??? 03/15/12 02:00 Read: times |
#186675 - Some of those rules are showing their age Responding to: ???'s previous message |
First of all, I don't think 100 nF is "right" for IC bypass unless in parallel with about 200pF. The sharp edges on modern CMOS signals cause considerable ground bounce and, unless the cap's are extremely high-quality, they won't respond quickly enough to suppress the switching noise internal to most parts, especially if they're registered parts.
Additionally, I believe one should avoid too much power-gnd capacitance, as it will cause far too slow a decay of Vcc. This means there will be lots of time for circuits to misbehave during the period in which Vcc is still high enough to allow them to operate, but not high enough to ensure they operate correctly. Not all components, including MCU's behave the in the same way once Vcc is out of specified limits. All one can say is that they behave unpredictably, and since their limits are often quite different, that problem has to be mitigated in some way. I prefer to put a short circuit across Vcc, and, especially, the input to the last regulator. I've been using very small-valued cap's to bypass HC, HCT, AC, ACT, and similar parts for decades with surprisingly good results. Your mileage may vary, but I doubt adding the tiny cap's will hurt, and you might actually find that 200 pF works well with those fast-clocked counters, shift registers, etc. After all, that 4.7 uF at the power entry will keep things smoothed with today's low-power circuits. RE |