LVDS problem - Black magic anyone?

I have an LVDS related issue that drives me crazy:

There are two boards with a FPGA that are connected by a ca. 30cm cable. On ly 6 wirea are used: GND + Power LVDS (with embedded clock), 720Mbps UART (Rxd + Txd) (The cable is unshielded for flexibility reasons)

The cable is a "flat Ethernet cable" with 4 twisted pairs, one pair is unus ed, one pair is LVDS, one pair is GND + Rxd and the last is Power + TxD.

Most cables work fine with a low error rate. However, some cables of the sa me batch have an excessive error rate. These cables have no visible differe nce to the good cables.

The end of the cables have the outer isolation removed for about 5cm, the L VDS pair is twisted also for this 5cm, the other wires are straight crimped to the connector.

Now the strange behavior: When touching the cable at some positions by hand , the bad cables are suddenly perfect or at least much better. And the even stranger thing: When touching at the last 5cm, it is NOT the touching of t he LVDS pair that makes the difference, but the touching the GND/Power/Uart wires! This can be observed on both sides of the cable.

It is really only "the hand" that makes the difference, strapping together the wires does not help. It does also not look like a mechanical problem of the cable.

I tried changing and even removing the termination resistors, this did not change the behavior at all. I have changed both boards, it is really the ca ble that makes the difference.

Has anybody an idea what the reason of this behavior could be?

Regards,

Thomas

Reply to
thomas.entner99
Loading thread data ...

What category cable is it? Even cat6 or cat6a aren't intended for use beyond 500MHz. While there's less loss because the cable is shorter, it's worth looking up the loss curves and doing the calculation. You have checked that the 'flat' cable does actually contain twisted pairs?

What's the position of the ground with respect to the LVDS pair? Is it adjacent, or further away? Are these direct electrical connections, or is there any signal isolation? Is the spare pair floating?

What's the grounding arrangements of both boards? Is this the only ground connection between them? How are they powered? Do they come from the same AC source, or different sources? What's the arrangement of earths, and any possibility they could be on different AC phases?

What are you driving the RXD/TXD signals with? Do you know their rise time?

For that matter, do you know the rise time of the LVDS signals? What are you using for an LVDS receiver? (Any equalisation?) What's the encoding on the wire (8b/10b, Manchester, etc)?

Have you looked at the signal on a scope?

Where did the 'termination resistors' come from? How did you decide what topology and what values to use?

Some ideas:

  1. You're changing the capacitance of the cable by touching it
  2. You're creating a capacitive path to ground through your body
  3. You're changing the topology of the inductive loop between an LVDS line and ground
  4. You're coupling other signals into the LVDS pair (eg RXD), especially if the twists have ended up aligned
  5. The signal has higher frequency components than you think and these are messing up the receiver. Extra capacitance by touching increases their loss, enough for the receiver to cope
  6. The cable is simply too lossy at the frequency you're using
  7. You have a grounding issue with the setup
  8. The line isn't terminated correctly so you're getting reflections which interfere with the signal

Do you have a network analyser available? Looking at the insertion loss of the cable over a range of frequencies may tell you something about what's going on.

I've done a lot of work with SATA cables. Bottom line is, some are just cheap and simply don't work. SATA error recovery is enough to mask many of the problems when used in a PC, so nobody notices.

Theo

Reply to
Theo Markettos

.
e

CAT5e (UTP)

s

I have opened up a cable now - the pairs are twisted but the turn rate is m uch lower than what I would have expected - it is about one full turn every 20cm or so.

Ground is (only) in this cable, it is paired with RxD:

1st pair: GND + RxD 2nd pair: LVDS 3rd pair: Power + TxD 4th pair: unused

s

Ground is only connected through the cable between the board. The transmitt er side (a small sensor board) has no other connections to it at all. The r eceiver side has other connections like HDMI, etc.

In fact, there is a ferrite bead on the sensor PCB in the ground and in the power path (directly at the connector). But I also have already bridged th is beads with zero ohm -> no change.

