• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

EE-Training

Knowledge makes you Curious

  • Home
  • Training Courses
    • Signal Integrity to 56+Gbps with Hands-On Simulation
    • Open the Black Box of Memory
  • References
    • References for Signal Integrity with Hands-On Simulation
    • References for SI Simulation Workshop
    • References for Lee Ritchey: Signal Integrity
    • References for Lee Ritchey: Stackup Design
  • Blog
  • About
    • Terms & Conditions
    • VAT Refund
    • Jobs
  • Contact
You are here: Home » Blog » Power Integrity (PI/PDN)

PDN ground offset error when doing measurements

March 13, 2014 by Rolf Ostergaard

Is there a risk of ground offset error when doing PDN measurements? This is another question that popped up after the story about what happens when the test points are moved in a network analyzer setup for measuring bypass (or PDN – Power Distribution Network) on a board is: Would it change anything if the coax into the network analyzer is run through a ferrite toroid (for common-mode rejection).

This is a good question, as the 4-point measurement setup does have an issue with the ground offset. Both the generator and the receiver shield/ground on the network analyzer connectors are very well connected together at the instrument. There is a non-zero impedance in the cable shield, so there will be a voltage difference between the two ends of the cable shields because of the 0dBm signal the generator is driving through the cable and into the ~0.01R impedance of the PDN. This voltage difference will be part of the measured signal.

Ideally, we would want a floating input, and the problem would go away. There are network analyzers with pseudo-floating inputs, but this is not a feature in the lower and more affordable instruments. Increasing the common-mode impedance in the receiver cable sounds like a good idea, so let’s try it.

Trying to reduce PDN ground offset error with a torioidThe board is populated with capacitors only (read more about what happens if you populate all parts in another post). The toroid is selected as the one that made the biggest difference after trying a box full of different ones. Here is the datasheet for this specific toroid.

Results

The impedance versus frequency was measured both with and without the ferrite toroid from 9kHz to 500MHz. This is how it looks on the analyzer screen:

torioid_resultThe yellow curve is with the toroid and the bluish curve is without. The differences at the lower frequencies are most likely due to noise, but the difference most visible between 100MHz and 200MHz is clearly related to the toroid.

Incidentally, the frequency at which we can see a significant difference is also around the frequencies where the impedance curve starts to be less interesting as it depends more on where exactly the test points are located (see the post about what happens when the test points are moved). In other words, the impedance is dominated by resonances – not the discrete bypass caps. So in practice, this is not a big deal.

Again, this was tried with a bunch of different ferries and this is the biggest difference seen.

To be sure that the measurement setup is sufficiently solid, a few other things were tried with very little impact:

  • A much longer cable of the same type (for higher cable shield impedance)
  • 20 turns on the toroid with the longer cable
  • 1-100MHz RF 50R transformer to create a floating input

How to avoid PDN ground offset error in measurements has been analyzed in great detail by Istvan Novak in his paper “Accuracy Improvements of PDN Impedance Measurements in the Low to Middle-Frequency Range” presented at DesignCon some years back. You can read his manuscript and see the slides on his website. Highly recommended if you want a much more detailed story.

Share this:

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky

Filed Under: Power Integrity (PI/PDN) Tagged With: Impedance, Network Analyzer, PDN

About Rolf Ostergaard

Rolf V. Ostergaard, M.Sc.EE. has worked with signal integrity in many different projects since working for 3Com in 1998 as a colleague to Lee Ritchey in Silicon Valley. While building a consulting business focused on advanced electronics and embedded software in Denmark, Rolf has been helping numerous companies with signal integrity and power integrity both as design, simulations, coaching, measurements, and troubleshooting. He started conducting training in SI in 2004 and has trained hundreds of engineers, which lead to founding EE-Training to further expand this.
You can hire Rolf to do signal integrity training and consulting worldwide and remote.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Get a free SI book

Right the First Time
by Lee Ritchey (was $95),
and news from EE-Training

Subscribe below!

Search

PDNTool

Try pdntool.com and see how a 1-click optimizer might reduce your bypass caps. Read more...

Categories

Latest News

  • The ultimate memory interface training course live in Copenhagen June 2-4, 2025
  • How we got un-hacked
  • Free IBIS Simulator: KiCAD 8?
  • Online memory course: Mar 1-5, 2021
  • Crosstalk video demonstration for stripline
  • University SI Course – COVID’19 Version
  • Video: Using a Network Analyzer as a TDR
  • Video: PDN Measurement with a Network Analyzer
  • Signal Integrity w/ Hands-On NOW ONLINE May 11, 2020
  • Schmartboard breakout prototyping PCB

Recent User Comments

  • Noelia Scotti on Free IBIS Simulator: KiCAD 8?
  • Vikram Mane on Free IBIS Simulator: KiCAD 8?
  • Peter on Ground bounce demonstration board
  • Rolf Ostergaard on High Speed Via
  • Rolf Ostergaard on Video: PDN Measurement with a Network Analyzer

Contact

EE-Training
Rolf V. Ostergaard
+45 2684 4876
Denmark

QUOTES

“Training worth attending more than pays for itself in added value for you and your project”

“Training is expensive. Good training is even more expensive. No training is the most expensive.”

Rolf V. Ostergaard

M.Sc.EE, SI Consultant
Twitter: @rolfostergaard
LinkedIn: Profile
Resume: CV (pdf)

Copyright 2025. All prices shown are exclusive of VAT. General Terms & Conditions apply.
By using this site with cookies enabled in your browser you consent. Privacy policy. CSR policy.