• Skip to main content
  • Skip to search
  • Skip to footer
Cadence Home
  • This search text may be transcribed, used, stored, or accessed by our third-party service providers per our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.

  1. Community Forums
  2. Custom IC Design
  3. Signal doesn't reach full swing (0 -> VDD) in post-layout...

Stats

  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 11
  • Subscribers 126
  • Views 4961
  • Members are here 0
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Signal doesn't reach full swing (0 -> VDD) in post-layout spectre tran-simulation

iq79
iq79 over 3 years ago

Hi,

I'm simulating a digital full-custom design using Spectre (20.1.0.298.isr9) in ADE Assembler (ICADVM20.1-64b.500.21).

The layout is DRC and LVS clean. The extraction was done with Cablire (xACT, xACT 3D, xACT 3D with 200 or 600.. same problem).

The following screenshot shows the waveforms of the pre-layout simuation (schematic  view). As there is no pass-transistor gates in the

the design, the output signal S<7:0> shows no "drop" or "ground bounce" as expected.

 

The following screen shot shows the output signal of the post-layout simulation (calibre view):

This effect don't appear in other (smaller) designs. So I assume that the extraction options are correct.

I tried the following:

* Different errpreset, spectre, APS, with and without ++aps, w and w/o postlayout (hpa, upa,...),etc.

* Different solvers. Trap causes oscillations so I stayed with gear2only for changing the solver didn't change anything.

The only thing that changed anything was:

* Setting rabsshort to 100 "fixed" the problem with the "drop" but the output still doesn't reach 0V.  The following screenshot shows the effect:

But most of the extracted resistances are below 100ohm, so this can't be the right way.

The following lines are from the output of the spectre-run using rabsshort=100:

Global user options:
ignorezerovar = yes
psfversion = 1.4.0
vabstol = 1e-06
iabstol = 1e-12
temp = 27
multithread = on
gmin = 1e-12
rforce = 1
rabsshort = 100
vthmod = vthcc
ivthn = 3e-07
ivthp = 7e-08
ivthw = 0
ivthl = 0
maxnotes = 5
maxwarns = 5
digits = 5
cols = 80
dc_pivot_check = yes
pivrel = 0.001
sensfile = ../psf/sens.output
checklimitdest = psf
vdsatmod = gds
save = allpub
reltol = 0.0001
tnom = 27
scalem = 1
scale = 1

Scoped user options:

Circuit inventory:
nodes 36507
bit 16
bsimimg 1332
delta_gate 1102
juncap200 6
vsource 8
capacitor 72470
resistor 34675

Important parameter values:
start = 0 s
outputstart = 0 s
stop = 5 ns
step = 5 ps
maxstep = 50 ps
ic = all
useprevic = no
skipdc = no
reltol = 10e-06
abstol(V) = 1 uV
abstol(I) = 1 pA
temp = 27 C
tnom = 27 C
tempeffects = all
errpreset = conservative_sigglobal
method = gear2only
lteratio = 10
relref = sigglobal
cmin = 0 F
gmin = 1 pS

rabsshort = 100 Ohm

My question is: is this a numerical effect/artifact of spectre or is the problem on the calibre extraction side? If it's the first case, how can I fix it?

Best regards,

Iqbal

(long-time-reader, first-time poster)

  • Cancel
Parents
  • ShawnLogan
    ShawnLogan over 3 years ago

    Dear Iqbal,

    I can provide my initial thoughts as I have experienced the "symptoms" you are observing on a few occasions. However, without intimate knowledge about your layout, layout practices, power/ground routing methodologies, and schematic/symbol I can't really be certain any of these possible issues exist!

    1. You noted you have not experienced this phenomena "... in other (smaller) designs." This suggests a couple of possibilities immediately to me.

    a. If your subcircuit has dedicated power and ground pins, are you sure the layout has sufficient contacts connected to those pins? I have four, as have others, that often a layout designer may only connect the power pin or ground pin to one of what could be a "sea" of vias. As such, ALL the supply and ground current to the subcircuit is forced to flow through a single via. This may cause a very significant IR drop and result in some or all of your internal CMOS based circuits to have logic low and high values that are too high relative to ground or too low relative to the positive supply. The layout designer can easily address this by connecting sufficient layout pins to the symbol defined power and ground pins. The fact that you have not observed this phenomena with smaller circuits (whose currents to the supply and ground may be much less) is also consistent with this hypothesis.

