Re: [bp] March Meeting Goals and Request for Presentations
John,
Thanks for your comments. Assuming that we will define a channel, we
will need a compliance test
defined which will include some copper traces from a test connector and
the backplane via on the
board side. I will assume the 40" backplane copper traces.
Petre
DAmbrosia, John F wrote:
>Petre,
>This issue was discussed during the meeting, and the group as a whole
>decided not to specify card length, because it can vary so much in a real
>system environment.
>
>In addition, the card length will have a substantial impact on return loss.
>I am not sure you will get to where you want to be.
>
>john
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-stds-802-3-blade@majordomo.ieee.org
>[mailto:owner-stds-802-3-blade@majordomo.ieee.org] On Behalf Of Petre
>Popescu
>Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 11:09 AM
>To: Healey, Adam B (Adam)
>Cc: stds-802-3-blade@ieee.org
>Subject: Re: [bp] March Meeting Goals and Request for Presentations
>
>
>Hi Adam,
>We are working on the channel model for 40" copper traces on FR4 and two
>connectors.
>For clarification, we propose to define the model as two sets of 4"
>copper traces (daughter
>cards) and one 32" copper trace on the backplane. Please let me know if
>this definition is
>what you have in mind.
>Thanks, Petre
>Petre Popescu
>Quake Technologies
>