Component "power dissipation" report using Multisim

[jgedde]

Hello,

I have a large design that has 66 resistors and 38 transistors.  As a sanity check, I'd like to be able to have Multisim let me know the dissipated power in each of these components.  I know how to do this on a component by component basis in the DC Operating Point setup.  Is there an easier way to get this info without creating a model/device parameter for "P" for all of these components?  It would seem I'm overlooking something...

Thanks!

John

[lacy]

I know what your wanting, but I don't know how to accomplish this the w ay you need. One idea is to use the wattmeter across each resistor and then run the simulation with the simulation switch. This still has to be done on a component by component basis though, but the meters will read the power dissipation for all components at the same time.

I don't know if any of this helps, but it is an idea you can think about.

[jgedde]

Thanks for the reply.  Wiring in all those wattmeters would be even worse! 

Here's what I did, although I'm sure there must be an easier way:

I exported the Multisim netlist to a .CIR file. 

I then wrote a C++ program to read in the CIR file, find all the resistors, diodes and transistors then generate another file containing series of SPICE commands that could be run using "User Defined Analysis".  It works!

Here's what my program outputs:

checknodes 1
save @qq32[p] @qq31[p] @qq6[p] @qq5[p] @qq36[p] @qq35[p] @qq12[p] @qq9[p] @qq22_a[p] @qq21_a[p] @qq16_a[p] @qq15_a[p] @qq14_a[p] @qq13_a[p] @qu5[p] @qu2[p] @qq25[p] @qq20[p] @qq19[p] @qq4[p] @qq3[p] @qq24[p] @qq23[p] @qq11[p] @qq10[p] @qq28[p] @qq8[p] @qq30[p] @qq29[p] @qq27[p] @qq26[p] @qq18[p] @qq17[p] @qq7[p] @rr60[p] @rr59[p] @rr58[p] @rr25[p] @rr57[p] @rr56[p] @rr6[p] @rr55[p] @rr54[p] @rr53[p] @rr52[p] @rr30[p] @rr15[p] @rr10[p] @rr12[p] @rr37[p] @rr13[p] @rr14[p] @rr29[p] @rr22[p] @rr35[p] @rr34[p] @rr33[p] @rr28[p] @rr27[p] @rr26[p] @rr20[p] @rr21[p] @rr17[p] @rr16[p] @rr7[p] @rr23[p] @rr32[p] @rr40[p] @rr45[p] @rr49[p] @rr46[p] @rr2[p] @rr5[p] @rr1[p] @rr3[p] @rr39[p] @rr38[p] @rr11[p] @rr36[p] @rr48[p] @rr47[p] @rr4[p] @rr44[p] @rr9[p] @rr24[p] @rr8[p] @rr43[p] @rr41[p] @rr42[p] @rr18[p] @rr31[p] @rr19[p] @dq22_b[p] @dq13_b[p] @dq21_b[p] @dq16_b[p] @dq15_b[p] @dq14_b[p]
iplot @qq32[p] @qq31[p] @qq6[p] @qq5[p] @qq36[p] @qq35[p] @qq12[p] @qq9[p] @qq22_a[p] @qq21_a[p] @qq16_a[p] @qq15_a[p] @qq14_a[p] @qq13_a[p] @qu5[p] @qu2[p] @qq25[p] @qq20[p] @qq19[p] @qq4[p] @qq3[p] @qq24[p] @qq23[p] @qq11[p] @qq10[p] @qq28[p] @qq8[p] @qq30[p] @qq29[p] @qq27[p] @qq26[p] @qq18[p] @qq17[p] @qq7[p] @rr60[p] @rr59[p] @rr58[p] @rr25[p] @rr57[p] @rr56[p] @rr6[p] @rr55[p] @rr54[p] @rr53[p] @rr52[p] @rr30[p] @rr15[p] @rr10[p] @rr12[p] @rr37[p] @rr13[p] @rr14[p] @rr29[p] @rr22[p] @rr35[p] @rr34[p] @rr33[p] @rr28[p] @rr27[p] @rr26[p] @rr20[p] @rr21[p] @rr17[p] @rr16[p] @rr7[p] @rr23[p] @rr32[p] @rr40[p] @rr45[p] @rr49[p] @rr46[p] @rr2[p] @rr5[p] @rr1[p] @rr3[p] @rr39[p] @rr38[p] @rr11[p] @rr36[p] @rr48[p] @rr47[p] @rr4[p] @rr44[p] @rr9[p] @rr24[p] @rr8[p] @rr43[p] @rr41[p] @rr42[p] @rr18[p] @rr31[p] @rr19[p] @dq22_b[p] @dq13_b[p] @dq21_b[p] @dq16_b[p] @dq15_b[p] @dq14_b[p]
set trtol = 7
set itl1 = 1000
set itl4 = 100
set convlimit
set rshunt = 1e+012
op -env-options
if-error end-scope audit-log-show
show all
showmod all
write-and-destroy-iplot C:\temp.raw

Cheers!

John

[lacy]

I had a feeling that all the meters would clutter thing up, but I didn't have any other idea. Oh well, I tried anyway.

This may be a good suggestion to incorparate into future releases. Component simulation result report after simulation. This would include current, voltage and power dissipation as well as any other information that would be important to have documented.