Scott presents a good summary of a portion of the questions raised on this thread by his comment below. This guidance is probably the most important one to SI engineers. "Chris has provided some additional excellent clarifications which I am generally in agreement with. The point that he (we) make is that if you engineer your return paths from die to die, the amount of noise which you have to contain through decoupling, thin dielectrics and extraordinary EMI control techniques is reduced drastically." However, other design areas impact the overall EMC performance of a design and must be integrated with the above. These include items noted by Chris such as beneficial planar stitching and the impact of myriads of vias. Additionally, there are planar splits (both power and ground), EMI confinement of on-board switching supplies (which are now often operating at 1 MHz or above), and a number of other special considerations that each different design seems to bring up. Most of these items have been discussed previously in the SI List forum. One of the most prominent solutions to these other EMC problems is the use of excellent planar bypassing/decoupling, which has been covered in-depth by many (especially by our distinguished colleagues at Sun Microsystems; i.e., Larry, Ray, and Istvan). Local and board-wide capacitor decoupling is the mainstay for lower frequency disturbances, but is limited (by inductance from physical construction and the length of connections to the planes) to under 200 MHz. That's where the interplanar capacitance, which inherently exhibits minimal inductance, takes over. The thinner the dielectric between the planes to be decoupled, the better the decoupling. This rationale was the stimulus for my earlier comments and was meant to assure our less educated colleagues were not misled as to the "simplicity" of achieving EMC in a design. A complex, high-density design requires implementation of all the techniques at our disposal. I apologize for any interpretation that I was personally attacking Chris in my initial comments. I was stating a heated difference of opinion on a subject I helped pioneer in the area of high-speed digital design. I'm glad Chris responded in depth to Scott's initial comments, as he has a lot to offer the forum. For the record, I only accept approximately one in five consulting requests that I perceive are the most challenging/difficult. All requests for my consulting services are by word-of-mouth recommendations as I do not advertise; i.e., there are no "scare tactics" in my portfolio. I have directly designed or guided over 1000 complex PCB designs in the last 16 years of consulting for an average exceeding 20 different clients per year. My client repeat rate is >98%. In the last two years, I have not worked on an active board that did not have some portion of the circuit(s) operating in excess of 1 GBPS (most above 2 GBPS), and not one of them had under 2000 vias. I critique and guide from one to five board designs per client. (How many boards does a corporate employee see each year?) My EMC modeling, analysis, and design techniques have achieved performance on (classified) programs that is over 60 dB (yes 60) below FCC Class B levels. Hopefully, this background experience constitutes enough "real world" evidence so no one thinks I am purely academic. Good engineering to all of you. Mike Michael L. Conn Owner/Principal Consultant Mikon Consulting Cell: (408)821-9843 *** Serving Your Needs with Technical Excellence *** ------------------------------------------------------------------ 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 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