Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I have no idea where this come from. I’ve successfully tested QucsStudio 3.3.2 on Windows 7.
Perhaps have you an old user library in the ~\.qucs\user_lib\ directory?
Can you check if the QucsStudio\library\ directory contains reasonable files? Or maybe, do they contain wrong (Windows style) linefeeds, i.e. 0A & 0D instead of 0A only?
Sorry, neither the resistor nor the capacitor currently exists in QucsStudio 3.3.2. But as you have already mentioned, you can create them by yourself.
The coil component has a constant series resistance already implemented (just double-click on the component to see it).
In the library (lowest tab in the left-hand side bar) in the section “diverse” there are two further coil models.
This is possible. Please read the program help (F1 key) or the following thread on this forum:
https://qucsstudio.de/forums/topic/change-directory-where-the-projects-are-saved/
Thanks for your report!
Topic 1 is a known bug.
Topic 2 works when you use “Export…”. Your file printer isn’t part of the QucsStudio package.
Concerning Topic 3, I don’t like alphabetic order. But change it to “most useful” order is perhaps a good idea.
For topic 4, the correct syntax is Pr1.dV ! (Just have a look into the dataset.)
With topic 5 and 6, you’re right. That’s just as it is.
In topic 7 you have to write 1mA or 2.3mV. The term 3m mean 3meters.
I hope that helps!
This is a known problems. It appears due to the transit times, namely the parameters “Tf” and “Tr” of the BJT. With zero values here, it should work.
It would be great, if someone can help to solve this problem, i.e. check if it works in simulators like XYCE (https://xyce.sandia.gov/), fREEDA (https://www.freeda.org/) or similar. Or maybe someone finds a publication about this topic, knows a friend who has a solution etc.
Many thanks indeed!
The 180-deg hybrid coupler works in frequency-domain only. So please use the AC or s-parameter analysis.
A time-domain model for this component does not exist, because its Fourier transformation has a pole.
In your MOSFET model, the parameter “Ld” is much too big. If it’s greater then half the channel length “L”, the effective length becomes negative, which is, of course, unphysical.
Anyway, the problem here is that the trapezoidal method can’t handle steps quite well. Please choose the integration method GEAR3. I hope that works better.
I don’t know what all these Octave commands actually do. Maybe there is something wrong. But under usual conditions, QucsConv works with spaces in filenames. So the problem surely liessomewhere else.
It works on my system, with drag’n’drop as well as with the import dialog! Can you please explain in more detail, what you have done.
It’s not really true, that I don’t like the philosophy of open source projects. But I had to learn in many years that it simply doesn’t work. Anyway, I’ve battled for a long time to keep QucsStudio alive, but struggled in vain for support of the users.
And, yes, QucsStudio will never make me rich!
Many thanks for the report! There is indeed a bug in the calculation that always appears if the gap between the lines is greater than 20 times the metal thickness. I will fix it in the next version.
The idea is, of course, that interested people can define by themselves what they want to see. Anyway, a starting point could be an introduction that shows how QucsStudio is intended to be used. This way, typical (maybe unknown) features are explained automatically. After this, the users may ask questions about problems they encounter etc.
