No. I am concerned with skin effect versus dielectric loss at present rates, and multi-path at future rates. Steve On 9/8/2014 3:58 AM, Chen, Sherman wrote: > > Steve, > > Iâm not sure about the low freq. problem caused from the larger > coupling cap. Do you mean the accumulated running disparity can cause > higher common mode voltage hence the noise will be produced in both > common mode and diff. mode? > > Best Regards, > > *//* > > */Sherman Chen/*** > > Signal Integrity > > EMC Global Hardware Engineering > > Tel: +86 21 60951100-3329 > > *From:*steve weir [mailto:weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx] > *Sent:* Saturday, September 06, 2014 7:18 PM > *To:* Chen, Sherman; jackle zheng > *Cc:* Scott McMorrow; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > *Subject:* Re: [SI-LIST] Re: options for reducing EMI > > LFSRs are a throwback to SONET voice coding with a short 7 bit LFSR. > Malicious payloads established the need to do something better. The > preamble and big coupling capacitor style of 64/66, 128/130, and > 128/132 is a solution that has lower channel overhead than 8b/10b, but > seems very brute force to me. It carries nasty side effects in the > channel when one tries to go really fast. In a world where 8Gbps are > pedestrian, imposing low frequency problems is a crime against > engineering sanity. > > Steve > On 9/5/2014 9:44 PM, Chen, Sherman wrote: > > Thatâs correct, Jackle. In PCIe the scrambling is on in default so > it should not be the contributor to the issue. > > However this remind me of another long time standing question â > How the 128/130b coding achieve DC balance? > > In PCIe Gen2 on the transmitter end the data is first scrambled > then 8b/10b encoded. In my understanding the main purpose of > scrambling are > > 1.Randomizing the data pattern hence disperse the spectrum. > > 2.Eliminate long runs of 1s or 0s so as to maintain the transition > ratio. > > And the usefulness of 8b/10 are > > 1.Achieving DC balance & 50% transition ratio within 10bit span. > > 2.Other features such as control symbols, error detection, etc. > > When it came to Gen3 the 8b/10b was replaced by 128b/130b with the > stages of scrambler LFSR raised from 16 to 23. Since the 128b/130b > encoding literally does nothing in minimizing running disparity, I > guess the 23-stage LFSR achieves an nearly equivalent effect in > terms of as the 16-stage LFSR + 8b/10b encoding? Also there is > another changes such as increasing the coupling cap from 75-200nF > to 176nF-265nF which looks to me this change is to accommodate the > increased running disparity⦠> > Are above conjectures true? > > Best Regards, > > *//* > > */Sherman Chen/* > > Signal Integrity > > EMC Global Hardware Engineering > > Tel: +86 21 60951100-3329 > > *From:*jackle zheng [mailto:zheng.jackle@xxxxxxxxx] > *Sent:* Thursday, September 04, 2014 5:09 PM > *To:* Chen, Sherman > *Cc:* Scott McMorrow; weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx>; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > *Subject:* Re: [SI-LIST] Re: options for reducing EMI > > scramble also can decrease EMI. i was testing the HDMI 2.0 UD60 > signals. Before sending, the data was scrambled for decreasing EMI > > 2014-09-04 5:27 GMT+08:00 Chen, Sherman <sherman.chen@xxxxxxx > <mailto:sherman.chen@xxxxxxx>>: > > Understood. That's why we've been keeping SSC off. Thanks. > > Best Regards, > > Sherman Chen > Signal Integrity > EMC Global Hardware Engineering > Tel: +86 21 60951100-3329 > > From: Scott McMorrow [mailto:scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>] > Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2014 9:31 PM > To: Chen, Sherman > Cc: weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:weirsi@xxxxxxxxxx>; > si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] Re: options for reducing EMI > > > Chen > > You can certainly do that, but it's a band aid for whatever the > actual problem is. You should just not be radiating at 8 GHz. > > Regards, > > Scott > > > Scott McMorrow > > Teraspeed(r) Consulting - A Division of Samtec > > 16 Stormy Brook Rd > Falmouth, ME 04105 > (401) 284-1827 <tel:%28401%29%20284-1827> Business > http://www.teraspeed.com > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Chen, Sherman > <sherman.chen@xxxxxxx > <mailto:sherman.chen@xxxxxxx><mailto:sherman.chen@xxxxxxx > <mailto:sherman.chen@xxxxxxx>>> wrote: > Thanks, Steve. > The freq. exceeding the EMI margin is 8GHz. Enabling SSC should > help on that I think. > Any impact & precaution for turning SSC on? Looks there would be > no big issue since all our chip vendors claims their products work > fairly well with SSC on... > > Best Regards, > > Sherman Chen > Signal Integrity > EMC Global Hardware Engineering > Tel: +86 21 60951100-3329 > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> > [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>] On Behalf Of steve weir > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2014 7:04 AM > > To: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> > Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: options for reducing EMI > > This is another infamous: "It depends". > > First: Will any combination of anticipated measures yield a > solution that meets both your SI and EMC requirements? > Second: Do you prioritize margin to SI or EMC, or split them? > > It sounds like you have a design that has failed EMC. Before > twiddling anything that you can look at where you are failing and > how badly. > > TX swing can only reduce noise in the best case dB for dB. So, if > you just need a couple of dB to squeak by and have the link > budget, it is an option. > SSC can buy up to 10dB on the clock and harmonics. > Edge rate could help if you have resonance issues. Otherwise, it > is similar to fiddling with the Tx swing. > > Steve > On 9/1/2014 1:43 PM, Chen, Sherman wrote: > > Hi SI Gurus, > > We are considering the following options in order to reduce the > EMI of one of our boards, which is mainly caused by the PCIe Gen3 > link: > > > > 1. Reducing TX swing. > > > > 2. Turn on SSC. > > > > 3. Slowing down edge rate. > > While we are running test to verify which option will bring us > the best result & least impact, any comments or suggestions from > those who had experiences on this matter? > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Sherman Chen > > Signal Integrity > > EMC Global Hardware Engineering > > Tel: +86 21 60951100-3329 > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from si-list: > > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > <mailto:si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto: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 > > <mailto:si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto: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: > > //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 <http://www.ipblox.com><http://www.ipblox.com> > > > (775) 299-4236 <tel:%28775%29%20299-4236> Business > (866) 675-4630 <tel:%28866%29%20675-4630> Toll-free > (707) 780-1951 <tel:%28707%29%20780-1951> 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 > > <mailto:si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto: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 > > <mailto:si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto: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: > //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list > <//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 > > <mailto:si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto: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 > > <mailto:si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto: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: > //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list > <//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 > <mailto: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 > <mailto: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: > //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list > <//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list> > > Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu > > > > > -- > æææ æå¨ > > > > > -- > Steve Weir > IPBLOX, LLC > 1580 Grand Point Way > MS 34689 > Reno, NV 89523-9998 > www.ipblox.com <http://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. -- 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: //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: //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu