Transient Tolerance Analysis ........................................................285

Chapter 13 Three-Phase Circuits ....................................................................295

Chapter 14 Miscellaneous Topics......................................................................303

Forever and Always

1.1.2 THE NDS METHOD OF NOMINAL CIRCUIT ANALYSIS

where A, B, D, E, and G are arrays; x, a column vector of the state variables; u, a

Array Rows Columns

Using dimensional notation, {row col}, y is {K N}{N N}{N M} + {K M} =

1.1.3 GENERAL GUIDELINES

For DC: dccomm42.mcd (creates A1 and B2 arrays)

1.2 INTRODUCTION TO NODE LIST CIRCUIT

1.2.1 RULES AND DEFINITIONS

Calculated using the Mathcad subprogram file comm42.mcd:

For AC analysis, log frequency sweep:

For the inductors, we similarly create the array LL:

K := 103 u := 10–6 m := 10–3

R1 := 10 R2 := 100 R3 := 50·K R4 := 10·K

f1 and f2 are resonant frequencies for the values of L3 and L4.

U := 3 Three unknown nodes.

Set up node list arrays: Ein := (99 1) (Ein = 1 V at node 99)

EE := 0 (No VCVSs) GG := 0 (No VCCSs)

DC output voltage at node Y: Y = 3 Vodc := D·X + E Vodc = (0)

Output magnitude at node Y

Phase angle at node Y

Note that only D and E have changed.

Output magnitude at node Y

We can plot the ratio of V3 to V2 as follows:

 ( cvi )2  180  ( cvi )2 

Introduction to NDS Method — SPICE Verification

Spice veriﬁcation - magnitude

Spice veriﬁcation - phase angle

2.2 INTRODUCTION TO NODE LIST CIRCUIT

eL3 = vC1 eL4 = vC2 (1)

Not done yet; need to eliminate V1.

We see that: V3 = vC2

Solving Equation 4 for V2:

V1 = vC1 + V2 From Equation 2 (6)

Substituting Equation 5 into Equation 6

Substituting Equation 7 into Equation 3:

From Equation 2: V2 = V1 − vC1