I have joined a small company that has no established experience in signal integrity. I have inherited a product that has a lot of problems that I believe are due to lousy signal integrity. I am looking for guidance in selecting a good basic stackup for a redesign of the PCB. I have spent a lot of time Googling for this and ended up here. The current PCB is 6 layer as follows: component side signals, ground plane, inner signals, power plane, ground plane, bottom side signals. Minimum trace width and spacing are both 0.006 in. Material is 1/16 inch FR4 with 1 oz finished copper thickness for all layers. Maximum signal frequency is, I think, 40 MHz and there's really nothing very special going on anywhere. It's all pretty low tech and the design is five years old. I have two revisions of the board. Both have the basic layer order as above but completely different layer separations. I think the layer order is fine, but I'm not really happy with either set of separations so this is where I'm asking for help. The first revision has 0.008 in. between the outer signal layers and the ground planes. Inside this is a 0.0145 in. separation. Then the inner signal layer is referenced to the power plane and has a 0.007 in. spacing from it. The type of problem this board has is that it will run for a while and then crash. I think there is serious crosstalk as traces are closer to their neighbors on the same layer than to their reference planes. Also, the power plane has no really close ground plane to form a distrubuted decoupling capacitor. The second revision has 0.0032 in. between the outer signal layers and the ground planes. Inside this is a 0.004 in. separation. The inner signal layer is therefore referenced to a ground plane. The power plane is not used as a reference and is very close to the other ground plane. The board thickness is made up with 0.038 in. in the middle. I have found only one problem with this board so far which is consistent though temperature dependent and can be fixed with a series resistor at the driving point of a badly routed clock trace. It slows the edge so as to increase the overlap of the outgoing and reflected signal edges. So, anyway, the second board with 3.2 : 4 : 38 : 4 : 3.2 mil separations is clearly the better of the two, but for such a low tech board the trace impedance seems rather low (40 ohms?). If I go with this I think I'll need to add high-strength drivers all over. I'm wondering if something like 5 : 7 : 28 : 7 : 5 wouldn't be a better choice with an impedance of around 58 ohms? Or 4 : 6 : 32 : 6 : 4 for around 50 ohms? Can someone help me out here? I can't figure out how my choice of separations affects the manufacturability of the PCB either. Google has never before let me down so badly. Graham. ------------------------------------------------------------------ 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