Mixing
90° Bend: Mitered vs Curved
$begingroup$
On RF PCBs to bend a trace 90° you have many choices but among them Curved and Mitered bend considered as a good choice from performance POV (Both shown below).
For many years I thought that if you have enough space on your board, curved bend is a better choice over mitered bend but lately I hear an opposite recommendation from one of my colleague.
My question is in case of having enough room which one of these options is a better choice? (simulated results or real world measurement is appreciated)
rf pcb-design microwave
asked Jan 6 at 10:06
pazel1374pazel1374
311212
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
On RF PCBs to bend a trace 90° you have many choices but among them Curved and Mitered bend considered as a good choice from performance POV (Both shown below).
For many years I thought that if you have enough space on your board, curved bend is a better choice over mitered bend but lately I hear an opposite recommendation from one of my colleague.
My question is in case of having enough room which one of these options is a better choice? (simulated results or real world measurement is appreciated)
rf pcb-design microwave
asked Jan 6 at 10:06
pazel1374pazel1374
311212
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It would help to specify a frequency of operation. For many frequencies the difference will be negligible. There may also other concerns e.g. manufacturing. Which part is your main concern?
$endgroup$
– David
Jan 6 at 13:31
$begingroup$
@David, Thanks for your comment. This is actually a general question, but you are right, it would be easier to answer if you know the TL operation frequency. This particular board will work from 100MHz to 6GHz on a 8mil RO4003 substrate and as long as it is feasible, manufacturing costs isn't a concern
$endgroup$
– pazel1374
Jan 6 at 15:26
add a comment |
$begingroup$
On RF PCBs to bend a trace 90° you have many choices but among them Curved and Mitered bend considered as a good choice from performance POV (Both shown below).
For many years I thought that if you have enough space on your board, curved bend is a better choice over mitered bend but lately I hear an opposite recommendation from one of my colleague.
My question is in case of having enough room which one of these options is a better choice? (simulated results or real world measurement is appreciated)
rf pcb-design microwave
asked Jan 6 at 10:06
pazel1374pazel1374
311212
$endgroup$
On RF PCBs to bend a trace 90° you have many choices but among them Curved and Mitered bend considered as a good choice from performance POV (Both shown below).
For many years I thought that if you have enough space on your board, curved bend is a better choice over mitered bend but lately I hear an opposite recommendation from one of my colleague.
My question is in case of having enough room which one of these options is a better choice? (simulated results or real world measurement is appreciated)
rf pcb-design microwave
rf pcb-design microwave
asked Jan 6 at 10:06
pazel1374pazel1374
311212
asked Jan 6 at 10:06
pazel1374pazel1374
311212
edited Jan 6 at 17:24
pazel1374
asked Jan 6 at 10:06
pazel1374pazel1374
311212
asked Jan 6 at 10:06
pazel1374pazel1374
311212
asked Jan 6 at 10:06
pazel1374pazel1374
311212
311212
$begingroup$
It would help to specify a frequency of operation. For many frequencies the difference will be negligible. There may also other concerns e.g. manufacturing. Which part is your main concern?
$endgroup$
– David
Jan 6 at 13:31
$begingroup$
@David, Thanks for your comment. This is actually a general question, but you are right, it would be easier to answer if you know the TL operation frequency. This particular board will work from 100MHz to 6GHz on a 8mil RO4003 substrate and as long as it is feasible, manufacturing costs isn't a concern
$endgroup$
– pazel1374
Jan 6 at 15:26
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It would help to specify a frequency of operation. For many frequencies the difference will be negligible. There may also other concerns e.g. manufacturing. Which part is your main concern?
$endgroup$
– David
Jan 6 at 13:31
$begingroup$
@David, Thanks for your comment. This is actually a general question, but you are right, it would be easier to answer if you know the TL operation frequency. This particular board will work from 100MHz to 6GHz on a 8mil RO4003 substrate and as long as it is feasible, manufacturing costs isn't a concern
$endgroup$
– pazel1374
Jan 6 at 15:26
$begingroup$
It would help to specify a frequency of operation. For many frequencies the difference will be negligible. There may also other concerns e.g. manufacturing. Which part is your main concern?
$endgroup$
– David
Jan 6 at 13:31
$begingroup$
It would help to specify a frequency of operation. For many frequencies the difference will be negligible. There may also other concerns e.g. manufacturing. Which part is your main concern?
$endgroup$
– David
Jan 6 at 13:31
$begingroup$
@David, Thanks for your comment. This is actually a general question, but you are right, it would be easier to answer if you know the TL operation frequency. This particular board will work from 100MHz to 6GHz on a 8mil RO4003 substrate and as long as it is feasible, manufacturing costs isn't a concern
$endgroup$
– pazel1374
Jan 6 at 15:26
$begingroup$
@David, Thanks for your comment. This is actually a general question, but you are right, it would be easier to answer if you know the TL operation frequency. This particular board will work from 100MHz to 6GHz on a 8mil RO4003 substrate and as long as it is feasible, manufacturing costs isn't a concern
$endgroup$
– pazel1374
Jan 6 at 15:26
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Neither a mitred nor curved bend is as 'good' as the equivalent length of straight track.
There are two main aspects to goodness, S11 and S21.
S11. Other things being equal, width and thickness of trace, dielectric performance, the curved bend can be designed to have good S11 to a higher frequency than the mitred. That's because the mitre is effectively a lowpass filter. The two 135 degree corners produce a slight extra capacitive loading, the thinner region in the elbow of the bend a slight series inductance. With a properly designed mitred bend (that mitre you illustrate is not properly designed, more should be taken off the corner, see below) the result is a matched 3rd order filter with good S11 up to a certain frequency. As the curved bend has smaller parasitic loadings, the good S11 passband is wider.
S21. A mitred bend can be made more compact than a curved bend, and will therefore have lower track loss, and allow tighter component packing. Either might be critical for your application, but I think there's quite a tendency to prefer to make things small these days.
The performance differences are small, and the design would have to be very marginal if they made the difference between working or not.
This is more like the proportions I'd expect to see from a correctly designed mitre, from microwaves101.com
answered Jan 6 at 10:34
Neil_UKNeil_UK
74.4k275164
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("schematics", function () {
StackExchange.schematics.init();
});
}, "cicuitlab");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "135"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f415504%2f90-bend-mitered-vs-curved%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Neither a mitred nor curved bend is as 'good' as the equivalent length of straight track.
There are two main aspects to goodness, S11 and S21.
S11. Other things being equal, width and thickness of trace, dielectric performance, the curved bend can be designed to have good S11 to a higher frequency than the mitred. That's because the mitre is effectively a lowpass filter. The two 135 degree corners produce a slight extra capacitive loading, the thinner region in the elbow of the bend a slight series inductance. With a properly designed mitred bend (that mitre you illustrate is not properly designed, more should be taken off the corner, see below) the result is a matched 3rd order filter with good S11 up to a certain frequency. As the curved bend has smaller parasitic loadings, the good S11 passband is wider.
S21. A mitred bend can be made more compact than a curved bend, and will therefore have lower track loss, and allow tighter component packing. Either might be critical for your application, but I think there's quite a tendency to prefer to make things small these days.
The performance differences are small, and the design would have to be very marginal if they made the difference between working or not.
This is more like the proportions I'd expect to see from a correctly designed mitre, from microwaves101.com
answered Jan 6 at 10:34
Neil_UKNeil_UK
74.4k275164
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Neither a mitred nor curved bend is as 'good' as the equivalent length of straight track.
There are two main aspects to goodness, S11 and S21.
S11. Other things being equal, width and thickness of trace, dielectric performance, the curved bend can be designed to have good S11 to a higher frequency than the mitred. That's because the mitre is effectively a lowpass filter. The two 135 degree corners produce a slight extra capacitive loading, the thinner region in the elbow of the bend a slight series inductance. With a properly designed mitred bend (that mitre you illustrate is not properly designed, more should be taken off the corner, see below) the result is a matched 3rd order filter with good S11 up to a certain frequency. As the curved bend has smaller parasitic loadings, the good S11 passband is wider.
S21. A mitred bend can be made more compact than a curved bend, and will therefore have lower track loss, and allow tighter component packing. Either might be critical for your application, but I think there's quite a tendency to prefer to make things small these days.
The performance differences are small, and the design would have to be very marginal if they made the difference between working or not.
This is more like the proportions I'd expect to see from a correctly designed mitre, from microwaves101.com
answered Jan 6 at 10:34
Neil_UKNeil_UK
74.4k275164
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Neither a mitred nor curved bend is as 'good' as the equivalent length of straight track.
There are two main aspects to goodness, S11 and S21.
S11. Other things being equal, width and thickness of trace, dielectric performance, the curved bend can be designed to have good S11 to a higher frequency than the mitred. That's because the mitre is effectively a lowpass filter. The two 135 degree corners produce a slight extra capacitive loading, the thinner region in the elbow of the bend a slight series inductance. With a properly designed mitred bend (that mitre you illustrate is not properly designed, more should be taken off the corner, see below) the result is a matched 3rd order filter with good S11 up to a certain frequency. As the curved bend has smaller parasitic loadings, the good S11 passband is wider.
S21. A mitred bend can be made more compact than a curved bend, and will therefore have lower track loss, and allow tighter component packing. Either might be critical for your application, but I think there's quite a tendency to prefer to make things small these days.
The performance differences are small, and the design would have to be very marginal if they made the difference between working or not.
This is more like the proportions I'd expect to see from a correctly designed mitre, from microwaves101.com
answered Jan 6 at 10:34
Neil_UKNeil_UK
74.4k275164
$endgroup$
Neither a mitred nor curved bend is as 'good' as the equivalent length of straight track.
There are two main aspects to goodness, S11 and S21.
S11. Other things being equal, width and thickness of trace, dielectric performance, the curved bend can be designed to have good S11 to a higher frequency than the mitred. That's because the mitre is effectively a lowpass filter. The two 135 degree corners produce a slight extra capacitive loading, the thinner region in the elbow of the bend a slight series inductance. With a properly designed mitred bend (that mitre you illustrate is not properly designed, more should be taken off the corner, see below) the result is a matched 3rd order filter with good S11 up to a certain frequency. As the curved bend has smaller parasitic loadings, the good S11 passband is wider.
S21. A mitred bend can be made more compact than a curved bend, and will therefore have lower track loss, and allow tighter component packing. Either might be critical for your application, but I think there's quite a tendency to prefer to make things small these days.
The performance differences are small, and the design would have to be very marginal if they made the difference between working or not.
This is more like the proportions I'd expect to see from a correctly designed mitre, from microwaves101.com
answered Jan 6 at 10:34
Neil_UKNeil_UK
74.4k275164
answered Jan 6 at 10:34
Neil_UKNeil_UK
74.4k275164
answered Jan 6 at 10:34
Neil_UKNeil_UK
74.4k275164
answered Jan 6 at 10:34
Neil_UKNeil_UK
74.4k275164
74.4k275164
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Electrical Engineering Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f415504%2f90-bend-mitered-vs-curved%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
It would help to specify a frequency of operation. For many frequencies the difference will be negligible. There may also other concerns e.g. manufacturing. Which part is your main concern?
$endgroup$
– David
Jan 6 at 13:31
$begingroup$
@David, Thanks for your comment. This is actually a general question, but you are right, it would be easier to answer if you know the TL operation frequency. This particular board will work from 100MHz to 6GHz on a 8mil RO4003 substrate and as long as it is feasible, manufacturing costs isn't a concern
$endgroup$
– pazel1374
Jan 6 at 15:26