[SI-LIST] Re: Relation between slew rate and ISI
- From: "Preethi Ramaswamy" <preethi.gowtham@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "wolfgang.maichen@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <wolfgang.maichen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 17:34:10 -0700
Totally agree. From these simulations trying to prove that at higher speeds
this kind of probing is not viable. Just need to clarify that, this is not
scope probing, this is logic analyzer probing. So I really don't care much
about how the signal looks. All I care is if the bit is sampled correctly as
a 1 or a 0.
On 5/7/08, wolfgang.maichen@xxxxxxxxxxxx <wolfgang.maichen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
>
> Probing in the middle of the line can have its pitfalls when trying to
> make sense of the observed waveform (and relating those to the "true"
> waveforms seeing at the receive)r. One such issue arises when the receiver
> does not provide perfectly matched termination (i.e. receiver impedance
> different from line impedance, but also - which is always the case - when
> the receiver has some input capacitance). In this case - if your probe is
> further away from the receiver than a small fraction of a rise time - you
> will observe two distict partial partial transitions, while at the receiver
> you would see both lumped together at the same time (i.e. only a single
> transition).
>
> Extreme case as an example (easy to simulate e.g. in PSpice): 50 Ohm
> driver driving a 50 Ohm transmission line with a 1V step, receiver is
> completely unterminated (high impedance). The driver is thus launching a
> 500mV step into the line (voltage divider - 50 Ohm driver + 50 Ohm
> transmission line). The receiver will see a full 1V step (500mV incident +
> 500mV reflected), but a probe looking at the middle of the line will see a
> 500mV step, and then (one round-trip delay to the receiver and back later)
> as second 500mV step on top of it.
>
> Trouble is, if you are "somewhat" close to the receiver those two
> transitions may partially overlap and you may think the waveform fidelity is
> poor, when in reality all is fine at the receiver end.
>
> Wolfgang
>
>
>
>
>
> *"Preethi Ramaswamy" <preethi.gowtham@xxxxxxxxx>*
> Sent by: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> 05/07/2008 04:12 PM
> To
> "Curt McNamara" <CurtM@xxxxxxxxxxx> cc
> si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject
> [SI-LIST] Re: Relation between slew rate and ISI
>
>
>
>
> Hi Curt
> For my application, I'm trying to tap the signal to feed to a probe.
> The best point to place a probe is at the receiver but it isn't always
> possible.
> Hence, I'm trying out a few options, one of them being tapping the signal
> before the receiver.
> Preethi
>
> On 5/7/08, Curt McNamara <CurtM@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > This may have been covered already by Wolfgang's excellent responses:
> > The wave arrives at the load and any reflected energy is almost no prop
> > delay away.
> > In contrast, at other points on the line the reflected energy from the
> > load (or other discontinuity) arrives 2 x tpd later (where tpd is the
> delay
> > from the measurement point to the reflection).
> >
> > This is one reason we may not care about intermediate points on the
> line:
> > at the load we need to see signal quality and establish that there are
> no
> > voltage levels beyond our limits. At the source signal quality may not
> be as
> > critical, but checking voltage levels is important.
> >
> > Why would we care about intermediate points? They could affect crosstalk
> > or emissions. Any other perspectives on this?
> >
> > Curt
> >
> >
> > Curt McNamara, P.E. // principal electrical engineer
> > Logic Product Development
> > 411 Washington Ave. N. Suite 400
> > Minneapolis, MN 55401
> > T // 612.436.5178
> > F // 612.672.9489
> > www.logicpd.com
> > / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
> > This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
> information
> > intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law.
> If
> > you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and
> are
> > hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this
> > message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly
> prohibited.
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > On Behalf Of Preethi Ramaswamy
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 5:52 PM
> > To: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [SI-LIST] Relation between slew rate and ISI
> >
> > I'm looking for some information on the relation between slew rate and
> ISI
> > effect on high speed memory data signals.
> > From my SI simulation I'm observing that a signal looks much worse with
> a
> > higher slew rate than a lower slew rate. But the point I'm tapping is
> not
> > at
> > the receiver but a point before the receiver. I don't expect the signal
> to
> > look as good as at the receiver but I was hoping that the trends match.
> At
> > the receiver itself, the fast corner signal looks better than the slow
> > corner signal. The bus is properly terminated.
> > Looking at the waveform, I see that in the fast corner case, whenever
> > there
> > is a 1010 pattern, the signal is not reaching its intended Vhigh and
> Vlow
> > level. A similar thing happens at the slow corner but the signal swing
> is
> > much better. Hence, the eye diagram in the fast corner is almost closed
> > whereas the slow corner looks open.
> >
> > While searching some artciles on this, I found the opposite stated. It
> > said
> > that ISI effects are more pronounced in the slow corner case and
> Crosstalk
> > is more pronounced in the fast corner case.
> >
> > Any experience or insight into this topic would be very helpful.
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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:
