Do you mean with a 7404 hex inverter? I actually did something like this recently while adding a 75ns pre-trigger pulse to an existing fast rise pulse generator.
The pre-trigger pulse ended up having significant pattern dependant jitter caused by the adjacent TTL divider chain modulating the supply voltage and the poor power supply rejection of the 7404. I was easily able to see the jitter on my 7T11 sampling oscilloscope but on my 2440 (20 GS/sec equivalent time sampling), it was barely perceptible if that despite ideal conditions. The peak to peak jitter was about 100ps. As far as I could tell from the available online documentation, the TDS220 and TDS3012 have relatively low sample rates and do not support equivalent time sampling so I would expect them to show even less than my 2440. On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 11:55:11 +0200, Azelio Boriani <[email protected]> wrote: >In your opinion, if I build a 7404 ZCD and a hard limiter one, can I see >the jitter difference on a simple 'scope (Tek TDS220 or TDS3012) or do I >need the Wavecrest SIA3000? > >On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Bob Camp <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi >> >> Since the Collins approach "tunes" the system for a single frequency input >> (more or less), the approach is probably not the best for a "many decades" >> sort of frequency range. There are a number of things that he alludes to in >> the paper, but does not directly address. The most obvious is the >> temperature dependance of the "stuff" the system is made of. Another is the >> simple fact that a non-clipping linear amplifier is likely the best choice >> for a first stage, provide the input is not already near clipping. >> >> Bob >> >> On Aug 21, 2012, at 12:50 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> >> > Hello everyone, >> > >> > I am new to this forum. >> > It looks like a lively discussion on various topics. >> > >> > A colleague of mine here at Agilent pointed me to this paper entitled >> "The Design of Low Jitter Hard Limiters" by Oliver Collins. In Bruce >> Griffiths' precision time in frequency webpage, this paper is described as >> "seminal." >> > (http://www.ko4bb.com/~bruce/ZeroCrossingDetectors.html) >> > >> > Since I'm trying to create a limiter that will accept frequencies >> ranging from 1 MHz to 100 MHz, I thought it would be good to understand the >> conclusions of this paper (if not the mathematics as well). The >> mathematics turned out to be quite challenging to decode. Has someone on >> this forum unraveled the equations? It appears Collins has recommendations >> on the bandwidth and gain of a jitter minimizing limiter, and then extends >> this analysis to provide the bandwidth and gain of a cascade of limiters. >> But the application is still fuzzy. In figure 5, he shows a graph showing >> the dependence of jitter on crossing time. Is the crossing time (implied >> by equations 7) considered a design parameter one can vary? Also, on figure >> 4, the "k" parameter has been varied to show the rising waveform as a >> function of "k". The threshold is always assumed to be 0.5. So could "k" >> be related to "tau", the time constant of the RC filter? >> > >> > Thanks in advance for all your help. >> > >> > Yours >> > >> > Raj >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >> > To unsubscribe, go to >> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >> > and follow the instructions there. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >> To unsubscribe, go to >> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >> and follow the instructions there. >> >_______________________________________________ >time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >and follow the instructions there. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
