From: Mike Saunders ([email protected])
Date: Fri Jun 02 2000 - 07:06:25 PDT
I usually choose ~66% of the number of power pins for the number of caps to
use for large BGAs (~450 balls), and this seems to be quite effective. On
the 0508's, whatch out for mechanical weaknesses. Otherwise, the low ESL
can help reduce part count. Another option would be to route the board
1:1, then empirically determine exactly how many caps are truly needed on
the first spin, updating the design before production runs. Also, have you
considered swapping the power planes in your stackup w/ two of the grounds?
Since components are placed on top (and maybe bottom), significant amounts
of bus routing will be on ustrip layers. I've always found that it's
better to reference a solid ground plane rather than a power plane, since
this tends to inject less noise into your power rails. I would especially
consider this if your power planes are split. Just my $0.02.
At 08:15 PM 6/1/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>I'm currently placing a board with many tightly spaced 676 pin Xilinx BGA's
>(XCV600's). Per Xilinx they are claiming one bypass for each power pin, which
>adds up to about 76 caps. This eats huge amounts of via sites for routing.
>currently using a .1uF 0603. Have looked at 0402's but they seem hard to
>Also considered the 0508 IDC cap from AVX which has much lower inductance
>hopes of reducing component count. The problem with the IDC's are the fact
>with 8 leads, you need a fanout with 8 vias which ends up eating as much
>as you saved by reducing part count. AVX says it's about a 2 or 3 to 1
>(1 IDC is the equivalent to 2 to 3 0603 X7R's).
>Thought about buried capacitance, but our power plane scheme doesn't lend
>Thinking of placing a cap on both sides at the same location, and using
>pad to connect the pairs together.
>We're currently at 16 layers with the following stack.
>POWER (Maybe split with core and I/O voltage)
>Any other thoughts on how to effectively bypass these large devices, while
>conserving via sites.
>Any help much appreciated.
>**** 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 : Wed Nov 22 2000 - 10:50:30 PST