From: John Kennedy (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Sep 22 2000 - 10:59:54 PDT
I have a board that through analysis requires:
32 x 100 microfarad caps with inductance of 4nH and 0.1 ohms ESR, for
321 x 100nF caps with inductance of 1nH (using 0508 package) and ESR of
0.1 ohms for high frequency switching of 576 sram drivers. I have an
Fknee of 200 MHz.
If I plot this using Ultracad's software (
http://www.ultracad.com/esr.htm ) I get the black plot in the attached
image. You can see that the maximum impedance is below my goal of 0.004
ohms at 200 MHz.
I then added to the analysis the use of either buried capacitance using
a standard dielectric of 4.5 with thickness of 2 mil (the red plot), and
then using embedded capacitance using Hadco's dielectric of 50 with a
thickness of 2 mil (the blue plot). Assumed inductance was 1 pH and 0.1
micro ohms ESR.
As you can see in both cases it appears to me that buried or embedded
capacitance is a hindrance and therefore I should separate my power and
ground planes with signal layers. My question to you all is am I
correct in this statement or have I missed something?
PS. 321 ceramic caps is a lot of board space, any suggestions on ways to
reduce the count?
**** To unsubscribe from si-list or si-list-digest: send e-mail to
email@example.com. 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 : Tue May 08 2001 - 14:29:33 PDT