INTERCONNECT APPLICATION NOTE Z-PACK HM-Zd PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing
Transcription
INTERCONNECT APPLICATION NOTE Z-PACK HM-Zd PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing
INTERCONNECT APPLICATION NOTE Z-PACK HM-Zd PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing Report # 20GC015-1, Rev. B July 10, 2003 Copyright 2003 Tyco Electronics Corporation, Harrisburg, PA All Rights Reserved C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing Table of Contents Item Page # I. INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................1 II. Z-PACK HM-Zd ............................................................................................................3 III. CONNECTOR FOOTPRINT.......................................................................................4 A. Dimensions ................................................................................................................4 B. Fabrication Technology .............................................................................................5 1. Pad Size................................................................................................................6 2. Antipad Size.........................................................................................................6 3. Non-functional Pads.............................................................................................11 IV. SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................12 V. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.................................................................................13 A. Z-PACK HM-Zd........................................................................................................13 B. Gigabit Research & General Application Notes ........................................................13 C. Electrical SPICE Models ...........................................................................................13 VI. CONTACT INFORMATION.......................................................................................13 A. Tyco Electronics ........................................................................................................13 B. Communications Circuits & Design ..........................................................................14 VII. REVISION HISTORY ..................................................................................................15 The information contained herein and the models used in this analysis are applicable solely to the specified AMP connector. Alternative connectors may be footprint-compatible, but their electrical performance may vary significantly, due to construction or material characteristics. Usage of the information, models, or analysis for any other connector is improper, and AMP disclaims any and all liability or potential liability with respect to such usage. C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing I. INTRODUCTION The transmission of serial gigabit data is helping to drive the development of new industry standards aimed at increasing aggregate bandwidth. At gigabit speeds the entire system interconnect needs to be properly considered and designed. Tyco Electronics Corporation (TEC) has been active in researching the role of the connector in the system interconnect intended to support gigabit data transmission. In its research TEC has demonstrated that traces in a PWB environment are capable of handling speeds up to 10 Gb/s. Furthermore, TEC has looked at the connector / board interface in an effort to understand the discontinuity associated with the connector. This research allowed TEC to demonstrate a backplane-style interconnect capable of supporting 5 Gb/s and 10 Gb/s serial links. See Gigabit Research & General Application Notes on Page 13. TEC’s research has shown the complexity in developing interconnect topologies capable of supporting serial gigabit data transmission. Intelligent system architects are employing techniques to overcome this complexity. There are two main techniques being used. The first technique compensates for losses associated with the interconnect, using either pre-emphasis at the transmitter (using either passive or active components) or equalization at the receiver. The second technique encodes or “conditions” the data in a manner that compensates for the interconnect. With the introduction of these techniques, the interconnect has progressed from a passive state to an active state. Figure 1 provides a useful diagram that shows the evolution of the interconnect. S P E E D V a r i a b l e Design Considerations • Equalization • Encoding Techniques • Pre-emphasis Semiconductors Board Interface Other Considerations • Board Materials • Trace Length • Differential Trace Coupling Connector F i x e d Design Considerations • Frequency Response • Impedance DI • Cross Talk • Skew N • Propagation Delay Design Considerations • Routing • Footprint Noise • Anti-pads • Trace Width • Trace Space Passive Active TYPE OF INTERCONNECT Figure 1 – Evolution of the System Interconnect Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design PAGE 1 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing Based on the options available to system designers, it is easy to see the difficulty in determining how “fast” a connector can operate. A connector has specific physical characteristics that influence the design of the interconnect and specific electrical characteristics that influences the performance of the interconnect. Nonetheless, the connector is still only part of the overall system. It is possible to improve the performance of the overall system by simply using better PWB materials or semiconductor devices that employ advanced signaling techniques. This paper focuses on providing the designer with guidelines for optimizing the PCB footprint of the Z-PACK HM-Zd connector. These guidelines have been developed to optimize system performance. Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design PAGE 2 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing II. Z-PACK HM-Zd Figure 2 – Z-PACK HM-Zd The Z-PACK HM-Zd connector is a member of the Z-PACK 2mm HM family. It is fully compatible with 2mm HM Equipment Practice, including all Z-PACK 2mm HM hardware and accessories. There are currently three basic signal module configurations – a 2 differential pair per signal column configuration, a 3 differential pair per signal column configuration and a 4 differential pair per signal column configuration. The 2 and 3 pair configurations yield 20 and 30 pairs per 25 mm respectively, and support a 0.8” slot pitch. The 4 pair configuration yields 40 pairs per 25 mm, and supports a 1” slot pitch. In addition to the basic signal modules the breadth of product line includes high speed cable assemblies, right angle pin headers for coplanar applications and vertical receptacles for mezzanine applications. Figure 2 shows a system based on HM-Zd 4 pair modules. Understanding the use of connectors in real system environments has permitted TEC to develop a connector that maximizes performance and density. The Z-PACK HM-Zd has been specifically designed for high-speed differential applications, and can support system speeds up to 6.25 Gigabits per second and beyond. Dedicated L-shaped ground blades reduce connector noise at the mating interface while eliminating the need to assign “ground” to signal pins, which would reduce the effective density of the connector. Careful consideration has been given to the design of the connector to minimize noise created in the connector and in the PCB footprint. For more information regarding the HM-Zd, please contact TEC via email at [email protected]. Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design PAGE 3 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing III. CONNECTOR FOOTPRINT A. DIMENSIONS Full mechanical dimensioning and tolerances are available for all versions of the HM-Zd connector. See Section V.A on page 13 for details. The dimensions critical to routing of the HM-Zd are related to the hole pattern, or “footprint”, of the connector. Figure 3 shows the dimensions for the HM-Zd receptacle. Figure 4 shows the dimensions for the HM-Zd header. All dimensions within the footprint are identical for both the backplane (header) and daughter card (receptacle) components. Both signal and ground pins have identical hole sizes. Table 1 summarizes critical connector hole dimensions for the circuit board. Manufacturing dependant dimensions are discussed later in this document. Figure 3 –Receptacle Dimensions (4 Pair) Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design PAGE 4 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing Figure 4 – Header Dimensions (4 Pair) Hole Dimension Drill Hole Size Finished Hole Size Diameter Mm (in.) 0.70 + 0.025 (0.0276+ 0.001) 0.60 + 0.05 (0.024+ 0.002) Table 1 – Connector Hole Dimensions B. FABRICATION TECHNOLOGY Other important dimensions for board layout are determined by the capabilities of the circuit board fabricator. Current high-tech PCB industry fabrication technology (i.e. capability) requires minimum pad sizes ranging from D+10 mils through D+18 mils, where “D” is the diameter of the drilled hole size (1 mil is 0.0254mm (0.001”)). For the HM-Zd connector this results in minimum pad sizes ranging from 0.96mm (0.038”) to 1.16mm (0.046”). These resultant pads are the minimum pad sizes required to maintain 0.05mm (0.002”) of annular ring for a given PCB manufacturer’s capability. Annular ring is an industry standard measure of the clearance between the pad edge and worst-case drill edge after manufacturing. Because the HM-Zd is typically used in high speed or dense applications where routing issues are most significant, all pad dimensions in this document will assume a D+12 mil pad size, or 1.02mm (0.040”) pad, unless otherwise specified. The pad diameter Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design PAGE 5 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing may be optimized for specific project needs, and should be evaluated on a project and vendor basis. Designing with a D+10 mil technology PCB could mean reduced yields or breakout, potentially adding cost to the PCB or violating industry specification compliance. Note: A minimum pad to trace clearance of 0.13mm (0.005”) will also be assumed for calculating routing dimensions. 1. PAD SIZE Based upon the D+12 mil fabrication technology assumption, a 1.02mm (0.040”) diameter pad should be used with all HM-Zd connector pins. For very high-tech PCBs (D+10 mil) the pad is 0.97mm (0.038”). In some cases the reduced manufacturability of a D+10 mil technology PCB is required to reduce pad sizes, although potentially reduced yields or breakout may add cost to the PCB. Where possible the largest appropriate pad size should be used to provide the PCB manufacturer with the greatest flexibility, thereby reducing overall system costs. Thermal reliefs are not required on ground or power pins, because the HM-Zd connector uses press-fit technology. A direct connection to reference and power planes will offer the lowest inductance connection to the circuit board. 2. ANTIPAD SIZE Antipads, or plane clearances (see Figure 5), are required to separate signal holes from reference voltages to avoid shorting. Choosing the proper size of these clearances is critical in determining several other design parameters: signal integrity, EMI, voltage breakdown, and manufacturability. The antipad for the HM-Zd is limited to a minimum of 1.27mm (0.050”) due to manufacturability to a maximum dimension that is determined by the differential trace geometry that will be routed through the connector pinfield. A minimum antipad should be at least 0.25mm (0.010”) in diameter larger than it associated pad. Via Pad Trace Plane Antipad Figure 5 – Trace, Via, and Antipads in Plane Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design PAGE 6 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing Determining the proper antipad size depends upon system design goals. Antipad sizes are minimized: • To reduce noise by closely shielding adjacent vias with reference planes • To reduce EMI by minimizing aperture sizes in reference planes • To maintain a strong reference to ground for single-ended signals and ground referenced differential signals Antipad sizes are maximized: • To maximize voltage breakdown spacing between the pin and the reference plane • To increase manufacturability by reducing the chance of shorting. • To reduce reflections in a high speed gigabit serial system by reducing the capacitive effect of the plated through-hole. Figure 6 shows the implementation of a differential antipad on a ground plane layer for the HM-Zd receptacle which would typically reside on a daughtercard. Figure 7 shows the implementation of a differential antipad on a ground plane layer for the HM-Zd header which would typically reside on the backplane. The width of the antipad is limited to 3.48 mm (0.137”) by the adjacent ground pins in the signal column. The antipad width should be appropriately reduced if vertical routing in the pinfield is required, in order to provide sufficient ground coverage for signals, or if manufacturing technology varies from “D+12”. The height, “z”, of the antipad is determined by the geometry of the differential pair(s) that needs to be routed between two adjacent signal columns. Note that the antipad sizes are the same for both the header and receptacle. On reference layers other than ground, an antipad around a ground pin is also required. Rules related to the isolation of ground from power may drive the design of this antipad. If there are no such rules, then the same height, “z”, used for a signal pin may be used for this antipad. If such rules do exist, then the antipad should be developed such that the desired isolation requirement is met. It is recommended that differential traces are routed so that they are centered between signal columns. Figure 8 shows a graph that provides recommendations in Metric units for the height, “z”, of an antipad when routing a single differential pair between two signal columns. Figure 9 shows the same graph in English units. Figure 10 shows a graph that provides recommendations in Metric units for the height, “z”, of an antipad when routing two differential pairs between two signal columns. Figure 11 shows the same graph in English units. Notes: 1. Routing two differential pairs between signal columns will result in crosstalk between differential pairs. This crosstalk should be factored into the analysis of the system. 