[SI-LIST] Re: DDR Vref Bypassing
- From: steve weir <weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: billw@xxxxxxxxxxx, si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 16:33:59 -0700
Bill, I really question where this assumption of average between Vdd and
Gnd comes from. The noise level on Vdd at the transmitter is not going to
be the same as the instantaneous noise at the receiver, so I don't buy an
argument based on the launch. That leaves us with the transmission
channel. What percentage of what couples onto the transmitted signal
depends on how the board is constructed.
A split filter is in essence a 2Y common mode filter turned inside
out. Impedance mismatch gives rise to mode conversion.which throws off
that 50% divider assumption for equal value ( data sheet )
capacitors. This is why we see 2Y RFI filters with a much bigger X
capacitor shunting the two lines together- to swamp out the mode
conversion. In the Vref application, the X capacitor is represented by the
bypass network from Vcc to Vss. That is really ugly, because it basically
says that we need to bypass the heck out of Vdd to get around mode
conversion in the Vref bypass caps.
The two capacitors in an X2Y match so well that even for analog
instrumentation they do not need an X capacitor. I have an application
note on this in ADI's instrumentation amplifier designer's guide, based on
real circuit measurements. An X2Y configured as: Terminal A => Vdd,
Terminal B => Vss, Terminals G1, and G2 => Vref matches to better than
1%. So, if one is bent on implementing the divider, X2Y capacitors do the
job in a way that is basically impossible using separate capacitors to each
rail.
If someone is really bent on this divider approach, then X2Y is definitely
the way to go. But given that people have been building with it, and
apparently it has "worked" despite the mode conversion with regular caps, I
really question the validity of the approach in the first place. Do you
know what the physical basis for the rationale of the divider is supposed
to be?
Regards,
Steve.
At 12:48 PM 7/19/2005 -0400, Bill Wurst wrote:
>Chris,
>
>The answer to your question lies in understanding the function of the
>Vref line. DDR, as well as DDR2, utilize differential receivers to
>process single-ended inputs that have been generated by drivers which
>swing in a balanced fashion around the mid-point of the VDD/GND system.
> To properly process these single-ended inputs, the inverting input of
>each differential receiver is connected to Vref. The receivers will
>work best when Vref equals exactly 0.5*(VDD-GND), including any noise
>that is present on the VDD/GND system. The purpose of placing an equal
>amount of capacitance from Vref to VDD and from Vref to GND is to form
>an ac divider that keeps Vref equal to 0.5*(VDD-GND) over all
>frequencies. The capacitance should be large enough to swamp out any
>parasitic capacitance that exists which could imbalance Vref.
>
>I'll have to hedge on the second question which was "whether an x2y
>capacitor is better than two discrete capacitors" since I don't know
>enough about x2y devices. Properly configured, an x2y capacitor could
>perform better, but the bottom line comes down to the accuracy of the ac
>divider.
>
>Regards,
>
> -Bill
>
>
> /************************************
> / billw@xxxxxxxxxxx /
> / /
> / Advanced Electronic Concepts, LLC /
> / www.aec-lab.com /
> ************************************
>=================================================================
>Christopher R. Johnson wrote:
> > I have seen references that have Vref bypass capacitors to both VDD and
> > GND. Other references have capacitors only to GND. Is it really
> > necessary to have "balanced" capacitors on the Vref lines? Why? If the
> > "balanced" design is desirable, would an X2Y capacitor be a good choice,
> > since it is "2 capacitors in one"?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Chris Johnson
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>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:
