0
\$\begingroup\$

some research has unfortunately not led to a clear result. Branches in transmission lines are not desirable, but if they are unavoidable the question arises how to properly terminate the individual branches. Assume I have a data signal that I want to transmit to several listeners in a star topology and the impedance of the lines in the star distribution is 50 ohms. Does that mean that each end of the line has to be terminated with 50 ohms?

\$\endgroup\$
6
  • \$\begingroup\$ Some research... could you please be more specific? Lee Ritchey's Right the First Time Vol.1 does have some examples of branching transmission line topologies. I highly recommend them. \$\endgroup\$
    – pfabri
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 19:55
  • \$\begingroup\$ Dr. Johnsons classic is still relevant and easy reading. Covers this topic and everything else you could want to know about high speed digital signal transmission. amazon.com/High-Speed-Digital-Design-Handbook/dp/0133957241 \$\endgroup\$
    – Kyle B
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 20:06
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Does that mean that each end of the line has to be terminated with 50 ohms? Yes because if you don't (terminate properly) the sigal will reflect and travel back to the beginning of your T-line. If there you have a passive signal splitter then the signal can distort the other lines. Terminating a line properly makes it look like it has an infinite length so that the signal never comes back. In reality of course the signal will be dissipated in the termination resistor. So proper termination is always needed at the end of a signal transmission line. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 20:17
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KyleB There were lots of errors in the book (I have it, bought long ago.) I did find one source for the errata here. That should help anyone who has or is considering getting the book. \$\endgroup\$
    – jonk
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 20:24
  • \$\begingroup\$ @jonk Haha Yeah you're not wrong. There was an updated version I believe, which is what I have. For sure I'm gonna check the errata! Thx! \$\endgroup\$
    – Kyle B
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 20:46

3 Answers 3

3
\$\begingroup\$

A distinction is usually made between stubs and branches in transmission lines. A stub is a short section for "tapping" a transmission line and should not have a termination resistor. If a long branch is needed, a line splitter should be used to match the impedances for all three branches (or 4 if there are that many.) Do not simply join the transmission line branches without a line splitter. Each branch should be terminated at its end with an appropriate terminator (usually a resistor matching the characteristic impedance of the transmission line).

In the case you describe, the characteristic impedance is 50 ohms, so all branches should be terminated with 50 ohms, and you need a 50 ohm line splitter.

Edit:

There are a number of different splitter/coupler topologies. Each one has their advantages and disadvantages. Without knowing more about which transmission lines can source signals, which ones need to receive and other details such as these, one cannot tell which topology is "best". However, in @SteveSh answer, he mentions a topology in which different transmission lines are connected via a resistive star. Here is an example.

schematic

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

The terminals are represented by R4, R5, and R6. There could, for example be high impedance transceivers connected in parallel to these resistors.

I claim that the impedances "seen" by R4, R5, and R6 are all 50 \$\Omega\$.

To see this, we just look at "the rest of the circuit" for each of these resistors. Choosing R4, the rest of the circuit consists of

R2 and R5 in series, all in parallel with R3 and R6 in series, all in series with R1. That is,

$$Z(4) = (( R2+R5) || (R3 + R6)) + R1$$

Assuming that all branches are "peers", and none has any special treatment, R1 = R2 = R3,

and, assuming that all branches are terminated with the characteristic impedance of the transmission line, \$Z_0\$

$$Z(4) = ((R1 + Z_0) || (R1 + Z_0)) + R1 = \frac{R1 + Z_0}{2} + R1 = \frac{3 R1 + Z_0}{2}$$

If we want the impedance "seen" by R_4 to also equal Z_0, then we have

$$Z_0 = \frac{3 R1 + Z_0}{2}$$

or $$2Z_0 = 3R1 + Z_0$$

$$Z_0 = 3R1$$

which is true if \$Z_0 = 50 \Omega\$ and \$R_1 = 16.67\Omega\$

By similar reasoning, if there were N transmission lines connected via such a resistive star, we would arrive at the formula

$$\frac{Z_0 + R1}{N-1} + R1 = Z_0$$

$$Z_0 + R1 = (Z_0 - R1)(N-1)$$ $$Z_0 + R1 = NZ_0 - NR1 - Z_0 + R1$$ $$Z_0 = NZ_0 - NR1 - Z_0$$ $$NR1 = NZ_0 - 2Z_0$$ $$R1 = Z_0 - \frac{2}{N}Z_0$$

\$\endgroup\$
5
  • \$\begingroup\$ Sound like a pretty universal approach. Some drawbacks I can think of wrt proper active splitting: the lines after the split are 'underdriven' I suppose so they would reach the final voltage level slower I guess. Maybe a spice sim would show if this termination a) destroys reflections after 1 bounce and b) how fast the final voltage equilibrates \$\endgroup\$
    – tobalt
    Commented Nov 5, 2021 at 3:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ @tobalt. The termination in this configuration is theoretically ideal. That is, each end of each transmission line theoretically sees a 50 ohm load. So, in theory, no reflections. The downside of this topology is the signal attenuation, as you surmise. A plus is that it is peer-to-peer if you need that. A down side is that it is not a directional coupler, if you need that. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 5, 2021 at 3:58
  • \$\begingroup\$ you are right. no reflection..forgot about the parallel termination at the end. Maybe by increasing those 50 Ohm parallel resistors, one can get around the 'underdriven'' part ? (just thinking out loud) Maybe even skipping the parallel termination altogether. \$\endgroup\$
    – tobalt
    Commented Nov 5, 2021 at 4:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ Well, you need the terminations to prevent reflections. Also, there is no way around the fact that with this topology a) the coupling resistors dissipate power, and b) the power that is not dissipated by those resistors is nonetheless split between the N-1 receivers. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 5, 2021 at 4:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ I did a practical test with a BNC T-distributor and 2 coaxial lines of different lengths. A square wave signal was fed in in the middle and if the ends were not both terminated, distortions occurred. Overall, much slower rising and falling edges were observed. \$\endgroup\$
    – arnisz
    Commented Nov 5, 2021 at 20:09
3
\$\begingroup\$

I have a data signal that I want to transmit to several listeners in a star topology and the impedance of the lines in the star distribution is 50 ohms. Does that mean that each end of the line has to be terminated with 50 ohms?

If you are only sending data to listeners then, if you have a powerful enough driving source with sufficiently low drive impedance, you can treat all the limbs of the star network as separate entities. This means, you can either terminate at each listener with a parallel termination or, series terminate at the send end multiple times.

\$\endgroup\$
2
\$\begingroup\$

A lot depends on your topology (how many branches, how long they are relative to the main line) and what your frequency of concern is (edge rate), but in general the answer is NO, you don't want to terminate each branch.

One reason is that if you have N branches, each one terminated with a parallel resistor R, the load seen by the driver chip DC-wise is R/N. This may be too low for the driver to reliably handle.

Another reason is that if the main trace and each branch are designed to be 50 ohms, at the junction of the branches (the node of the star), the 50 ohm main trace sees a trace impedance of 50/N, which in itself is a bad mismatch.

Your best approach to making something like this work is to insert a series resistor (say 33 ohms for starters) in each leg of the star. Then you have to simulate the design, using your favorite SI tool and see if your waveforms are acceptable.

This is a heuristic approach (some would call it a hack).

Another approach is to treat this as a RF problem and use something like Wilkinson splitters (power dividers). But you usually have to limit the bandwidth of you signal for these to work (they are not DC to light devices).

EDIT 1 - Added reference below

Some of these same points are discussed here: Why longer stubs cause more intense ringing?

\$\endgroup\$
5
  • \$\begingroup\$ If I am not mistaken, three 50 ohm transmission lines connected in a resistive Y, should have 16.7 ohms in each leg of the Y. (Assuming the T-lines are to be terminated with 50 ohms, all impedances are matched, and no T-line is preferred). ((50 + R) || (50 + R)) + R = 50 implies R = 16.7. For N 50 ohm transmission lines connected by a resistive star (50 + R)/(N-1) + R = 50. So, R = 50-100/N. But this assumes that all branch T-lines are terminated with 50 ohms. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 5, 2021 at 0:13
  • \$\begingroup\$ I don't understand the "((50 + R) || (50 + R)) + R = 50 implies R = 16.7". The 50 ohm Zo of the transmission line does not add to the 50 ohms of the termination resistor. \$\endgroup\$
    – SteveSh
    Commented Nov 5, 2021 at 0:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ I will add an explanation to my answer. I could be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 5, 2021 at 1:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ I made an edit to my answer. Did that help? \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 5, 2021 at 2:11
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SteveSh As fast as I understand the series resistor does add to the impedance seen by the traveling wave. The line voltage first jumps to VDD/2 and only reaches VDD when the reflected wave arrives. the series resistor dissipates the reflection so it will not propagate randomly for a long time but only exactly once \$\endgroup\$
    – tobalt
    Commented Nov 5, 2021 at 3:36

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.