Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [BP] Revised S-parameters



Title:
In line ... -joel

Ali Ghiasi wrote:
Joel

Joel Goergen wrote:
Ali,
We have been focusing on this for several months now.  I think Steve has presented nothing new that hasn't been published and, at a min, agreed to in some form of straw poll.
I am not disagreeing that these were agreed in the straw poll, I just didn't participated in some
of earlier meeting.

I would like to offer a thought ...
For the channel ... we use the SMA and SMA foot print that allows for a clean launch.  At both ends of the channel.  This allows us to see the SDD11/SDD22 without doing a major de-embedding and still allow for freq to 12.5Ghz.
How can you define a channel "backplane" but not define a minimum attribute for the connector.
There is no reason to de-embed the connector as the connector is part of the channel.  A compliant
channel must meet an specified transmission and reflection property which include connector.
Ali, The connector is not the issue.  It never has been the major contributor.  The thru-hole  or SMT pad for the connector has, as well as the pin depth pressed into the hole.  The channel model and the test cards defined takes that into account.
-joel



For the tp1 and tp4 ... we then let the tx (tp1) handle the BGA and via, the rx(tp4) handle the via, both cap pads, both via and BGA pad.  It will be easier to do the de-embedding and specify the SDD11/SDD22 as seen by the chip from the channel.
The methodology specified currently in BP is suitable for chip to chip applications but not for backplane.
Where do you handle connector effect and multiple reflection between the connector-IC?  In 4Gig FC we addressed some of these issues and do specify the channel which include the connector. 
Ali, There has been data presented to discuss daughter card channel lengths, as well as teh back plane portion of the total length.  What you are getting at is a channel that varies with thru-hole location.  It's not a factor of thru-hole location as much as it is a stub length.  I could not be talked into a variable model when the issue you are describing can, in most cases, be delt with in design practises.
-joel



Thanks,
Ali