05:02
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
05:20
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
05:41
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
06:35
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
07:11
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
07:20
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
07:26
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
08:20
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
08:38
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
10:26
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
11:53
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
12:14
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
16:47
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
18:10
bvernoux has joined #scopehal
18:20
<
bvernoux >
azonenberg, do you have some news on your simulation with SMA connectors I'm very interested by them ;)
18:21
<
bvernoux >
In order to avoid doing lot of SMA Test Fixture "blindly" until I obtain something well matched ...
18:22
<
bvernoux >
The idea is to test that with TRL board PCB containing all test fixture on same PCB ...
18:23
<
azonenberg >
bvernoux: i'm making progress but still chasing strange results
18:23
<
bvernoux >
last time I have found demo version has some "bugs"
18:23
<
azonenberg >
Still learning various quirks of the tool and/or counterintuitive RF resonance problems
18:24
<
bvernoux >
do you have seen answer from Sonnet guys on Twitter ?
18:24
<
azonenberg >
i found a segfault in the full version
18:24
<
azonenberg >
but they replied with a workaround in less than two hours
18:24
<
bvernoux >
as they have tested with latest version of Sonnet and that was working better ...
18:24
<
azonenberg >
and are working on a full patch to avoid the issue
18:24
<
bvernoux >
especially for the Impedance
18:24
<
azonenberg >
well i have the thick metal model in l2 basic
18:24
<
azonenberg >
So i've been using that a lot for coplanar waveguide stuff
18:25
<
bvernoux >
the hint was to use thick metal option
18:26
<
bvernoux >
and they also have used latest version to have a correct Impedance vs Simulation on a very basic test with microstrip line
18:26
<
azonenberg >
i have not, will look later on
18:26
<
azonenberg >
But what i can say is, thick metal option is critical for CPWs with 100um gap on 35um thick copper
18:27
<
bvernoux >
Anyway your research are very interesting especially to use "cheap" SMA with correct tuning to have best performance
18:27
<
azonenberg >
yeah i am not saying my current footprint is optimal
18:27
<
bvernoux >
as using Harmon Instruments connectors are clearly too expensive ...
18:28
<
azonenberg >
Its the best i've come up with so far but i have been tweaking by hand, the next step is to run some sweeps to optimize
18:28
<
bvernoux >
yes very nice
18:28
<
bvernoux >
I'm mainly interested by the match on connector
18:28
<
azonenberg >
Right now i'm trying to simulate five copies of my equivalent circuit for the 200R resist
18:29
<
bvernoux >
I'm working on a TDR stuff with OSHPark 4layers PCB
18:29
<
azonenberg >
compared to a 1K. or the vishay s2p model
18:29
<
azonenberg >
including coplanar waveguide parasitics
18:29
<
azonenberg >
And having some problems i dont yet understand
18:29
<
bvernoux >
Yes I have seen it on Twitter as it does not match the datasheet of vishay
18:30
<
bvernoux >
but with SMA ;)
18:30
<
bvernoux >
not those costly connectors
18:30
<
bvernoux >
especially to go up to 6GHz ...
18:30
<
bvernoux >
or even 15GHz as SMA as specified (when perfectly matched ...) up to 18GHz or more
18:31
<
bvernoux >
so far I have not found any Application Note or something like that to provide a very good match with PCB ...
18:33
<
bvernoux >
also doing some test with flexpcb could be very interesting ;)
18:33
<
bvernoux >
as the Er is very low and flexpcb are cheap compared to RO4350 ...
18:39
<
bvernoux >
Done with OSHPark 4layers FR408
18:39
<
bvernoux >
but the connector is very expensive too
18:51
<
azonenberg >
yes i plan to design some higher end flex probes down the road too
18:53
<
bvernoux >
There is clearly very nice RF stuff to do without the need to use Rosenberger or other ultra expensive connectors especially if we do not need to exceed 10GHz ...
19:14
_whitelogger has joined #scopehal
19:39
<
azonenberg >
bvernoux: well yeah i'm just doing high speed digital, not mm-wave radar or anything (yet)
19:40
<
bvernoux >
but that can help and at end everything is RF ;)
19:43
<
bvernoux >
and up to 15GHz ;)
19:44
<
bvernoux >
anyway it is very interesting even with such expensive connectors
19:46
<
bvernoux >
Southwest Microwave 1492-02A-5 are only 100USD ;)
19:57
<
azonenberg >
oooh this is interesting
20:18
<
azonenberg >
So it looks like there's a trick to use up to 2 external s-parameter passives in an L2 Basic model as long as it's a 2-port network
20:19
<
azonenberg >
tl;dr add internal ports to the component pads
20:19
<
azonenberg >
sonnet's
*netlist* solver lets you use s-parameter models
20:19
<
azonenberg >
So you can make a 6-port netlist with 2 boxwall ports and 4 internal ports then add two s2p models to that
20:20
<
azonenberg >
it means you have to do two simulations, and the current density plot doesn't work
20:23
<
azonenberg >
But its better than using an equivalent circuit at multiple GHz
20:28
<
bvernoux >
Do you have the new version of SOnnet or 15.53-Lite ?
20:30
<
azonenberg >
I bought L2 Basic of the new version, planning to upgrade to silver and eventually gold down the road
20:30
<
azonenberg >
May or may not end up with pro eventually
20:30
<
azonenberg >
i'm hugely more productive than with lite already
20:31
<
bvernoux >
ha great so yes you have the new version already
20:34
<
bvernoux >
I have just finished my first buy on JLCPCB ;)
20:34
<
bvernoux >
Mainly for test with different NFC antenna ;)
20:34
<
bvernoux >
very cheap and fast 24H to produce the PCB
20:36
<
bvernoux >
I have built a NFC Calibration Coil Compliant ISO/IEC 10373-6 ;)
20:36
<
bvernoux >
Such Calibration Coil cost more than 250USD ...
20:36
<
bvernoux >
just for a PCB respecting some rules ;)
20:39
<
bvernoux >
Fun things in my order I have 5x PCB => 220mm*151mm for 13.68Euros ;)
20:39
<
bvernoux >
it is clearly really cheap
20:39
<
bvernoux >
even if they are only 2 layers
20:40
<
bvernoux >
Just a very bad things the preview of PCB is totally buggy ;)
20:41
<
bvernoux >
But JLCPCB say it does not reflect the real board which will be built ...
21:39
<
azonenberg >
Ok so it looks like the flattest option with vishay FC is actually 2x 200R + 1x 50R
21:41
<
azonenberg >
The SMA match is still not perfect
21:41
<
azonenberg >
But here's the best i have so far. 200R + 50R, 0.5mm RO4350B between CPW trace and ground plane
21:41
<
azonenberg >
0.1mm planar gap from trace to ground, 0.5mm wide trace
21:42
<
azonenberg >
via fence modeled as a solid wall
21:42
<
azonenberg >
Probe consists of the 3-resistor tip assembly, 40mm of CPW after that, then the SMA transition
21:43
<
azonenberg >
There's room to improve, but it's already flat +/- 1 dB out to around 6 GHz
21:43
<
azonenberg >
And -3 dB bandwidth is >10 GHz
21:43
<
azonenberg >
The actual probe tip is not modeled and will likely limit usable b/w to quite a bit less than this
21:50
<
azonenberg >
that last url was an old graph
22:12
<
bvernoux >
yes very nice
22:13
<
azonenberg >
yeah thats an old one
22:14
<
bvernoux >
S11 too if you have
22:14
<
azonenberg >
Reuploaded
22:14
<
bvernoux >
anyway variation of +/1dB for S21 is not too bad
22:14
<
azonenberg >
try s21-02 again
22:15
<
azonenberg >
That work?
22:16
<
bvernoux >
from -15 to -17.5dB a bit strange
22:16
<
azonenberg >
this has s11 too (right axis scale)
22:17
<
azonenberg >
I'm not modeling lossless conductors so i think some of this is conductor loss
22:17
<
bvernoux >
it is simulated with FR4 PCB ?
22:17
<
azonenberg >
No, RO4350B
22:17
<
bvernoux >
strange it loose so much
22:17
<
azonenberg >
and copper conductors. Both conductor and dielectric loss are included
22:18
<
azonenberg >
Plating is not modeled
22:18
<
bvernoux >
-3dB on 10GHz range
22:18
<
bvernoux >
it look like FR4 ;)
22:18
<
azonenberg >
Lol well the match to the SMA isnt perfect
22:19
<
bvernoux >
ha yes it include match to SMA
22:19
<
azonenberg >
theres -20 dB return loss at the connector right now from 6-10 GHz
22:19
<
azonenberg >
and this is modeling the sma footprint, not any extra capacitance etc from the sma itself
22:19
<
azonenberg >
But i think it's pretty close
22:19
<
bvernoux >
and TDR ?
22:19
<
azonenberg >
I dont have any time domain plots, sonnet is entirely a frequency domain tool
22:20
<
azonenberg >
but i guess i could export a s2p for the whole design and feed that into qucs
22:20
<
bvernoux >
It will be interesting to see it as it shall show the connector mismatch ...
22:20
<
azonenberg >
Yeah that is on my list of things to do when i get home
22:20
<
azonenberg >
(traveling for the holidays)
22:20
<
azonenberg >
anyway, even if i can't do better than this
22:21
<
azonenberg >
this probe would still be very usable out to the mid single digit GHz range
22:21
<
azonenberg >
vastly better than cheap oem probes :p
22:22
<
bvernoux >
we see clearly the difference between FR4 vs RO4350B
22:22
<
bvernoux >
loss shall be less than 0.2dB from 0 to 7 GHz and even more
22:22
<
azonenberg >
Yes there's a lot of imperfections
22:23
<
bvernoux >
In your simulation it take into account the SMA so yes it is different
22:23
<
bvernoux >
will be interesting to remove the SMA to check theory too
22:23
<
azonenberg >
I also modeled my conductors as copper, not plating
22:24
<
bvernoux >
could you display the Z fro whole freq ?
22:24
<
bvernoux >
we shall see the mismatch with connector
22:25
<
azonenberg >
Of just the connector match? or the whole board
22:25
<
azonenberg >
the resistors dominate
22:25
<
bvernoux >
in your simulation there is also resistors ?
22:26
<
bvernoux >
I do not remember what there is in fact
22:26
<
bvernoux >
it is the whole RF probe ?
22:26
<
azonenberg >
everything but the tip needle
22:27
<
azonenberg >
2x 200R FC0402, 1x 50R FC0402, ~50mm of GCPW, and the SMA
22:27
<
azonenberg >
this is the line impedance for the sma connector match only, without resistors or the long waveguide
22:27
<
bvernoux >
ha interesting
22:28
<
bvernoux >
there is a big mismatch
22:28
<
azonenberg >
Yes. it's a lot better than i had before
22:28
<
bvernoux >
more than 8 Ohm
22:28
<
azonenberg >
But i havent fully optimized it
22:28
<
bvernoux >
before it was more than 10 ?
22:28
<
azonenberg >
i dont remember how bad the naive version was but it was a lot worse
22:28
<
bvernoux >
a must will be +/-5 Ohms ;)
22:29
<
azonenberg >
Going to do sweep optimization of ground plane cutout length and width, angles, etc
22:29
<
bvernoux >
especially over 10GHz
22:29
<
bvernoux >
will be intresting to check up to 15GHz too
22:29
<
azonenberg >
as well as the transition from sma to cpw
22:29
<
bvernoux >
as anyway SMA are specified as 18GHz or more
22:29
<
azonenberg >
i've optimized the cpw itself to be quite good
22:31
<
bvernoux >
can you show the stackup + view of the whole things ?
22:31
<
azonenberg >
52.2 ohms at 100 MHz, 51.4 at 2 GHz
22:31
<
azonenberg >
then around 51.3 out to 10 GHz
22:31
<
bvernoux >
ha very nice
22:31
<
azonenberg >
I'm not going to try and optimize more than that because fab tolerances will be more than this
22:31
<
azonenberg >
And this design has nice round numbers
22:32
<
bvernoux >
yes fab tolerance will be +/-2 Ohms ...
22:32
<
bvernoux >
maybe better with your fab
22:32
<
azonenberg >
0.5mm wide 1oz copper trace, 0.1mm gap to copper ground at left and right
22:32
<
azonenberg >
then 0.508mm ro4350b between signal and ground plane on internal layer
22:33
<
azonenberg >
then whatever cores/prepregs needed to pad the board out to 1.6mm finished thickness, but wont be electrically active
22:33
<
azonenberg >
maybe additional grounding or something
22:33
<
bvernoux >
it is only 2 layers ?
22:33
<
azonenberg >
it will likely be built as a 4L board
22:34
<
azonenberg >
signal on front, CPW from front to inner1
22:34
<
bvernoux >
yes but using only 2 layers ?
22:34
<
azonenberg >
then inner2 and back solid ground or empty, TBD
22:34
<
bvernoux >
I have a fun design using 4 layers ;)
22:34
<
bvernoux >
with trace on center
22:34
<
azonenberg >
oh cool
22:34
<
bvernoux >
will be fun to analyze
22:34
<
bvernoux >
as it shall be more robust to external things
22:34
<
azonenberg >
anyway like i said i'm not 100% on this design yet
22:34
<
azonenberg >
But its better than what i've had before
22:35
<
bvernoux >
but I think S11/S21 will be not very good ...
22:39
<
bvernoux >
For info BloopRadar use Southwest Microwave 292-06A-5
22:39
<
bvernoux >
they still cost > 76USD
22:39
<
bvernoux >
but it is for >27GHz ;)
22:46
<
bvernoux >
interesting point with OSHPark 4Layers
22:46
<
bvernoux >
The best for 50ohms is 13.4mils traces ;)
23:04
<
bvernoux >
see you later bye
23:05
bvernoux has quit [Quit: Leaving]