2. Recommendations for antipads have been developed to optimize data throughput. Under nominal conditions for PWB manufacturing, these recommendations will ensure sufficient ground coverage for trace widths of 15 mils or less. Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design PAGE 7 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing G H HG FG E F DG D C BG B A B O A R D 2.5 mm E D G E Antipad Height “z” 1.5 mm Antipad Width 3.48 mm (Max.) 1.5 mm Figure 6 - HM-Zd Receptacle (Daughtercard) Footprint & Antipad Design A B BG C D DG E F FG G H HG 2.5 mm Antipad Height “z” 1.5 mm Antipad Width 3.48 mm (Max.) 1.5 mm Figure 7 - HM-Zd Header (Backplane) Footprint & Antipad Design Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design PAGE 8 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing 2.0 "w" = 0.1016 mm 1.9 1.8 "w" = 0.2032 mm 1.7 s h "w" =0.1524 mm w h "w" = 0.2540 mm 1.6 "w" = 0.3048 mm 1.5 "w" =0.3556 mm 1.4 "w" = 0.4064 mm 1.3 NOT RECOMMENDED 1.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 "s" - Trace Spacing (m m ) Note - Based on a 1.0160 pad Figure 8 - Recommendations for Antipad Height, “z” (Metric Units) 80 "w " = 4 m ils 78 s h 76 w "w " = 6 m ils 74 h 72 "w" = 8 m ils 70 68 "w " = 10 m ils 66 64 62 "w " = 12 m ils 60 58 "w" =14 m ils 56 54 "w" = 16 m ils 52 50 NOT RECOM MENDED 48 0 2 4 N ote - Based on a 40 m il pad 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 "s " - T rac e S pa cin g (m ils ) Figure 9 – Recommendations for Antipad Height, “z” (English Units) Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design PAGE 9 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing 1.8 "w" = 0.1016 mm h s h Pair 1 s 2w w 1.7 Pair 2 1.6 "w" = 0.1270 mm Note - Routing traces in this manner will result in crosstalk between differential pairs. This crosstalk should be factored into the analysis of the system design. 1.5 1.4 "w" = 0.1524 mm 1.3 NOT RECOM MENDED 1.2 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 "s" - Trace Spacing (m m ) Note - Based on a 1.0160 pad Figure 10 - Recommendations for Antipad Height, “z” (Metric Units) 70 "w" = 4 mils 68 s h s 2w w 66 Pair 1 h Pair 2 "z" - Antipad Height (mils) 64 "w" = 5 mils 62 60 Note - Routing traces in this m anner will result in crosstalk between differential pairs. This crosstalk should be factored into the analysis of the system design. 58 56 "w" = 6 m ils 54 52 50 NO T RECO MM ENDED 48 0 2 Note - Based on a 40 m il pad 4 6 8 10 12 14 "s" - Trace Spacing (m ils) Figure 11 - Recommendations for Antipad Height, “z” (English Units) Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design PAGE 10 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing 3. ANTIPAD SHAPE The differential antipad which encompasses both signal vias is shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7 as octagonal, but may also be oval or rectangular. The selection of shape is more a determination of CAD ease than electrical performance. If a rectangular antipad is implemented, avoid routing the signals over or near the corner of the antipad after exiting the signal via. The proper route-out is perpendicular to the long side of the rectangle as shown in Figure 12. Correct Incorrect Figure 12 – Rectangular Antipad Corner Avoidance 4. NON-FUNCTIONAL PADS The removal of non-functional internal pads will improve signal integrity and manufacturability of the PCB. However, some assembly facilities prefer that pads are left in order to maintain hole integrity through various soldering processes. For electrical reasons it is recommended to remove unused pads on internal layers. 5. COUNTERBORING Counterboring, also referred to as reverse drilling, back drilling, or controlled depth drilling, is a technique used to reduce the electrical impact of the plated through-hole. Because the signal only utilizes the portion of the via between the layer connection in the PWB and the connector surface, a considerable portion of the via is unused by the signal. By drilling out the remainder of the via, the excess stub is eliminated, leaving only the portion of the via that is required, similar to a blind via. While this technique provides electrical advantages and is also compatible with the HM-Zd connector for depths beyond 1.4 mm (0.055”) from the connector side of the PWB, the board manufacturer should be consulted when considering counterboring. Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design PAGE 11 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing IV. SUMMARY Item HM-Zd Signal Pin Column Pitch HM-Zd Signal Pin Row Pitch Number of Pair per Row Number of Connector Columns Suggested Pad Size Suggested Antipad Size Range (Single Differential Pair Between Adjacent Columns) Suggested Antipad Size Range (Two Differential Pairs Between Adjacent Columns) Maximum Trace Width (Header & Receptacle) (Single Differential Pair Between Adjacent Columns) Maximum Trace Width (Header & Receptacle) (Two Differential Pairs Between Adjacent Columns) Nominal Finished Hole Sizes Nominal Drill Hole Sizes Number of Layers to Route Out 2 Pair Connector (Single Differential Pair Between Adjacent Columns) Number of Layers to Route Out 2 Pair Connector (Two Differential Pairs Between Adjacent Columns) Number of Layers to Route Out 4 Pair Connector (Single Differential Pair Between Adjacent Columns) Number of Layers to Route Out 4 Pair Connector (Two Differential Pairs Between Adjacent Columns) Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design PAGE 12 Value 2.5 mm (0.098”) 1.5 mm (0.059”) 2/3/4 10 typ. 1.02 mm (0.040”) For Metric Units, see Figure 8, p. 9 For English Units, see Figure 9, p. 9 For Metric Units, see Figure 10, p. 10 For English Units, see Figure 11, p. 10 For Metric Units, see Figure 8, p. 9 For English Units, see Figure 9, p. 9 For Metric Units, see Figure 10, p. 10 For English Units, see Figure 11, p. 10 0.60 mm (0.024”) 0.70 mm (0.0276”) 2 1 4 2 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing V. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION A. Z-PACK HM-Zd More electrical and mechanical information regarding the HM-Zd connector may be obtained via email to [email protected]. B. Gigabit Research & General Application Notes More information regarding Tyco Electronics research into the transmission of electrical signals at gigabit speeds or general application notes are available for download via the World Wide Web at www.amp.com/simulation. C. Electrical SPICE Models Electrical SPICE models for [email protected]. the HM-Zd connector may be requested at VI. CONTACT INFORMATION A. TYCO ELECTRONICS Tyco Electronics Corporation is the world's leader in electrical, electronic and fiber-optic connectors and interconnection systems. Its facilities are located in over 50 countries serving customers in the automotive, computer, communications, consumer electronics, industrial and power industries. Tyco Electronics, headquartered in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA, is the largest passive electronics components supplier in the world, providing advanced technology products from its AMP, Elcon, Elo Touchsystems, HTS, M/A-COM, Madison Cable, OEG, Potter & Brumfield, Raychem, Schrack and Simel brands. For more information about Tyco Electronics Products, call us today or visit us on the web. Product Information Center 800-522-6752 717-986-7777 http://www.tycoelectronics.com Internet Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design PAGE 13 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing B. CIRCUITS & DESIGN Circuits & Design (C&D) is part of the Communications, Computer, and Consumer Electronics Division of Tyco Electronics, which focuses on the telecom, datacom, storage, and consumer markets. C&D offers the industry interconnection expertise from concept to production, and helps customers to validate their designs at the concept stage. C&D is providing a leadership role for the industry in the area of signal integrity by working with Tyco Electronics customers, industry standard working groups, and semiconductor vendors. Offering interconnection expertise from concept to production, C&D can help validate your design and package it for manufacturing. At the front end, our end-to-end computer simulation and analysis of your system will evaluate the most critical parameters of your design. Our advanced analysis and modeling techniques can help determine the optimal device drivers, board design and stackup, and board layout for your design. By identifying problems such as reflections, ground bounce, crosstalk, jitter, propagation delay, and timing, C&D can help you reduce costs and verify the performance of your design. C&D has been instrumental in developing and verifying many of the world’s most popular bus standards. Here is a brief sampling. CompactPCI: Our recommendations helped make CompactPCI the rock-solid, industrial-strength bus that combines high performance with flexibility. CompactPCI Hot Swap: We provided the critical simulations that allowed mission-critical hot swapping to be a reality in CompactPCI. CT: C&D performed the simulations for the H.110 computer telephony extensions to CompactPCI. PXI: Our analysis of PXI resulted in several improvements for increased signal integrity. CPCI/CT/ATM Backplane: This is a C&D-designed system that combines CompactPCI, CT, and Cellbus into a high-performance system that meets the growing needs of communications convergence. For more information regarding C&D, contact us today. Internet Electrical simulation Electrical models Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design http://www.amp.com/simulation [email protected] [email protected] PAGE 14 July 10, 2003 C&D REPORT #20GC015-1, Rev. B : Z-PACK HM-Zd, PWB Footprint Optimization for Routing VII. REVISION HISTORY Revision Date A 1/29/01 Initial Release B 7/10/01 Counterboring, antipad updates, and minor text changes Tyco/Electronics Circuits & Design Change PAGE 15 July 10, 2003