[SI-LIST] Re: Seperate Sparameter for gnd & supply plane !!
- From: Young <long.0.yang@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Rajan Hansa <all.si.list@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 16:08:56 +0800
What we care about and what it makes sense is the voltage difference
between vcc and vss at chip side. Do not leave vcc or vss alone.
Generally when extracting S-parameter we need define local positive
terminal and negative terminal(as reference 0, mostly is ground).
Keeping this concept in mind, the S-parameter captures the loop
parasitics, including all the effect between the local positive
terminal and the negative terminal. In the other words, S-parameter
includes the parasitics between vcc and vss from the local terminals.
Or you can try to swap the positive terminal and negative terminal,
you will have the same S-parameter, because the loop is the same.
Regards
Long
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 01:04, Larry Smith <LSMITH@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Rajan - There are some very basic principles that should be considered here.
> To the little circuits on the die, the only PDN voltage that is important is
> the difference between Vcc and Vss locally at the circuit terminals. The
> circuits respond to this voltage and they do not care about the voltage on
> the PCB ground plane or the voltage at the center of the earth or any other
> place.
>
> An S parameter model of the PDN is fully capable of giving Vcc-Vss at the
> circuit terminals in a properly set up simulation. The simulation may show
> you local Vcc-Vss (differential) at several points in the system (i.e. bump
> joints, wire bond pads, package-via tops and bottoms, package balls, pcb
> vias, pcb power planes, etc.). At each of these points in the system, the
> only thing that is important is the difference between Vcc and Vss voltage.
> Consider this the "TEM" for the PDN if you like. The voltage along the
> ground path is not defined (voltages are not unique and depends greatly upon
> the path of integration). The structures are usually large enough that
> voltage along a ground path distance should be considered voltage across time
> which is not well defined. S parameters cut through all that and give you
> the impedance of some port when a different port is excited, always with
> respect to a local reference node.
>
> I've seen a lot of analog designers get really confused about this and try to
> talk about "ground noise." But the voltage on a node (particularly ground)
> is not defined (what would you measure it with respect to?). Voltage is
> always the difference in potential between two nodes (i.e. Vcc-Vss) and is
> clearly defined when you can identify a parallel plate capacitor to integrate
> the E field through a distance (volts/meter x meters). This is valid when
> there are no time varying magnetic fields in the picture. All voltage bets
> are off when you get into typical packaging structures where there certainly
> are time varying magnetic fields and the integral of dB/dt through a loop
> area is important. Once again, the local Vcc-Vss voltage is still valid all
> along the PDN path (TEM mode) but voltage along the path (and therefore
> ground noise) is not defined. An S parameter model simulation that has a
> port for Vcc wrt it's local Vss will tell you everything you need to know
> about the po
> wer quality for the local circuit..
>
> Now, what about the signals that come away from the die circuit and follow
> some path down to a PCB trace? As long as the signals are referenced to
> ground along the entire path, the S parameter representation of that path is
> good. But if the signal finds itself referenced to Vcc or some other node
> along the way (return current is on something other than continuous ground),
> then you have to be real careful about mode conversion when the signal
> return-current is forced to jump from one reference node to another. Some
> people will call this ground bounce but I prefer to think of it as poorly
> referenced signals.
>
> I hope this does not get you into trouble with your analog engineer. These
> are basic power integrity concepts that need to be resolved anytime we talk
> about power quality and signal referencing. Any attempt to get S parameters
> for ground will simply lead to confusion and trouble.
>
> Regards,
> Larry Smith
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of steve weir
> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 4:34 AM
> To: Rajan Hansa
> Cc: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Seperate Sparameter for gnd & supply plane !!
>
> Don't suppose. Analyze. Your real problem is that you analog engineer
> wants to understand the extent of noise disturbance that is associated
> with the interconnects and PDN. He first needs to define his problem by
> deciding for each victim what location in the assembly constitutes his
> reference. Once that is done, the problem can be solved with analytical
> tools. An equipotential if it exists somewhere convenient reduces the
> effort required to get a reasonable answer.
> Steve
> On 6/1/2011 4:23 AM, Rajan Hansa wrote:
>>
>> Steve,
>>
>> The board has many chips including ours and they all have different
>> current requirement so it won't be correct to consider it
>> equipotential and if I suppose consider them quasi-equipotential, what
>> extra things I have to take care while generating s-parameter ?? OR do
>> you mean to say for quasi-equipotential, separate vdd & gnd
>> s-parameters will take care our problem ?
>>
>> Rajan
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 4:10 PM, steve weir <weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx
>> <mailto:weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>
>> You have a matrix of current sources attached to a matrix of RLCG
>> legs, and you want to know the noise voltage that occurs between
>> different point pairs in that matrix. If the product of the
>> static and dynamic currents against a section of those legs is
>> very small, you can treat that region as a quasi- equipotential.
>> Otherwise you have to treat the point pairs as unique.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> On 6/1/2011 3:29 AM, Rajan Hansa wrote:
>>>
>>> Steve,
>>>
>>> You are right !! Our analog engineer basically wants to
>>> see ground bounce w.r.t pcb ground which was not possible with
>>> single s-parameter but you said that I have to do whole lot more
>>> than just produce s-parameters between one port inside the
>>> package and some other virtual port.
>>>
>>> Can you help me to understand that why separate s-parameter is
>>> not sufficient to see ground bounce and what is the right way to
>>> handle such problems ??
>>> Rajan
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:30 PM, steve weir <weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx
>>> <mailto:weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>>
>>> What it sounds like your analog engineer wants is to be able
>>> to figure out how much bounce will occur in each plane
>>> relative to some external reference, such as the PCB Vss
>>> plane. In order to figure that out, you have to do a whole
>>> lot more than just produce s-parameters between one port
>>> inside the package and some other virtual port. Your analog
>>> engineer needs to be more specific about what he wants to
>>> figure out.
>>>
>>> Steve.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/1/2011 1:41 AM, Rajan Hansa wrote:
>>>
>>> Guys,
>>> I have got a request to provide sparameter for one
>>> package but this time my
>>> analog engineer wants seperate s-parameter for gnd&
>>> supply plane. The
>>> reason he gave is that with single sparameter for vdd&
>>> gnd plane. He can't
>>> see gnd noise as s-parameter is generated with gnd as
>>> reference so it'll
>>> always be seen as '0' but that problem won't come in
>>> separate s-parameters
>>> for gnd& supply planes.
>>>
>>> Though the tool I am using has an option to generate
>>> sparameter with
>>> reference to some virtual point and I can use that option
>>> to generate
>>> separate sparameters for gnd& supply but problem is that
>>> I have not still
>>> understood if using separate s-parameter is a right way
>>> to do things and if
>>> it's the standard practice in industry.
>>>
>>> Experts comments please.
>>>
>>> Rajan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe from si-list:
>>> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> <mailto: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
>>> <mailto:si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> with 'help' in the
>>> Subject field
>>>
>>>
>>> List technical documents are available at:
>>> http://www.si-list.net <http://www.si-list.net/>
>>>
>>> List archives are viewable at:
>>> //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
>>>
>>> Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
>>> http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steve Weir
>>> IPBLOX, LLC
>>> 150 N. Center St. #211
>>> Reno, NV 89501
>>> www.ipblox.com <http://www.ipblox.com/>
>>>
>>> (775) 299-4236 Business
>>> (866) 675-4630 Toll-free
>>> (707) 780-1951 Fax
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steve Weir
>> IPBLOX, LLC
>> 150 N. Center St. #211
>> Reno, NV 89501
>> www.ipblox.com <http://www.ipblox.com/>
>>
>> (775) 299-4236 Business
>> (866) 675-4630 Toll-free
>> (707) 780-1951 Fax
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Steve Weir
> IPBLOX, LLC
> 150 N. Center St. #211
> Reno, NV 89501
> www.ipblox.com
>
> (775) 299-4236 Business
> (866) 675-4630 Toll-free
> (707) 780-1951 Fax
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
> Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
>
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Notice.
> This message may contain information that is confidential or otherwise
> protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
> hereby notified that any use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or
> copying of this message, or any attachments, is strictly prohibited. If you
> have received this message in error, please advise the sender by reply
> e-mail, and delete the message and any attachments. Thank you.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
> 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
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
Other related posts:
