 
| Received: |
by ipchq.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0svQfs-0000HsC; Wed, 20 Sep 95 10:03 CDT |
| Old-Return-Path: |
|
| Date: |
Wed, 20 Sep 95 07:58:46 PDT |
| Precedence: |
list |
| X-Loop: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| X-Status: |
|
| Status: |
O |
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| TO: |
|
| Return-Path: |
|
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"rgRQH.0.yE9.8q2Om"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| Resent-From: |
|
| From [log in to unmask] Sat Apr 27 14: |
51:51 1996 |
| Message-Id: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
A futher comment to Jerry Cupples comments on "use the smallest wire you can"
and James Moffitt's note amout checking for current capacity.
On one design that I was involved in finding a "fix" for, a board redesign
was determined not to be an option. (The driver ic didn't have enough
"horsepower" to drive the routed line accross the pwb!)
Analsys and test showed that a 27awg wire routed on the top of the pwb
had half the capacitance of a trace inside the board.
(about 2pf/in for a wire)
I used the Pacific Numerics 2D "Parisitic Parameters" software & had good
correlation with measured data.
Bill Gaines
AeroJet (for $) IHPVA (for speed & fun)
IEPS (for info) SCCA (for trophys)
[log in to unmask]
===================================================
/| _ _ _
/_||_ |_ |
/ ||_ _| |_
===================================================
|
|
|
