Design Article
Comment
LJohnso58
While this article is focused on the chip creation process, it is equally ...
Guru of Grounding
Although this piece is so full of "marketspeak" that I needed to translate every ...
Electrically-aware design improves analog/mixed-signal productivity
David White and Akshat Shah - Cadence Design Systems
10/29/2012 9:01 AM EDT
Electrically-aware, “in design” verification
Electrically-aware, “in design” verification
As shown in Figure 4, the in-design flow begins with creation of a schematic that is simulated and modified to meet the designer’s specifications. After the ideal, pre-layout simulation is completed, the currents at each terminal are saved. A testbench setup is configured to generate the average, RMS, and peak currents necessary for EM checking.

After device creation and placement, routing is initiated. For a given interconnect geometry to be routed, the EM limits should verify that it is below the maximum current or current density allowed for each segment of the net. To solve the current flow, parasitics need to be extracted as the net is routed and sized. The extracted parasitics are then used to solve current distribution throughout the wires and vias that constitute a net, with extraction and current solving occurring as the net is created.
Foundries create and maintain EM-related current density limits to ensure reliability of the manufactured device over years of operation at nominal and elevated temperatures. These limits are provided in a technology file and, as discussed above, are growing increasingly complex with geometric dependencies. During layout creation, the limits from the techfile are loaded and made available for in-design verification. The current limits and the solved currents for each geometric shape or set of net shapes are checked as layout edits are made.
Use models for electrically-aware, in-design verification and optimization fall into three basic categories: manual, assisted, and automatic. It is likely that a manual use mode will be adopted by users first until they are confident that in-design solutions provide accurate problem detection and correction. The results can be displayed in real time as color-coded overlays on the layout (Figures 2 and 3), or a threshold may be set where only violations are shown.
When violations are identified in the GUI, the user can simply click on the net and resize the wire. Incremental electrical analysis immediately checks the edit, and when the wire is sufficiently wide, the display is updated accordingly (as indicated with the green overlay). Sometimes resizing may not be sufficient or desirable. In those cases, movement of the route location may be necessary, as shown in Figure 3. Once the net passes verification, the user can move to the next net to be routed.
In the assisted use mode, once a current density limit violation is identified, the tool will compute and display a suggested fix such as “increase wire width by 100%.” The user would have the option to review and approve fixes individually or simply approve all. As the user becomes more comfortable with the suggested modifications from the tools, in-design solutions can drive more automatic wire sizing and routing changes during the routing process. This approach is often referred to as current-driven routing, which may take the form of a feed-forward approach (a topology editor and wire size selection are used to select net properties prior to physical routing), or a feedback approach (an optimization loop and cost function are used to iterate after the net is routed until the acceptance criteria are met).
Next: Conclusion
Electrically-aware, “in design” verification
As shown in Figure 4, the in-design flow begins with creation of a schematic that is simulated and modified to meet the designer’s specifications. After the ideal, pre-layout simulation is completed, the currents at each terminal are saved. A testbench setup is configured to generate the average, RMS, and peak currents necessary for EM checking.

Figure
4: In-design EM verification methodology allows for current densities
to be computed and checked as interconnect is incrementally created or
modified
After device creation and placement, routing is initiated. For a given interconnect geometry to be routed, the EM limits should verify that it is below the maximum current or current density allowed for each segment of the net. To solve the current flow, parasitics need to be extracted as the net is routed and sized. The extracted parasitics are then used to solve current distribution throughout the wires and vias that constitute a net, with extraction and current solving occurring as the net is created.
Foundries create and maintain EM-related current density limits to ensure reliability of the manufactured device over years of operation at nominal and elevated temperatures. These limits are provided in a technology file and, as discussed above, are growing increasingly complex with geometric dependencies. During layout creation, the limits from the techfile are loaded and made available for in-design verification. The current limits and the solved currents for each geometric shape or set of net shapes are checked as layout edits are made.
Use models for electrically-aware, in-design verification and optimization fall into three basic categories: manual, assisted, and automatic. It is likely that a manual use mode will be adopted by users first until they are confident that in-design solutions provide accurate problem detection and correction. The results can be displayed in real time as color-coded overlays on the layout (Figures 2 and 3), or a threshold may be set where only violations are shown.
When violations are identified in the GUI, the user can simply click on the net and resize the wire. Incremental electrical analysis immediately checks the edit, and when the wire is sufficiently wide, the display is updated accordingly (as indicated with the green overlay). Sometimes resizing may not be sufficient or desirable. In those cases, movement of the route location may be necessary, as shown in Figure 3. Once the net passes verification, the user can move to the next net to be routed.
In the assisted use mode, once a current density limit violation is identified, the tool will compute and display a suggested fix such as “increase wire width by 100%.” The user would have the option to review and approve fixes individually or simply approve all. As the user becomes more comfortable with the suggested modifications from the tools, in-design solutions can drive more automatic wire sizing and routing changes during the routing process. This approach is often referred to as current-driven routing, which may take the form of a feed-forward approach (a topology editor and wire size selection are used to select net properties prior to physical routing), or a feedback approach (an optimization loop and cost function are used to iterate after the net is routed until the acceptance criteria are met).
Next: Conclusion
Navigate to related information


Ron.Koths
11/1/2012 11:37 AM EDT
I couldn't agree more, why can't my layout software show me a 3D projection with lines of force or a colored cloud representing the magnetic field of the trace I'm laying down, as I route it.
Sign in to Reply
Guru of Grounding
11/1/2012 2:45 PM EDT
Although this piece is so full of "marketspeak" that I needed to translate every sentence to get the drift, the point is an excellent one. Those of us who work in the low-level, wide dynamic-range analog world called "audio" learned long ago that "auto-routing" circuit boards leads most often to disaster. Given the generally poor state of analog skill, an auto-router that embraced common-impedance coupling, magnetic loop areas, and electric field coupling could eliminate thousands of badly-designed products. In audio, most of these bad designs pass bench tests but have horrible problems when connected into real-world systems where power-line noise and significant shield currents exist. I dub many of these "sensitive" designs as "power-line primadonnas".
Sign in to Reply
LJohnso58
11/1/2012 2:47 PM EDT
While this article is focused on the chip creation process, it is equally applicable to the board level creation process, also at the advanced nodes. High density designs in this arena also need electrical awareness from top to bottom. EDA vendors are starting to address this with integrated tool suites incorporating schematic, simulation, PCB and documenation all rolled into one. These tools don't go far enough yet. We routinely work at geometries on the PCB that once were reserved for silicon. We have mixed signal and have to do current density analysis as well as thermal flow analysis. SI analysis is also an integral part of PCB layout and unfortunately, very few DRC tools understand how to check for unbroken return paths, proper termination placement and unexpected radiation. Parasitics from the layout need to be extracted and moved back to the simulation environment to tighten the design so it can be adjusted prior to finalization. Gone are the days when we can just throw a design over the wall to the next step in the process. More and more, the entire vertical process belongs in the hands of a single engineer, and the tools need to support that approach. As no engineer can be expected to know and comprehend all the technologies that may appear on a board,a team is now divided horizontally, so the tools need to permit collaborative efforts. Such tools are just starting to emerge, but not all are on the band wagon. At this time, only a small percentage of project absolutely fall into this category, but as time moves on, these sorts of things will become the norm. Just think of the many tools we have for board and system design that used to be the province of silicon designers. Perhaps its time for that lag to disappear.
Sign in to Reply