The simulation results are quite different in the two versions.
Posted: Tue 21 Oct 2025 05:10
Dear Didier,
I observed significant differences in the simulation results when running the same input file in versions 2.17 and 2.25. In the input file, I used the SPACE_CHARGE_COMP and SUPERPOSE_MAP_OUT commands. After checking the TraceWin update log, I found that version 2.19.0.4 notes that "The SPACE CHARGE COMP command is not taken into account in field maps that are preceded by a SUPERPOSE MAP OUT." This appears to be the reason why the simulation results differ so much between the two versions.Given this difference, which version’s simulation results should be considered more reliable for use in subsequent research？
I observed significant differences in the simulation results when running the same input file in versions 2.17 and 2.25. In the input file, I used the SPACE_CHARGE_COMP and SUPERPOSE_MAP_OUT commands. After checking the TraceWin update log, I found that version 2.19.0.4 notes that "The SPACE CHARGE COMP command is not taken into account in field maps that are preceded by a SUPERPOSE MAP OUT." This appears to be the reason why the simulation results differ so much between the two versions.Given this difference, which version’s simulation results should be considered more reliable for use in subsequent research？