From: Salvador Aguinaga jr (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Feb 13 2001 - 11:33:32 PST
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 18:51:14 -0600 (CST)
From: Salvador Aguinaga jr <email@example.com>
Subject: Multi-drop backplane trace, with Z0=50 ohms - but my TDR says 40 ohms
A backplane trace that was designed to have a characteristic impedance of
50 ohms registers at 40 ohms when I measure it with a TDR scope. Clearly
it's the capacitance of the equally spaced vias (or pin holes) that is
impedance of the trace. Or, is it that the trace between two slots is so
short that the TDR cannot resolve the actual impedance of the trace from
slot to slot?
Taking a step back, the impedance coupons on this board say that the trace
with x width should be 50 ohms. However, this impedance test coupon only
has vias (or pin holes) at each end of the trace. So, naturally the
impedance registers at 50 ohms. But, as I mentioned before, on a real
application the trace is going to have pin holes at every slot.
If I absolutely have to have a 50 ohm trace, should I increase the
impedance of the traces between slots to compensate for the added
capacitance of the via? Or should one reduce the parasitic capacitance of
the via, by reasonably increasing the anti-pads on internal layers? And,
no I can't make the backlane any thinner!
Please, let me know what your thoughts are on this, especially if you'd
ran into similar situation.
Thanks a lot!
**** To unsubscribe from si-list or si-list-digest: send e-mail to
firstname.lastname@example.org. 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 - 14:30:50 PDT