I expect many people would use it for basic circuits only, but I think the power of the simulator comes from the code blocks you can easily add. I wrote a model for an LM2611 Cuk controller since there wasn't one available from the manufacturer and they said they wouldn't be making one. It took me less than an hour using the DLL block capabilities of Qspice & it seems to be working quite well.
Keeping Notepad++ alive. LOL. After 40+ years of writing code, my old eyes can't do "light mode" anymore. Dark mode everything FTW. Thanks for the excellent video!
What are the particular advantages compared to LTSpice? Are there good device libraries available? I use LTSpice since more than 20 years. What do you like in QSpice?
My top reasons to use QSpice over LTspice: (1) Integrated digital support (C++ or Verilog) (2) Faster / easier to bring in external models (just copy/paste) (3) No restrictions on who can use it (4) I like the interface better - this one is quite subjective though... I can just work faster in QSpice.
@@electronicswithemrys It seems the software lacks some of theses basics features: To be able to create our own components library accessible directly inside the program and we could have a menu with most used simulation instructions like, .tran, .op etc, preconfigured and that we could modify.
You can create your own Qspice library saving all models imported from another sub or lib files, from LTSpice, Spice or another software. Use option to create new symbol in Qspice, use CTRL+V to put ther saved in memory model. Redraw as you want and save as a new Qspice model.
I want something that runs unit tests in GoogleTest against a spice simulator. I have realized though that QSpice needs to be the thing that "invokes" the C++, but I would like it the other way around. I want GTest to be able to load my test fixture (whatever simulated hardware that looks like in spice) and connect it to my source code and run scripted simulations. So far I have not been able to find anything like what I want. Can this do that? Does QSpice have a command line interface?
I don't know if it's capable of that. I'd recommend to post this to the QSpice forums - there's a lot of very experienced folks on there that can probably help.
Thanks for the help, I have also one quick question. I have a capacitor that is supposed to move my sine wave from 8V to 0V and it works pretty well on other simulations programs, but on Qspice it doesn't change anything at all. the capacitor value is 0.1uF, dont know if it could be that Qspice isn't used to small capacitor values.
Are you leaving the circuit open after the capacitor, or terminating with a load resistor? I expect your circuit is ambiguous (ie the other side of the cap is floating) and different simulators handle that situation differently. I'm sure Mike Engelhardt over on the QSpice forums can answer why exactly QSpice responds the way it does (and he probably also can tell you why other sims do it the other way) -- but a simple fix is to add a load resistor (from the capacitor to ground). Even 1 Gohm works.
You have to remember long text strings also only to modify a single generator. Panels to insert parameters are disappeared. At this point is better LTSPice or Micro-cap.
Hi, new subscriber here! It will be great if you can make a tutorial course with the QSpice, and a little bit of programming with C++, much appreciated! Thanks!
Nope - it's running under Windows. I would definitely like to see a linux version. From what I've found, the latest Mike said was, "I’ll revisit it when WINE implements with DirectX12 API."
Agreed. The help files aren't bad, but could be better. They do have an active forum that is very helpful, and there's some good content there for anyone who wants to tinker with the DLL models.
Seems like yet another simulator designed for more advanced users I'll try it out at some stage but unlikely i'll give up my current easy to use extensive GUI simulator Edit; I'm slow. Just realised this is Windoze. I'll needto check for a linux release, try in wine or a vm
So...Become an Advanced User. I understand being a beginner, but how long were you planning on remaining a beginner for. HERE'S A TIP TO GET YOUR MOVING FORWARD Try things that you don't think you can do , from time to time What you'll find is that you can do more things than you actually thought you could
Any SPICE that only runs on Windows cannot be the best. It is a toy, a game, not a professional tool. No good software developer writes a modern application to only run on one platform - it is too easy to use the toolkits to provide cross platform UIs and architectures. Simulation in a professional environment properly integrates within the development flow, allowing for automation and master data management. Qorvo should have had this mindset from the outset of this effort, and that they do not casts shade upon their technical and operational abilities as a company, and if they don’t know how a modern development flow should work, their components will likely reflect their haphazard and amateurish methods.
Wow, quite diatribe you left there, but alas - tough shit pumpkin - CAD is the domain of windows, it saddens me as well and there is nothing you can do here - I'm too busy to make things work on nix, nor am I willing to learn things that work natively. Also most problems of qorvo stem from its dumbass interface.
I would respectfully disagree - I've always thought LTSpice had a terrible user interface that I was forced to get used to and prefer the updates Mike made to Qspice.
@@electronicswithemrys how do you expect someone to be able to memorize all the parameters of the strings to be inserted? We are in 2023, not 1980. The idea of using text strings is unacceptable today. We have to concentrate about the project and not on the syntax of the strings.
@@stefano.aFor those that I don't already know b/c I use SPICE quite a bit, I refer to the help files. Personally, I find that graphical interfaces often take much more time and effort to build the same circuit as text interfaces.
@@electronicswithemrys LTSpice has and always had shit interface, thanks to Mike's stubbornness and holier than though attitude to UI design, also what is with this obsesssion of representing circuits with text - what sense does that make? You do you, I want my schematics, so do hundreds of others, instead we'll get these dumbass interfaces.
The option to include one's own C++ code is absolutely fantastic!
boy that's going to be a lot of fun pasting in and drawing bog standard parts.
I expect many people would use it for basic circuits only, but I think the power of the simulator comes from the code blocks you can easily add. I wrote a model for an LM2611 Cuk controller since there wasn't one available from the manufacturer and they said they wouldn't be making one. It took me less than an hour using the DLL block capabilities of Qspice & it seems to be working quite well.
This is a great quick start guide. Thanks for making it!
Keeping Notepad++ alive. LOL. After 40+ years of writing code, my old eyes can't do "light mode" anymore. Dark mode everything FTW. Thanks for the excellent video!
This is very helpful to a complete noob to electronics like myself. Thanks for sharing this!
i like the argument names when writing the pulse, i can never remember the order
What are the particular advantages compared to LTSpice? Are there good device libraries available? I use LTSpice since more than 20 years. What do you like in QSpice?
My top reasons to use QSpice over LTspice:
(1) Integrated digital support (C++ or Verilog)
(2) Faster / easier to bring in external models (just copy/paste)
(3) No restrictions on who can use it
(4) I like the interface better - this one is quite subjective though... I can just work faster in QSpice.
@@electronicswithemrys Thank you. I think I will give it a try.
When you import a model, can you save it in the QSpice library?
I'm afraid I don't know off the top of my head. That's probably a good topic for the QSpice forum.
@@electronicswithemrys It seems the software lacks some of theses basics features: To be able to create our own components library accessible directly inside the program and we could have a menu with most used simulation instructions like, .tran, .op etc, preconfigured and that we could modify.
You can create your own Qspice library saving all models imported from another sub or lib files, from LTSpice, Spice or another software. Use option to create new symbol in Qspice, use CTRL+V to put ther saved in memory model. Redraw as you want and save as a new Qspice model.
@@dziadekRem Thanks!
are the schematics created compatible with ltspice?
I doubt that could ever happen since LTSpice restricts competitors (like Qorvo) from using their simulator.
Hell, I'm saving this to my favorites 🙂
I want something that runs unit tests in GoogleTest against a spice simulator. I have realized though that QSpice needs to be the thing that "invokes" the C++, but I would like it the other way around. I want GTest to be able to load my test fixture (whatever simulated hardware that looks like in spice) and connect it to my source code and run scripted simulations. So far I have not been able to find anything like what I want. Can this do that? Does QSpice have a command line interface?
I don't know if it's capable of that. I'd recommend to post this to the QSpice forums - there's a lot of very experienced folks on there that can probably help.
Hi, Great video!! Do you know how to add a specific transistor if it is not in the list? I am trying to simulate a circuit using 2n3904 Transistor.
Yes, just copy the model text and paste into QSpice. It should generate an appropriate symbol for you.
Thanks for the help, I have also one quick question. I have a capacitor that is supposed to move my sine wave from 8V to 0V and it works pretty well on other simulations programs, but on Qspice it doesn't change anything at all. the capacitor value is 0.1uF, dont know if it could be that Qspice isn't used to small capacitor values.
