Stories with Tag PCB Design

• PCBs, copper pours, ground planes, and you

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-01-30 04:33:25

  Verbose tl;dr

  This post discusses the nuances of ground planes and copper pours in PCB design, emphasizing that they are not automatically equivalent. While both involve areas of copper, a ground plane is a specifically designated layer for current return paths, offering predictable impedance and reducing EMI. Copper pours, on the other hand, can be connected to any net and are often used for thermal management or simple connectivity. Blindly connecting pours to ground without understanding their impact can negatively affect signal integrity, creating unintended ground loops and compromising circuit performance. The author advises careful consideration of the desired function (grounding vs. thermal relief) before connecting a copper pour, potentially using distinct nets for each purpose and strategically stitching them together only where necessary.

  This comprehensive discourse, entitled "PCBs, copper pours, ground planes, and you," delves into the intricacies of printed circuit board (PCB) design, focusing specifically on the often-misunderstood concept of ground planes and their relationship to copper pours. The author meticulously dismantles the common misconception that simply flooding areas of a PCB with copper and connecting it to ground constitutes a proper ground plane, elucidating the significant differences between a true ground plane and a mere copper pour.

  The article commences with a foundational explanation of signal propagation in PCBs, emphasizing the role of return currents and their preferred paths. It underscores the importance of providing low-impedance return paths for signals to minimize noise and ensure signal integrity. The author then introduces the concept of a ground plane as an ideal, low-impedance return path that effectively distributes return currents evenly across its surface. This uniform distribution, the author argues, is key to mitigating electromagnetic interference (EMI) and maintaining signal quality.

  A significant portion of the article is devoted to contrasting true ground planes, typically found on multi-layer PCBs and characterized by a continuous sheet of copper on an inner layer, with copper pours on outer layers, often erroneously referred to as ground planes. The author meticulously details how the presence of discontinuities, such as traces and components, in these outer layer copper pours significantly alters their behavior and impedes their ability to function as effective ground planes. These discontinuities introduce impedance variations and can lead to the formation of ground loops, potentially exacerbating noise issues rather than mitigating them.

  Furthermore, the author explores the impact of the shape and size of copper pours on their effectiveness, emphasizing the importance of minimizing sharp corners and narrow necks that can concentrate current flow and increase impedance. The discussion extends to the topic of thermal relief connections for components soldered to copper pours, explaining their purpose in facilitating soldering while acknowledging their potential to introduce impedance discontinuities.

  The article also touches upon the nuances of using copper pours for other purposes, such as power distribution, and highlights the challenges associated with mixing power and ground pours on the same layer. The author advocates for careful consideration of the potential for noise coupling and the importance of separating power and ground planes, particularly in high-speed designs.

  Finally, the author concludes with practical recommendations for designing effective ground planes and utilizing copper pours strategically. This includes advice on choosing the appropriate layer for ground planes, optimizing the shape and size of copper pours, and utilizing techniques such as stitching vias to improve the performance of copper pours and mitigate the effects of discontinuities. The overarching message is that a thorough understanding of the principles governing signal propagation and return currents is essential for designing robust and reliable PCBs, and that the seemingly simple act of adding copper to a PCB requires careful planning and execution.

  • PCB Design
  • Ground Planes
  • Copper Pours
  • Electronics
  • Hardware
  • electrical engineering
  • Signal Integrity
  • EMI
  • EMC
  • Printed Circuit Boards
  • PCB Manufacturing
  • circuit design

  Summary of Comments ( 57 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42874885

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users generally praised the article for its clarity and practical advice on PCB design, particularly regarding ground planes. Several commenters shared their own experiences and anecdotes reinforcing the author's points about the importance of proper grounding for signal integrity and noise reduction. Some discussed specific techniques like using stitching vias and the benefits of a solid ground plane. A few users mentioned the software they use for PCB design and simulation, referencing tools like KiCad and LTspice. Others debated the nuances of ground plane design in different frequency regimes, highlighting the complexities involved in high-speed circuits. One commenter appreciated the author's focus on practical advice over theoretical explanations, emphasizing the value of the article for hobbyists and beginners.

  The Hacker News post "PCBs, copper pours, ground planes, and you" has generated a lively discussion with several insightful comments. Many of the commenters express appreciation for the author's clear and concise explanation of grounding techniques, particularly for those without a deep background in electronics.

  One recurring theme is the importance of the article's emphasis on practical considerations and real-world examples. Several commenters share their own experiences and anecdotes about troubleshooting grounding issues, highlighting the value of the author's advice. One user mentions how the article helped them understand why a particular grounding approach failed in a past project.

  Another point of discussion centers on the nuances of ground plane design. Commenters delve into specific techniques for optimizing ground planes, such as using vias to connect different layers and avoiding isolated "islands" of copper. They also discuss the trade-offs between different grounding strategies, considering factors like signal integrity, electromagnetic compatibility (EMC), and manufacturing cost. One commenter specifically praises the article's explanation of how ground planes can help reduce noise and improve signal quality.

  Some comments focus on the educational value of the article. Several users mention how the article serves as a good introduction to grounding principles for beginners, while others point out that even experienced engineers can benefit from the practical tips and insights. One commenter suggests using the article as a teaching resource for electronics courses.

  Several commenters also discuss the software tools and techniques used for PCB design, referencing specific software packages and highlighting their respective strengths and weaknesses. They also touch upon the importance of simulation and testing in verifying the effectiveness of grounding strategies.

  A few comments also delve into more advanced topics related to grounding, such as the effects of high-frequency signals and the challenges of grounding in mixed-signal designs. One commenter raises a specific question about the impact of ground plane impedance on signal integrity, prompting a further discussion among other users.

  Overall, the comments on the Hacker News post reflect a general appreciation for the article's clarity and practical focus. The discussion provides further context and insights into the complexities of grounding in PCB design, demonstrating the importance of careful planning and execution.

• Proper decoupling capacitor practices, and why you should leave 100nF behind

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-01-26 16:00:50

  Verbose tl;dr

  The article argues against blindly using 100nF decoupling capacitors, advocating for a more nuanced approach based on the specific circuit's needs. It explains that decoupling capacitors counteract the inductance of power supply traces, providing a local reservoir of charge for instantaneous current demands. The optimal capacitance value depends on the frequency and magnitude of these demands. While 100nF might be adequate for lower-frequency circuits, higher-speed designs often require a combination of capacitor values targeting different frequency ranges. The article emphasizes using a variety of capacitor sizes, including smaller, high-frequency capacitors placed close to the power pins of integrated circuits to effectively suppress high-frequency noise and ensure stable operation. Ultimately, effective decoupling requires understanding the circuit's characteristics and choosing capacitor values accordingly, rather than relying on a "one-size-fits-all" solution.

  The blog post "Proper Decoupling Capacitor Practices, and Why You Should Leave 100nF Behind" argues that while the traditional practice of using 100nF (0.1µF) capacitors for decoupling integrated circuits (ICs) has been a long-standing rule of thumb, it's no longer the optimal solution in many modern digital circuit designs. The author contends that a deeper understanding of the underlying principles of decoupling and the specific needs of contemporary ICs calls for a more nuanced approach.

  The core function of a decoupling capacitor is to provide a localized source of current for the IC, mitigating voltage fluctuations caused by rapid changes in current demand during switching operations. These fluctuations, often referred to as noise or ripple, can disrupt the proper functioning of the IC and other components in the circuit. Traditionally, 100nF capacitors were considered adequate for this task. However, with the advent of faster switching speeds and higher clock frequencies in modern digital circuits, the frequency content of this noise has shifted upwards. The author explains that the impedance of a capacitor decreases with increasing frequency. Therefore, a capacitor that presents a low impedance at lower frequencies (like a 100nF capacitor) may exhibit a significantly higher impedance at the higher frequencies characteristic of today's high-speed digital systems. This higher impedance renders the capacitor less effective at filtering out high-frequency noise.

  The article emphasizes that the optimal decoupling strategy involves using a combination of capacitors with different values, effectively creating a "ladder" of capacitance. This approach leverages the unique impedance characteristics of different capacitor types across a wider frequency range. Specifically, the author advocates for including smaller value capacitors, such as 10pF or 100pF, placed physically closer to the IC's power pins. These smaller capacitors, while having lower overall capacitance, exhibit lower impedance at higher frequencies, effectively suppressing the high-frequency noise that the larger 100nF capacitor might miss. Larger capacitors, like the traditional 100nF and even larger values in the microfarad range, remain important for handling lower frequency noise and providing bulk capacitance for transient current demands.

  The author further delves into the practical considerations of capacitor selection, such as Equivalent Series Resistance (ESR) and Equivalent Series Inductance (ESL). These parasitic elements can significantly impact the capacitor's performance at higher frequencies. Lower ESR and ESL values are generally desirable for effective decoupling. The physical placement of the capacitors is also highlighted as crucial, emphasizing the importance of minimizing the inductance of the connection between the capacitor and the IC's power pins. Short and wide traces are recommended to minimize this inductance.

  In conclusion, the post advocates for a shift away from the blind application of the 100nF decoupling capacitor rule. Instead, it encourages a more deliberate and informed approach based on understanding the frequency characteristics of the noise being suppressed and the impedance properties of different capacitor values. The author champions a multi-capacitor decoupling strategy utilizing a range of capacitor values, including smaller capacitors placed very close to the IC's power pins, to effectively address the broader spectrum of noise present in modern high-speed digital circuits. This, they argue, ensures more robust and reliable circuit operation.

  • Decoupling Capacitors
  • Electronics
  • Hardware Design
  • PCB Design
  • circuit design
  • Capacitance
  • Noise Reduction
  • Signal Integrity
  • Embedded Systems
  • 100nF Capacitor
  • best practices
  • Hardware Engineering

  Summary of Comments ( 68 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42830948

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users discussing the article about decoupling capacitors generally agree with the author's premise that blindly using 100nF capacitors is insufficient. Several commenters share their own experiences and best practices, emphasizing the importance of considering the specific frequency range of noise and choosing capacitors accordingly. Some suggest using a combination of capacitor values to target different frequency bands, while others recommend simulating the circuit to determine the optimal values. There's also discussion around the importance of capacitor placement and the use of ferrite beads for additional filtering. Several users highlight the practical limitations of ideal circuit design and the need to balance performance with cost and complexity. Finally, some commenters point out the article's minor inaccuracies or offer alternative explanations for certain phenomena.

  The Hacker News thread linked has several comments discussing the original blog post about decoupling capacitors. Many of the comments delve into the nuances and practical considerations not fully explored in the blog post itself.

  A significant point of discussion revolves around the practicality of the author's advice. One commenter points out that while striving for ideal decoupling is theoretically sound, real-world constraints often necessitate compromises. They mention that factors like board space, component availability, and cost can influence decisions, sometimes making the "perfect" solution impractical. This leads to a discussion about the "good enough" approach, where engineers aim for adequate decoupling rather than striving for theoretical perfection.

  Another commenter raises the issue of the author's focus on digital circuits. They argue that the recommendations might not be universally applicable, particularly for analog circuits where noise considerations are significantly different. They suggest that applying the author's advice indiscriminately could lead to suboptimal results in analog designs.

  Several commenters discuss the importance of considering the entire signal path. They emphasize that decoupling capacitors are only one part of the puzzle and that proper layout, grounding, and component selection all play crucial roles in minimizing noise and ensuring signal integrity. One comment specifically highlights the importance of minimizing the inductance between the decoupling capacitor and the component it's serving, emphasizing the importance of placing the capacitor as close as possible.

  There's a thread discussing the use of ferrite beads in conjunction with decoupling capacitors. Commenters debate the effectiveness of ferrite beads, with some arguing for their use in specific situations while others express skepticism about their benefits. This leads to a discussion about the importance of understanding the impedance characteristics of different components and how they interact within a circuit.

  Finally, some commenters offer additional resources and further reading on the topic of decoupling capacitors, providing links to application notes, articles, and textbooks. This suggests a general interest in the topic and a willingness to explore it in more depth. The shared resources indicate that the discussion sparked a desire for continued learning and a deeper understanding of the complexities of decoupling in electronic circuits.

• Eki Bright – The Case for DIY Routing

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-01-24 08:19:52

  Verbose tl;dr

  Eki Bright argues for building your own internet router using commodity hardware and open-source software like OpenWrt. He highlights the benefits of increased control over network configuration, enhanced privacy by avoiding data collection from commercial routers, potential cost savings over time, and the opportunity to learn valuable networking skills. While acknowledging the higher initial time investment and technical knowledge required compared to using a pre-built router, Bright emphasizes the flexibility and power DIY routing offers for tailoring your network to your specific needs, especially for advanced users or those with privacy concerns.

