Re: [BP] Simulations for EIT
Rich, John,
I'm not saying don't do the simulation set with the listed
conditions from Charles that have the victim (thru) and aggressors
(crosstalk) at the same level. I'm putting out there that everyone that
is going to run simulations to also look at the condition when
everything is worse case. Because we allow 1200mVppd to exist there
could be a case where we have the victim at 800 and the aggressors at
1200. Remember the aggressors are alien aggressors, that is you can't
count on your transmitter as the largest source of next, the largest
source could be from another part where the silicon doesn't have control
of the tx output amplitude. We will be simulating these more extreme,
but allowed, conditions.
Another note, I'd like to propose the first set of conditions have
a transmit transition time of 42ps at the output of the package model.
Howard
Mellitz, Richard wrote:
>Maybe next should be same as victim and Fext should be higher.
>... Ric
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: DAmbrosia, John F [mailto:john.dambrosia@TYCOELECTRONICS.COM]
>Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 7:16 PM
>To: STDS-802-3-BLADE@listserv.ieee.org
>Subject: Re: [BP] Simulations for EIT
>
>Howard,
>My only concern with your suggestion regarding the amplitude of the
>crosstalk is that we agreed to use the lower voltage because that is the
>only level that can be guaranteed. Your simulation condition supplies
>that the higher level is available, and ok that is fine, but if it is
>available for the aggressor it would be available for the victim as
>well.
>
>John
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Howard A. Baumer [mailto:hbaumer@BROADCOM.COM]
>Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 1:17 PM
>To: STDS-802-3-BLADE@listserv.ieee.org
>Subject: Re: [BP] Simulations for EIT
>
>Charles,
> When are we planning the next channel adhoc phone conference?
>Should we have one sometime next week? One possible set of goals would
>be to report the results for the listed General Idea #1, simulation of
>the selected channels with the selected conditions.
> I noticed an item missing from these conditions, the transmit
>transition time. What does the group thing we should put this at? Also
>
>a second set of simulations on these channels under more worse case
>condtions should be done. I'd recommend the change to the conditions to
>
>be: Tx amplitude target=800mVpp, crosstalk=1200mVpp; Tx equalization for
>
>crosstalk set to the preset state; add ideal delays between the
>transmitter and channel and between the channel and receiver such that a
>
>worse case result is obtained. Any other worse case conditions not
>already covered?
>
>Howard
>
>
>
>