Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article
, "Pete KE9OA" wrote: I so use a CAD program. For the prototyping, I print out the artwork on an Inkjet transparency, and use boards that have a photosensitized resist. Our jobber wants 250 dollars for each prototype run, so it is cheaper for me to do it myself. Once I get everything designed, we will go to our board house, and have some real boards made up. It is quite a bit of work, spotfacing all of the holes on the ground plane, and soldering feedthrough wires, to connect the top ground plane to the copper flood on the bottom side of the board, but it is the only way to get a board with a nice low impedance RF ground. Another interesting thing.................it is a good idea not to lay down your ground vias on a fixed grid; instead, drop them around the board in a pseudo-random fashion. This way, you can minimize the chances of having resonances in the structure. I remember one project that I was working on a few years back. The designer decided to lay down all of the ground vias on a 50 mil grid. This was a 900MHz hybrid synthesizer, that used a mixing scheme to translate the tuning range. Anyway, the board had a very sharp resonant peak right in the middle of the image band. The engineer that I was working with didn't believe that this was the case, until we started drilling out the vias with a Dremel tool. This sounds to me like the problem resonance was just moved to a different frequency by removing vias. The solution should have been to add more ground vias. Iım assuming the situation you are painting is a continuous ground plane on the bottom with circuit features on the top of the board with additional ground plane ³flood² on the top in a bid to provide more isolation between circuit paths or just improving ground on the board. To get patches of ground plane on the top of the board to behave the same electrically as ground plane on the bottom the impedance must remain low relative to the frequency of operation. To accomplish this a number of vias must connect the patches or areas of ground plane on top to the continuous ground plane on the bottom. The rule of thumb I use is a 1/4 wave of the highest frequency of operation. The reason for the 1/4 wave is this is the minimum feature size that is likely to resonate inadvertently in the design so for 900 MHz that would be about ~ 278 ps for a 1/4 wave and at ~ 145 ps an inch for a FR4 type dielectric that would be ~ 1.9 inches to propagate on the board. You donıt want any ground plane features on the board top to be any longer than 1.9 inches without a via to the ground plane below. For example lets say you pick a via spacing of 1 inch to be safe and you have two circuit traces going two a mixer on the board. These two traces start several inches apart on the board and gradually come to about .5 inches of each other as they approach the mixer. If you put ground plane between them it will look like a finger pointed at the mixer and with 1-inch regular grid placement of the vias none might have connected this finger to the ground plane below. This finger can then behave as a 1/4-wave stub if it is 1.9 inches long. This can be fixed by adding (at least) one via at the end of the finger to the ground plane below lowering the impedance next to the mixer so it canıt move electrically. A good way to check a PC board for undesired resonances is to take the unpopulated board, and connect an SMA launch at each end of the board (input and output). Connect a network analyzer, and you should see a flat noise spectrum, if the board was properly designed. I never thought of doing this. Thanks for the idea. Another trick of the trade for checking VCOs is to connect a network analyzer to the inpur of the VCO. Set up the analyzer for a Smith Chart type of display. You will know if you have your feedback capacitors optimized for the tuning range of interest, if you are centered in the maximum magnitude region of negative resistance. This was a pretty common technique at Rockwell. When I mentioned this to the folks that I was working with in my department at Motorola, they had never heard of this method. I think I understand what you are describing here but I need more detail to be sure. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
a page of motorola 2way 2 way portable and mobile radio history | Policy | |||
Review: Ramsey HFRC-1 WWV receiver kit | Equipment | |||
Review: Ramsey HFRC-1 WWV receiver kit | Homebrew | |||
Review: Ramsey HFRC-1 WWV receiver kit | Equipment | |||
Review: Ramsey HFRC-1 WWV receiver kit | Homebrew |