time-nuts@lists.febo.com

Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement

View all threads

Low Phase-Noise measurements and design (was Re: HP 5071A Electron Multiplier of Cesium Beam Tube)

MD
Magnus Danielson
Sat, Sep 12, 2009 10:17 AM

Hi!

Shouldn't this thread have a more appropriate subject?

A better  approach IMHO is to work on pushing the  limits  of what
can be  done  with  homebrew  crystal  oscillators.  The excellent
broadband floor  of Wenzel and similar oscillators is  not  due to
their use of exotic crystals, but to their use of  good oscillator
circuit topologies (and no buffering to speak of).

This is  very  interesting news. I thought  it  took  excellent high
quality quartz and very good low noise circuitry.

Can you tell more about how it is done? Do you happen to know of any
schematics? What kind of crystal would be suitable? I would  be very
interested in any additional info.

What a good crystal gives you is a high Q value and high purity and
mounting which gives you low drift. Ovenizing aids to lower the
frequency deviations due to temperature sensitivity, as usual.

The low noise oscillator and buffering amps makes the next important
step. The 1/f noise and white noise is of importance. I recommend
Rubiolas book and do read it through carefully. He drives the points
down very well. In the end, the concepts are simple and the way
interaction occurs isn't too complex. For phase-noise, the 1/f noise and
white noise of the oscillating amplifier becomes crutial, as they
convert into 1/f³ and 1/f² noise within the bandwidth defined by the
crystal Q-value. The output buffer amps noise can then hide part of that
spectrum, but as Rubiola points out, spending too much money on the
buffer amps and not on the oscillating amps will be wasted as the 1/f²
and 1/f³ noise rises quicker than the 1/f noise of the buffer amp.

The crystal's  job is stability, not noise, and unlike  low noise,
good stability is relatively cheap and trivial nowadays  thanks to
cheap GPS clocks, rubidiums, and good-quality OCXOs.

Yes, I very much agree. GPS solves a lot of problems.

So the  question  is what kind of tweaking is needed  to  get the
best performance  in  a regenerative divider,  and  what  kind of
equipment is  needed to do it? Then, is perfection  really needed
in order  to  beat  the  Wenzel  ULN?  Maybe  put  up  with lower
performance in the beginning, then upgrade later.

In practice  many applications for ULN-class  oscillators  put the
broadband floor at risk in other ways. Very few  buffer amplifiers
have a  noise floor below -170 dBc/Hz, for  instance. Fortunately,
apart from  timing metrology, ULNs often end  up  driving high-end
ADCs, where  the  application is likely to be a good  test  bed in
itself.

I thought  the  noise in a 50 ohm resistor set  the  lower  limit to
-174dBc. Modern  amplifiers are better than that. For example,  a 50
ohm resistor  has 0.894nV/sqrt(Hz) noise, but you  can  get wideband
amplifiers with 0.7nV/sqrt(Hz) noise, which is equal to the noise in
a 30.6 ohm resistor. (Of course, flicker noise is not included)

-174 dBm, but not -174 dBc... the intrinsic noise of the resistor does
not change with the amplitude of the carrier, it has a fixed amplitude
with relation to the carrier... unless you consider the heating effect,
but it needs to be very high to make any larger contribution as you most
probably start with room temperature for most cases.

High speed adcs have very low jitter requirements to  maintain ENOB,
so anything that can improve the noise is helpful.

One trick  I have found that really helps isolate  circuit blocks
is to  put  them  on their own small island  pcb,  which  is then
soldered to the main ground plane to hold it in place.  Then find
the location  of  ground  connections  that  give  the lowest
crosstalk. A brief description is here.

Yep, totally, and the islands become reusable components  in their
own right.

That's a  valid  thing to do, although I find that  when  I'm that
concerned with  isolation,  I probably want a  full  shield anyway
(hence the use of lots of discrete Hammond boxes).  Sometimes even
this approach  is  self-defeating,  as  when  I  find  that my
tightly-sealed Hammond enclosures make good cavity oscillators.

I'm probably  preaching to the choir, but do you find  the waveguide
cutoff frequency  for the box? It's pretty easy - you can  do  it in
your head. For example, the cutoff frequency is

fc = c / 2w, where

fc = cutoff in GHz
c  = speed of light, 30 cm/ns
w  = width in cm

So a box 4 inches wide would be

fc = 30 / (2 * 10)
= 30 / 20
= 1.5 GHz

Here's a  calculator  that  gives  the  attenuation  at  any desired
frequency below cutoff:

http://www.k5rmg.org/calc/waveguide.html

Another problem  is  the pcb will resonate at  some  frequency, just
like a patch antenna.

For example, a 100mm x 50 mm (4 inch x 2 inch) pcb will  resonate at
700MHz. But  drop  the size to a 1 inch  square,  and  the resonance
moves up  to 2.768 GHz. This is a bit more difficult to  do  in your
head, so here's a calculator to help:

http://www.emtalk.com/mpacalc.php

There is of course ways to mitigate that resonance by design.

However, for homebrew it may just be simpler to obey the simple rules.

Cheers,
Magnus

Hi! Shouldn't this thread have a more appropriate subject? > > A better approach IMHO is to work on pushing the limits of what > > can be done with homebrew crystal oscillators. The excellent > > broadband floor of Wenzel and similar oscillators is not due to > > their use of exotic crystals, but to their use of good oscillator > > circuit topologies (and no buffering to speak of). > > This is very interesting news. I thought it took excellent high > quality quartz and very good low noise circuitry. > > Can you tell more about how it is done? Do you happen to know of any > schematics? What kind of crystal would be suitable? I would be very > interested in any additional info. What a good crystal gives you is a high Q value and high purity and mounting which gives you low drift. Ovenizing aids to lower the frequency deviations due to temperature sensitivity, as usual. The low noise oscillator and buffering amps makes the next important step. The 1/f noise and white noise is of importance. I recommend Rubiolas book and do read it through carefully. He drives the points down very well. In the end, the concepts are simple and the way interaction occurs isn't too complex. For phase-noise, the 1/f noise and white noise of the oscillating amplifier becomes crutial, as they convert into 1/f³ and 1/f² noise within the bandwidth defined by the crystal Q-value. The output buffer amps noise can then hide part of that spectrum, but as Rubiola points out, spending too much money on the buffer amps and not on the oscillating amps will be wasted as the 1/f² and 1/f³ noise rises quicker than the 1/f noise of the buffer amp. > > The crystal's job is stability, not noise, and unlike low noise, > > good stability is relatively cheap and trivial nowadays thanks to > > cheap GPS clocks, rubidiums, and good-quality OCXOs. > > Yes, I very much agree. GPS solves a lot of problems. > > >> So the question is what kind of tweaking is needed to get the > >> best performance in a regenerative divider, and what kind of > >> equipment is needed to do it? Then, is perfection really needed > >> in order to beat the Wenzel ULN? Maybe put up with lower > >> performance in the beginning, then upgrade later. > > > In practice many applications for ULN-class oscillators put the > > broadband floor at risk in other ways. Very few buffer amplifiers > > have a noise floor below -170 dBc/Hz, for instance. Fortunately, > > apart from timing metrology, ULNs often end up driving high-end > > ADCs, where the application is likely to be a good test bed in > > itself. > > I thought the noise in a 50 ohm resistor set the lower limit to > -174dBc. Modern amplifiers are better than that. For example, a 50 > ohm resistor has 0.894nV/sqrt(Hz) noise, but you can get wideband > amplifiers with 0.7nV/sqrt(Hz) noise, which is equal to the noise in > a 30.6 ohm resistor. (Of course, flicker noise is not included) -174 dBm, but not -174 dBc... the intrinsic noise of the resistor does not change with the amplitude of the carrier, it has a fixed amplitude with relation to the carrier... unless you consider the heating effect, but it needs to be very high to make any larger contribution as you most probably start with room temperature for most cases. > High speed adcs have very low jitter requirements to maintain ENOB, > so anything that can improve the noise is helpful. > > >> One trick I have found that really helps isolate circuit blocks > >> is to put them on their own small island pcb, which is then > >> soldered to the main ground plane to hold it in place. Then find > >> the location of ground connections that give the lowest > >> crosstalk. A brief description is here. > > > Yep, totally, and the islands become reusable components in their > > own right. > > > That's a valid thing to do, although I find that when I'm that > > concerned with isolation, I probably want a full shield anyway > > (hence the use of lots of discrete Hammond boxes). Sometimes even > > this approach is self-defeating, as when I find that my > > tightly-sealed Hammond enclosures make good cavity oscillators. > > I'm probably preaching to the choir, but do you find the waveguide > cutoff frequency for the box? It's pretty easy - you can do it in > your head. For example, the cutoff frequency is > > fc = c / 2w, where > > fc = cutoff in GHz > c = speed of light, 30 cm/ns > w = width in cm > > So a box 4 inches wide would be > > fc = 30 / (2 * 10) > = 30 / 20 > = 1.5 GHz > > Here's a calculator that gives the attenuation at any desired > frequency below cutoff: > > http://www.k5rmg.org/calc/waveguide.html > > Another problem is the pcb will resonate at some frequency, just > like a patch antenna. > > For example, a 100mm x 50 mm (4 inch x 2 inch) pcb will resonate at > 700MHz. But drop the size to a 1 inch square, and the resonance > moves up to 2.768 GHz. This is a bit more difficult to do in your > head, so here's a calculator to help: > > http://www.emtalk.com/mpacalc.php There is of course ways to mitigate that resonance by design. However, for homebrew it may just be simpler to obey the simple rules. Cheers, Magnus