[SI-LIST] Re: One stitching via or more vias is better for 25Gbps application???

  • From: Leeyuyun <lee.home.61@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx" <weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2014 20:32:36 +0800

Hi, Steve
Thank you
I use SI wave and HFSS simulation software
Which one is better for this vias in the 25Gbps application?
Do you agree P/N share only one stitching vias with the same return path is 
good?
Thank you
Lee

> steve weir <weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx> 於 2014/9/6 下午7:42 寫道:
> 
> "It depends".  In the general sense: Tighter stitching increases the 
> lowest cavity resonant frequencies.  However stitching is not free, and 
> where stitching goes particularly close to signal vias can have a big 
> impact on how the overall structure performs.
> 
> If you want well controlled results that meet a particular loss budget, 
> then you really need to model in a good solver.  You can always contract 
> with someone to design your transitions for you. There are entire 
> businesses built around getting structures like this right:  Teraspeed, 
> Wild River, etc.
> 
> Steve
>> On 9/6/2014 4:25 AM, Leeyuyun wrote:
>> Hi, all
>> I am doing 100Gbps (4x25Gps) product now
>> How do we put stitching vias when high speed signal change the layer?
>> This is a differential pair, which has P and N
>> Someone told me that one stitching vias is better because P and N share the 
>> common return
>> Someone told me that more stitching vias is better because loop inductance 
>> could be reduced more
>> I am confused which one is better?
>> Can anyone help me?
>> Thanks, Lee------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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:
>> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
>> 
>> For help:
>> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
>> 
>> 
>> List forum  is accessible at:
>>                http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list
>> 
>> List archives are viewable at:
>>        http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
>> 
>> Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
>>          http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Steve Weir
> IPBLOX, LLC
> 1580 Grand Point Way
> MS 34689
> Reno, NV  89523-9998
> www.ipblox.com
> 
> (775) 299-4236 Business
> (866) 675-4630 Toll-free
> (707) 780-1951 Fax
> 
> All contents Copyright (c)2013 IPBLOX, LLC.  All Rights Reserved.
> This e-mail may contain confidential material.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all records
> and notify the sender.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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:
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
> 
> For help:
> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
> 
> 
> List forum  is accessible at:
>               http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list
> 
> List archives are viewable at:     
>        http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> 
> 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:
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list

For help:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field


List forum  is accessible at:
               http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list

List archives are viewable at:     
                http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
 
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
                http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
  

Other related posts: