If you use C=2.2uF, R=90.9k, RS=1MEG, the CD4060 simulation completes in about 90 seconds.

BTW- I took a look at the linked post to the circuit AK posted. I think there is a error in the description. The timing calculation that was described in the post applies to the Q4 output NOT the Q14 output. So, to get the 1Hr output, the output should be connected to Q4 NOT Q14. Q14 will go high in 1024 Hrs!

eT

 

hi,
The rise time and response of the 4011 is creating the glitch in its output, tried a CD4093 and it all works fine, decided to use 40106 in place of the 4049, getting a nice clean signal.
Will tidy it up and use a CD4020 in a hierarchical model of the 4060. will check the timing formula.

E

 

If you use C=2.2uF, R=90.9k, RS=1MEG, the CD4060 simulation completes in about 90 seconds.

BTW- I took a look at the linked post to the circuit AK posted. I think there is a error in the description. The timing calculation that was described in the post applies to the Q4 output NOT the Q14 output. So, to get the 1Hr output, the output should be connected to Q4 NOT Q14. Q14 will go high in 1024 Hrs!

eT

You sure about that?! I did all my own calculations straight from the data sheets, then plugged in AK's numbers to make sure I was on the right track. I came up with all the same values he did. I could've sworn that was all correct.

 

You sure about that?! I did all my own calculations straight from the data sheets, then plugged in AK's numbers to make sure I was on the right track. I came up with all the same values he did. I could've sworn that was all correct.

Yes...calculation is correct...I jus thought it was connected to Q4 but Q14 is right. so nevermind.
Sorry bout that.

eT

 

Yes...calculation is correct...I jus thought it was connected to Q4 but Q14 is right. so nevermind.
Sorry bout that.

eT

No worries. Thanks for following up with confirmation.

 

hi,
The rise time and response of the 4011 is creating the glitch in its output, tried a CD4093 and it all works fine, decided to use 40106 in place of the 4049, getting a nice clean signal.
Will tidy it up and use a CD4020 in a hierarchical model of the 4060. will check the timing formula.

E

I look forward to seeing your more elegant fix. For the moment, I've simply increased the speed setting on CD4094B to 1.5. For my current project, with nearly one second oscillator period, subtle changes in propagation delays will have no effect on the sim for me. With the glitches out of the way, I find the time divisions of the ripple counter to be as I expected (Q4=Q4, Q5=Q5, no offset required anymore.) I've made a temporary copy of the model for myself with the ripple stages bumped up accordingly, which makes it possible to include Q14 now. Simming the whole project with this version of the CD4060 in place, all timing values match calculated (from datasheet) values perfectly, and sim times are way better than they were with the other model I was originally trying.

Oddly, I tried replacing the 4011 with a 4093, and that caused a strange shift in the timing. A time value that should have been ~111 seconds (Q8 going high with my chosen RC values) shifted up to ~130 seconds. I can't begin to guess how this would happen, but something odd happened with the 4093, so I went back to a 4011 and just increased the speed setting on the 4094. Probably an imperfect solution, but it's working for what I need at the moment!

 

hi e17,
I am doing final checking of the new CD4060m2 hierarchical model, it still will not be 'blazing fast', thats limited by how fast LTS can do the maths.

The sims I have run using 4093 and 40106, give a Fosc = 1/[2.66 * R * C]
For a quick fix use a Vsource set to pulse at the frequency of your choice to produce the CLK signal.
Clock a CD4020, [ 14 stage ripple counter] and use its outputs to drive the following circuitry.

I would suggest you consider only the parts of your project that really need simulation in order to verify a point.
Most of your project in simulation could be represented using existing 'faster' existing proved models eg: the oscillator section, becomes a Vsource.

When you do the final real world build, use for example the CD4060 formula of Fosc= 1/[2.3 *R*C] to calculate the required component values.

E

 

hi e17,
I am doing final checking of the new CD4060m2 hierarchical model, it still will not be 'blazing fast', thats limited by how fast LTS can do the maths.

The sims I have run using 4093 and 40106, give a Fosc = 1/[2.66 * R * C]
For a quick fix use a Vsource set to pulse at the frequency of your choice to produce the CLK signal.
Clock a CD4020, [ 14 stage ripple counter] and use its outputs to drive the following circuitry.

I would suggest you consider only the parts of your project that really need simulation in order to verify a point.
Most of your project in simulation could be represented using existing 'faster' existing proved models eg: the oscillator section, becomes a Vsource.

When you do the final real world build, use for example the CD4060 formula of Fosc= 1/[2.3 *R*C] to calculate the required component values.

E

Awesome! Thanks so much to you especially, and also to everyone else who's contributed to this thread. I've learned a lot about LTspice in this process.

You're right about only simming what I really have to, although in this case I lacked the confidence in my understanding of even the most basic aspects of CD4060 operation to assume anything. Once I'm a little more confident in my abilities to get each of these subsystems right, I'll be more willing to speed up the simulation by using simple shortcuts like a voltage source in place of the oscillator components.

Thanks again!

P.S. Thanks to all the great insights here, I got my own tweaked version of the 4060 model running well enough to do a full simulation of the circuit from the other thread that started me down this path. To test the ultimate version, the simulated time was over an hour. The whole thing ran in a matter of minutes (not hours as before) and the circuit being tested worked perfectly, so I'm really happy with how this has all worked out.

 

My thanks to you for highlighting the glitch problem in my first 4060 model.
E