[SI-LIST] Re: Split gnd planes - for/against?
- From: "Grasso, Charles" <Charles.Grasso@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "steve weir" <weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Sol Tatlow" <Sol.Tatlow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 10:53:46 -0600
We use split planes all the time.
When you have circuits of *vastl8 different noise floors co-existing
on one board - it's the only way to go.
Chas
-----Original Message-----
From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of steve weir
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 10:11 AM
To: Sol Tatlow
Cc: si-list
Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: Split gnd planes - for/against?
Sol, unfortunately there is not a single answer. In most cases moating
is a bad idea, particularly if one does not understand the caveats and
how to deal with them. It's not just the moats: It's the placement,
clearances, stitching, and routing that all need to be considered.
Steve
Sol Tatlow wrote:
> I know this subject has been raised before, countless times in one
> guise or another. I have also googled plenty. I'm not looking for
> theoretical opinions, either, about whether or not, or when, they
> should be used (specifically not, "it depends", unless you've got
> REAL-LIFE examples, for and against!!!).
>
> This subject raised its head for me in this case due to using
> 2 A/Ds as well as 2 D/As, both from Analog Devices, where one
> specifies a split plane, the other specifies no split. Now, I am
> all too wary of relying simply on evaluation boards, where, in
> general, one layout is done, and if it works, that's how everyone
> should do it (_without_ comparing 2 different approaches).
>
> I personally have 3 concrete cases where split gnds had no positive
> effect on SI, but significantly worsened EMC results (despite
> sticking to all the usual guidelines, like no tracks over the
> splits, etc.), but I have no concrete case FOR split ground planes.
>
> So, what I'm interested in is: does anyone have CONCRETE examples
> which they would like to share for/against split planes? The kind
> of thing I mean would be like in one of the cases I had, where I
> wanted to go against the suggested approach of using a split gnd,
> and persuaded my customer to pay for 2 variants of the same board
> on the same manufacturing panel, one with split ground, one with
> solid ground. Both variants were assembled and tested, with regards
> to both SI as well as EMC: both were functionally satisfactory; at
> EMC testing, however, the split-plane bombed out big time, while
> the non-split sailed through. I like to think that it wasn't due
> to any screw-ups on my side, that the split ground failed - I am
> not a newbie to PCB layouts, and, while for sure no professional
> expert on all areas of SI, I believe I avoided the typical blunders
> often present in split ground layouts.
>
> Anyway, my customer was more than happy, but not everyone has the
> money/time/desire to do as I suggested. So, any 'war stories' to
> support one or the other approach would be appreciated to help
> expand my knowledge and understanding of this subject - obviously,
> we all respect confidentiality, so I'm not looking for circuits,
> layouts and so on, but I figure many of you must have stories that
> can be related regarding this subject. Or perhaps some good links
> to non-confidential 'real-life' examples/studies?
>
> Regards,
> Sol
>
>
--
Steve Weir
Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC
121 North River Drive
Narragansett, RI 02882
California office
(866) 675-4630 Business
(707) 780-1951 Fax
Main office
(401) 284-1827 Business
(401) 284-1840 Fax
Oregon office
(503) 430-1065 Business
(503) 430-1285 Fax
http://www.teraspeed.com
This e-mail contains proprietary and confidential intellectual property
of Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Teraspeed(R) is the registered service mark of Teraspeed Consulting
Group LLC
------------------------------------------------------------------
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 technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.net
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 technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.net
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:
