Capacitor with specific self-resonant frequency?What is the unit for resonant frequency?Resonant Frequency from Bode plotSelf resonance frequency for MLCC capacitorSelf resonant frequency of buck converterLDO regulator stability with bypass capacitorCapacitor Selection for TPS56221Can you filter out power supply noise by using a capacitor with a resonant frequency that matches the noise frequency?Why does a real world capacitor behave like an inductor at frequencies above its self-resonant frequency?LC circuit, resonant frequencyProblem with load switching at capacitor resonant frequency
What is the life span of a Flerken?
How may I shorten this shell script?
Monty Hall Problem with a Fallible Monty
Do Rabbis get punished in Heaven for wrong interpretations or claims?
Hold[Expression] (or similar) in InputField that truly holds the input unmodified
Why are off grid solar setups only 12, 24, 48 VDC?
Is an easily guessed plot twist a good plot twist?
Strange Cron Job takes up 100% of CPU Ubuntu 18 LTS Server
What do teaching faculty do during semester breaks?
Is it legal for private citizens to "impound" e-scooters?
What is the difference between $path and $PATH (lowercase versus uppercase) with zsh?
How did C64 games handle music during gameplay?
Memory capability and powers of 2
Can GPL and BSD licensed applications be used for government work?
Inadvertently nuked my disk permission structure - why?
What are the exact meanings of roll, pitch and yaw?
How important is a good quality camera for good photography?
How do campaign rallies gain candidates votes?
What does the minus sign mean in measurements in datasheet footprint drawings?
Why did Saturn V not head straight to the moon?
Why keep the bed heated after initial layer(s) with PLA (or PETG)?
Why are there not any MRI machines available in Interstellar?
Current relevance: "She has broken her leg" vs. "She broke her leg yesterday"
The seven story archetypes. Are they truly all of them?
Capacitor with specific self-resonant frequency?
What is the unit for resonant frequency?Resonant Frequency from Bode plotSelf resonance frequency for MLCC capacitorSelf resonant frequency of buck converterLDO regulator stability with bypass capacitorCapacitor Selection for TPS56221Can you filter out power supply noise by using a capacitor with a resonant frequency that matches the noise frequency?Why does a real world capacitor behave like an inductor at frequencies above its self-resonant frequency?LC circuit, resonant frequencyProblem with load switching at capacitor resonant frequency
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
I have a datasheet that calls for "a 15 pF capacitor with Self-Resonant Frequency in the 1800/1900 MHz range". It then recommends a capacitor (Murata GRM1555C1H150J) that (so far as I can tell) from the datasheet doesn't specify it's SRF.
I'd like to use a different, slightly larger SMT capacitor, but I understand this may lower (or just change) the SRF.
Mouser's part search engine doesn't include an SRF parameter. Is there some way to obtain capacitors with a specific SRF? Can the SRF be reliably derived in some way? Or does this property have to be measured?
capacitor frequency bypass-capacitor bypass
edited Jul 15 at 20:18
Voltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
asked Jul 15 at 20:11
Britton KerinBritton Kerin
212 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have a datasheet that calls for "a 15 pF capacitor with Self-Resonant Frequency in the 1800/1900 MHz range". It then recommends a capacitor (Murata GRM1555C1H150J) that (so far as I can tell) from the datasheet doesn't specify it's SRF.
I'd like to use a different, slightly larger SMT capacitor, but I understand this may lower (or just change) the SRF.
Mouser's part search engine doesn't include an SRF parameter. Is there some way to obtain capacitors with a specific SRF? Can the SRF be reliably derived in some way? Or does this property have to be measured?
capacitor frequency bypass-capacitor bypass
edited Jul 15 at 20:18
Voltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
asked Jul 15 at 20:11
Britton KerinBritton Kerin
212 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I think a more important question would be /why/ the datasheet (which datasheet, btw?) calls for a capacitor with a specific self-resonance frequency. Usually you would just want it to be 'high enough', and if you need resonance, build a resonator with an LC tank. There is already a lot of tolerance on the capacitance of such ceramic capacitors, which is the specification they are built for. I don't want to know the tolerance on something non-advertised like SRF
$endgroup$
– Joren Vaes
Jul 16 at 9:51
$begingroup$
It's looking for good filtering in the cell frequency bands. I agree it seems like a surprising approach, but it's what the manufacturer recommends, in section 2.2.1.10 of this document: u-blox.com/sites/default/files/…
$endgroup$
– Britton Kerin
Jul 17 at 18:00
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have a datasheet that calls for "a 15 pF capacitor with Self-Resonant Frequency in the 1800/1900 MHz range". It then recommends a capacitor (Murata GRM1555C1H150J) that (so far as I can tell) from the datasheet doesn't specify it's SRF.
I'd like to use a different, slightly larger SMT capacitor, but I understand this may lower (or just change) the SRF.
Mouser's part search engine doesn't include an SRF parameter. Is there some way to obtain capacitors with a specific SRF? Can the SRF be reliably derived in some way? Or does this property have to be measured?
capacitor frequency bypass-capacitor bypass
edited Jul 15 at 20:18
Voltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
asked Jul 15 at 20:11
Britton KerinBritton Kerin
212 bronze badges
$endgroup$
I have a datasheet that calls for "a 15 pF capacitor with Self-Resonant Frequency in the 1800/1900 MHz range". It then recommends a capacitor (Murata GRM1555C1H150J) that (so far as I can tell) from the datasheet doesn't specify it's SRF.
I'd like to use a different, slightly larger SMT capacitor, but I understand this may lower (or just change) the SRF.
Mouser's part search engine doesn't include an SRF parameter. Is there some way to obtain capacitors with a specific SRF? Can the SRF be reliably derived in some way? Or does this property have to be measured?
capacitor frequency bypass-capacitor bypass
capacitor frequency bypass-capacitor bypass
edited Jul 15 at 20:18
Voltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
asked Jul 15 at 20:11
Britton KerinBritton Kerin
212 bronze badges
edited Jul 15 at 20:18
Voltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
asked Jul 15 at 20:11
Britton KerinBritton Kerin
212 bronze badges
edited Jul 15 at 20:18
Voltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
edited Jul 15 at 20:18
Voltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
edited Jul 15 at 20:18
Voltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
asked Jul 15 at 20:11
Britton KerinBritton Kerin
212 bronze badges
asked Jul 15 at 20:11
Britton KerinBritton Kerin
212 bronze badges
asked Jul 15 at 20:11
Britton KerinBritton Kerin
212 bronze badges
212 bronze badges
$begingroup$
I think a more important question would be /why/ the datasheet (which datasheet, btw?) calls for a capacitor with a specific self-resonance frequency. Usually you would just want it to be 'high enough', and if you need resonance, build a resonator with an LC tank. There is already a lot of tolerance on the capacitance of such ceramic capacitors, which is the specification they are built for. I don't want to know the tolerance on something non-advertised like SRF
$endgroup$
– Joren Vaes
Jul 16 at 9:51
$begingroup$
It's looking for good filtering in the cell frequency bands. I agree it seems like a surprising approach, but it's what the manufacturer recommends, in section 2.2.1.10 of this document: u-blox.com/sites/default/files/…
$endgroup$
– Britton Kerin
Jul 17 at 18:00
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think a more important question would be /why/ the datasheet (which datasheet, btw?) calls for a capacitor with a specific self-resonance frequency. Usually you would just want it to be 'high enough', and if you need resonance, build a resonator with an LC tank. There is already a lot of tolerance on the capacitance of such ceramic capacitors, which is the specification they are built for. I don't want to know the tolerance on something non-advertised like SRF
$endgroup$
– Joren Vaes
Jul 16 at 9:51
$begingroup$
It's looking for good filtering in the cell frequency bands. I agree it seems like a surprising approach, but it's what the manufacturer recommends, in section 2.2.1.10 of this document: u-blox.com/sites/default/files/…
$endgroup$
– Britton Kerin
Jul 17 at 18:00
$begingroup$
I think a more important question would be /why/ the datasheet (which datasheet, btw?) calls for a capacitor with a specific self-resonance frequency. Usually you would just want it to be 'high enough', and if you need resonance, build a resonator with an LC tank. There is already a lot of tolerance on the capacitance of such ceramic capacitors, which is the specification they are built for. I don't want to know the tolerance on something non-advertised like SRF
$endgroup$
– Joren Vaes
Jul 16 at 9:51
$begingroup$
I think a more important question would be /why/ the datasheet (which datasheet, btw?) calls for a capacitor with a specific self-resonance frequency. Usually you would just want it to be 'high enough', and if you need resonance, build a resonator with an LC tank. There is already a lot of tolerance on the capacitance of such ceramic capacitors, which is the specification they are built for. I don't want to know the tolerance on something non-advertised like SRF
$endgroup$
– Joren Vaes
Jul 16 at 9:51
$begingroup$
It's looking for good filtering in the cell frequency bands. I agree it seems like a surprising approach, but it's what the manufacturer recommends, in section 2.2.1.10 of this document: u-blox.com/sites/default/files/…
$endgroup$
– Britton Kerin
Jul 17 at 18:00
$begingroup$
It's looking for good filtering in the cell frequency bands. I agree it seems like a surprising approach, but it's what the manufacturer recommends, in section 2.2.1.10 of this document: u-blox.com/sites/default/files/…
$endgroup$
– Britton Kerin
Jul 17 at 18:00
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
You need to use Murata Simsurfer (or the equivalent from another vendor) that provides the REAL datasheet (so-called tech-PDF in Murata's case) for the individual capacitor's detailed curves. That's where you will find the datasheet for the GRM1555C1H150J and its SRF:
What you are probably looking at right now is not the datasheet but the catalog where they cannot afford to actually list the datasheets for thousands of different capacitor with different combinations of capacitance, package, voltage, and dielectric.
Taken from Murata Tech-PDF for GRM1555C1H150J.
I think they are fairly representative from one manufacturer to the next though for a given dielectric and package size so if you can't find it for one dielectric in a package size, you might not find it for any manufacturer unless you change dieelectrics.
https://ds.murata.co.jp/simsurfing/mlcc.html?lcid=en-us
answered Jul 15 at 20:14
DKNguyenDKNguyen
4,9831 gold badge5 silver badges24 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It is btw amazing that Murata does this, it's a great resource.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
Does every manufacturer do this? I assume they must somewhere but since it's so difficult/cumbersome to find it's the main reason I tend to stick with Murata.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
I've never seen it in such detail from any other manufacturer at least, maybe it's available on a case-by-case NDA basis for large customers or they expect customers to do their own testing.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:26
$begingroup$
How many customers can even afford to spend the time and equipment to buying and test every possible combination of capacitor? I guess only the ones big enough that spend enough money for them to actually care about. Ugh.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:31
1
$begingroup$
The PCB layout will strongly affect the usefulness of SelfResonance.
$endgroup$
– analogsystemsrf
Jul 16 at 12:07
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
Most capacitor manufactures will list these parameters on their website which they have measured. Most of them will also provide spice models (use lt spice, it's free), s-parameter models and other tools to help you model the effects of parasitics at high frequencies.
answered Jul 15 at 20:16
Voltage SpikeVoltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Simsurfing web tool from Murata that @DKNguyen mentioned is my weapon of choice for problems like this. Other manufacturers may offer somewhat similar tools, but none as convenient as Murata's.
Addressing issues not yet mentioned in the other replies:
- the particular part that was recommended (GRM1555C1H150J - 0402 size) has SRF ~2.05GHz, a little higher than you're looking for. Besides, this part is not recommended for new designs. You're better off using the bigger 0603 part GRM1885C2E150JW07, with SRF ~1.75GHz.
- as a first order approximation, you may assume that the parasitic inductance is more or less constant for a given package size and dielectric. This way, if you know the SRF of a particular capacitance value, you can estimate the SRF for other capacitance values within the same series. I find it easier to use the tool interactively, though.
- the bigger the package, the bigger the parasitic inductance, and the lower the SRF; for really low inductance, high SRF, there are special packages with the pad side along the longest dimension of the package.
- unfortunately, the SRF always changes a little from manufacturer to manufacturer even for the same ceramic and package size. If SRF is really critical for your circuit, I recommend sticking to a single manufacturer.
answered Jul 16 at 2:10
joribamajoribama
9411 silver badge11 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I love those 0204 caps. The 1uF have high capacitance in such a low inductance package that by the time you put enough in parallel to decouple the high frequencies you have tons of bulk capacitance for the lower frequencies. Even the 0.1uF 0204s provide more than enough bulk capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 16:57
$begingroup$
The inductance seems solely dependent on package and independent of how much capacitance is packed into that package. So, for decoupling, it's best (cost permitting) to go for the smallest possible package (required for the lowest inductance) with the highest possible capacitance. These caps have worse DC bias effects than those where a smaller amount of capacitance is packed in, but even with the degradation you end up with more capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 17:00
$begingroup$
@DKNguyen - I agree 100%. Most people blindly use 0.1uF for decoupling, instead. I’m a big fan of the 0402 1uF caps for decoupling for the exact reason you mentioned (as long it’s not a very cost sensitive design since they are a little expensive).
$endgroup$
– joribama
Jul 18 at 15:37
add a comment |
Your Answer
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%2f448481%2fcapacitor-with-specific-self-resonant-frequency%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
You need to use Murata Simsurfer (or the equivalent from another vendor) that provides the REAL datasheet (so-called tech-PDF in Murata's case) for the individual capacitor's detailed curves. That's where you will find the datasheet for the GRM1555C1H150J and its SRF:
What you are probably looking at right now is not the datasheet but the catalog where they cannot afford to actually list the datasheets for thousands of different capacitor with different combinations of capacitance, package, voltage, and dielectric.
Taken from Murata Tech-PDF for GRM1555C1H150J.
I think they are fairly representative from one manufacturer to the next though for a given dielectric and package size so if you can't find it for one dielectric in a package size, you might not find it for any manufacturer unless you change dieelectrics.
https://ds.murata.co.jp/simsurfing/mlcc.html?lcid=en-us
answered Jul 15 at 20:14
DKNguyenDKNguyen
4,9831 gold badge5 silver badges24 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It is btw amazing that Murata does this, it's a great resource.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
Does every manufacturer do this? I assume they must somewhere but since it's so difficult/cumbersome to find it's the main reason I tend to stick with Murata.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
I've never seen it in such detail from any other manufacturer at least, maybe it's available on a case-by-case NDA basis for large customers or they expect customers to do their own testing.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:26
$begingroup$
How many customers can even afford to spend the time and equipment to buying and test every possible combination of capacitor? I guess only the ones big enough that spend enough money for them to actually care about. Ugh.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:31
1
$begingroup$
The PCB layout will strongly affect the usefulness of SelfResonance.
$endgroup$
– analogsystemsrf
Jul 16 at 12:07
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
You need to use Murata Simsurfer (or the equivalent from another vendor) that provides the REAL datasheet (so-called tech-PDF in Murata's case) for the individual capacitor's detailed curves. That's where you will find the datasheet for the GRM1555C1H150J and its SRF:
What you are probably looking at right now is not the datasheet but the catalog where they cannot afford to actually list the datasheets for thousands of different capacitor with different combinations of capacitance, package, voltage, and dielectric.
Taken from Murata Tech-PDF for GRM1555C1H150J.
I think they are fairly representative from one manufacturer to the next though for a given dielectric and package size so if you can't find it for one dielectric in a package size, you might not find it for any manufacturer unless you change dieelectrics.
https://ds.murata.co.jp/simsurfing/mlcc.html?lcid=en-us
answered Jul 15 at 20:14
DKNguyenDKNguyen
4,9831 gold badge5 silver badges24 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It is btw amazing that Murata does this, it's a great resource.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
Does every manufacturer do this? I assume they must somewhere but since it's so difficult/cumbersome to find it's the main reason I tend to stick with Murata.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
I've never seen it in such detail from any other manufacturer at least, maybe it's available on a case-by-case NDA basis for large customers or they expect customers to do their own testing.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:26
$begingroup$
How many customers can even afford to spend the time and equipment to buying and test every possible combination of capacitor? I guess only the ones big enough that spend enough money for them to actually care about. Ugh.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:31
1
$begingroup$
The PCB layout will strongly affect the usefulness of SelfResonance.
$endgroup$
– analogsystemsrf
Jul 16 at 12:07
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
You need to use Murata Simsurfer (or the equivalent from another vendor) that provides the REAL datasheet (so-called tech-PDF in Murata's case) for the individual capacitor's detailed curves. That's where you will find the datasheet for the GRM1555C1H150J and its SRF:
What you are probably looking at right now is not the datasheet but the catalog where they cannot afford to actually list the datasheets for thousands of different capacitor with different combinations of capacitance, package, voltage, and dielectric.
Taken from Murata Tech-PDF for GRM1555C1H150J.
I think they are fairly representative from one manufacturer to the next though for a given dielectric and package size so if you can't find it for one dielectric in a package size, you might not find it for any manufacturer unless you change dieelectrics.
https://ds.murata.co.jp/simsurfing/mlcc.html?lcid=en-us
answered Jul 15 at 20:14
DKNguyenDKNguyen
4,9831 gold badge5 silver badges24 bronze badges
$endgroup$
You need to use Murata Simsurfer (or the equivalent from another vendor) that provides the REAL datasheet (so-called tech-PDF in Murata's case) for the individual capacitor's detailed curves. That's where you will find the datasheet for the GRM1555C1H150J and its SRF:
What you are probably looking at right now is not the datasheet but the catalog where they cannot afford to actually list the datasheets for thousands of different capacitor with different combinations of capacitance, package, voltage, and dielectric.
Taken from Murata Tech-PDF for GRM1555C1H150J.
I think they are fairly representative from one manufacturer to the next though for a given dielectric and package size so if you can't find it for one dielectric in a package size, you might not find it for any manufacturer unless you change dieelectrics.
https://ds.murata.co.jp/simsurfing/mlcc.html?lcid=en-us
answered Jul 15 at 20:14
DKNguyenDKNguyen
4,9831 gold badge5 silver badges24 bronze badges
edited Jul 15 at 20:19
answered Jul 15 at 20:14
DKNguyenDKNguyen
4,9831 gold badge5 silver badges24 bronze badges
answered Jul 15 at 20:14
DKNguyenDKNguyen
4,9831 gold badge5 silver badges24 bronze badges
answered Jul 15 at 20:14
DKNguyenDKNguyen
4,9831 gold badge5 silver badges24 bronze badges
4,9831 gold badge5 silver badges24 bronze badges
$begingroup$
It is btw amazing that Murata does this, it's a great resource.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
Does every manufacturer do this? I assume they must somewhere but since it's so difficult/cumbersome to find it's the main reason I tend to stick with Murata.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
I've never seen it in such detail from any other manufacturer at least, maybe it's available on a case-by-case NDA basis for large customers or they expect customers to do their own testing.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:26
$begingroup$
How many customers can even afford to spend the time and equipment to buying and test every possible combination of capacitor? I guess only the ones big enough that spend enough money for them to actually care about. Ugh.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:31
1
$begingroup$
The PCB layout will strongly affect the usefulness of SelfResonance.
$endgroup$
– analogsystemsrf
Jul 16 at 12:07
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
It is btw amazing that Murata does this, it's a great resource.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
Does every manufacturer do this? I assume they must somewhere but since it's so difficult/cumbersome to find it's the main reason I tend to stick with Murata.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
I've never seen it in such detail from any other manufacturer at least, maybe it's available on a case-by-case NDA basis for large customers or they expect customers to do their own testing.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:26
$begingroup$
How many customers can even afford to spend the time and equipment to buying and test every possible combination of capacitor? I guess only the ones big enough that spend enough money for them to actually care about. Ugh.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:31
1
$begingroup$
The PCB layout will strongly affect the usefulness of SelfResonance.
$endgroup$
– analogsystemsrf
Jul 16 at 12:07
$begingroup$
It is btw amazing that Murata does this, it's a great resource.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
It is btw amazing that Murata does this, it's a great resource.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
Does every manufacturer do this? I assume they must somewhere but since it's so difficult/cumbersome to find it's the main reason I tend to stick with Murata.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
Does every manufacturer do this? I assume they must somewhere but since it's so difficult/cumbersome to find it's the main reason I tend to stick with Murata.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:23
$begingroup$
I've never seen it in such detail from any other manufacturer at least, maybe it's available on a case-by-case NDA basis for large customers or they expect customers to do their own testing.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:26
$begingroup$
I've never seen it in such detail from any other manufacturer at least, maybe it's available on a case-by-case NDA basis for large customers or they expect customers to do their own testing.
$endgroup$
– pipe
Jul 15 at 20:26
$begingroup$
How many customers can even afford to spend the time and equipment to buying and test every possible combination of capacitor? I guess only the ones big enough that spend enough money for them to actually care about. Ugh.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:31
$begingroup$
How many customers can even afford to spend the time and equipment to buying and test every possible combination of capacitor? I guess only the ones big enough that spend enough money for them to actually care about. Ugh.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 15 at 20:31
1
1
$begingroup$
The PCB layout will strongly affect the usefulness of SelfResonance.
