This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

DP83848 board change recommendation

Dear Sirs,

our customer is using Pulse Transformer for DP83848 between the board#A and the board #B, but they would like to change this Pulse Transformer to Capacitor and also change a number of communication board from two to four.

Q1: Is this avaialble to connect with 4board by like the attachment?

Q2:  How should they change the capacitance(Calculating the Minimum Recommended Capacitance) and  against this change?

The minimum series capacitance can be calculated using the following equation for return loss,

Return Loss = -20 Log |(Zload – Zo)| / |(Zload + Zo)| (1)
Where:
Return Loss = 16 dB
Zo = 100 ohms
Zload = 100 + 1/jωC + 1/jωC ohms (from circuit in Figure 5).
Substituting the above values into Equation 1 and solving, results in:
ωC = 0.0622 (2)
At 2 MHz, the minimum series blocking capacitor value, C, would be 4.95 nF based on the return loss requirement.
The ANSI standard also specifies a limitation on the phase angle of the load (+/-3° maximum). For the phase calculation, a 100
ohm load at -3° phase angle produces a worst case capacitance.
2 * 1/ωC = 100 sin(-3°) = -5.233 (3)
Solving Equation 3 for C at 2 MHz gives 30.42 nF, which represents minimum capacitor value required to meet the phase
specification. The recommendation of 33 nF is the nearest standard value generally available, and proved acceptable based on
validation testing.
National

DP83848 usecase.pdf
  • I moved your post to the Ethernet forum so that it can get better visibility from the Ethernet experts. 

    The current 2 board implementation should work if the transformers were replaced with coupling capacitors. However, the DP83848 cannot operate in the 4 board configuration shown in the attachment. 

    Ethernet is a point to point connection and cannot operate with multiple devices connected together in a star configuration as shown.  This is true regardless of whether the devices are connected via transformer or via capacitors.

    Patrick

  • Thanks, but do not we verifty Ethernet itself starndard does not support a multiple port?  or DP8348 not to support a multiple port?

    Could we propose an alternative device of DP83838, f.e DP83849(2ch) x 2?

     

  • Ethernet itself is point to point.  A multi-port implementation would still require point to point connection of each PHY. 

    What is the end application?  How will data be shared throughout the system?

    Patrick

  • Ok, this application is the Power Monitoring system for FA, and I think they need the interactive communication between Board A and Board B. It is more than welcome not to change a hardware at this moment and it means some software change help this multiple connection. If not, which solution should we propose to realize BoardA(Single) and BoardB(Multiple port)? and also need the capacitance value then.

     

  • For an application with multiple ports, the PHY must still have a single, point-to-point connection for each link.  For a four port connection as you have described, I believe the configuration would require a 4-port switch and would look like the diagram below:

    In this configuration, the PHY connections would be point to point and the capacitance value would be 33nF as calculated previously.

    Patrick

  • Thank you very much for your advice.

    SInce the customer gave us addtional questions, please add your comment on E2E too.

    Q1: it is not nessesory to use a connector and a capacitor for 4port Swithch, right?

    Q2: is it possible for firmware to manage a communication collision instead of 4port Swith?

           this means to remove 4port Switch and change only software.

  • The need for a capacitor on the 4-port switch would depend on the switch.  I included this in the connection diagram, but I do not know if it would be required.  This would have to be specified by the switch vendor. 

    If the devices are all operated in 100Base-TX full-duplex mode, there is no need to manage collisions.  The switch allows the point to point connection required for 100Base-TX while still allowing communication between each of the PHYs. 

    What is the expected communication between the four PHYs?  I understand that this is a power monitoring system, but I don't understand the purpose of each PHY and how they will be controlled.  Could you provide a block diagram showing the controller and the purpose of each PHY?

    Thanks,

    Patrick