Electronics > Open Source Hardware
Ask shares some good projects of QUCS software
abdulbadii:
Anyone please generous enough to give and share away most of good/excellent projects in the format on which QUCS software makes use of ?
Just badly felt aghast found the S/W sample/project is completely nill
as feel it the only motivation if it's fulfilled
Bassman59:
--- Quote from: abdulbadii on July 07, 2021, 06:33:07 pm ---Anyone please generous enough to give and share away most of good/excellent projects in the format on which QUCS software makes use of ?
Just badly felt aghast found the S/W sample/project is completely nill
as feel it the only motivation if it's fulfilled
--- End quote ---
I'm pretty sure that QUCS is dead. Why bother, when LTSpice and ngspice exist?
Whales:
abdulbadii: QUCS does have example documents. Are you having trouble finding them? I also didn't realise they were there until I looked, they do not make them obvious.
I found the example docs very useful for understanding how to use QUCS.
--- Code: ---$ ls qucs_examples/
Amp_Baseband_Low-noise.pro bpf_10Ghz.sch groupdelay_sp.sch
Amp_Baseband_Low-noise.sch bridge.sch gyrator.sch
Amp_Two_Tone.dat buckboost.dat lc_osc.dat
Amp_Two_Tone.dpl buckboost.dpl lc_osc.dpl
Amp_Two_Tone.sch buckboost.sch lc_osc.sch
Amp_baseband_noise.dat buckconverter.sch lf_osci.dat
Amp_baseband_noise.dpl charac.dat lf_osci.dpl
BPF_1550_edge_cpld.sch charac.dpl lf_osci.sch
BPF_2000_Co-ax.dat charac.sch microstrip.sch
BPF_2000_Co-ax.dpl chargepump.sch mixer.sch
BPF_2000_Co-ax.sch chebyshev1_5th.sch mscoupler.sch
Comb_Gen.dat classic_osci.dat multiplier.sch
Comb_Gen.dpl classic_osci.dpl notch.sch
Comb_Gen.sch classic_osci.sch opamp_gyrator.sch
IdealBalun.sch colpitts.dat pentode.sch
LPF-Balun2.sch colpitts.dpl preregulator.sch
LPF-Balun3.sch colpitts.sch resonance.sch
LPF_1000_Coplanar.sch colpitts_base.dat rf_osci.dat
LPF_1000_Radial-Stub.sch colpitts_base.sch rf_osci.dpl
LPF_1250_Elliptical.sch diff1.sch rf_osci.sch
Puls3b.sch diode_hb.dat rgummel.sch
SmithChartTest.sch diode_hb.sch sawtooth-1.sch
VCO_100.sch elliptic_5th.sch sawtooth-2.sch
X2_100_Bipolar.sch fet.sch sawtooth-3.sch
X5_500.sch fet_noise.sch sawtooth-discreet.sch
active_bp.dat fgummel.dat schmitt.sch
active_bp.dpl fgummel.dpl selective_amp.sch
active_bp.sch fgummel.sch shot.sch
active_lp.dat fhr01fh.sch singleOPV.sch
active_lp.dpl filter_optimization.sch single_balanced.sch
active_lp.sch flicker.sch stab.sch
active_mixer.sch fullwaverectifier_1.sch supply.sch
bbv.dat fullwaverectifier_2.sch swr_meter.sch
bbv.dpl gain.dat sym_osci.sch
bbv.sch gain.dpl time_resistor.sch
boostconverter.dat gain.sch triode.sch
boostconverter.sch giacoletto.sch wilkinson.sch
bpf_10GHz.dat gilbert.sch
bpf_10GHz.dpl groupdelay_ac.sch
--- End code ---
--- Quote from: Bassman59 on July 11, 2021, 10:57:26 pm ---
--- Quote from: abdulbadii on July 07, 2021, 06:33:07 pm ---Anyone please generous enough to give and share away most of good/excellent projects in the format on which QUCS software makes use of ?
Just badly felt aghast found the S/W sample/project is completely nill
as feel it the only motivation if it's fulfilled
--- End quote ---
I'm pretty sure that QUCS is dead. Why bother, when LTSpice and ngspice exist?
--- End quote ---
No one SPICE package is the same and everyone will prefer something different. The concept of software 'dying' is a relatively new thing, the laws of electromagnetism don't change from one year to the next.
ngspice: doesn't provide a GUI for drawing circuits; you need to get some other software to do that. Doesn't draw graphs either?
ltspice: I prefer QUCS' option of graphs-on-schematic (rather than graphs being on separate page/window). That and yellow>grey :P
qucs: I run the windows version of it under Wine because qucs uses qt4 and my distro doesn't ship those libs any more :(. Navigation between part types is a bit slow. The key shortcuts for wire (Ctrl+E) and ground (Ctrl+G) are useful but not shown in the GUI (only the full docs). I always turn the grid dots off, they hurt my eyes. Absolute PITA when the solver hits problems in transient analysis ("jacobian error"), but I'm not sure how other SPICE suites fare here.
micro-cap: did a side-by-side sim comparison with QUCS, it turns out QUCS was a magnitude or so faster. Was very surprised (perhaps mc was redrawing the window each sim cycle so it could live update its graphs?). Interface is very complicated and doesn't seem straightforward.