  This blog post by Eki Bright, titled "Eki Bright – The Case for DIY Routing," makes a comprehensive argument for adopting a do-it-yourself (DIY) approach to network routing, as opposed to relying on commercially available, off-the-shelf solutions. Bright begins by establishing the context of increasing complexity in modern networks, driven by factors like the proliferation of Internet of Things (IoT) devices, the rise of edge computing, and the demand for more granular network control. This complexity, Bright argues, necessitates a deeper understanding of network traffic flow and management, a level of control that pre-built routing solutions often fail to provide.

  The core of Bright's argument rests on the enhanced flexibility and customization afforded by a DIY routing approach. By building a router from the ground up, or by significantly modifying existing open-source software, users gain the ability to tailor their network behavior to their specific needs. This can include implementing highly specialized routing protocols, optimizing for particular types of traffic, and integrating unique security measures. Bright emphasizes the potential for performance gains, suggesting that DIY routing can lead to reduced latency and increased throughput by eliminating unnecessary features and overhead found in commercial routers.

  Furthermore, the post highlights the educational benefits inherent in undertaking a DIY routing project. The process of building and configuring a router, Bright contends, provides invaluable practical experience with networking concepts, from basic subnetting and IP addressing to advanced topics like Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) and Quality of Service (QoS). This hands-on learning experience, Bright suggests, is far more effective than theoretical study alone and can lead to a deeper appreciation of network architecture and functionality.

  Bright acknowledges the potential challenges associated with DIY routing, such as the increased time investment required for development and maintenance, the need for specialized technical skills, and the potential for instability if not implemented correctly. However, the post argues that these challenges are outweighed by the long-term benefits of increased control, flexibility, and deeper understanding of network operations. The author concludes by encouraging readers to explore the world of DIY routing and provides links to several open-source projects and resources to facilitate this exploration. The overall tone of the post is one of enthusiastic advocacy for DIY routing, presenting it as a powerful and rewarding approach for those seeking greater control over their network infrastructure.

  • DIY
  • Routing
  • Eki Bright
  • Electronics
  • PCB Design
  • Hardware
  • Open Source Hardware
  • circuit design
  • manufacturing
  • Prototyping

  Summary of Comments ( 0 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42811435

  Verbose tl;dr

  HN users generally praised the author's ingenuity and the project's potential. Some questioned the practicality and cost-effectiveness of DIY routing compared to readily available solutions like Starlink or existing cellular networks, especially given the complexity and ongoing maintenance required. A few commenters pointed out potential regulatory hurdles, particularly regarding spectrum usage. Others expressed interest in the mesh networking aspects and the possibility of community-owned and operated networks. The discussion also touched upon the limitations of existing rural internet options, fueling the interest in alternative approaches like the one presented. Several users shared their own experiences with similar projects and offered technical advice, suggesting improvements and alternative technologies.

  The Hacker News post "Eki Bright – The Case for DIY Routing" has generated a moderate discussion with several insightful comments. Many commenters focus on the practicality, cost-effectiveness, and learning opportunities presented by DIY routing, while others express concerns or offer alternative perspectives.

  Several commenters echo the author's sentiment regarding the educational value of DIY routing. They emphasize the satisfaction and deeper understanding gained by taking control of the process, as opposed to relying on pre-built solutions. One commenter points out the potential cost savings, particularly for complex or specialized setups, highlighting how DIY allows for customized solutions without the premium pricing often associated with commercial products.

  A significant portion of the discussion revolves around the complexity and potential challenges of DIY routing. Some users acknowledge the steep learning curve, particularly for those unfamiliar with networking concepts. They suggest that while rewarding, DIY routing requires significant time and effort investment. One comment specifically mentions the need for careful consideration of hardware and software choices, as compatibility issues can arise.

  Another thread of conversation explores the potential benefits of DIY routing for specific use cases, such as home networks and small businesses. Commenters discuss scenarios where custom routing solutions might offer advantages over off-the-shelf options, such as improved performance, enhanced security, or greater control over network traffic.

  Some commenters offer alternative solutions, suggesting that for less technical users, managed routers or cloud-based networking services might be a more practical choice. They acknowledge the benefits of DIY routing but caution against undertaking such a project without adequate preparation and understanding.

  Finally, a few comments delve into the technical aspects of DIY routing, discussing specific software options like pfSense and OPNsense. These comments offer practical advice and recommendations for those considering embarking on a DIY routing project. One commenter even shares their personal experience with a specific hardware and software configuration, providing valuable insights for other potential DIYers. Overall, the comments section provides a balanced perspective on the pros and cons of DIY routing, highlighting both the potential rewards and the challenges involved.