Concept

Permittivity — where it appears

The property of an insulator that decides how much electric energy it stores for a given field, relative to vacuum. Field concentrates in the material that has more of it, so a thin high-permittivity film between two conductors holds most of the energy and therefore sets a capacitance that the conductors' dimensions do not.

Named by 7 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

A permittivity quoted as one number falls 0.645 across five decades. computed by solving, not by drawing. The real part of the relative permittivity against frequency for FR-4 (ε′ = 4.4 at 1 GHz, tanδ = 0.02), from a continuum of relaxations spread uniformly in log-frequency — the arrangement that makes the loss tangent flat. The dashed line is the single number a datasheet quotes. FR-4: 4.787 at 1 MHz and 4.142 at 100 GHz, a fall of 14.7 per cent. Nothing here is fitted: the slope is what a flat loss tangent forces.

The permittivity a loss forbids

A datasheet quotes a relative permittivity and a loss tangent as two independent numbers, and they are not two numbers. A material that dissipates has a permittivity that falls logarithmically with frequency at a rate its own loss fixes — 0.129 of permittivity a decade for FR-4, so the 4.4 quoted at a gigahertz is 4.79 at a megahertz and 4.14 at a hundred. Three hundred millimetres of track loses 62.9 picoseconds of delay between 100 MHz and 10 GHz, which a constant permittivity puts at 1.3; and the constant-permittivity model smears an edge backwards, taking 180 picoseconds to reach half height and 133 more to reach nine tenths.

lines · Dispersion
The winding window solved electrostatically, in two portions. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same cross-section the loss solve reads, read with ∇·(ε∇φ) = 0 instead. Two things are the opposite way round from the magnetic problem and both are the whole difference. The iron is now a Dirichlet boundary rather than a Neumann one — an earthed core is an equipotential, so the field meets it at right angles instead of running along it — and a conductor carries a prescribed potential rather than a prescribed current. The thin curves are equipotentials, which are contours of φ, so equal spacing is equal potential step and crowded curves are a strong field. The copper is shaded by the potential each foil sits at, which rises along the winding rather than being one number. Winding to winding this window is 926.9 picofarads a metre, and 89 per cent of the energy is inside insulation that occupies a fraction of the window.

The other half of the same window

The two-dimensional solve that settled what a winding's alternating-current resistance really is computed one of the window's two parameters and never mentioned the other. Read with Laplace instead of the vector potential, the same cross-section returns 926.9 picofarads a metre — and 89 per cent of that energy sits inside films that occupy 14.1 per cent of the window. The instrument agrees with a layered slab to three parts in ten thousand billion and converges on a real winding at order 1.34, and the reason for the shortfall is not the arithmetic but the corner of a conductor.

magnetics · Winding capacitance
Routed along the glass weave, a length-matched pair with one conductor over a bundle and one over a gap builds 63.6 ps of skew in 20 cm — the skew nobody routed. computed by solving, not by drawing by integrating each conductor's delay along its route: a length-matched pair of 0.25 mm pitch over a glass weave of 0.5 mm pitch whose effective permittivity swings between 4.2 and 4.6 across it, positioned so that one conductor runs over a bundle and the other over the gap. Routed along the weave (dashed) the skew grows in proportion to the length, 0.318 ps a millimetre, to 63.62 ps in 200 mm. The slider rotates the route.

The skew in the glass

Match a differential pair's two lengths exactly and it can still have tens of picoseconds of skew, because a circuit board is woven glass in resin and the two conductors need not sit over the same one. Over a weave of half a millimetre whose effective permittivity swings from 4.2 to 4.6, a pair of quarter-millimetre pitch with one conductor over a bundle and the other over a gap builds 0.318 ps of skew every millimetre — 63.6 ps in 20 cm, the equivalent of 13.6 mm of routed mismatch by 30 cm, and 68 per cent common mode at 2.5 GHz. Where the pair falls across the weave is a lottery from nothing to that. Rotate the route by ten degrees and the skew never exceeds 0.146 ps, however long the pair: each conductor crosses bundle and gap in turn, and the difference averages out.

lines · Differential line
The trade, in the plane where both halves of it live. computed by solving, not by drawing. Leakage inductance across, interwinding capacitance up, both solved on the same cross-section with the same cells. The faint diagonals are lines of constant leakage-times-capacitance, so a design action that runs along one of them has bought nothing and only moved where the energy is kept. Interleaving runs at slope -0.78, which is nearly along them: six sections cut the leakage 21.3 fold and multiply the capacitance 11.0 fold, and the product moves by 1.94. What it does change is the winding's characteristic impedance, 95 ohms down to 6.2 — a factor of 15. Thickening the interlayer instead runs at -4.8, steeply across the diagonals, and moves the product 5.2 fold over the same sweep. It is the cheaper action by that measure and it is not free either: the millimetre it spends is a millimetre of window that is not copper.

