Re: [SI-LIST] : App note assumptions

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Ray Anderson ([email protected])
Date: Fri Apr 14 2000 - 13:05:08 PDT

I don't know well how their systems function, but I do
know ours work well and we have an entirely different
decoupling methodology.

I'm not going to tell anyone how to use decoupling caps
in their system today, but I'm not going to follow the
recommendations in the app-note either :)

-Ray Anderson
Sun Microsystems

> From: Mark Geddes <[email protected]>
> To: "SI-List (E-mail)" <[email protected]>
> Subject: [SI-LIST] : App note assumptions
> Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 13:31:34 -0600
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Has anyone else noticed in this "app note" (see below) that Cypress has a
> very good
> scientific explanation about why using several values of decoupling
> capacitors can cause problems, and then they go on to recommend a bunch of
> general routing rules that they haven't substantiated?
> This is how false information is spread.
> 1+1=2, because if I have one cow in a field, & then put another cow in that
> field, I will have two cows in the field. Therefore use one cap per power
> pin, 1+1=2, place caps close to the IC & on the same side, and keep leads
> below 6mm. Can anyone pick out the assumptions I made after giving an
> example why 1+1=2?
> Thanks Lee Ritchey, for making me skeptical of app notes!
> Mark Geddes

**** To unsubscribe from si-list or si-list-digest: send e-mail to [email protected] In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list or UNSUBSCRIBE si-list-digest, for more help, put HELP.
si-list archives are accessible at

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 20 2000 - 11:36:11 PDT