Are you leaving the circuit open after the capacitor, or terminating with a load resistor? I expect your circuit is ambiguous (ie the other side of the cap is floating) and different simulators handle that situation differently. I'm sure Mike Engelhardt over on the QSpice forums can answer why exactly QSpice responds the way it does (and he probably also can tell you why other sims do it the other way) -- but a simple fix is to add a load resistor (from the capacitor to ground). Even 1 Gohm works.
hoping they do a Mac port.
Michael Thomas Engelhardt was born in June 1953
so ... He's ... 71 years old !!!
Well well
Let's hope he continues to be healthy for a long, long time :).
@@electronicswithemrys haha yes we need him !
Why does it look like LT's ?
Same author.
@@richardgray8593 same author but with 1980 mentality
You have to remember long text strings also only to modify a single generator. Panels to insert parameters are disappeared. At this point is better LTSPice or Micro-cap.
Hi, new subscriber here! It will be great if you can make a tutorial course with the QSpice, and a little bit of programming with C++, much appreciated! Thanks!
Great suggestion! Do you have a particular circuit in mind that you'd like to see simulated?
Is that linux?
Nope - it's running under Windows. I would definitely like to see a linux version. From what I've found, the latest Mike said was, "I’ll revisit it when WINE implements with DirectX12 API."
Can you please pinpoint (with a time code) where you answer the title question: "the *best free* simulator"?
The question is to you, the viewer.
Look nice in principle. Learning curve could be steep
Agreed. The help files aren't bad, but could be better. They do have an active forum that is very helpful, and there's some good content there for anyone who wants to tinker with the DLL models.
windows only. Qucs is more universal.
I had tried QUCS a few years back and didn't get the hang of it. I'll have to give it another try.
Seems like yet another simulator designed for more advanced users
I'll try it out at some stage but unlikely i'll give up my current easy to use extensive GUI simulator
Edit; I'm slow. Just realised this is Windoze. I'll needto check for a linux release, try in wine or a vm
Which simulator is your favorite now?
So...Become an Advanced User.
I understand being a beginner, but how long were you planning on remaining a beginner for.
HERE'S A TIP TO GET YOUR MOVING FORWARD
Try things that you don't think you can do , from time to time
What you'll find is that you can do more things than you actually thought you could
Any SPICE that only runs on Windows cannot be the best. It is a toy, a game, not a professional tool. No good software developer writes a modern application to only run on one platform - it is too easy to use the toolkits to provide cross platform UIs and architectures. Simulation in a professional environment properly integrates within the development flow, allowing for automation and master data management. Qorvo should have had this mindset from the outset of this effort, and that they do not casts shade upon their technical and operational abilities as a company, and if they don’t know how a modern development flow should work, their components will likely reflect their haphazard and amateurish methods.
Wow, quite diatribe you left there, but alas - tough shit pumpkin - CAD is the domain of windows, it saddens me as well and there is nothing you can do here - I'm too busy to make things work on nix, nor am I willing to learn things that work natively.
Also most problems of qorvo stem from its dumbass interface.
You are delusional. You don't know what you are talking about.
Haha. Sine waves rule! Cosine sucks!
LTSpice have a way better interface
I would respectfully disagree - I've always thought LTSpice had a terrible user interface that I was forced to get used to and prefer the updates Mike made to Qspice.
@@electronicswithemrys how do you expect someone to be able to memorize all the parameters of the strings to be inserted? We are in 2023, not 1980. The idea of using text strings is unacceptable today. We have to concentrate about the project and not on the syntax of the strings.
@@stefano.aFor those that I don't already know b/c I use SPICE quite a bit, I refer to the help files. Personally, I find that graphical interfaces often take much more time and effort to build the same circuit as text interfaces.
@@electronicswithemrys LTSpice has and always had shit interface, thanks to Mike's stubbornness and holier than though attitude to UI design, also what is with this obsesssion of representing circuits with text - what sense does that make? You do you, I want my schematics, so do hundreds of others, instead we'll get these dumbass interfaces.
So does that mean I can simulate any processor written in "C++" ????
You should give it a shot - it would be quite interesting to see.