$endgroup$
– analogsystemsrf
Jul 16 at 12:07
$begingroup$
The PCB layout will strongly affect the usefulness of SelfResonance.
$endgroup$
– analogsystemsrf
Jul 16 at 12:07
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
Most capacitor manufactures will list these parameters on their website which they have measured. Most of them will also provide spice models (use lt spice, it's free), s-parameter models and other tools to help you model the effects of parasitics at high frequencies.
answered Jul 15 at 20:16
Voltage SpikeVoltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Most capacitor manufactures will list these parameters on their website which they have measured. Most of them will also provide spice models (use lt spice, it's free), s-parameter models and other tools to help you model the effects of parasitics at high frequencies.
answered Jul 15 at 20:16
Voltage SpikeVoltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Most capacitor manufactures will list these parameters on their website which they have measured. Most of them will also provide spice models (use lt spice, it's free), s-parameter models and other tools to help you model the effects of parasitics at high frequencies.
answered Jul 15 at 20:16
Voltage SpikeVoltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
$endgroup$
Most capacitor manufactures will list these parameters on their website which they have measured. Most of them will also provide spice models (use lt spice, it's free), s-parameter models and other tools to help you model the effects of parasitics at high frequencies.
answered Jul 15 at 20:16
Voltage SpikeVoltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
answered Jul 15 at 20:16
Voltage SpikeVoltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
answered Jul 15 at 20:16
Voltage SpikeVoltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
answered Jul 15 at 20:16
Voltage SpikeVoltage Spike
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
35.1k12 gold badges40 silver badges102 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Simsurfing web tool from Murata that @DKNguyen mentioned is my weapon of choice for problems like this. Other manufacturers may offer somewhat similar tools, but none as convenient as Murata's.
Addressing issues not yet mentioned in the other replies:
- the particular part that was recommended (GRM1555C1H150J - 0402 size) has SRF ~2.05GHz, a little higher than you're looking for. Besides, this part is not recommended for new designs. You're better off using the bigger 0603 part GRM1885C2E150JW07, with SRF ~1.75GHz.
- as a first order approximation, you may assume that the parasitic inductance is more or less constant for a given package size and dielectric. This way, if you know the SRF of a particular capacitance value, you can estimate the SRF for other capacitance values within the same series. I find it easier to use the tool interactively, though.
- the bigger the package, the bigger the parasitic inductance, and the lower the SRF; for really low inductance, high SRF, there are special packages with the pad side along the longest dimension of the package.
- unfortunately, the SRF always changes a little from manufacturer to manufacturer even for the same ceramic and package size. If SRF is really critical for your circuit, I recommend sticking to a single manufacturer.
answered Jul 16 at 2:10
joribamajoribama
9411 silver badge11 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I love those 0204 caps. The 1uF have high capacitance in such a low inductance package that by the time you put enough in parallel to decouple the high frequencies you have tons of bulk capacitance for the lower frequencies. Even the 0.1uF 0204s provide more than enough bulk capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 16:57
$begingroup$
The inductance seems solely dependent on package and independent of how much capacitance is packed into that package. So, for decoupling, it's best (cost permitting) to go for the smallest possible package (required for the lowest inductance) with the highest possible capacitance. These caps have worse DC bias effects than those where a smaller amount of capacitance is packed in, but even with the degradation you end up with more capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 17:00
$begingroup$
@DKNguyen - I agree 100%. Most people blindly use 0.1uF for decoupling, instead. I’m a big fan of the 0402 1uF caps for decoupling for the exact reason you mentioned (as long it’s not a very cost sensitive design since they are a little expensive).
$endgroup$
– joribama
Jul 18 at 15:37
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Simsurfing web tool from Murata that @DKNguyen mentioned is my weapon of choice for problems like this. Other manufacturers may offer somewhat similar tools, but none as convenient as Murata's.
Addressing issues not yet mentioned in the other replies:
- the particular part that was recommended (GRM1555C1H150J - 0402 size) has SRF ~2.05GHz, a little higher than you're looking for. Besides, this part is not recommended for new designs. You're better off using the bigger 0603 part GRM1885C2E150JW07, with SRF ~1.75GHz.
- as a first order approximation, you may assume that the parasitic inductance is more or less constant for a given package size and dielectric. This way, if you know the SRF of a particular capacitance value, you can estimate the SRF for other capacitance values within the same series. I find it easier to use the tool interactively, though.
- the bigger the package, the bigger the parasitic inductance, and the lower the SRF; for really low inductance, high SRF, there are special packages with the pad side along the longest dimension of the package.
- unfortunately, the SRF always changes a little from manufacturer to manufacturer even for the same ceramic and package size. If SRF is really critical for your circuit, I recommend sticking to a single manufacturer.
answered Jul 16 at 2:10
joribamajoribama
9411 silver badge11 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I love those 0204 caps. The 1uF have high capacitance in such a low inductance package that by the time you put enough in parallel to decouple the high frequencies you have tons of bulk capacitance for the lower frequencies. Even the 0.1uF 0204s provide more than enough bulk capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 16:57
$begingroup$
The inductance seems solely dependent on package and independent of how much capacitance is packed into that package. So, for decoupling, it's best (cost permitting) to go for the smallest possible package (required for the lowest inductance) with the highest possible capacitance. These caps have worse DC bias effects than those where a smaller amount of capacitance is packed in, but even with the degradation you end up with more capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 17:00
$begingroup$
@DKNguyen - I agree 100%. Most people blindly use 0.1uF for decoupling, instead. I’m a big fan of the 0402 1uF caps for decoupling for the exact reason you mentioned (as long it’s not a very cost sensitive design since they are a little expensive).
$endgroup$
– joribama
Jul 18 at 15:37
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Simsurfing web tool from Murata that @DKNguyen mentioned is my weapon of choice for problems like this. Other manufacturers may offer somewhat similar tools, but none as convenient as Murata's.
Addressing issues not yet mentioned in the other replies:
- the particular part that was recommended (GRM1555C1H150J - 0402 size) has SRF ~2.05GHz, a little higher than you're looking for. Besides, this part is not recommended for new designs. You're better off using the bigger 0603 part GRM1885C2E150JW07, with SRF ~1.75GHz.
- as a first order approximation, you may assume that the parasitic inductance is more or less constant for a given package size and dielectric. This way, if you know the SRF of a particular capacitance value, you can estimate the SRF for other capacitance values within the same series. I find it easier to use the tool interactively, though.
- the bigger the package, the bigger the parasitic inductance, and the lower the SRF; for really low inductance, high SRF, there are special packages with the pad side along the longest dimension of the package.
- unfortunately, the SRF always changes a little from manufacturer to manufacturer even for the same ceramic and package size. If SRF is really critical for your circuit, I recommend sticking to a single manufacturer.
answered Jul 16 at 2:10
joribamajoribama
9411 silver badge11 bronze badges
$endgroup$
The Simsurfing web tool from Murata that @DKNguyen mentioned is my weapon of choice for problems like this. Other manufacturers may offer somewhat similar tools, but none as convenient as Murata's.
Addressing issues not yet mentioned in the other replies:
- the particular part that was recommended (GRM1555C1H150J - 0402 size) has SRF ~2.05GHz, a little higher than you're looking for. Besides, this part is not recommended for new designs. You're better off using the bigger 0603 part GRM1885C2E150JW07, with SRF ~1.75GHz.
- as a first order approximation, you may assume that the parasitic inductance is more or less constant for a given package size and dielectric. This way, if you know the SRF of a particular capacitance value, you can estimate the SRF for other capacitance values within the same series. I find it easier to use the tool interactively, though.
- the bigger the package, the bigger the parasitic inductance, and the lower the SRF; for really low inductance, high SRF, there are special packages with the pad side along the longest dimension of the package.
- unfortunately, the SRF always changes a little from manufacturer to manufacturer even for the same ceramic and package size. If SRF is really critical for your circuit, I recommend sticking to a single manufacturer.
answered Jul 16 at 2:10
joribamajoribama
9411 silver badge11 bronze badges
answered Jul 16 at 2:10
joribamajoribama
9411 silver badge11 bronze badges
answered Jul 16 at 2:10
joribamajoribama
9411 silver badge11 bronze badges
answered Jul 16 at 2:10
joribamajoribama
9411 silver badge11 bronze badges
9411 silver badge11 bronze badges
$begingroup$
I love those 0204 caps. The 1uF have high capacitance in such a low inductance package that by the time you put enough in parallel to decouple the high frequencies you have tons of bulk capacitance for the lower frequencies. Even the 0.1uF 0204s provide more than enough bulk capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 16:57
$begingroup$
The inductance seems solely dependent on package and independent of how much capacitance is packed into that package. So, for decoupling, it's best (cost permitting) to go for the smallest possible package (required for the lowest inductance) with the highest possible capacitance. These caps have worse DC bias effects than those where a smaller amount of capacitance is packed in, but even with the degradation you end up with more capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 17:00
$begingroup$
@DKNguyen - I agree 100%. Most people blindly use 0.1uF for decoupling, instead. I’m a big fan of the 0402 1uF caps for decoupling for the exact reason you mentioned (as long it’s not a very cost sensitive design since they are a little expensive).