Yes. I have removed this wires from one bad cable now -> no change.

d

See above

ny

The receiving board is powered via an external +12V power supply, the senso r board is only powered via this cable.

me? With 3.3V FPGA I/O pins with series resistors and even some small cap at th e connector. The rise-time is very slow. I have also stopped the UART commu nciaton for testing -> no change.

Unfortunately: No (I have only a 500 MHz scope)

It is a Cyclone IVGX SerDes. Yes, equalization is active (at a medium setti ng). I will play around a little bit with this settings (unfortunately the compile-time is quite long).

It is quite a simple protocol with start- and stop-bit (10b data-word) as u sed by DS92LV1023 (no DC balancing)

not

he

Yes (as good as possible with a 500MHz scope...): I see no visible change i n all the signals when touching the cable. Only the dramatic effect in the error rate. What surprises me is that the scope probe has almost no influen ce on the error rate while the touching by hand does...

They are 100R on both sides (as this is what I expect as impedance of a CAT

5e cable). I put a 100R also on the transmitter side as this improves the r obustness in my experience, esp. with longer cables. I also removed the 100 R on the transmitter side and it did not help.
e

if

e
h

I will have to think further about these...

of

Unfortunately: No.

of

Thanks a lot. This discussing this issue with someone really helps. I will post new results here when I have any.

Regards,

Thomas

Reply to
thomas.entner99

It turned out that the equalization was too high. When increasing the setting, things got worse. When setting it to "low", things work perfect without any errors...

I think the great effects of touching the cable can be explained with the weak twisting of the pairs.

Regards,

Thomas

Reply to
thomas.entner99

I suspect the cable looks more like a parallel ribbon cable than twisted pair. That means there could be other signals between the twisted pair and ground - eg if it turns out it goes: GND RXD D+ D- TXD VCC

Any common mode currents, which there will be because your coding scheme is not DC balanced, will flow around a loop with RXD or TXD in the middle, so are likely to be inductively coupled with these wires (ie cause crosstalk). It's difficult to say what effect the inductance of this loop will have on the LVDS signal (I suspect not a huge amount, but have no numbers: it will depend on how quick the rise times are), but I wouldn't be surprised if you saw coupling into the RXD and TXD wires.

Likewise, we'd have to know a bit more about the channel characteristics to predict what the likely frequency response of the channel might be (you'd model each part's LCR properties separately: hard numbers needed).

I'd guess that the touching effect increases both the capacitance to ground and the inter-pair capacitance. It moves the frequency nulls around - I'm not familiar with the equalisation settings on that transceiver to know the effect of the different modes, but it's not implausible that equalisation could cope with one but not the other. In theory your transmission line should be correctly terminated so you don't need equalisation, but it very obviously isn't.

Theo

Reply to
Theo Markettos

Ethernet cables use pin pairs (1,2) (3,6) (4,5) and (7,8).

With the usual cables, you can see the pairs, including the colors, in the connector.

I have one, though, which I would call flat, and which the pairs are not visible. It is very thin and flexible, and seems to work fine for 100baseTX. I suspect the wire is much smaller than the normal Cat 5 wire.

But otherwise, ethernet cables are normally rated to 100MHz.

1000baseT uses a complicated signal system on all four pairs (in both directions at the same time) to get the bits through.

I wouldn't be surprised if you could get 720MHz through Cat 5 cable for 30cm, but your cable might not be quite that good.

-- glen

Reply to
glen herrmannsfeldt

This is NOT LVDS! The D stands for Differential! You use one wire of the pair for the true signal, one wire for the complement signal. I don't even know how you do single-ended with LVDS receivers, but it won't work well, as you clearly have discovered.

You can still use LVDS the right way with 3 pairs. One pair is power & ground, one is the Rxd true/compl pair, the other is the Txd true/compl pair.

Jon

Reply to
Jon Elson

afaiu, he is using one pair for LDVS, the other rx/tx is single ended uart paired with gnd and power. So the wiring is ok

-Lasse

Reply to
langwadt

The OP stated he has one LVDS pair (D+ and D- twisted), and two UART signals (RXD and TXD). The UART signals aren't sent by LVDS, they're just other things down the same cable. I assume the OP's LVDS is unidirectional (or else there would be other issues). The OP's situation of having RXD+GND and TXD+VCC pairs, rather than RXD+TXD and GND+VCC, is probably slightly better but it's marginal at typical UART speeds (and as always depends on the setup

- as we've discovered the 'twisted pair' isn't).

