Tobias The diode connected BJT (2N2222) mixer is compared with various commercial mixers and phase detectors in a NIST paper that has a graph showing the PN of various mixers as a function of offset frequency.
The RPD series phase detectors have a higher output and lower PN than most mixers. The output depends on the input characteristics of the lowpass filter at the IF output. A capacitive load at this port increases the output at the expense of isolation between ports etc. These interactions are clearly shown in Spice simulations of such mixers. Bruce > On 04 April 2020 at 13:09 Tobias Pluess <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Bruce > > the NIST design you mentioned - do you mean that publication where they > used 2N2222's for a diode ring mixer? if so I can perhaps build this as > well because I think I even have some 2N2222s in my home lab :-) > Concerning the RPD vs. TUF mixers - what is the actual property which makes > the RPD "better" than the TUF? > > Thanks, > Tobias > > On Sat., 4 Apr. 2020, 02:01 Bruce Griffiths, <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Tobias > > > > That would certainly work for a start and have a better performance that a > > counter front end. > > The performance can be estimated using the tools at the link Bob provided. > > Lower noise opamps will improve the performance somewhat. > > A wider bandwidth opamp with a higher slew rate may be useful for the > > final stage of a Collins style zero crossing detector. > > The RPD series of phase detectors will have better performance than the > > TUF-1. > > For the ultimate performance at low offset frequencies one can build a > > mixer using diode connected BJTs as NIST have done. > > > > Bruce > > > On 04 April 2020 at 12:38 Tobias Pluess <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Bruce > > > > > > I have some TUF-1 mixers in my junk box as well as some JFET OpAmps > > AD8626. > > > So, if I connect the OpAmps appropriately with some diode limiters as you > > > suggest, would you say this would give an acceptable DMTD system? > > > If so it sounds like something that can easily be built on a breadbord or > > > in manhattan style, as Bob already mentioned. That would be really cool. > > > I think a while ago I asked a question which goes in a similar direction > > - > > > which mixers are better as phase detectors (to build a PLL for phase > > noise > > > measurement) and which ones should be used as actual mixers (like in this > > > case). > > > > > > > > > Tobias > > > HB9FSX > > > > > > On Fri., 3 Apr. 2020, 23:09 Bruce Griffiths, <[email protected] > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > One can merely add diodes to the opamp feedback network form a feedback > > > > limiter and maintain the opamp outputs within the range for which the > > opamp > > > > is well behaved whilst maintaining the increase in slew rate for the > > output. > > > > > > > > Bruce > > > > > On 04 April 2020 at 04:26 Tobias Pluess <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup, some of them even have phase reversal when they are overloaded, > > so > > > > it > > > > > is perhaps not a good idea in general, but I think there are opamps > > which > > > > > are specified for this. > > > > > > > > > > Tobias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 3:30 PM Dana Whitlow <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: opamps make terrible limiters- their overload behavior is > > > > > > generally ugly > > > > > > and unpredictable. It's much better to use a genuine level > > > > comparator, and > > > > > > wire it > > > > > > up so that it has a modest amount of hysteresis. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 6:45 AM Bob kb8tq <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The quick way to do this is with a single mixer. Take something > > like > > > > an > > > > > > old > > > > > > > 10811 and use the coarse tune to set it high in frequency by 5 > > to 10 > > > > Hz. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then feed it into an RPD-1 mixer and pull out the 5 to 10 Hz > > audio > > > > tone. > > > > > > > That tone is the *difference* between the 10811 and your device > > under > > > > > > > test. > > > > > > > If the DUT moves 1 Hz, the audio tone changes by 1 Hz. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you measured the 10 MHz on the DUT, that 1 Hz would be a very > > > > small > > > > > > > shift > > > > > > > ( 0.1 ppm ). At 10 Hz it’s a 10% change. You have “amplified” the > > > > change > > > > > > > in frequency by the ratio of 10 MHz to 10 Hz ( so a million X > > > > increase ). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *IF* you could tack that on to the ADEV plot of your 5335 ( no, > > it’s > > > > not > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > simple) your 7x10^-10 at 1 second would become more 7x10^-16 at 1 > > > > > > > second. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason its not quite that simple is that the input circuit > > on the > > > > > > > counter > > > > > > > really does not handle a 10 Hz audio tone as well as it handles > > a 10 > > > > MHz > > > > > > > RF signal. Instead of getting 9 digits a second, you probably > > will > > > > get > > > > > > > three > > > > > > > *good* digits a second and another 6 digits of noise. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The good news is that an op amp used as a preamp ( to get you up > > to > > > > maybe > > > > > > > 32 V p-p rather than a volt or so) and another op amp or three as > > > > > > limiters > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > get you up around 6 or 7 good digits. Toss in a cap or two as a > > high > > > > pass > > > > > > > and low pass filter ( DC offsets can be a problem ….) and you > > have a > > > > > > > working > > > > > > > device that gets into the parts in 10^-13 with your 5335. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It all can be done with point to point wiring. No need for a PCB > > > > layout. > > > > > > > Be > > > > > > > careful that the +/- 18V supplies to the op amp *both* go on and > > off > > > > at > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > same time …. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bob > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 3, 2020, at 5:13 AM, Tobias Pluess <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hi John > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yes I know the DMTD method, and indeed I am planing to build > > my own > > > > > > DMTD > > > > > > > > system, something similar to the "Small DMTD system" published > > by > > > > > > Riley ( > > > > > > > > https://www.wriley.com/A Small DMTD System.pdf). > > > > > > > > However I am unsure whether that will help much in this case, > > > > because > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > what the DMTD does is to mix the 10MHz signals down to some 1Hz > > > > Signal > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > so which can be measured more easily, and I already have 1Hz > > > > signals > > > > > > (the > > > > > > > > 1PPS) which I am comparing. > > > > > > > > Or do you suggest to use the DMTD and use a higher frequency > > at its > > > > > > > > outputs, say 10Hz or so, and then average for 10 samples to > > > > increase > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > resolution? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > Tobias > > > > > > > > HB9FSX > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 12:53 AM John Miles <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> b) if I want to measure 1e-11 or even 1e-12 at 1sec - what > > > > resolution > > > > > > > >> does > > > > > > > >>> my counter need? If the above was true, I would expect that > > a 1ps > > > > > > > >>> resolution (and an even better stability!) was required to > > > > measure > > > > > > ADEV > > > > > > > >> of > > > > > > > >>> 1e-12, The fact that the (as far as I know) world's most > > recent, > > > > > > > >>> rocket-science grade counter (some Keysight stuff) has "only" > > > > 20ps of > > > > > > > >>> resolution, but people are still able to measure even 1e-14 > > shows > > > > > > that > > > > > > > my > > > > > > > >>> assumption is wrong. So how are the measurement resolution > > and > > > > the > > > > > > ADEV > > > > > > > >>> related to each other? I plan to build my own TIC based on a > > > > TDC7200, > > > > > > > >> which > > > > > > > >>> would offer some 55ps of resolution, but how low could I go > > with > > > > > > that? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> That sounds like a simple question but it's not. There are a > > few > > > > > > > >> different approaches to look into: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> 1) Use averaging with your existing counter. Some counters > > can > > > > yield > > > > > > > >> readings in the 1E-12 region at t=1s even though their > > single-shot > > > > > > > jitter > > > > > > > >> is much worse than that. They do this by averaging hundreds > > or > > > > > > > thousands > > > > > > > >> of samples for each reading they report. Whether (and when) > > this > > > > is > > > > > > > >> acceptable is a complex topic in itself, too much so to > > explain > > > > > > quickly. > > > > > > > >> Search for information on the effects of averaging and dead > > time > > > > on > > > > > > > Allan > > > > > > > >> deviation to find the entrance to this fork of the rabbit > > hole. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> 2) Search for the term 'DMTD' and read about that. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> 3) Search for 'direct digital phase measurement' and read > > about > > > > that. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> 4) Search for 'tight PLL' and read about that. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Basically, while some counters can perform averaging on a > > > > > > post-detection > > > > > > > >> basis, that's like using the tone control on a radio to reduce > > > > static > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > >> QRM. It works, sort of, but it's too late in the signal > > chain at > > > > that > > > > > > > >> point to do the job right. You really want to limit the > > bandwidth > > > > > > > before > > > > > > > >> the signal is captured, but since that's almost never > > practical > > > > at RF, > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > >> next best thing to do is limit the bandwidth before the > > signal is > > > > > > > >> "demodulated" (i.e., counted.) > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Hence items 2, 3, and 4 above. They either limit the > > measurement > > > > > > > >> bandwidth prior to detection, lower the frequency itself to > > keep > > > > the > > > > > > > >> counter's inherent jitter from dominating the measurement, or > > > > both. > > > > > > > You'll > > > > > > > >> have to use one of these methods, or another technique along > > the > > > > same > > > > > > > >> lines, if you want to measure the short-term stability of a > > good > > > > > > > oscillator > > > > > > > >> or GPSDO. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> -- john, KE5FX > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > >> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > > > > > > > >> To unsubscribe, go to > > > > > > > >> > > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > > > > > > > >> and follow the instructions there. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, go to > > > > > > > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > > > > > > > > and follow the instructions there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, go to > > > > > > > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > > > > > > > and follow the instructions there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > > > > > > To unsubscribe, go to > > > > > > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > > > > > > and follow the instructions there. > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > > > > > To unsubscribe, go to > > > > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > > > > > and follow the instructions there. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > > > > To unsubscribe, go to > > > > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > > > > and follow the instructions there. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > > > To unsubscribe, go to > > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > > > and follow the instructions there. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > > To unsubscribe, go to > > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > > and follow the instructions there. > > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe, go to > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > and follow the instructions there. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com and follow the instructions there.
