Re: [BP] DC block capacitors in 10G NRZ channels
Hi Charles, All,
I recognize the problem with 64B/66B coding and AC coupling, but 8B/10B,
with its guaranteed DC balance over the span of a codeword, does not
appear to share that problem, and could tolerate a much much smaller
time constant.
It appears that the goal to make the SERDES fairly independent of the
coding may be preventing the integration of the AC coupling capacitor
and thus forfeiting the many benefits of such integration. That is
unfortunate for the many applications that are likely to use 8B/10B
coding and that will be forced to share the same difficulties with
implementation of DC blocks with channels that use 64B/66B or similar
codes.
Vicente
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Moore [mailto:charles.moore@avagotech.com]
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 10:07 AM
To: STDS-802-3-BLADE@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [BP] DC block capacitors in 10G NRZ channels
While i recognize that putting the AC coupling capacitor on chip would
be desirable it is not really that easy.
The 100nF off chip coupling capacitor leads to a coupling time constant
of 10 us. Such a long time constant is needed to limit baseline wander
with scrambled data, as independent analysis by Rick Walker, Steve
Anderson, and me indicate.
Generating such a long time constant is going to be hard in today's deep
sub-micron processes. One could use, for instance, a 100pF capacitor
and a 100 kOhm resistor, but size of both components would be a problem,
parasitics in the capacitor will make meeting return loss specs hard and
leakage current through the 100 kOhm resistor may casue offset problem.
charles
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Charles Moore
| Avago Technologies
| ISD
| charles.moore@avagotech.com
| (970) 288-4561
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
Jia Gongxian wrote:
> Hi Vicente,Steve,All,
>
> I have same concern about the AC coupling, according to the draft,
> AC compactors does belong to RX, but doesn't clearly say, whether its
> in linecard or in IC chip, I do think these will cause problems while
> we design a system. if in linecard, the pad and vias will surely cause
> the impedance discontinuity, different processing in AC coupling area
> of PCB will have different effect on the channel performance. How well
> we will process the AC compactors area ? As a system designer, I don't
> know, because the spec of backplane channel doesn't include this
part.
>
> In order to reduce the risk, I do agree Vicente that it's a better
> choice that place the AC coupling into the IC package.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jia Gongxian
>
> Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Steve Anderson <mailto:steve.anderson@XILINX.COM>
> *To:* STDS-802-3-BLADE@listserv.ieee.org
> <mailto:STDS-802-3-BLADE@listserv.ieee.org>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:02 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [BP] DC block capacitors in 10G NRZ channels
>
>
>
> Hi Vicente, all:
>
>
>
> I share your concern. I don't think that the draft
> standard correctly deals with
>
> the topology that you describe. I commented on this in an earlier
> draft of the standard.
>
> I think we need to say what is meant by AC coupling by providing
one
> or more
>
> specifications that place some bounds on it.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Steve A.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
>
> *From:* Mellitz, Richard [mailto:richard.mellitz@intel.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 30, 2006 8:53 PM
> *To:* STDS-802-3-BLADE@listserv.ieee.org
> *Subject:* Re: [BP] DC block capacitors in 10G NRZ channels
>
>
>
> Hi Vicente,
>
>
>
> 803.3ap really doesn't say the caps are on the board. The cap is
> after TP4 and is the domain of the Rx. Yes it's a challenge for
chip
> folks as they will need to tell there customers how to deal with
> this issue.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rich Mellitz, Intel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cavanna, Vicente Vaca (Sr. ; ProCurve ASICs)
> [mailto:vicente.cavanna@HP.COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 6:45 PM
> To: STDS-802-3-BLADE@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: [BP] DC block capacitors in 10G NRZ channels
>
>
>
> Hello colleagues,
>
>
>
> I would like to understand the perspective of the group with
> regards to
>
> external DC block capacitors in 10Gbps channels such as the one
> being
>
> designed by this group. My past experience indicates it will be
>
> difficult to find DC block capacitors that are specified for
> operation
>
> at 5GHz and beyond - at least capacitors that are priced
> reasonably such
>
> that their cost is a small proportion of the link cost. In the
> farily
>
> recent past I have had difficulty finding capacitors with low
> enough
>
> ESRs even at 4Gbps operation.
>
>
>
> Even if such a capacitor is found the transmission line
> discontinuities
>
> (vias, pads etc) associated with such capacitors present a
> significant
>
> degradation that would be nice to eliminate.
>
>
>
> I will ask a secondary question.
>
> Has it been considered to require the DC block capacitor to be
internal?
>
> Many SERDES vendors have DC blocks integrated within their
> receivers and
>
> located downstream from the internal 50 ohm termination but
> upstream
>
> from their receiver bias network (which has much larger impedance
> than
>
> 50 ohms). Such placement allows the capacitor to be much smaller
> in
>
> value and thus integrateable and still allows the receiver to be
> biased
>
> independently of the transmitter which I believe is the main
> purpose of
>
> the DC block. Another benefit of the internal capacitor is that it
> will
>
> not have the associated discontinuties that an external capacitor
> will
>
> have.
>
>
>
> Thanks in anticipation of your reply.
>
>
>
>
>
> Vicente Cavanna
>
> HP ProCurve Networking
>