$endgroup$
– joribama
Jul 18 at 15:37
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I love those 0204 caps. The 1uF have high capacitance in such a low inductance package that by the time you put enough in parallel to decouple the high frequencies you have tons of bulk capacitance for the lower frequencies. Even the 0.1uF 0204s provide more than enough bulk capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 16:57
$begingroup$
The inductance seems solely dependent on package and independent of how much capacitance is packed into that package. So, for decoupling, it's best (cost permitting) to go for the smallest possible package (required for the lowest inductance) with the highest possible capacitance. These caps have worse DC bias effects than those where a smaller amount of capacitance is packed in, but even with the degradation you end up with more capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 17:00
$begingroup$
@DKNguyen - I agree 100%. Most people blindly use 0.1uF for decoupling, instead. I’m a big fan of the 0402 1uF caps for decoupling for the exact reason you mentioned (as long it’s not a very cost sensitive design since they are a little expensive).
$endgroup$
– joribama
Jul 18 at 15:37
$begingroup$
I love those 0204 caps. The 1uF have high capacitance in such a low inductance package that by the time you put enough in parallel to decouple the high frequencies you have tons of bulk capacitance for the lower frequencies. Even the 0.1uF 0204s provide more than enough bulk capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 16:57
$begingroup$
I love those 0204 caps. The 1uF have high capacitance in such a low inductance package that by the time you put enough in parallel to decouple the high frequencies you have tons of bulk capacitance for the lower frequencies. Even the 0.1uF 0204s provide more than enough bulk capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 16:57
$begingroup$
The inductance seems solely dependent on package and independent of how much capacitance is packed into that package. So, for decoupling, it's best (cost permitting) to go for the smallest possible package (required for the lowest inductance) with the highest possible capacitance. These caps have worse DC bias effects than those where a smaller amount of capacitance is packed in, but even with the degradation you end up with more capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 17:00
$begingroup$
The inductance seems solely dependent on package and independent of how much capacitance is packed into that package. So, for decoupling, it's best (cost permitting) to go for the smallest possible package (required for the lowest inductance) with the highest possible capacitance. These caps have worse DC bias effects than those where a smaller amount of capacitance is packed in, but even with the degradation you end up with more capacitance.
$endgroup$
– DKNguyen
Jul 16 at 17:00
$begingroup$
@DKNguyen - I agree 100%. Most people blindly use 0.1uF for decoupling, instead. I’m a big fan of the 0402 1uF caps for decoupling for the exact reason you mentioned (as long it’s not a very cost sensitive design since they are a little expensive).
$endgroup$
– joribama
Jul 18 at 15:37
$begingroup$
@DKNguyen - I agree 100%. Most people blindly use 0.1uF for decoupling, instead. I’m a big fan of the 0402 1uF caps for decoupling for the exact reason you mentioned (as long it’s not a very cost sensitive design since they are a little expensive).
$endgroup$
– joribama
Jul 18 at 15:37
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%2f448481%2fcapacitor-with-specific-self-resonant-frequency%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
$begingroup$
I think a more important question would be /why/ the datasheet (which datasheet, btw?) calls for a capacitor with a specific self-resonance frequency. Usually you would just want it to be 'high enough', and if you need resonance, build a resonator with an LC tank. There is already a lot of tolerance on the capacitance of such ceramic capacitors, which is the specification they are built for. I don't want to know the tolerance on something non-advertised like SRF
$endgroup$
– Joren Vaes
Jul 16 at 9:51
$begingroup$
It's looking for good filtering in the cell frequency bands. I agree it seems like a surprising approach, but it's what the manufacturer recommends, in section 2.2.1.10 of this document: u-blox.com/sites/default/files/…
$endgroup$
– Britton Kerin
Jul 17 at 18:00