Hi

Indeed, the output can never be better than the input with a DDS, but the 
Cy2302 is rated at a 90 to 100 ps jitter level. These days sub 1 ps jitter is a 
more reasonable spec for those sort of parts. 

A lot depends on how wide a band you want to cover. A VCXO can pull +/- 1000 
ppm and still do fairly well. That would give you +/- 14 KHz on 20 meters. For 
high(er) performance you could run over a 1.5 KHz range with a VCXO. Either way 
you still need to lock it up. An mix down and then compare architecture is 
probably the quick / easy way to go for sub 1 Hz steps and good spurs. Your 
synthesizer would be pretty band specific, but it could be quite low power.

Bob

On Aug 30, 2013, at 2:30 PM, "Collins, Graham" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Bob,
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> I was looking around for some different ideas on frequency multiplication and 
> stumbled across these "built in VCO" parts such as the CY2302. My first 
> thought was that they seem to be targeted to multiplying and synchronizing 
> clocks in digital systems rather than RF multiplication. 
> 
> Ultimate use of the DDS generated signal is as a high stability RF source for 
> a very low power transmitter for use with amateur radio QRSS modes. The 
> signals are typically frequency shift keyed or about 5 Hz and use slow data 
> keying to permit long integration at the reception location. Transmitted 
> Power levels are frequently 100 mW plus or minus, sometimes much lower. 
> Frequency stability is needed. The data keying is usually time synced as 
> well, commonly having a 10 minute frame rate, sometimes longer, sometimes 
> much longer.
> 
> The more I think of it, the more it seems that the better choice is the 
> multiplier chain to get from 10 MHz to where I need to be.  Perhaps I will 
> have a go at building an 80 MHz VCXO and phase locking that to my external 10 
> MHz ref.
> 
> There is another interesting chip, the SI-570, one version of which has a 
> Vcontrol input for FM'ing. Locking this device to an external 10 MHz 
> reference should not be much different than building a GPSDO.
> 
> As I have discovered, with respect to these DDS chips, the signal out can 
> never any better quality than the refclock going in - GIGO. 
> 
> Cheers, Graham ve3gtc
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On 
> Behalf Of Bob Camp
> Sent: August-30-13 1:21 PM
> To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] frequency multiplication
> 
> Hi
> 
> A discrete VCXO and PLL chip will always outperform the "buit in VCO" silicon 
> parts. The CY2302 is quite noisy even by silicon standards. Your doubler / 
> tripler will give you good close in noise, but poor performance broadband. A 
> lot depends on what the ultimate use for the DDS output is. The DDS it's self 
> likely has enough issues noise and spur wise to make the quality of the clock 
> driving it somewhat less important. 
> 
> Bob
> 
> On Aug 30, 2013, at 12:56 PM, "Collins, Graham" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Good day all,
>> 
>> Lately I have been contemplating a variety of methods to take a high 
>> stability 10 MHz reference multiply it up to a suitable frequency for use a 
>> the reference clock for a DDS, for example 10 MHz to 80 MHz or 120 MHz (or 
>> whatever).
>> 
>> On method is to use simple diode based doublers and triplers to get to where 
>> I want to be, that 10 x 2 x 2 x 2 = 80 or 10 x 3 x 2 x 2 = 120 or whatever 
>> combinations that would accomplish the same thing.
>> 
>> Another is the use of something like the Cypress CY2302 frequency multiplier 
>> and zero delay buffer which uses a PLL to perform it's magic (i.e 2 or 4 or 
>> 8 or 16 times multiplication).
>> 
>> My goal is to be able to use the DDS to generate a stable frequency close to 
>> the stability of the 10 MHz reference with good phase noise although the 
>> latter criteria is ill defined and of lesser importance than frequency 
>> stability at the moment.
>> 
>> Anyone have any firsthand experience with the likes of the CY2302 and can 
>> comment on their suitability for this task?
>> 
>> Cheers, Graham ve3gtc
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.

Reply via email to