RoGeorge:
Live update of the plots can be turned off in LTspice. The simulation speed might come from the fact that QUCS is not based on SPICE, it has its own engine/solver, or that's what I was told.
Anyways, the simulation time for a given circuit, or even the success/fail to converge to a solution for either of these can vary widely by adjusting the max allowed steps/errors or other tuning parameter of the solver. At this aspect LTspice might be advantageous because it has a wider adoption, and solutions to problems are already known, so it's easy to find online how to get out of LTspice troubles.
QUCS still have some nice RF goodies, filters, microstrips, Smith charts, etc. but other things like placing a measuring probe are cumbersome in QUCS when compared with LTspice. That's what makes me use mostly LTspice. Only very rare I found myself using QUCS. QUCS has a lot of examples and a nice PDF with a few examples and how to use QUCS in general, some in the Help menu from QUCS, or online: http://qucs.sourceforge.net/docs.html
I have QUCS installed on Kubuntu, don't recall how I solved the qt4 requirement. I guess I've let it install all the needed dependencies, or maybe added qt4 manually, IDK.
LTspice only has a Windows installer, but works fine in Linux, too, from Wine. LTspice charts looks more appealing to me, and are much smarter than the charts in QUCS. For example, the charts know to put electrical units on the axes, you can add formulas from the GUI, the plot "knows" that U*I formula will measure Watts, has RMS, has useful options for Bode plots, like showing group delay or using linear instead of log, knows octaves and decades, etc.
For more plotting the data can be exported (I think both QUCS and LTspice can do that). For example, yesterday I've fool around plotting LTspice raw data using Python and matplotlib. There is even a Python module called "ltspice", module that can understand the data format of the LTspice raw results file. Doesn't have implemented all the features (i.e. the Python module doesn't identify automatically the data sections for multiple parametric runs when using the .step SPICE directive, but can be easily seen from the module's sources how to grab a certain step from the data file, or how to add new features to the Python module.
LTspice can be run in batch mode, from command line, and the .net or .asc schematics can be eventually generated or edited from Python, then all the runs and data files collected and post processed, all done programmatically from Python.
Because many other physics phenomena can be simulated with electrical circuits (e.g. a mechanical weight and a spring will behave like an LC tank, water ram in a pipe can be a reflection in a transmission line, a sound absorbent material can be seen like a filter, etc.) mixing Python with LTspice can be a very interesting combination.
Bassman59:
--- Quote from: Whales on July 11, 2021, 11:58:49 pm ---
--- Quote from: Bassman59 on July 11, 2021, 10:57:26 pm ---
I'm pretty sure that QUCS is dead. Why bother, when LTSpice and ngspice exist?
--- End quote ---
No one SPICE package is the same and everyone will prefer something different. The concept of software 'dying' is a relatively new thing, the laws of electromagnetism don't change from one year to the next.
--- End quote ---
Software dies when its developers stop maintaining it. There doesn't seem to be much activity in the qucs SourceForge or Github repositories.
--- Quote ---ngspice: doesn't provide a GUI for drawing circuits; you need to get some other software to do that. Doesn't draw graphs either?
--- End quote ---
The original SPICE didn't do that, either. I used to use MacSpice which is still maintained and still works well, but editing the text files for my deck gets tedious. But, as many have noted, at least one Kicad developer is dealing with using Kicad schematics as a front end for ngspice.
--- Quote ---ltspice: I prefer QUCS' option of graphs-on-schematic (rather than graphs being on separate page/window). That and yellow>grey :P
--- End quote ---
Sure, that's nice. but it's a preference.
--- Quote ---qucs: I run the windows version of it under Wine because qucs uses qt4 and my distro doesn't ship those libs any more :(. Navigation between part types is a bit slow. The key shortcuts for wire (Ctrl+E) and ground (Ctrl+G) are useful but not shown in the GUI (only the full docs). I always turn the grid dots off, they hurt my eyes. Absolute PITA when the solver hits problems in transient analysis ("jacobian error"), but I'm not sure how other SPICE suites fare here.
--- End quote ---
WINE is a pain in the ass. But to your statement about "qucs uses qt4 and my distro doesn't ship those libs any more" just adds to the impression that qucs is a dead end.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version