Interleaving is a choice, not an improvement

Splitting a transformer's windings into six sections divides its leakage inductance by 21.4 and multiplies its winding-to-winding capacitance by 11.0. The product of the two — which is what sets the frequency the part stops being a transformer at — moves by 1.94, and the resonance it decides goes from 1.804 to 2.515 megahertz for all that work. What interleaving really changes is the winding's characteristic impedance, 95.2 ohms down to 6.2, and nobody quotes it.

magnetics · Winding capacitance
With the weft counted as well as the warp, the skew a pair can reach is least at 45.0° to the warp — 128 fs — and turning further off the warp makes it worse again. computed by solving, not by drawing, to first order in the permittivity's swing, the summed bound held against an integration over 64 registrations of the pair to the cloth at six angles. A 0.25 mm pair over a cloth whose warp has a 0.5 mm pitch and whose weft has a 0.5 mm pitch, each swinging the permittivity by ±0.2 about 4.4. The warp's contribution falls as the route turns off it, as the earlier figures found; the weft's rises, because the pair's projection across the weft grows as d·sin θ while its yarns are crossed less often. The worst skew is least at 45.00°, 128.3 fs. At 10°, where the warp alone allows 291.4 fs over every registration — twice the earlier figure's 146 fs, which was for a route starting over bundle and gap — the weft adds 13.8 fs. Integrated: 5° 587.6 fs, 15° 215.1 fs, 30° 139.3 fs, 40° 126.3 fs, 60° 139.2 fs, 80° 304.9 fs. The slider is the weft's pitch.

The angle two weaves allow

Turning a differential pair a few degrees off a board's glass weave stops its skew growing with length — but a cloth has two weaves, and turning off the warp turns onto the weft. Counting both, the worst skew over every registration of the artwork to the cloth is a sum of two bounds, one falling as the route leaves the warp and one rising as it meets the weft, and it is least at an angle the cloth decides: 45° and 128 fs for two identical half-millimetre weaves and a quarter-millimetre pair, against 305 at 10°; 52° for a finer weft; 67° for a flatter one. Doing the count properly also finds the earlier bound a factor of two low, and finds the obvious answer a trap: on a square weave's exact diagonal the two weaves' product stops averaging and the skew grows again, 2.2 fs a millimetre, while a degree either side it stays at 128.

lines · Differential line
A pair with one conductor over glass-rich laminate (4.6, tan δ 0.015) and one over resin-rich (4.2, tan δ 0.025): the skew per millimetre against frequency. computed by solving, not by drawing: each conductor as its own causal line — permittivity dispersing with its own loss tangent, copper with its internal reactance — and the skew as the difference of their delays. With both permittivities held at their 1 GHz values the skew would be 0.318 ps/mm at every frequency (level line). Dispersing, it is 0.272 ps/mm at 100 MHz, 0.319 at 1 GHz and 0.366 at 10 GHz: the resin, lossier, loses permittivity faster with frequency, and the gap between the two halves widens.

The skew that moves with frequency

A pair with one half over glass-rich laminate and one over resin-rich builds 0.318 ps of skew a millimetre when each permittivity is held at its 1 GHz value. But the two regions lose differently — tan δ 0.015 against 0.025 — so their permittivities fall at different rates, and the skew is a curve: 0.272 ps/mm at 100 MHz, 0.319 at 1 GHz, 0.366 at 10 GHz. A deskew set at one frequency leaves ±2.35 ps in 50 mm at the other two. The resin half also loses 3.7 dB more by 10 GHz over 200 mm, so its edge arrives 63.7 ps early and rises in 257 ps against 202; the halves differ in timing and in edge rate at once, and leave a common-mode pulse of 151 mV for each volt.

lines · Dispersion
Both ends of the quiet line, 100 mm of microstrip-like coupling, edge 200 ps. computed by solving, not by drawing. The near end (pale) is the saturated plateau, 16.28 mV per volt. The far end (dark) is a single pulse arriving with the edge after one delay, 0.676 ns, as wide as the edge and 25.16 mV per volt deep — negative, because the inductive coupling exceeds the capacitive. Its depth is the coupling difference, the delay and the edge's slope multiplied: 24.96 predicted.

The far end that is a derivative

Where the two couplings are unequal the far end does not cancel, and in time it is the derivative of the edge: a single pulse as wide as the rise time, arriving after one delay, its height the coupling difference times the delay times the edge's slope. On 100 mm of microstrip-like coupling a 200 ps edge gives −25.16 mV per volt against 24.96 predicted, and the height falls as one over the rise time with a fitted slope of −1.000 while the saturated near end sits still. It grows with length without a knee until the two modes separate by a whole edge — 249 mm for a 50 ps edge — and then stops at half the driven line's voltage.

lines · Crosstalk

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

SkewDesign tradeoffDifferential lineHomogeneous dielectricMode conversionModel rangeRise timeDispersionEnergy-storageField solutionInterwinding capacitanceLeakage inductance

All concepts