    b. Most layouts make use of a power and ground grid consisting of one or more upper layers of metal. As such, the layout for a subcircuit usually does not include the layers of the power and ground grid as it cannot use these layers for its routing. Hence, when an extracted view of the subcircuit is created for simulation, it does NOT include the low impedance planes the circuit will have in a higher level of the layout hierarchy where the power and ground planes are included. Hence, often it is necessary to ask your layout designer to make sure to include a "pseudo grid" in the subcircuit that approximates the power and ground grid within the subcircuit. This 'pseudo grid" is not retained in the layout when the subcircuit's layout is added to the next level of layout hierarchy.

    2. Secondly, and perhaps it is too obvious to all, but study the power and ground routing strategy of your layout to make sure the IR drops to devices are within your required tolerances. The sheet resistance of lower metal layer metals in today's technologies are relatively large and it is often necessary to double and triple up on traces or lower metal layers to meet IR drop requirements.

    Without more data, I tend to think your observed behavior is not a result of a simulator issue, but related to one of the aforementioned layout issues.

    Just a few thoughts to (hopefully!) provide some food for thought for you Iqbal.

    Shawn

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up +1 Vote Down
    • Cancel
  • Senan
    Senan over 3 years ago in reply to ShawnLogan

    Dear Shawn, your answer is looking interesting for me, 

    I have faced a similar problem and I have solved it by using pin layer that cover the entire power lines for the VDD and GND. 

    However, since there is no physical meaning and there is no special fab process for pins, I would like to ask you if this only like a trick to pass the Cadence simulation?

    because on the other side if I cover the entire rails with the pin layer, it will make the IR drop perfectly removed, which is not the practical thing

    Thank you  

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Cancel
  • Andrew Beckett
    Andrew Beckett over 3 years ago in reply to Senan

    Of course, when simulating the effects of IR drop, you really have to think about how the supply will be connected into the block The tools cannot magically know what is going on outside of the block you're analysing. If you pretend that both ends are perfectly connected, and that makes a significant difference, you will need to be confident that the supply is very well connected across the supply net - otherwise you're just fooling yourself.

    It's not a trick - it's just a good way of potentially getting the wrong answer. It's nothing to do with pins not having a special fab process - do you really think that fabs could convert a pin into a perfect conductor?

    Andrew

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up +1 Vote Down
    • Cancel
Reply
  • Andrew Beckett
    Andrew Beckett over 3 years ago in reply to Senan

    Of course, when simulating the effects of IR drop, you really have to think about how the supply will be connected into the block The tools cannot magically know what is going on outside of the block you're analysing. If you pretend that both ends are perfectly connected, and that makes a significant difference, you will need to be confident that the supply is very well connected across the supply net - otherwise you're just fooling yourself.

    It's not a trick - it's just a good way of potentially getting the wrong answer. It's nothing to do with pins not having a special fab process - do you really think that fabs could convert a pin into a perfect conductor?

    Andrew

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up +1 Vote Down
    • Cancel
Children
  • Senan
    Senan over 3 years ago in reply to Andrew Beckett

    Thank you Andrew very much for your response to my comment

    Your explanation is quite clear and I believe in it, but I don't know why the PDK IP comes with pins covering the complete rails, that is what indeed made me misunderstanding this concept,

    I agree with you that covering the rail with the pin is nothing but tricking or fooling myself, which means I have to put the pins only where I expect to have the connection to the supply ring after constructing the PAD frame,

    let me ask you here please, if i have an op-amp cell and I have layout fllor plan that allow me to have the VDD&GND connection from the right and the left side only, it means for accurate modelling of the IR drop I should emulate this condition by making two pins of VDD and two pins of GND and i put them one to the right and one to the left, is this possible to have copy of the same pine at different places?

    Thank you once again

    Regards

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Cancel

Community Guidelines

The Cadence Design Communities support Cadence users and technologists interacting to exchange ideas, news, technical information, and best practices to solve problems and get the most from Cadence technology. The community is open to everyone, and to provide the most value, we require participants to follow our Community Guidelines that facilitate a quality exchange of ideas and information. By accessing, contributing, using or downloading any materials from the site, you agree to be bound by the full Community Guidelines.

© 2025 Cadence Design Systems, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy
  • Cookie Policy
  • US Trademarks
  • Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information