[SI-LIST] Re: impedance relation with frequency...
- From: Martyn Gaudion <martyn.gaudion@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: jeff.loyer@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:29:19 +0100
Hi Jeff,
A number of posts have discussed loss on silicon and
on longer PCB traces, however loss also starts to become significant
on fine line (3mil and less) traces especially where copper weights
under 1/2 ounce are employed.
On broader traces where dc and ac series loss is insignificant
you can get an idea of the expected variation over frequency
by graphing the change in Zo due to Er change, - many laminate
manufacturers will have the graphs. Zo varies as 1/sq root Er so
in a lossless case the variation is small. Most of the change
occurs as Andy points out at the lower end of the frequency
spectrum.
Here is a link to a fairly generic graph of Zo Vs Frequency for
FR4
http://www.polarinstruments.com/support/cits/images/ap155_1.jpg
And the resultant modelled variation in impedance (lossless case)
www.polarinstruments.com/support/cits/images/ap155_2.jpg
Kind regards
Martyn Gaudion
www.polarinstruments.com
At 12:40 PM 24/09/03 -0700, you wrote:
>Hi Andrew,
>I would like some help understanding the difference between board traces =
>and "chip lines". My experience has been that I can TDR a trace using a =
>35ps risetime, or through 100 and 400ps filters, and measure the same Z0 =
>for that trace. This would seem to be backed up by the fact that there =
>is no compensation made when measuring traces with different TDRs, =
>regardless of their risetime.
>
>I just confirmed that again, measuring the same 3" microstrip trace with =
>no filter, and 100ps and 400ps filters, and finding the TDR and TDT =
>waveforms stabilize at the same level, regardless of the risetime. Of =
>course, there's significant impact to the risetime of the TDT, but the =
>Z0 of the trace (as indicated by the DC level of the TDR trace) remains =
>constant.
>
>This implies to me that the Z0 of the trace is constant for 10GHz , =
>3.5GHz, or 875MHz (35ps, 100ps, 400ps risetimes, respectively).
>
>My experience with VNA seems to substantiate this - S11 typically =
>remains fairly constant (other than resonances at lambda/4, etc.) while =
>S21 varies with frequency due to loss effects.
>
>Is there something else I'm missing?
>
>Jeff Loyer
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: andrew.c.byers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:andrew.c.byers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 12:05 PM
>To: jonpowell@xxxxxxxxxxxx; kbagga31@xxxxxxxxx; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: impedance relation with frequency...
>
>
>Concerning Zo relation with frequency:
>
>Once again, depends where you live. On boards, typically the
>frequency-dependent impedance change starts leveling out at much lower
>frequencies. Essentially you are approaching the sqrt(L/C) impedance,
>because your omega*L overwhelms your R. *Usually* by 1MHz your Zo curve =
>is
>flat. But if you are modeling chip lines, your R value for the line =
>might be
>comparable (or greater) than omega*L up to a couple GHz or so. Then you
>cannot ignore this frequency dependent behavior. I have seen a typical =
>line
>on chip go from about Zo=3D100ohms @100MHz, to Zo=3D63ohms @1GHz, to =
>Zo=3D55ohms
>@10GHz. Measurement, simulation, theory, literature, and gut feel all =
>back
>this up.=20
>
>So the bottom line (as it always is in the world of interconnect =
>modeling)
>is it depends on how high you go in frequency, the dimensions of line =
>you
>are using, and if you are designing in a narrow band or a wide band.
>HOWEVER, as Jon pointed out, you can often see greater variations due to
>coupling from nearby traces. Plus you have to remember that impedance
>control is an issue too - usually +/- 10% is as good as it gets for
>run-of-the-mill PCBs out there (but money talks).=20
>
>To get a feel for the numbers I got above, you can use a 2D field solver
>that handles the frequency dependent behavior of R and L (ansoft =
>spicelink
>or some other flavor). Or you can dig up equations and plug them into a
>matlab or mathcad. Calculate your R and L and C (usually G is =
>non-existant
>or insignificant...) and crunch away.
>
>salud,
>Andy Byers
>
> =20
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jon Powell [mailto:jonpowell@xxxxxxxxxxxx]=20
>Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 9:09 AM
>To: kbagga31@xxxxxxxxx; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: impedance relation with frequency...
>
>
>Karen,
>It is my feeling that the frequency related impedance changes on a =
>signal
>will be second order considerations compared to the impedance changes =
>caused
>by crosstalk from neighboring wires. These effects can be shown with =
>most
>good SI engines. Intel has often recommended (for instance) calculating =
>the
>effective impedance when the coupled wires on either side of the target =
>wire
>switch simultaneously with the target wire in both the same direction =
>(all
>going high and low) and opposite (target going high and low and coupled
>going low and high).
>
>hope this helps (and if I am wrong, I am sure someone will scream at me =
>so
>wait a couple of minutes).
>
>regards,
>jon
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of karan bagga
>Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 2:24 AM
>To: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [SI-LIST] impedance relation with frequency...
>
>
>Hi
>
> >From the telegraphic equations on Transmision lines it seems the =
>impedance
>of the Trace varies with frequency.
>
>In my design specifications it is specified that my trace should be on =
>(25
>+/- 10%) Ohms.
>How will I do it ? How will I do these kind of analysis?
>
>The frequency of the signal is high and also the rise time is =
>significantly
>low.
>Will FFT be of some help here ?
>
>Regards
>Karan.
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>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
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: =20
> //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
>or at our remote archives:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages=20
>Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> =20
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: =20
> //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
>or at our remote archives:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages=20
>Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> =20
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>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
>
------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Other related posts:
