[SI-LIST] Re: Cable grounding scheme
- From: "Lee Ritchey" <leeritchey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "chen_jinhua@xxxxxxx" <chen_jinhua@xxxxxxx>, erdinih@xxxxxxxxx, xileil@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:09:34 -0700
What is this ting called "Chassis Ground" that everyone keeps referring to?
Last I remember it was just the green wire on the AC cord that UL requires.
How does that play into discussion of EMI?
> [Original Message]
> From: <chen_jinhua@xxxxxxx>
> To: <erdinih@xxxxxxxxx>; <xileil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: <si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 8/15/2006 9:16:30 AM
> Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Cable grounding scheme
>
> Ihsan
>
> If I understand your email correctly, you still use separate chassis and
> logic grounds. But you use many many stitching points to connect them
> together. If you consider the high speed cable application. It will
> impact SI. If the cable does not have separate logic and chassis
> grounds. Cable reference is chassis ground when it connects to the board
> connector. From connector to semiconductor chips, there will be a
> reference interruption because chip references to logic ground. Depends
> on how bad of the reference interruption, the SI impacts will vary. If
> the signal-point connection is used, I would guess the SI impact is
> huge.
>
> This brings an old question: single-point connection vs. many many
> points of connections, which one we prefer for high speed SI and EMI? Or
> it depends ...
>
> Thanks!
>
> Jinhua
> ________________________________
>
> From: Ihsan Erdin [mailto:erdinih@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 9:40 AM
> To: Xilei Liu
> Cc: chen, jinhua; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] Re: Cable grounding scheme
>
>
> Celine,
>
> First of all, I want to express my apologies to Jinhua for -kind of-
> hijacking his topic for a potentially flaring issue.
> I think this issue goes as far back as the debate over single-point
> vs.multi-point connection between chassis and digital grounds. As such,
> it is more of an conducted/radiated emission problem than SI. The
> dilemma is while single-point connection could be justified by the fact
> that it avoids very low frequency common mode (noise) currents from
> creeping into the power line, in order to cut down on the radiated
> emissions at high frequencies, multi-point connection is strictly
> required between the two reference systems. In his "EMC and printed
> Circuit board design theory and layout made simple" book, for example,
> M. Montrose suggests stitching the two reference systems at a distance
> of lambda/20, with lambda being the wavelength of the highest frequency
> component of the spectrum of the system. The book was published in 1999.
> With today's multi-gigahertz systems, it's impossible to achieve such a
> design goal and it's an overkill at any rate. But the necessity of
> multi-point connection is not a debate any more. Some designers try to
> find a mid-way by connecting the reference systems with high frequency
> caps but the boards are already overly-populated by the same type of
> caps used for decoupling and there's the issue of parasitic inductances
> that defeat the purpose. Today, the commonplace approach, at least in
> the designs that I observe, is to suppress the low frequency CM currents
> with power line filters and directly connect the chassis and digital
> grounds at practically as many points as possible against radiated
> emissions.
> If you want to see some numbers and charts to support these ideas, in
> "EMI and Troubleshooting Techniques" book, M. Mardiguian gives a very
> good example that compares the two grounding strategies.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ihsan
>
>
> On 8/15/06, Xilei Liu <xileil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hey, Ihsan,
>
> I've ever seen notes that published in the past in 2002, saying
> that"we
> learned from NRAO engineers that it is both feasible and
> advisable to
> physically separate digital circuits from analog systems, and to
> interpose a
> minimum of two levels of Faraday shielding acting in series."
> From my point
> of view, it should be easier to employ different EMI solutions
> for power
> line and signal line separately when the digital/analog grounds
> are
> separated and connected somehow at a single-point. What will be
> the problems
> in terms of SI? Welcome your 'fight back' so that I can learn
> more ;)
>
> Regards,
> Celine
>
>
> >From: "Ihsan Erdin" <erdinih@xxxxxxxxx>
> >Reply-To: erdinih@xxxxxxxxx
> >To: chen_jinhua@xxxxxxx
> >CC: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Cable grounding scheme
> >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 06:29:32 -0400
> >
> >This question makes me wonder if there're any designers left
> who still
> >separate logic ground from the chassis ground in high-speed
> digital circuit
> >design -and on what basis? I thought this whole issue of
> chassis vs. logic
> >ground was something of the past.
> >Regards,
> >
> >Ihsan
> >
> >On 8/14/06, chen_jinhua@xxxxxxx <chen_jinhua@xxxxxxx > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have a few general questions about the high speed cable
> grounding
> > > scheme. It could impact both SI and EMI. I would like to
> have your
> > > inputs about this issue.
> > >
> > > Scheme 1: cable does not separate logic ground and chassis
> ground. But
> > > when it connects the system/boards, the system/boards have
> separate
> > > logic ground and chassis ground. How do you separate/connect
> the logic
> > > ground to chassis ground in boards? What is the pros and
> cons for SI
> > > and/or EMI?=20
> > >
> > > Scheme 2: Cable keeps separate logic ground and chassis
> ground.
> > > System/boards also keep the separate logic and chassis
> ground. Cable
> > > logic ground and board logic ground connects, and chassis
> connects the
> > > chassis ground. How do you separate/connect the logic ground
> to chassis
> > > ground in boards? What is the pros and cons for SI and/or
> EMI?
> > >
> > > Do you prefer scheme 1 or scheme 2? What is the pros and
> cons of scheme
> > > 1 vs. scheme 2 for SI and/or EMI? Does SI and EMI have
> conflict
> > > requirements?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > Jinhua Chen
> > > SI of Hardware Engineering
> > > EMC Corp.
> > >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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 FAQ wiki page is located at:
> > > http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> > >
> > > List technical documents are available at:
> > > http://www.si-list.org
> > >
> > > 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 FAQ wiki page is located at:
> > http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> >
> >List technical documents are available at:
> > http://www.si-list.org
> >
> >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 FAQ wiki page is located at:
> http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
>
> List technical documents are available at:
> http://www.si-list.org
>
> 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 FAQ wiki page is located at:
http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
List technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.org
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:
