How to set the model parameter STIMOD in simulation?

Hi Andrew, my server cashed so I can only try your suggestion next week.

But for you last question, I can answer you now.

To be frank with you, a standard model is enough for running simulation from the perspective of a 

circuit designer. As a researcher, I care about the significance brought about by any changes of meaningful 

parameters. For instance, the impact of STI, you can always simulate the impact of it in any circuit. But the 

distance of cells in real layout largely contribute to STI impact on performance especially in sub-65nm 

technology node. If people only consider running post-layout simulation iteratively to satisfy specifications, 

that's still OK for using standard model. However, unlike digital system design, mixed-signal design requires 

large design cycle. A bottleneck of a project involving large system may rely on the progress of analog part. 

Those time are money. Those who want to integrate more layout information into schematic-level simulation is 

making a big difference in reducing cycles of traditional design flow. We call it design optimization at pre-

layout stage. Such group of people need to know how much influence STI can bring about. If one do not know the 

performance gap between non-STI and STI-included simulation, how can he/she completes the optimization in 

schematic-level. The sensitive analysis cannot be performed; no data comparison regarding the degree of 

influence of layout-dependent factors (WPE, STI). On top of that, I cannot verify the effectiveness of my 

manually calculated equation if I cannot switch off STI. If I can, I would switch off the impact of STI and 

replace with my parameters to see if the performance resulting from my values matches with the one simulated 

using standard model with STI-effect switch on. Through tuning my parameters I could reflect the STI impact in 

early stage, intelligently repeat simualtion, give advises to layout designers, accomplish optimization. Nobody 

approves those equations or optimization methodology if I cannot even reflect non-STI, the very ideal case in 

my paper. This is why I want to modify the 'perfect' model. So I may not only have question on the performance 

of a circuit, I may have questions on how those stuff interactive with each other reflecting a simulation in 

Specter because now the Spectre is the only tool I can verify my thought. Know them, modify them, verify them and make a difference! 

I sincerely appreciate your help provied to me as well as those friends from EDAboard forum! I am lack of knowlege as a beginer however it is all of you who are supporting me in the course of research. Thank you all.

Best Regards,

Alex 

Hi Andrew, my server cashed so I can only try your suggestion next week.

But for you last question, I can answer you now.

To be frank with you, a standard model is enough for running simulation from the perspective of a 

circuit designer. As a researcher, I care about the significance brought about by any changes of meaningful 

parameters. For instance, the impact of STI, you can always simulate the impact of it in any circuit. But the 

distance of cells in real layout largely contribute to STI impact on performance especially in sub-65nm 

technology node. If people only consider running post-layout simulation iteratively to satisfy specifications, 

that's still OK for using standard model. However, unlike digital system design, mixed-signal design requires 

large design cycle. A bottleneck of a project involving large system may rely on the progress of analog part. 

Those time are money. Those who want to integrate more layout information into schematic-level simulation is 

making a big difference in reducing cycles of traditional design flow. We call it design optimization at pre-

layout stage. Such group of people need to know how much influence STI can bring about. If one do not know the 

performance gap between non-STI and STI-included simulation, how can he/she completes the optimization in 

schematic-level. The sensitive analysis cannot be performed; no data comparison regarding the degree of 

influence of layout-dependent factors (WPE, STI). On top of that, I cannot verify the effectiveness of my 

manually calculated equation if I cannot switch off STI. If I can, I would switch off the impact of STI and 

replace with my parameters to see if the performance resulting from my values matches with the one simulated 

using standard model with STI-effect switch on. Through tuning my parameters I could reflect the STI impact in 

early stage, intelligently repeat simualtion, give advises to layout designers, accomplish optimization. Nobody 

approves those equations or optimization methodology if I cannot even reflect non-STI, the very ideal case in 

my paper. This is why I want to modify the 'perfect' model. So I may not only have question on the performance 

of a circuit, I may have questions on how those stuff interactive with each other reflecting a simulation in 

Specter because now the Spectre is the only tool I can verify my thought. Know them, modify them, verify them and make a difference! 

I sincerely appreciate your help provied to me as well as those friends from EDAboard forum! I am lack of knowlege as a beginer however it is all of you who are supporting me in the course of research. Thank you all.

Best Regards,

Alex