Skip to main content
added 70 characters in body
Source Link
DKNguyen
  • 56.9k
  • 5
  • 70
  • 160

The smaller cap closest to output should help with radiated noise. Larger caps deal with lower frequencies (and tend have more self-inductance) so can tolerate more trace inductance so can be farther away.

Electrolytic vs ceramic capacitor is moot in the face of what I just outlined since type implies capacitance and self-inductance. Your electrolytics are always larger and slower than your ceramics.

It follows all the same principles of capacitors on inputs to ICs.

The smaller cap closest to output should help with radiated noise. Larger caps deal with lower frequencies (and tend have more self-inductance) so can tolerate more trace inductance so can be farther away.

Electrolytic vs ceramic capacitor is moot in the face of what I just outlined since type implies capacitance and self-inductance. Your electrolytics are always larger and slower than your ceramics.

The smaller cap closest to output should help with radiated noise. Larger caps deal with lower frequencies (and tend have more self-inductance) so can tolerate more trace inductance so can be farther away.

Electrolytic vs ceramic capacitor is moot in the face of what I just outlined since type implies capacitance and self-inductance. Your electrolytics are always larger and slower than your ceramics.

It follows all the same principles of capacitors on inputs to ICs.

Source Link
DKNguyen
  • 56.9k
  • 5
  • 70
  • 160

The smaller cap closest to output should help with radiated noise. Larger caps deal with lower frequencies (and tend have more self-inductance) so can tolerate more trace inductance so can be farther away.

Electrolytic vs ceramic capacitor is moot in the face of what I just outlined since type implies capacitance and self-inductance. Your electrolytics are always larger and slower than your ceramics.