[SI-LIST] Re: Cable grounding scheme
- From: "Ihsan Erdin" <erdinih@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: chen_jinhua@xxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 16:28:23 -0400
Jinhua,
Despite all the discussions revolving around it using many stitches or caps
between logic and chassis ground is an easier-said-than-done issue. In
practice, both mechanical difficulties and the board real estate will impose
strict limitations to the number of connections. So, placing the stitches or
caps close to the high-risk areas like connector apertures or ventilation
holes could be the best bet.
A capacitor has a frequency limitation because of its parasitic inductance.
Otherwise a single ideal cap would be enough to clean up all the noise on a
PCB. For the same reason, a stitch will have a frequency limitation
depending on the screw radius. While the multipoint connection will surely
help in a frequency spectrum ranging through several hundred megahertz if
you're expecting a benefit for above the gigahertz region you may be putting
too much faith in those discretes.
Regards,
Ihsan
On 8/16/06, chen_jinhua@xxxxxxx < chen_jinhua@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Chris, That is exactly the problem I am facing. One design has to work
> for GigE, iSCSI, FC, copper and optical etc. I am trying to understand
> the reasons behind the different specs such as GigE and FC. In my
> opinion, if the solusion is better in GigE, it also should be better in
> FC. Physics is physics. It is not going to change per spec. If it is
> copper cable, how to design and match the cable chassis/logic grounds to
> connector chassis/logic grounds is also critical.
>
> Ishan, if we use many vias to stitch the chassis ground to logic ground,
> why should we separate them? If use capacitors to stitch them together,
> it makes more sense. But as you mentioned, capacitor has its frequency
> limitations. Does it work at high frequencies (> GHz)?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Jinhua
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Chris Cheng
> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 2:06 AM
> To: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Cable grounding scheme
>
> We can argue about tying chassis to logic ground here or there till
> everyone faces turn blue but specs like Ethernet calls out specifically
> for isolated chassis from logic ground on RJ45. FC-PI CHANGES from DC
> short between logic and chassis (in optical modules) to complete
> isolation (in quad lane connector). So how do you dictate a system that
> support iSCSI and FCAL at the same time ?
> To make things more fun, what are you going to do with peripherals like
> disk drives and cdrom ? Have you ohm out your disk drive chassis and
> your disk cable ground lately ? Do you even see them being consistent
> between different vendors ?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----=20
> From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
> [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of chen_jinhua@xxxxxxx =20
> Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 9:13 AM=20
> To: erdinih@xxxxxxxxx; xileil@xxxxxxxxxxx=20
> Cc: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx =20
> Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Cable grounding scheme=20
>
>
> Ihsan=20
> =20
> If I understand your email correctly, you still use separate chassis and
>
> logic grounds. But you use many many stitching points to connect them=20
> together. If you consider the high speed cable application. It will=20
> impact SI. If the cable does not have separate logic and chassis=20
> grounds. Cable reference is chassis ground when it connects to the board
>
> connector. From connector to semiconductor chips, there will be a=20
> reference interruption because chip references to logic ground. Depends=20
>
> on how bad of the reference interruption, the SI impacts will vary. If=20
> the signal-point connection is used, I would guess the SI impact is=20
> huge.=20
> =20
> This brings an old question: single-point connection vs. many many=20
> points of connections, which one we prefer for high speed SI and EMI? Or
>
> it depends ...=20
> =20
> Thanks!=20
> =20
> Jinhua=20
> ________________________________=20
>
> From: Ihsan Erdin [mailto: erdinih@xxxxxxxxx]=20
> Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 9:40 AM=20
> To: Xilei Liu=20
> Cc: chen, jinhua; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
> Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] Re: Cable grounding scheme=20
>
>
> Celine,=20
> =20
> First of all, I want to express my apologies to Jinhua for -kind of-=20
> hijacking his topic for a potentially flaring issue.=20
> I think this issue goes as far back as the debate over single-point=20
> vs.multi-point connection between chassis and digital grounds. As such,=20
> it is more of an conducted/radiated emission problem than SI. The=20
> dilemma is while single-point connection could be justified by the fact=20
> that it avoids very low frequency common mode (noise) currents from=20
> creeping into the power line, in order to cut down on the radiated=20
> emissions at high frequencies, multi-point connection is strictly=20
> required between the two reference systems. In his "EMC and printed=20
> Circuit board design theory and layout made simple" book, for example,=20
> M. Montrose suggests stitching the two reference systems at a distance=20
> of lambda/20, with lambda being the wavelength of the highest frequency=20
>
> component of the spectrum of the system. The book was published in 1999.
>
> With today's multi-gigahertz systems, it's impossible to achieve such a=20
> design goal and it's an overkill at any rate. But the necessity of=20
> multi-point connection is not a debate any more. Some designers try to=20
> find a mid-way by connecting the reference systems with high frequency=20
> caps but the boards are already overly-populated by the same type of=20
> caps used for decoupling and there's the issue of parasitic inductances=20
> that defeat the purpose. Today, the commonplace approach, at least in=20
> the designs that I observe, is to suppress the low frequency CM currents
>
> with power line filters and directly connect the chassis and digital=20
> grounds at practically as many points as possible against radiated=20
> emissions. =20
> If you want to see some numbers and charts to support these ideas, in=20
> "EMI and Troubleshooting Techniques" book, M. Mardiguian gives a very=20
> good example that compares the two grounding strategies.=20
> =20
> Regards,=20
> =20
> Ihsan =20
>
>
> On 8/15/06, Xilei Liu < xileil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:=20
>
> Hey, Ihsan,=20
> =20
> I've ever seen notes that published in the past in 2002, saying=20
> that"we=20
> learned from NRAO engineers that it is both feasible and=20
> advisable to=20
> physically separate digital circuits from analog systems, and to
>
> interpose a=20
> minimum of two levels of Faraday shielding acting in series."=20
> From my point=20
> of view, it should be easier to employ different EMI solutions=20
> for power=20
> line and signal line separately when the digital/analog grounds=20
> are=20
> separated and connected somehow at a single-point. What will be=20
> the problems=20
> in terms of SI? Welcome your 'fight back' so that I can learn=20
> more ;)=20
> =20
> Regards,=20
> Celine=20
> =20
> =20
> >From: "Ihsan Erdin" < erdinih@xxxxxxxxx>=20
> >Reply-To: erdinih@xxxxxxxxx=20
> >To: chen_jinhua@xxxxxxx=20
> >CC: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
> >Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Cable grounding scheme=20
> >Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 06:29:32 -0400=20
> >=20
> >This question makes me wonder if there're any designers left=20
> who still=20
> >separate logic ground from the chassis ground in high-speed=20
> digital circuit=20
> >design -and on what basis? I thought this whole issue of=20
> chassis vs. logic=20
> >ground was something of the past.=20
> >Regards,=20
> >=20
> >Ihsan=20
> >=20
> >On 8/14/06, chen_jinhua@xxxxxxx <chen_jinhua@xxxxxxx > wrote:=20
> > >=20
> > > Hi,=20
> > >=20
> > > I have a few general questions about the high speed cable=20
> grounding=20
> > > scheme. It could impact both SI and EMI. I would like to=20
> have your=20
> > > inputs about this issue.=20
> > >=20
> > > Scheme 1: cable does not separate logic ground and chassis=20
> ground. But=20
> > > when it connects the system/boards, the system/boards have=20
> separate=20
> > > logic ground and chassis ground. How do you separate/connect
>
> the logic=20
> > > ground to chassis ground in boards? What is the pros and=20
> cons for SI=20
> > > and/or EMI?=3D20=20
> > >=20
> > > Scheme 2: Cable keeps separate logic ground and chassis=20
> ground.=20
> > > System/boards also keep the separate logic and chassis=20
> ground. Cable=20
> > > logic ground and board logic ground connects, and chassis=20
> connects the=20
> > > chassis ground. How do you separate/connect the logic ground
>
> to chassis=20
> > > ground in boards? What is the pros and cons for SI and/or=20
> EMI?=20
> > >=20
> > > Do you prefer scheme 1 or scheme 2? What is the pros and=20
> cons of scheme=20
> > > 1 vs. scheme 2 for SI and/or EMI? Does SI and EMI have=20
> conflict=20
> > > requirements?=20
> > >=20
> > > Thanks!=20
> > >=20
> > > Jinhua Chen=20
> > > SI of Hardware Engineering=20
> > > EMC Corp.=20
> > >=20
> ------------------------------------------------------------------=20
> > > To unsubscribe from si-list:=20
> > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the=20
> Subject field=20
> > >=20
> > > or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:=20
> > > //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list=20
> > >=20
> > > For help:=20
> > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject=20
> field=20
> > >=20
> > > List FAQ wiki page is located at:=20
> > > http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ=20
> > >=20
> > > List technical documents are available at:=20
> > > http://www.si-list.org=20
> > >=20
> > > List archives are viewable at:=20
> > > //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list=20
> > > or at our remote archives:=20
> > >=20
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages=20
> > > Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:=20
> > > http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> =20
> >------------------------------------------------------------------=20
> >To unsubscribe from si-list:=20
> >si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject
>
> field=20
> >=20
> >or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:=20
> > //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list=20
> >=20
> >For help:=20
> > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field=20
> >=20
> >List FAQ wiki page is located at:=20
> > http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ=20
> >=20
> >List technical documents are available at:=20
> > http://www.si-list.org=20
> >=20
> >List archives are viewable at:=20
> > //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list=20
> >or at our remote archives:=20
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages=20
> >Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:=20
> > http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu=20
> >=20
> >=20
> =20
> =20
> =20
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------=20
> To unsubscribe from si-list:=20
> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field=20
>
> or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:=20
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list=20
>
> For help:=20
> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field=20
>
> List FAQ wiki page is located at:=20
> http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ=20
>
> List technical documents are available at:=20
> http://www.si-list.org=20
>
> List archives are viewable at: =20
> //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list=20
> or at our remote archives:=20
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages=20
> Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:=20
> http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu=20
> =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 FAQ wiki page is located at:
> http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
>
> List technical documents are available at:
> http://www.si-list.org
>
> 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
> 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 FAQ wiki page is located at:
> http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
>
> List technical documents are available at:
> http://www.si-list.org
>
> 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 FAQ wiki page is located at:
http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
List technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.org
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:
