Reply by Ricky January 28, 20232023-01-28
On Saturday, January 28, 2023 at 11:21:47 PM UTC-4, Simon S Aysdie wrote:
> On Thursday, January 26, 2023 at 11:07:06 AM UTC-8, Uwe Bonnes wrote: > > Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote: > > > > > I'm actually working on a proof-of-concept that needs two separate TIAs > > > to have very closely similar phase and amplitude response out to a > > > couple of hundred kilohertz, which requires excellent phase matching. > > > We're only making 10 or so boards, so I'm planning to put a couple of > > > DNP caps in parallel with the main one, to get the tolerance down from > > > ~5% to ~0.5%. (Yes, this will require a bit of measurement and > > > selection on each board, but there aren't very many, and we have all the > > > stuff in stock.) > > > > > Did you look at parts similar to > > https://www.mouser.de/c/passive-components/capacitors/silicon-rf-capacitors-thin-film/?q=0402%201pf > > > > At least you do not start with 5 %. > You beat me to it. It can be had with 10 fF tolerance. They are very repeatable. There is nothing quite like Accu-P. They can get expensive with the tight tolerance.
That was a trip. Accessing the German Mouser site from Puerto Rico. My choices are German or Spanish... I think! -- Rick C. -+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging -+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Reply by Simon S Aysdie January 28, 20232023-01-28
On Thursday, January 26, 2023 at 11:07:06 AM UTC-8, Uwe Bonnes wrote:
> Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote: > > > I'm actually working on a proof-of-concept that needs two separate TIAs > > to have very closely similar phase and amplitude response out to a > > couple of hundred kilohertz, which requires excellent phase matching. > > We're only making 10 or so boards, so I'm planning to put a couple of > > DNP caps in parallel with the main one, to get the tolerance down from > > ~5% to ~0.5%. (Yes, this will require a bit of measurement and > > selection on each board, but there aren't very many, and we have all the > > stuff in stock.) > > > Did you look at parts similar to > https://www.mouser.de/c/passive-components/capacitors/silicon-rf-capacitors-thin-film/?q=0402%201pf > > At least you do not start with 5 %.
You beat me to it. It can be had with 10 fF tolerance. They are very repeatable. There is nothing quite like Accu-P. They can get expensive with the tight tolerance.
Reply by whit3rd January 27, 20232023-01-27
On Friday, January 27, 2023 at 9:26:34 AM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 16:56:47 -0000 (UTC), Hul Tytus <h...@panix.com> > wrote: > >Get your xacto knife & slice across a trace on the pc board.
> That's not very manufacturable.
Unknowable. Do you recall turret tuners, where each of a dozen channels' LC time constants were adjusted, in several places per channel, in mass production? That started out with handwork, but got automated, and... was actually pretty efficient. Someone got clever and put an array of computer-controlled pistons to work squishing coils until they hit the target value. The 'slice across' could be laser scan, or vibrating chisel, or platinum-spark-plug electrode doing spark erosion, if you want a manufacturable process. Maybe just a grinding wheel and a jig to present the right edge to the right feed depth, about as fast as applying an inspection stamp.
Reply by John Larkin January 27, 20232023-01-27
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 16:56:47 -0000 (UTC), Hul Tytus <ht@panix.com>
wrote:

>Get your xacto knife & slice across a trace on the pc board. > >Hul
That's not very manufacturable.
Reply by Hul Tytus January 27, 20232023-01-27
Get your xacto knife & slice across a trace on the pc board.

Hul

John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:
> I need a tiny cap.
> This one is interesting
> https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Walsin/RF03N0R1B100CT?qs=sGAEpiMZZMvsSlwiRhF8qtsBU8Zhqm2Ra%2Fa5698GTEQZP2uSIBTS%2FQ%3D%3D
> Below 0.1 pF, maybe I can use a 10 meg resistor, which is around 0.04 > pF. Maybe a couple in series? Maybe a network?
Reply by Phil Hobbs January 26, 20232023-01-26
Uwe Bonnes wrote:
> Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: > >> I'm actually working on a proof-of-concept that needs two separate TIAs >> to have very closely similar phase and amplitude response out to a >> couple of hundred kilohertz, which requires excellent phase matching. >> We're only making 10 or so boards, so I'm planning to put a couple of >> DNP caps in parallel with the main one, to get the tolerance down from >> ~5% to ~0.5%. (Yes, this will require a bit of measurement and >> selection on each board, but there aren't very many, and we have all the >> stuff in stock.) >> > > Did you look at parts similar to > https://www.mouser.de/c/passive-components/capacitors/silicon-rf-capacitors-thin-film/?q=0402%201pf > > At least you do not start with 5 %. > > Bye >
Thanks, Uwe, Very nice. I confess that I wasn't aware of the whole precision picofarad capacitor niche--I can get 100 pF 1% NP0s for two cents in hundreds, hurrah. Cheers Phil Hobbs -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 http://electrooptical.net http://hobbs-eo.com
Reply by John Larkin January 26, 20232023-01-26
On 26 Jan 2023 19:06:59 GMT, Uwe Bonnes
<bon@hertz.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de> wrote:

>Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: > >> I'm actually working on a proof-of-concept that needs two separate TIAs >> to have very closely similar phase and amplitude response out to a >> couple of hundred kilohertz, which requires excellent phase matching. >> We're only making 10 or so boards, so I'm planning to put a couple of >> DNP caps in parallel with the main one, to get the tolerance down from >> ~5% to ~0.5%. (Yes, this will require a bit of measurement and >> selection on each board, but there aren't very many, and we have all the >> stuff in stock.) >> > >Did you look at parts similar to >https://www.mouser.de/c/passive-components/capacitors/silicon-rf-capacitors-thin-film/?q=0402%201pf > >At least you do not start with 5 %. > >Bye
Check out PEREGRINE PE64907MLAA-Z We use them for coarse-tuning an LC oscillator which is then fine-tuned over a small range by a varicap. It replaced a Maxim part that of course went EOL.
Reply by Uwe Bonnes January 26, 20232023-01-26
Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
 
> I'm actually working on a proof-of-concept that needs two separate TIAs > to have very closely similar phase and amplitude response out to a > couple of hundred kilohertz, which requires excellent phase matching. > We're only making 10 or so boards, so I'm planning to put a couple of > DNP caps in parallel with the main one, to get the tolerance down from > ~5% to ~0.5%. (Yes, this will require a bit of measurement and > selection on each board, but there aren't very many, and we have all the > stuff in stock.) >
Did you look at parts similar to https://www.mouser.de/c/passive-components/capacitors/silicon-rf-capacitors-thin-film/?q=0402%201pf At least you do not start with 5 %. Bye -- Uwe Bonnes bon@elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt --------- Tel. 06151 1623569 ------- Fax. 06151 1623305 ---------
Reply by Phil Hobbs January 26, 20232023-01-26
John Larkin wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 21:26:38 -0500, Phil Hobbs > <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: > >> John Larkin wrote: >>> On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 07:59:52 -0500, Phil Hobbs >>> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: >>> >>>> whit3rd wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 5:36:47 PM UTC-8, Phil Hobbs wrote: >>>>>> whit3rd wrote: >>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 12:47:09 PM UTC-8, Phil Hobbs wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It's already not that easy to get less than 0.1 pF to ground from a PCB >>>>>>>> pad, let alone a trace. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yeah, but the usual trim techniques still work; RG174 is 30 pF/foot, >>>>>>> so you can get your 0.1 pf by soldering a short length onto the board, and then >>>>>>> with flush nippers, cut it off. >>>>>> I invite you to try getting the fringing capacitance of an actual piece >>>>>> of RG-174, connected to a circuit, to be that low. Show your work. ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> (The capacitance per unit length only applies when the fringing >>>>>> capacitance is negligible.) >>>>> >>>>> But, because this is a trimming technique, there's an end correction BEFORE the >>>>> snip as well as after. At least, there is until the two ends of the cable coincide... >>>>> >>>>> I'm not concerned with high frequencies much, so I might apply a negative capacitor >>>>> first, swamp it with the long-RG174 trimmer, then trim down to get near zero. Negative >>>>> impedance converter, you know... >>>>> >>>>> <https://wiki.analog.com/university/courses/electronics/text/chapter-4> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes and no. Given invariant fringing capacitance, changing the length >>>> incrementally does give a nice predictable delta-C. Trombone line is >>>> good that way down at low frequency, for instance. >>>> >>>> This is because, in a nice long piece of coax, the E field inside is >>>> purely radial almost everywhere, and any departure from the pure TEM >>>> mode at the ends dies off exponentially, roughly as exp(-2 pi L/r), >>>> where L is the distance from the open end and r is the radius. (That's >>>> a consequence of Laplace's equation, and is also why perforated metal >>>> makes good electrostatic shielding.) >>>> >>>> However, John asked for a small absolute capacitance. A picofarad or so >>>> of end effect doesn't fit that bill. >>> >>> And I want something that can be manufactured, not a hobby fiddle >>> thing. >>> >>> Something like this: >>> >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/z4vevjyuflm732l/T578_LVDS.jpg?raw=1 >>> >>> It needs extreme CMRR to work. If C1 is just a resistor parasitic, I >>> can make C2 a bit larger and the CMRR error becomes positive feedback, >>> which is OK in moderation. High voltage Schmitt trigger. >> >> Okay, for something like that, just dorking it to one side a bit makes >> sense, assuming that the worst-case RC time constant is small enough >> that it doesn't distort the next transition. >> >> I'm actually working on a proof-of-concept that needs two separate TIAs >> to have very closely similar phase and amplitude response out to a >> couple of hundred kilohertz, which requires excellent phase matching. >> We're only making 10 or so boards, so I'm planning to put a couple of >> DNP caps in parallel with the main one, to get the tolerance down from >> ~5% to ~0.5%. (Yes, this will require a bit of measurement and >> selection on each board, but there aren't very many, and we have all the >> stuff in stock.) >> >> Maybe it's possible to use a dpot with a shunt cap on the wiper to >> balance the two sides. >> >> Cheers >> >> Phil Hobbs > > How about a trimmer cap? Beats soldering.
If it can be adjusted, it can be mis-adjusted, leading to hard-to-diagnose misbehavior and reasonable-looking wrong answers. (My least favorite kind.)
> > If it's TIA feedback, a trimpot can tweak the effective C value. > > DPOTs are usually slow with the slowness code-dependent. Real trimpots > are great and easy to program.
Sure, if you can still get them. Those nice Murata PVA2 things are long gone. A dpot is a variable RC network, so by putting the cap at the wiper, you change the capacitive loading of the ends. There's some built in to the dpot as well, as you say, but it varies with code too. Cheers Phil Hobbs -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 http://electrooptical.net http://hobbs-eo.com
Reply by John Larkin January 25, 20232023-01-25
On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 21:26:38 -0500, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

>John Larkin wrote: >> On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 07:59:52 -0500, Phil Hobbs >> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: >> >>> whit3rd wrote: >>>> On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 5:36:47 PM UTC-8, Phil Hobbs wrote: >>>>> whit3rd wrote: >>>>>> On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 12:47:09 PM UTC-8, Phil Hobbs wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> It's already not that easy to get less than 0.1 pF to ground from a PCB >>>>>>> pad, let alone a trace. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, but the usual trim techniques still work; RG174 is 30 pF/foot, >>>>>> so you can get your 0.1 pf by soldering a short length onto the board, and then >>>>>> with flush nippers, cut it off. >>>>> I invite you to try getting the fringing capacitance of an actual piece >>>>> of RG-174, connected to a circuit, to be that low. Show your work. ;) >>>>> >>>>> (The capacitance per unit length only applies when the fringing >>>>> capacitance is negligible.) >>>> >>>> But, because this is a trimming technique, there's an end correction BEFORE the >>>> snip as well as after. At least, there is until the two ends of the cable coincide... >>>> >>>> I'm not concerned with high frequencies much, so I might apply a negative capacitor >>>> first, swamp it with the long-RG174 trimmer, then trim down to get near zero. Negative >>>> impedance converter, you know... >>>> >>>> <https://wiki.analog.com/university/courses/electronics/text/chapter-4> >>>> >>> >>> Yes and no. Given invariant fringing capacitance, changing the length >>> incrementally does give a nice predictable delta-C. Trombone line is >>> good that way down at low frequency, for instance. >>> >>> This is because, in a nice long piece of coax, the E field inside is >>> purely radial almost everywhere, and any departure from the pure TEM >>> mode at the ends dies off exponentially, roughly as exp(-2 pi L/r), >>> where L is the distance from the open end and r is the radius. (That's >>> a consequence of Laplace's equation, and is also why perforated metal >>> makes good electrostatic shielding.) >>> >>> However, John asked for a small absolute capacitance. A picofarad or so >>> of end effect doesn't fit that bill. >> >> And I want something that can be manufactured, not a hobby fiddle >> thing. >> >> Something like this: >> >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/z4vevjyuflm732l/T578_LVDS.jpg?raw=1 >> >> It needs extreme CMRR to work. If C1 is just a resistor parasitic, I >> can make C2 a bit larger and the CMRR error becomes positive feedback, >> which is OK in moderation. High voltage Schmitt trigger. > >Okay, for something like that, just dorking it to one side a bit makes >sense, assuming that the worst-case RC time constant is small enough >that it doesn't distort the next transition. > >I'm actually working on a proof-of-concept that needs two separate TIAs >to have very closely similar phase and amplitude response out to a >couple of hundred kilohertz, which requires excellent phase matching. >We're only making 10 or so boards, so I'm planning to put a couple of >DNP caps in parallel with the main one, to get the tolerance down from >~5% to ~0.5%. (Yes, this will require a bit of measurement and >selection on each board, but there aren't very many, and we have all the >stuff in stock.) > >Maybe it's possible to use a dpot with a shunt cap on the wiper to >balance the two sides. > >Cheers > >Phil Hobbs
How about a trimmer cap? Beats soldering. If it's TIA feedback, a trimpot can tweak the effective C value. DPOTs are usually slow with the slowness code-dependent. Real trimpots are great and easy to program.