Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Series Termination

I am trying to understand series termination for a board I'm designing
with a Cyclone II FPGA. The Cyclone II has internal series termination
resistors making it easier for me. These resistors are typical 50 ohms
(25 in some cases). I assume the traces on my board must also be a 50
ohm transmission line so I plug some numbers into a microstrip trace
impedance calculator (at http://www.chemandy.com/calculators/microstrip-transmission-line-calculator-hartley27.htm
using specs for the board from http://www.expresspcb.com/ExpressPCBHtm/SpecsStandard.htm)
and it says I need a trace that is 1.5 mm wide. That trace is too
wide...it'll cover three pins! I think I must be missing something
because when I look at a PCB I don't see traces this wide for data.

Thanks for your help,
Brian
 
T

Tim Williams

Jan 1, 1970
0
and it says I need a trace that is 1.5 mm wide. That trace is too
wide...it'll cover three pins! I think I must be missing something
because when I look at a PCB I don't see traces this wide for data.

How thick is your PCB? Does it have enough layers? That'll take down
thickness-per-layer pretty well.

Tim
 
B

Baron

Jan 1, 1970
0
I am trying to understand series termination for a board I'm designing
with a Cyclone II FPGA. The Cyclone II has internal series termination
resistors making it easier for me. These resistors are typical 50 ohms
(25 in some cases). I assume the traces on my board must also be a 50
ohm transmission line so I plug some numbers into a microstrip trace
impedance calculator (at
http://www.chemandy.com/calculators/microstrip-transmission-line-calculator-hartley27.htm
using specs for the board from
http://www.expresspcb.com/ExpressPCBHtm/SpecsStandard.htm) and it says
I need a trace that is 1.5 mm wide. That trace is too wide...it'll
cover three pins! I think I must be missing something because when I
look at a PCB I don't see traces this wide for data.

Thanks for your help,
Brian

Use whatever trace impedance suits, then terminate to match. 1.5mm is
about right for 50ohms on 1oz FR4. But do you have to use 50ohm ?
Could you use, say 300ohm ? Without some knowledge of your requirement
its difficult to make sensible suggestions.
 
W

WhiteDog

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi Brian,


Don't get too hung up on 50 ohms unless you REALLY need it (like when
you are doing a board using RF parts that are internally matched to 50
ohms). The place to start is with the signals you are sending down the
traces. How fast are the edges? 1ns? 500ps? faster?

This tells you the bandwidth requirement of your design, and what the
electrical length of your transmission lines will be. Depending on how
far apart your chips are, you may not need to be worried about
matching. Remember, driving a 50 ohm line requires a nontrivial
amount of current from the driving devices. I like the suggestion of
300ohms (or somewhere in between). It typically works better on FR4.

Tell us more about the project... we'll be able to help you a little
easier. I've done several designs with the Cyclone II, and have seldom
used 50ohm terminations with anything other than fast serial data
(over 100Mbps), clocks that I need to be really pure (for DSP) or
stuff that interfaces to OTHER chips that require 50-ohm lines.
 
B

Baron

Jan 1, 1970
0
Robert said:
300 ohm?? Are you nuts? Tha is too close to free-air impedance.

I agree its close to 377ohms ! Depending upon frequency, quite
practical.

The points being 1/ does the OP need to use 50ohms, and 2/ Without some
knowledge of the requirements it is difficult to make sensible
suggestions.
 
Wow,I didn't expect so much help. Thank you so much.

I took a while to respond because I wanted to do some more research to
ask less stupid questions (hopefully).

The advice you all gave helped a lot. First I was getting "hung up" on
50 ohms. I assumed the FPGA provided 50 ohm series terminating
resistors for a reason, and that I needed to take advantage of it.
Also I wanted to use a two layer FR4 board to reduce cost (it's my
personal project) but after getting deeper into the layout it became
too much of a burden, so I opted for a 4 layer board. This greatly
reduced the trace width necessary for a particular transmission line.

If I am reading the Cyclone II handbook correctly, the rise and fall
times are 500 ps, giving an electrical length of 144 mm. This means
that, according to this article http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/3854
, I only need to consider the traces as transmission lines if the
length exceeds about 2.5 cm. That's good to know...

