EEVblog #516 - LTSPICE Tutorial - DC Operating Point Analysis

[c4757p]

Build the schematics yourself, it's good to get practice. If you just "play along" you'll only learn the parts you're interested in.

[mmagin]

Has anyone tried the fairly new Mac OS X build of LTSpice found that it's as broken as I have?  Wondering if it's just me.
(Menu items missing, sometimes have to force quit it, schematic editing works, can't set up a simulation.)

I may just give it up on it and use it on my Windows machine, but then I have to make the install work with UAC (as a long-time user of real multi-user operating systems, I think turning off UAC globally is a dumb thing to do.)

[dr.diesel]

And LTSpice is available for Windows, GNU/Linux and MacOS.

Mmmmmmm, they didn't used to, gonna have to check that out!

[c4757p]

LTspice works very well under Linux with WINE, I imagine it would work similarly well if you installed the Windows version under WINE on Mac.

And LTSpice is available for Windows, GNU/Linux and MacOS.

Really? I don't see it, I just see the Mac version. Or by "available" do you mean "under WINE"

[jancumps]

Yes, it needs Wine. I just installed it under Ubuntu to follow alongg with this video.

Initialy I had installed the linux version of Spice and tried to couple it with the Linux version of KiCad, but that didn't work out. The penguins didn't align.

[rizzy]

Initialy I had installed the linux version of Spice and tried to couple it with the Linux version of KiCad, but that didn't work out. The penguins didn't align.

Do they on Windoze?

[wblackledg]

Anyway, you haven't put your home country in your profile, so I don't know whether advising you on how to simulate a crystal radio in SPICE would be considered aiding and abetting criminal blasphemy.

Well, I'm an American, if that's what you mean? 

[jancumps]

Initialy I had installed the linux version of Spice and tried to couple it with the Linux version of KiCad, but that didn't work out. The penguins didn't align.

Do they on Windoze?

Don't know. I never tried that.

[Totoro]

Thank you, Dave for the LTSPICE tutorial. Please continue! I look forward to them.
I have LTSPICE with Wine on Mac OS X and want to learn more!

[dentaku]

I've never been happy with the interface of LTSPICE.
I wish they would just let you pan around the screen while holding down the spacebar for one, more like Adobe Illustrator.

ALSO: How was Dave getting an arrow pointer instead of the crosshair most of the time?
It's difficult to select stuff in LTSPICE and it needs more shortcut keys.
An interface that has a scissor tool is clumsy too. Just let me right-click on something OR draw a square around things then press the Delete key.

It's nice software, it's just the interface that's annoying to try and figure out.
Maybe I just haven't tried hard enough.

[Rigby]

LTSpice is software that considers perfect UI to be a secondary (or tertiary) concern.  It seems that simulation functionality is the primary concern of the development team.

I wouldn't worry about these things too much.  Lots of application specific software has weird bugs and a general lack of polish.  Often this is due to a near complete focus on the core functionality of the application.  In my experience, the more specific the software, the less polish there is.  This is certainly true in software that I write.  I care much more for correct output than anything else, so that's what I spend my time on.

[gotnoise]

Thanks a million, Dave! This series is already (and will be) very helpful!
I do realize that many of your viewers are advanced and probably bored by the content. You mentioned this problem previously, and that you won't reach the same viewer count as compared to your other videos. But please keep producing LTSpice tutorials. I am sure you will be able to recruit more beginners to your vlog crowd, so on the long run you might get good viewer counts with this as well. And whoever does not like the content, nobody has to watch it. We can just pick whatever fits our bill anyway.

[Bored@Work]

It seems that simulation functionality is the primary concern of the development team.

There is no development team. There is one guy. And he seems to be stuck in the '70th when it comes to user interfaces.

LTspice follows the old "select a tool and then manipulate the drawing with the tool" paradigm. This emerged in CAD as a 1:1 copy of the way draftsmen used to work. Select a pen of a particular size and draw as many lines as possible with that pen. Then change to another pen. Then to the compass (or is it compasses?), and do as many as possible with it before changing to yet another tool.

While modern user interfaces use an object-oriented approach. First select the object to manipulate, then the operation to apply to the object.

I wouldn't worry about these things too much. Lots of application specific software has weird bugs and a general lack of polish.

I would, if it would be my application. It is very typical for LTspice that users don't find functions. Often not even the much hated last resort - reading the manual - works for some things, because they aren't documented. LTspice's user interface is as bad as some open-source EDA software user interfaces.

[hikariuk]

LTspice follows the old "select a tool and then manipulate the drawing with the tool" paradigm. This emerged in CAD as a 1:1 copy of the way draftsmen used to work. Select a pen of a particular size and draw as many lines as possible with that pen. Then change to another pen. Then to the compass (or is it compasses?), and do as many as possible with it before changing to yet another tool.

I note its original name was "SwitcherCAD".

[firewalker]

Persuade LT to open source LTSpice.

After that we can make it accept python addons! Bored@Work? 

I believe no one in LT wants to take over and polish it. Maybe after the retirement of the solo developer there will be a major redesign. Probably polished, only for Windows and not free of charge. 

Alexander.

[ales22]

Great little tool for beginners is Analog Circuit Simulator Applet here http://www.falstad.com/mathphysics.html. It's not for detailed analysis, but rather for demonstration of basic principles - it has many example circuits predefined and ready to try. It helped me many times in EE studies.

[firewalker]

BTW. What language they use for LTspice?

Alexander.

[robrenz]

Great video Dave  please do more of the same.

[Bored@Work]

Persuade LT to open source LTSpice.

Won't happen. If they fear one thing than that someone reverse-engineers or otherwise learns about the inner working of LTspice when it comes to their proprietary, encrypted switcher models.

BTW. What language they use for LTspice?

Microsoft Visual C++.

[firewalker]

They could keep the engine closed and split it from the gui. Although I don;t know if it worth the hassle.

Alexander.

[ondreji]

Has anyone tried the fairly new Mac OS X build of LTSpice found that it's as broken as I have?  Wondering if it's just me.

Indeed, it's quirky. I wasn't able to rotate placed component . On the other hand I didn't try very hard. So far, it looks better to use Wine and win version of LT Spice. Anyway, I used it for lees than 5 minutes...

[mmagin]

Has anyone tried the fairly new Mac OS X build of LTSpice found that it's as broken as I have?  Wondering if it's just me.

Indeed, it's quirky. I wasn't able to rotate placed component . On the other hand I didn't try very hard. So far, it looks better to use Wine and win version of LT Spice. Anyway, I used it for lees than 5 minutes...

Yep, I've gone and ran it under wine as well, and that way it seems to work flawlessly so far

[Bored@Work]

I note its original name was "SwitcherCAD".

Yes, LTspice/SwitcherCAD. The binary is still called scad3.exe. Because ...

They could keep the engine closed and split it from the gui. Although I don;t know if it worth the hassle.

... it was once split. Into the schematic capture part (SwitcherCAD), and the SPICE engine (LTspice). But they put that into one binary. And after some releases, they just renamed the combination LTspice IV.

Makes you wounder if they still have their SPICE engine run separately in other inhouse tools. Because that is how LTspice/SwitcherCAD started, as an inhouse tool which they later opened up to customers.

What I always find sad with all the manufacturer-specific SPICE versions is that all the manufacturers never cooperated to just settle on a single industry-wide standardized SPICE version. Manufacturers do cooperate in standard committees for some things, but they could never be bothered or didn't manage to do that to evolve SPICE.

[Rigby]

What I always find sad with all the manufacturer-specific SPICE versions is that all the manufacturers never cooperated to just settle on a single industry-wide standardized SPICE version. Manufacturers do cooperate in standard committees for some things, but they could never be bothered or didn't manage to do that to evolve SPICE.

There's always going to be a certain amount of pride that will impede this notion.  I agree with you that this would be nice indeed, but Manufacturer A doesn't want to put a lot of effort into a tool that lets users see that Manufacturer B's part is exactly what they need.

[dentaku]

So... I guess my question would be
How did Dave get that arrow pointer during his demo?
I always end up with the crosshair tool, scissors, hand etc.. but I've never seen a regular old white arrow tool like you'd expect in any drawing tool (like Illustrator) that you can use for selecting things.
Was that arrow pointer maybe something his screen capture software provides (it WAS extra big looking).

Multisim might not have a nice interface either but from what I can see at least it seems to follow some of the regular UI conventions. Of course it's not a free application.