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

Re: [BP] proposed channel model change



Hi Charles,

All for KX.  The 6 I looked at had a problems with KX. They are:

Peter T1, T20, Tyco 1, 6, Molex in H2, Molex out h2

I have no doubt that these channels will really work for KX.

… Rich

 


From: Charles Moore [mailto:charles.moore@avagotech.com]
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 3:14 PM
To: Mellitz, Richard
Cc: STDS-802-3-BLADE@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [BP] proposed channel model change

 

rich,

        So which channels appear much worse and in what way?  Are they channels which should look worse?  Or
is this all 1000BASE-KX stuff? 

                                                      charles

Mellitz, Richard wrote:

Hi All,

 

When I talked to Charles I said this seemed to have promise because the Goergen line has as strong sqrt(f) dependence and low frequencies. It has basis in the skin loss physics. This would mostly affect KX which we really didn't spend much time on. After all we just changed the ICR fit line. However, I made these comments without really taking a close look at our data. Isn't theory grand... J

 

Since then I did look at the data. I had Steve Krooswyk alter the spreadsheet s-parameter analysis tool (SCAT) to look at this new fit. What I discovered was that it actually makes many channels appear much worse. After further review of the data I think we could do much better by just changing the confidence region lines for KX only. However, I think the data needs to be presented and then we, as working group, can determine a plan of action.

 

…Rich Mellitz, Intel Corporation

803-216-2160 (o)

803-873-7343 (m)

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Moore [mailto:charles_moore@agilent.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 1:11 PM
To: STDS-802-3-BLADE@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [BP] proposed channel model change

 

guys,

 

   Rich Mellitz and i have been discussing changing the channel model,

to use a fit to Amax, as we are now doing for the interference tolerance

test channel (see moore_03_1105.pdf), instead of a fit to a straight line.

 

   This would have several advantages:

 

   1.  It would use a common method for both the test channel and the

       working channel

   2.  It would allow us to replace three graphical tests:

       i.   That the linear fit is better than Amax

       ii.  That the insertion loss is always better than Amax + something

       iii. That the ripple is better than something

       with one numeric test, that mc < 1.0, and the graphical ripple

       test.  We may need an additional limit on bc.

    3. Since the fit to Amax will be substantially better than the fit

       to a straight line, the ripple will be smaller and more meaningful.

       This will reduce the number of false fails.  We should be able

       to shrink the ripple bounds (Rich:  will you figure out by how

       much?) which may also  reduce false passes.

    4. Since the fit will be especially improved at low frequency, we

       will be able to reduce f1, especially for 10GBASE-KR, which

       actually uses low frequencies more than either 1000BASE-KX or

       10GBASE-KX4.

 

    Does anyone see any problems with this proposal?

 

                     charles

 

--

|--------------------------------------------------------------------|

|       Charles Moore

|       Agilent Technologies

|       ASIC Products Division

|       charles_moore@agilent.com

|       (970) 288-4561

|--------------------------------------------------------------------|




-- 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
|       Charles Moore 
|       Avago Technologies
|       ASIC Products Division
|       charles_moore@agilent.com
|       (970) 288-4561
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|