How about some background? I'm trying to build a 900 MHz CDMA
transmitter and receiver, with a 1 Mcps chip rate (actually 1.023
Mcps, more on that later). I've posted a block diagram of the
transmitter here: http://www.geocities.com/heiligb/LPS/transmitter_block_diag.gif

The schematic diagrams so far are here: http://www.geocities.com/heiligb/LPS/transmitter_schem1.gif
and here: http://www.geocities.com/heiligb/LPS/transmitter_schem2.gif

So far there is no useful output from the FPGA, only LEDs and GPIOs
for debugging.

The plan is the FPGA will generate the chipping code, combine it with
the data from USB, and send it to the mixer at zero IF. It is then
mixed up to 920 MHz, filtered and amplified as necessary (haven't done
much design there yet) and transmitted. My plan of attack is to
approach the design incrementally, creating about 5 boards and testing
along the way. Since this is my first high-speed or wireless board
design I believe I'll ultimately save money (and understand the design
better) this way as opposed to creating a full design and having it
not work. The first board will only have the DAC output sent to an SMA
connector. I'm also assuming I'll be able to get my hands on a
spectrum analyzer, high-speed O-scope, etc for testing. Haven't solved
that problem yet.

It seems to me that the requirement for decoupling capacitors can be
summarized as (somewhat tongue in cheek): put a capacitor as close to
the pin as possible. Make the capacitance as large as possible and the
size as small as possible, with a good temperature coefficient,
balancing the cost of the cap.

Here are some highlights from the design so far:
I copied lots of examples from other designs.
I put a .1 uF capacitor on every DC input pin of the FPGA. I don't
know if this is overkill (or underkill?) but it seems like it can't
hurt. The decoupling caps for the FPGA are on page 1.
The decoupling caps on VCCA_PLL1 and VCCA_PLL2 came from an Altera
reference design. Can't figure out why all those different caps would
help, but what do I know?
The LEDs I ordered (Part# 754-1127-1-ND) have a voltage rating of 2.1
volts and a current draw of 20ma. I took (Vcc - VLED) / ILED and found
I needed a 60 ohm resistor. Digikey didn't have one so I got 62 ohms
instead.
I assumed a max of 500ma for 1.2v and 500ma for 3.3v is enough. I put
the jumper there so I can test the current draw in case I assumed
incorrectly.
I'm using only JTAG to program the chip. I ordered a knock-off USB
Blaster from China (hope I don't get ripped off) and hope to get
Quartus II software for a reasonable price.

What's next?
The output of the FPGA will be a square wave at 1 Mcps with no IF. I'm
not convinced yet that I can't directly take an output pin from the
FPGA, send it through a DC blocking capacitor directly to the mixer
(as an analog signal) bypassing the DAC. For this reason I want to
take one pin, terminate for 50 ohms, put a series cap and output it to
an SMA connector. I want to see what comes out on the spectrum
analyzer.
Assuming that doesn't work I will also send data and clock to an 8-bit
DAC (such a waste to have 8 bits when I only need one!). The output of
that will also be to an SMA connector so I can see how it looks.

I've been researching the DAC and I don't know how to pick one. There
are two kinds: current-output and voltage-output. I try to understand
what a current output is and how it is different from a voltage
output, but I can't understand and I can't find any reference. If the
output impedance is constant, then an increase in current will result
in a proportional increase in voltage, right? So then what's the
difference?

Sorry for the long post. Read as much as you like and respond as much
as you like. Again I greatly appreciate your help.
 
I missed two points in my post:

It is a BPSK transmitter.

With a 10 MHz input I couldn't figure out how to get a 1.023 Mhz clock
using only the FPGA PLLs. So, when I get to that point if I still
can't figure out how to generate the clock I'll either add an external
PLL or eliminate the requirement. The code sequence length is 1023
chips and it would be nice if the code repeated every ms, but that's
not necessary.

Thanks again!
 
B

Baron

Jan 1, 1970
0
[email protected] wrote:

Notes inline.
Wow,I didn't expect so much help. Thank you so much.

I took a while to respond because I wanted to do some more research to
ask less stupid questions (hopefully).

The advice you all gave helped a lot. First I was getting "hung up" on
50 ohms. I assumed the FPGA provided 50 ohm series terminating
resistors for a reason, and that I needed to take advantage of it.
Also I wanted to use a two layer FR4 board to reduce cost (it's my
personal project) but after getting deeper into the layout it became
too much of a burden, so I opted for a 4 layer board. This greatly
reduced the trace width necessary for a particular transmission line.

If there are any example board layouts based around the chips you are
using it might be worth a look.
If I am reading the Cyclone II handbook correctly, the rise and fall
times are 500 ps, giving an electrical length of 144 mm. This means
that, according to this article
http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/3854 , I only need to consider
the traces as transmission lines if the length exceeds about 2.5 cm.
That's good to know...

Any trace or piece of wire can be considered a transmission line ! The
shorter it is with respect to frequency the less its effect is going to
be ! A general rule of thumb would be if its 10% or less of a wave
length it can be neglected.
How about some background? I'm trying to build a 900 MHz CDMA
transmitter and receiver, with a 1 Mcps chip rate (actually 1.023
Mcps, more on that later). I've posted a block diagram of the
transmitter here:
http://www.geocities.com/heiligb/LPS/transmitter_block_diag.gif

The schematic diagrams so far are here:
http://www.geocities.com/heiligb/LPS/transmitter_schem1.gif and here:
http://www.geocities.com/heiligb/LPS/transmitter_schem2.gif

So far there is no useful output from the FPGA, only LEDs and GPIOs
for debugging.

The plan is the FPGA will generate the chipping code, combine it with
the data from USB, and send it to the mixer at zero IF. It is then
mixed up to 920 MHz, filtered and amplified as necessary (haven't done
much design there yet) and transmitted.

920Mhz = A wavelength of 326mm
My plan of attack is to
approach the design incrementally, creating about 5 boards and testing
along the way. Since this is my first high-speed or wireless board
design I believe I'll ultimately save money (and understand the design
better) this way as opposed to creating a full design and having it
not work. The first board will only have the DAC output sent to an SMA
connector. I'm also assuming I'll be able to get my hands on a
spectrum analyzer, high-speed O-scope, etc for testing. Haven't solved
that problem yet.

It seems to me that the requirement for decoupling capacitors can be
summarized as (somewhat tongue in cheek): put a capacitor as close to
the pin as possible. Make the capacitance as large as possible and the
size as small as possible, with a good temperature coefficient,
balancing the cost of the cap.

One of the things you will have to be careful of is creating resonant
loops with multiple caps on the supply lines. Also the caps themselves
have self resonances ! Whilst they should be orders of magnitude
higher than the frequencies that you are playing with. Its worth
checking them.

I could relate an experience here... Maybe later.
Here are some highlights from the design so far:
I copied lots of examples from other designs.
I put a .1 uF capacitor on every DC input pin of the FPGA. I don't
know if this is overkill (or underkill?) but it seems like it can't
hurt. The decoupling caps for the FPGA are on page 1.
The decoupling caps on VCCA_PLL1 and VCCA_PLL2 came from an Altera
reference design. Can't figure out why all those different caps would
help, but what do I know?

See note above.
The LEDs I ordered (Part# 754-1127-1-ND) have a voltage rating of 2.1
volts and a current draw of 20ma. I took (Vcc - VLED) / ILED and found
I needed a 60 ohm resistor. Digikey didn't have one so I got 62 ohms
instead.

I think you will find that you can reduce the current draw for that LED
considerably and it will still be bright enough. I would run it around
5 to 10ma.
 
K

krw

Jan 1, 1970
0
[email protected] wrote:

Notes inline.


If there are any example board layouts based around the chips you are
using it might be worth a look.

Sounds about right.
Any trace or piece of wire can be considered a transmission line ! The
shorter it is with respect to frequency the less its effect is going to
be ! A general rule of thumb would be if its 10% or less of a wave
length it can be neglected.

Any trace or wire *can* be, but it often isn't necessary to consider
it a t-line. Where the effect becomes apparent has nothing to do with
the wavelength, rather the edge rates. The general rule-o-thumb is if
the length of the line is 1/2 the edge rate (round trip = edge) then
the line will look like a transmission line. Shorter than that it's
more like a lumped capacitor.

<snip>
 
Top