You can connect single-ended into an LVDS receiver by grounding the negative input (if you have positive and negative voltage rails) or putting it mid-range via a resistive divider (on a single supply arrangement) but you've just halved your signal amplitude (and thus differential SNR) - and of course you have no protection from common-mode noise.

Theo

Reply to
Theo Markettos

OK, he confused me with the UART data signals.

Well, one other thing, is he terminating the LVDS with a resistor matching the characteristic impedance of the cable? I'll bet he isn't, his results would VERY likely match what he describes. We use 100 Ohm resistors, they are close enough. For best results, tune between 110 and 120 Ohms for minimum reflection.

Jon

Reply to
Jon Elson

hi Jon,

from the OP: I tried changing and even removing the termination resistors, this did not change the behavior at all. I have changed both boards, it is really the cable that makes the difference.

BTW, removing the terminators on an LVDS - single drop - line is *never* a good idea. LVDS drivers are current sources and the receiver may simply not tolerate the differential swing on it's big input impedance.

I did not understand how the op solved his problem changing receiver equalization, he clearly mentioned some cables did work ok without the need to change equalization...

Al

Reply to
alb

Wow, quite some discussion going on here... (I have considered this myself "solved" and working on other stuff again.)

To give some comments: Yes, we use 100 ohm termination, in fact on both sides of the cable. I trie d to remove the termination on both sides (but I don't think I have removed both sides at the same time - would not really make sense...). I have also checked with a multimeter and got the correct values (e.g. 50 ohm, when bo th are mounted and cable connected.)

My conclusion was, that with the original (quite strong) equalizer setting things were barely working (even with "good" cables I got an transmission e rror here and then while "bad" cables resulted in errors all over). I think it was simply to strong for the short cable distance. With the lowest poss ible equalizer setting we have not seen any transmission errors anymore wit h any combination of boards and cables.

I had dismantled one cable and found that the (while they were really twist ed) the turn rate was very low, about 1 to 2 full turns about the complete length. This might be good enough for long ethernet cables, but I can imagi ne that this short length make some of them almost behave like untwisted c ables with quite some cross talk. This is my explanation why touching the u ntwisted wires had some influence although I am still surprised that the ef fect was such a drastic improvement.

What I still cannot understand is why the (in my opinion) much more dramati c change of removing the termination resistors had no influence (not good n or bad) on this obviously barely working system while the touching had.

Regards,

Thomas

Reply to
thomas.entner99

Hi Thomas,

snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote: []

I do not understand why you need termination at both ends. There are two aspects when terminating an LVDS line:

  1. line impedence matching.
  2. provide a load for a current source.

In both cases it does not make too much sense to have a termination at the source.

Did you see your signal on the scope *after* the receiver for both a /good/ and /bad/ cable? Do you have an eye diagram?

twist per meter is usually specified in the cable datasheet; considering the rate you're working at I'd seriously consider the cable as a fundamental part to be analyzed.

I would not call 'improvement' something that you cannot justify or explain. Since you do not know what is going on, it is *very* possible the problem is simply hidden for a various combination of causes and will likely reappear later on.

IMO your connection is far from being a proper one, with serious matching issues and a very scattered amount of information to analyze. With these basis any conclusion on 'working' or 'not working' are pointless at best.

If you don't have a model to explain why it works and why it doesn't, your likely exposed to see the issue again later and thanks to Murphy's law it would be right two days before shipping!

If you want to seriously remove your issues you need to be able to explain every detail, spot the cause and remove it. Otherwise it would just be another piece of guesswork.

Al

Reply to
alb

See "LVDS Owner's Manual Design Guide , 4th Edition"

formatting link

Ensure the probes don't disturb the signal - which is easier said than done.

Reply to
Tom Gardner

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.