[SI-LIST] Re: 50 Ohm Via?
- From: wolfgang.maichen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: "Joel Brown" <joel@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 11:01:59 -0800
Joel,
a good estimate for the prop delay is simply
T_prop = length / (speed_of_light x eps_r)
where length is the length of the via, speed_of_light is 30cm/ns (or 6
inches/ns) - make sure lengths has the same dimension (cm or inches), and
eps_r is the dielectric constant (2.5 ... 4.5 for typical PCB materials).
For example, for a board made out of FR-4 (eps_r approx 4), Of course that
does not take into account where the signal traces attach to the via, on
the other hand you wouldn't want to have any stubs hanging off that are
even close to 1/6th of your signal rise time.
As for loosely vs. closely coupled, that depends. I would NOT recommend
leaving out the return vias simply because you have a closely coupled
differential pair. That would make your design very sensitive to any
common mode component on your signal - causing e.g. excessive EMI. There
have benn quite a few threads on this duscussion list in the past.
Regards,
Wolfgang
"Joel Brown" <joel@xxxxxxxxxx>
01/09/2008 08:30 PM
To
<wolfgang.maichen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <luant@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
<si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject
RE: [SI-LIST] Re: 50 Ohm Via?
Wolfgang,
Your point about how much simulation is worthwhile is well taken.
I work for a small company and wear a lot of hats, I am not a full time SI
engineer. We do have some tools such as Hyperlynx and Hspice which in my
opinion have been under utilized. I know Hyperlynx claims to have some GHz
via modeling capability but I am not sure how accurate it is and I don't
think it takes the return path such as stitching vias into account. I have
been trying to do more simulation as time allows and learning along the
way.
It's certainly not easy to learn multiple simulation environments and all
the pitfalls. I have yet to get to the point to where I can correlate
measurements against simulations.
How would I know what the prop delay through a via will be?
To Chris:
I have been reading several places that recommend using loosely coupled
differential pairs, that is why I mentioned 50 ohms. I know there are
religious beliefs about tightly coupled vs loosely coupled pairs. The
material I read regarding loosely coupled pairs mentioned advantages such
as
wider trace widths for a given impedance and avoiding degradation of rise
time caused by coupling between signals within a pair.
Thanks - Joel
-----Original Message-----
From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On
Behalf Of wolfgang.maichen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 7:19 PM
To: luant@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: 50 Ohm Via?
As a simple rule of thumb:
Usually not very important if the prop delay through the via is less than
about 1/6th of your signal rise time (you may be able to get away with
1/4th). Rise time is much more important than bit rate or clock frequency.
As to the number of vias - this can of course aggravate the problem; but
on the other hand, I wouldn't attempt to design a 10 Gb/s channel and put
in more than maybe two vias...
just my 2 cents
Wolfgang
"Tony Luan" <luant@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
01/09/2008 07:06 PM
Please respond to
luant@xxxxxxxxxxx
To
<si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
[SI-LIST] Re: 50 Ohm Via?
How critical the characteristic impedance of via transition is? It
depends on the bit rate, channel insertion loss and the number of vias
on each channel.=20
BR
Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Harry Selfridge
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 6:50 PM
To: 'SI LIST'
Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: 50 Ohm Via?
There was an article written about controlled impedance vias several=20
years ago by Thomas Neu of Texas Instruments. I haven't seen any=20
followup articles by anyone on the subject since. You can read Neu's=20
article online at:
http://www.edn.com/index.asp?layout=3Darticle&articleid=3DCA324403 .
Others may have experienced different results, but I've never found=20
controlled impedance vias to be necessary or useful. The distances=20
involved in a via are so short that any pretense of matching=20
impedance is negligible compared with other variations that you might=20
encounter over the full length of a signal path. One board we built=20
for a customer provided two signal paths, one with Neu's controlled=20
impedance vias, and duplicates without. Testing of the loaded board=20
showed no appreciable difference in performance, and the loss of=20
board space to the structure necessary to achieve the controlled=20
impedance vias was considerable.
Regards - Harry
At 05:51 PM 1/9/2008, you wrote:
>Is there such a thing as a design methodology for designing a PCB via
with
>50 ohm impedance, or does it have to be done iteratively using a 3D
field
>solver?
>Are controlled impedance vias necessary, worthwhile or helpful for
>multi-gigabit serial links running at 1 to 5 Gbps?
>
>
>
>Thanks - Joel
------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from si-list:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
For help:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
List technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.net
List archives are viewable at: =20
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
or at our remote archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
=20
------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from si-list:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
For help:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
List technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.net
List archives are viewable at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
or at our remote archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from si-list:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
For help:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
List technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.net
List archives are viewable at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
or at our remote archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from si-list:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
For help:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
List technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.net
List archives are viewable at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
or at our remote archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
Other related posts:
