Article View: sci.electronics.basics
Article #35Re: 4 layer PCB (from 2 layer) + array of designs on one board
From: Vitaliy
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 06:56
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 06:56
67 lines
4513 bytes
4513 bytes
> The power planes on 4 layers boards are more useful for high switching > current and high speed digital stuff. There is a good chance it may > make little or no difference for application depending on your layout. > 4 layers will give you greater ability to achieve a lower noise layout, > but if you don't know exactly how to achieve this then it's not going > to help you much, it could even make things worse, I have seen that > happen before. > To start off, I will read you tutorial from pcb123 and hopefully improve a few things in my design from that manual. I want to add the power layers to reduce the length of power traces (I might need to add the 2nd stage to the detector, and that will definitely require more/longer power traces without power layers). > > Simply ask the manufacturer to do it, do waste time and effort > yourself. Just supply them the layout for one board and tell them you > want X number of boards. For the prototype services they will usually > fit as many as they can on the one panel for you, you pay per panel. > > For high production designs it's usually different, you have to worry > about panel handling and tooling hole/marks etc. > Any recommendations, I'm using pcbexpress, will try to get a hold of them after New Year's day, local manufacturers are charging per panel (but I will see if they can put a few designs on the same panel). John Devereux wrote: > > These requirements tend to be mutually exclusive... i.e., more > bandwidth lets in more noise. > > What is the source of the "noise"? E.g. source noise, photocurrent > shot noise, transimpedance amplifier noise, external interference? > > Until you do this it seems pointless to speculate about numbers of > layers in boards. > > John Devereux What I meant was: I must increase the BW but see if there is a way to reduce the noise (it does not have to be less than what I have right now). I was thinking differently: if I can provide more stable voltage to both opamp and photodiodes, I can get less fluctuations during current generation and amplifications and power plane should give more stable voltage, right? (I can be totally wrong about this) John Larkin wrote: > More layers won't necessarily improve speed or reduce noise. If you > increase trace capacitance (from thinner dielectrics) it might make > things worse. > > 10 or even 40 MHz isn't very fast for a photodetector; I've got 180 > MHz from cheap opamps. What detector device are you using? Increasing > the photodiode back-bias should help speed a bunch, maybe 2:1 if you > go from 5 volts to something like 20. > > What's the application? How much noise do you see, in equivalent > optical power? > > John I'm using InGaAs PIN (Small Area/Fiber-Optic) photodiodes, which according to the datasheet should be biased at 5V, wavelenth of the signals varies between 800nm to 1700nm. NEP of the photodiode is <0.02 pW/sqrt(Hz) @1550nm according to the datasheet. Vitaliy
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1167289008.324833.163420@n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mailReferences:
<1167029740.938190.304470@n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1167084781.607472.54690@i12g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 111d0a,98c8f92c95d5cd79 X-Google-Thread: 112d1e,98c8f92c95d5cd79 X-Google-Thread: f849b,98c8f92c95d5cd79 X-Google-Thread: 103407,98c8f92c95d5cd79 X-Google-Attributes: gid111d0a,gid112d1e,gidf849b,gid103407,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: "Vitaliy" <m.vitaliy@gmail.com> Newsgroups: sci.electronics.basics,sci.electronics.design,comp.arch.embedded,aus.electronics Subject: Re: 4 layer PCB (from 2 layer) + array of designs on one board Date: 27 Dec 2006 22:56:48 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 68 Message-ID: <1167289008.324833.163420@n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1167029740.938190.304470@n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1167084781.607472.54690@i12g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 74.99.207.27 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Trace: posting.google.com 1167289013 18919 127.0.0.1 (28 Dec 2006 06:56:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 06:56:53 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <1167084781.607472.54690@i12g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; .NET CLR 1.1.4322),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=74.99.207.27; posting-account=1Z6aeg0AAAD9jkv8-xbyDEkLhNl1_XOH