[SI-LIST] Re: Right Angle Bends

I've done the same.  Been a long time ago when I did microwave work.  In 
this case the bends were visible on the TDR plots, but were not considered 
significant.

This thread concerns traces of the dimensions layout people and fabricators 
are  called upon to make digital PCBs and the testing that has been done 
shows that the bends are not even visible.

It would be good to see your tests for "macro' traces.

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Tom Dagostino" <tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 4:46 PM
To: "'Lee Ritchey'" <leeritchey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "'Julian Ferry'" 
<julian.ferry@xxxxxxxxxx>; "'Brad Brim'" <bradb@xxxxxxxxxxx>; "'Jeff 
Walden'" <jwalden@xxxxxxxx>; <si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Right Angle Bends

> Lee
>
> I have measured 50 Ohm traces that were on the order of 0.100" wide that 
> had
> 90 degree bends.  It was very easy to point out the bend on the TDR plots.
> If I can find those boards again, they are well over 10 years old, I'll
> remeasure them and put out the details.
>
> Tom Dagostino
>
> Teraspeed Labs
> 9999 SW Wilshire St.
> Suite 102
> Portland, OR 97225
> USA
>
> 971-279-5325  Office
> 971-279-5326   FAX
> 503-430-1065  Cell
>
> tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> www.teraspeed.com
>
> Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC
> 121 North River Drive
> Narragansett, RI 02882
> 401-284-1827
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> On
> Behalf Of Lee Ritchey
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 3:32 PM
> To: Julian Ferry; Brad Brim; 'Jeff Walden'; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Right Angle Bends
>
> I've have asked for evidence that this high power microwave problem 
> exists.
> Same answer, "somebody says", nobody has shown it with measurements.
>
>
> As to the paper, the simulations were not validated with any measurements.
> As to the Montrose paper, refer to the 90 degree corner paper which is 
> well
> controlled laboratory measurements which contradict it.
>
> What is true is that with very high power RF and microwave there is also
> high voltage.  With high voltage comes corona discharge and potential 
> arcing
> at sharp points.  That is a good reason to avoid pointy structures of any
> kind in these applications.   But it is not a signal integrity problem.
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Julian Ferry" <julian.ferry@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 12:48 PM
> To: "Brad Brim" <bradb@xxxxxxxxxxx>; "'Jeff Walden'" <jwalden@xxxxxxxx>;
> <si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Right Angle Bends
>
>>
>> I think one of the problems here is that like with most myths or urban
>> legends, there is a kernel of truth to it.
>>
>> It is pure, unarguable physics that the capacitance will go down and
>> the inductance will go up in a right angle bend.  The question is
>> whether that change matters in a particular application.
>>
>> For some applications, like in high power microwave or RF
>> applications, this effect can be significant enough relative to other
>> factors that it is definitely worth worrying about.
>>
>> But in the grand scheme of things in the current SI world, this change
>> is way down on the list of potential problems. It is effectively
>> swamped out by many other effects (like our relatively crappy
>> connectors, for one
>> example...)
>>
>> I think these guys wrote a pretty decent little paper with some math
>> that can help determine whether you might need to worry about bends.
>>
>> http://www.millertechinc.com/pdf_files/mti_tn063_microstrip_right_angl
>> e_bends.pdf
>>
>>
>> Also keep in mind that we in the SI world are mostly dealing with
>> pulsed signals, where a large portion of the energy is contained in
>> the lower frequency components.  The excess capacitance will only
>> affect the very high frequency components. But in the microwave
>> environment, it's all about the high frequency signal, so a bend can be a
> much greater concern.
>>
>>
>>
>> Julian Ferry
>> High Speed Engineering Manager
>> Samtec, Inc
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> On Behalf Of Brad Brim
>> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 2:57 PM
>> To: 'Jeff Walden'; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Right Angle Bends
>>
>> exactly, Jeff ... and the traces that connect to the bends are also
>> MUCH longer than typical for the RF/microwave case.
>>
>> In RF/mw ckt sim libraries/layouts a bend is a separate "component".
>> The reference planes (i.e. where the traces connect to the bend) are
>> at the edge of this component. For example, the 90-degree bend
>> reference planes are at the edge of the square representing the area
>> of the bend. For most SI applications the bend is NOT a separate
>> component and the two traces simply meet at a single node. Having
>> worked way too many hours to implement and test RF/mw ckt sim bend
>> models over a dozen years ago I observed the parasitics are a delay of
>> length on the order of the node-to-node distance with additional
>> capacitive parasitics for sharp bends and inductive parasitics for
>> aggressively chamfered bends. For a 90 degree bend the different
>> definitions of reference plane imply 2*(W/2) additional length trace
>> for the SI case. Given approximate parasitic delay of sqrt(2)*W/2, all
>> implies doing nothing for SI applications is still on the order of
>> only 30% phase delay error versus a much more precise parasitic model
>> (for an already small parasitic). The phase delay dominates because
>> bend capacitive parasitics are small for SI apps relative to other
>> capacitive parasitics not modeled throughout the system.
>>
>> Therefore, if the trace are not wide (low impedance) and their lengths
>> coming in/out of the bend are long relative to the linewidth, then
>> ignoring the bend is obviously the correct choice.
>>
>> Where SI apps might not always want to ignore bends is for tight
>> meander structures used to accumulate phase delay and balance skew.
>> These geometries sometimes have short distance between bends and could
>> therefore lose some accuracy from ignoring bend parasitics. In these
>> cases it is probably more important to include coupling amongst the
>> parallel traces. As we all might guess, if you need to know a meander
>> behavior accurately you may wish to model it as a single component
>> with more detailed simulation rather than treat it as a collection of
>> traces (with or without bend parasitics).
>>
>> cheers,
>> -Brad
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jeff Walden
>>> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 10:55 AM
>>> To: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Right Angle Bends
>>>
>>> The difference is that today's SI traces are significantly narrower
>>> than the typical "RF" microstrip of 30 years ago.
>>> -Jeff
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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:
>> http://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:
>> http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
>>
>> 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:
>> http://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:
>> http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
>>
>> 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:
> http://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:
> http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
>
> 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:
> http://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:
> http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
>
> 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:
http://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:     
                http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
 
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
                http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
  

Other related posts: