From: S. Weir ([email protected])
Date: Sat Apr 15 2000 - 00:55:13 PDT
Is this a question or a rant?
At 01:31 PM 4/14/2000 -0600, you wrote:
>Has anyone else noticed in this "app note" (see below) that Cypress has a
>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!
> > What worries me about using bulk capacitors with different capacitance
> > in parallel as in the picture you sent is well described in
> > the following
> > article:
> > http://www.cypress.com/pub/appnotes/decouple.pdf
> > (look especially picture 5 on page 3)
>**** 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 http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
**** 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 http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 20 2000 - 11:36:11 PDT