[time-nuts] Oleg' s PN test Re: A new member & PN test set

Oleg Skydan olegskydan at gmail.com
Tue Mar 29 03:17:42 EDT 2016


Hi, Bruce,

Thank you for the comments and useful link. Probably you did not understand 
the goal and positioning of this "project" and I did not tell the history of 
how it was build :)

So, the solely goal of making this "test set" was to assist with the design
of the synthesizer unit for my HF transceiver. The synthesizer PN goals are 
to archive PN better then -145..-150dBc/Hz at 1kHz offset and better 
then -150..-155dBc/Hz at 5kHz and farther. So I do not need something perfect 
to measure parts of the synthesizer or the complete unit.

Now some words how it was build. Several years ago I experimented with the 
voltage regulators and needed to measure their noise. So I made an AD797 LNA 
for my soundcard. Later I added the mixer which I used (along with the 
signal generator) as a selective meter or primitive spectrum analyzer. 
Several months ago I started to work at the synthesizer project, so I needed 
PN "test set". I found a board with two TL071 in suitable configuration in 
my "junk box" and after several minutes of soldering I had the PLL board :) 
Usually I am not a fan of such construction methods, but that time it solved 
problem quickly.

> 1) The chosen mixer isnt as low noise as the various Minicircuits phase
> detectors.
I just used what I have. There are some very bad things here :( (it is way 
out of the list theme), so buying parts (especially ones not widely used) is 
not a simple task here. The Minicircuits parts are expensive and exotic 
here.

> 2) The 50 ohm load after the filter merely serves to halve the phase 
> detector
> gain. The IF port is terminated by a 15nF capacitor at RF and LO 
> frequencies
> and their harmonics. This produces a frequency dependent gain, however it 
> will
> likely be relatively flat over the sound card bandwidth.
I know it does not terminate mixer correctly, but it is simple and it works. 
I tried the termination suggested in the NIST papers (with 50Ohm RF 
termination and 1kOhm DC/AF one) with no success - the noise floor of the 
"test set" was higher. As for the gain flatness, I checked it - you can see 
the results of the quick test here 
http://skydan.in.ua/PNTestSet/Screen(432)-e.png (it was 60MHz LO + signal 
generator slowly tuned around 60MHz, the SA was set to peak and hold mode). 
It completely satisfies my needs.

> 3) Saturating both mixer ports increases the phase detector gain 
> substantially
> and has the lowest noise
>
In this case the simple and reliable calibration method I use will not work, 
cause the mixer output will not be sinusoidal anymore. Another problem is 
the signal levels - two good RF LNAs will be needed to amplify signals up to 
the necessary levels to saturate mixer.

> 4) Cascading the PLL circuitry with the preamp causes interaction between 
> the
> Preamp gain settings and the PLL bandwidth. Driving the PLL circuit in
> parallel with the preamp input directly from the low pass filtered mixer 
> output
> avoids this issue as well as your 0.1x amplifier in the PLL section.
I see no reason to use 20dB preamp gain for measurements (the sound card 
noise will have too much influence with this setting), so it useful only for 
calibration or the other LNA use (not in PN test set). On the other hand if 
the PLL circuit connected to the LNA output we have minimal 
components/wires/traces/connections in the most sensitive part of the test 
set, so the chance to pick up some external noise is also minimized.

I can add that other good and simple/cheap additions will be the integrator 
reset button, two buttons to move integrator in positive or negative 
direction manually (to speed up the initial lock in some cases, or shift the 
output voltage into the necessary EFC range), potentiometer for the manual 
VCO/VCXO frequency control (for the calibration) with the switch to 
close/open PLL.

> An OCXO like the 10811A has an EFC gain of around 0.1Hz/volt.
> The PLL bandwidth should ideally be less than 1/10 of the lowest offset
> frequency for which the PN is to be measured.
> If the system frequency response is measured then the PLL bandwidth can be 
> a
> little higher albeit with a reduction is sensitivity and an increase in 
> system
> PN at the low offset frequency end of the range.
> AS is the PN noise of this test set is far too high to measure the PN of 
> state
> of the art OCXOs or indeed most modern OXCOs.
Ohh... I am not a time nut (or maybe not a time nut YET ;). I did not try to 
make something "state of the art" - my goals were/are different (see 
earlier).

As for the PLL BW of cause one should be aware what the BW is. In my 
measurements the PLL BW is less then 30Hz. I am not interested in PN closer 
then 1kHz, so no need for any additional correction of the results.

Much more sophisticated system can be made - better ADC, better LNA, RF LNAs 
to push mixer in saturation, better software, two channels with cross 
correlation and etc. Or we can even use two high speed ADC and move more 
things into digital domain. But it can not be done in one evening and for 
the less then $40 ;).

Best wishes!
Oleg 



More information about the time-nuts mailing list