[SI-LIST] Re: rise time performance
- From: Fred Balistreri <fred@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Muranyi, Arpad" <arpad.muranyi@xxxxxxxxx>, si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2002 11:11:29 -0800
Hello Arpad, I believe there was mass mis-communication in this
case. You responded to the message by Jason Jeung which started
the thread. His message was non-specific and a lot of things
could have been implied. My response was to Jeff Loyer's message.
That message clearly indicated ideal components. Incidently if
you have not followed Jeff's response, he found the cause of the
discrepency.
There was no name calling so I do not believe there was any personnal
attack. I think its ok to disagree or have a difference of opinion.
Sometimes that makes life interesting.
I was trying to point out a descrepency in the simulation. Which was
found. If you felt that I attacked you personally, you have my public
appology.
Best Regards,
"Muranyi, Arpad" wrote:
>
> Fred,
>
> Quote from the original posting:
>
> > I have found that using different impedance for a transmission line, I
> > can obtain different rise time at the receiver.
>
> For plain vanilla CMOS circuits "receiver" to me equals capacitance.
> The writer didn't specify what type of receiver he was talking about,
> and whether there was on die termination, or whether he used package
> inductance, etc., so I just assumed that he was talking about a simple
> T-line with a pure CMOS input, and that is what I was responding to.
>
> Also, I didn't intend to say that my simple answer was supposed to
> explain all the higher order effects and everything under the sun.
> >From the author's words it seemed to me that he was a newcomer to SI,
> and I felt that a simple example may have helped him more than RF theory.
>
> Even though I may have answered a different question from what was asked,
> I firmly believe that my posting is correct (as shown by the HSPICE example
> I included) and therefore there is nothing to disagree with what I stated.
>
> Now, I think we should close this right here, I do not intend to start
> a personal or theoretical argument, and I do not mean to imply that all
> of the other responses were incorrect either.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Arpad Muranyi
> Intel Corporation
> ==========================================================================
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fred Balistreri [mailto:fred@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 8:17 AM
> To: arpad.muranyi@xxxxxxxxx
> Cc: 'si'
> Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] Re: rise time performance
>
> There was no capacitor in the original posting. The case was
> ideal, meaning voltage source, lossless transmission lines and
> resistance. Under those conditions there will be no tr/tf
> degradation or change except that relection and the final voltage
> levels may be different. I am not saying that the ideal case is
> in any way realistic but it is theoriticaly correct. Storage
> elements and/or copper losses changes the situation. Therefore
> I disagree with your rc circuit statements.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jason D Leung [mailto:jleung@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 6:08 AM
> > To: si
> > Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: rise time performance
> >
> > Hi all,
> > I have found something interesting while I was doing some simulation and
> > would like to see if there is anyone out there also see this.
> > I have found that using different impedance for a transmission line, I
> > can obtain different rise time at the receiver.
> > Let say I have a simple net with a driver -> 60 ohms tline-> 35 ohm
> > stripline(this is the part I am going to change for the experiment)->
> > receiver
> > and the rise time for the driver is 0.25ns. For a 35 ohm stripline I can
> > achieve a rise time of 0.4 ns at the output, and if we replace the 35
> > ohm stripline with a 85 ohm stripline I can achieve a rise time of 0.3
> > ns at the output. Moreover for a 15 ohm stripline I can achieve a rise
> > time of 0.68 ns at the output.
> > For my limited knowledge I can understand if I have a difference in
> > impedance along the net, I am going to get different
> > overshoot/undershoot since we have a different reflection coefficient,
> > but I am having some probelms in understanding why we can achieve a
> > different rise time with different impedance.
> > Is there any kind soul out there, that can explain this phenomenon to
> > me?
> > thanks in advance
> > Jason Leung
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> >
>
> --
> Fred Balistreri
> fred@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> http://www.apsimtech.com
--
Fred Balistreri
fred@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.apsimtech.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
