Thread
:
Phase frequency Detector
View Single Post
#
33
May 30th 04, 04:02 AM
John Crabtree
Posts: n/a
Hello All
Rick Karlquist. N6RK,
on 5/28/04 wrote:
Everyone please read the 11C44 datasheet at:
http://ira.club.atnet.at/rd/11c44/11C44.html
before declaring there is no dead zone. See figure 11.
Rick N6RK
"Avery Fineman" wrote in message
...
In article B_Htc.4677$pt3.1214@attbi_s03, "Rick Karlquist N6RK"
writes:
There are various fixes for the dead zone problem.
In the mid-1970's, Fairchild (the original company)
sold an "11C44" phase detector that got rid of the
dead zone by injecting a narrow pulse so that the
phase detector pulses would never have to try to
go to zero width. Eric Breeze holds the patent
on this technique; if interested read his patent.
Analog Devices makes that AD9901 phase detector
which gets around the dead zone by first dividing
the frequency by 2. However, it is not suitable
for a frequency synthesizer because of the large
spurious sidebands resulting from this technique.
SNIP
See also 'The PLL Dead Zone and How to Avoid it', A. Hill & J. Surber, RF
Design, March 1992, pp131-134. The authors were with Analog Devices and
compared the performance of the AD9901 with that of the MC4044.
My understanding of the AD9901 is that it behaves as a edge controlled
frequency detector, until it gets close enough in frequency, when it switches
to being an EXOR phase detector.
I am struggling to understand the comment above that the AD9901 is not suitable
for use in frequency synthesisers because of the large spurious sidebands
arising from its use. What causes the additional sidebands ?
Elsewhere in this thread there seems to have been some debate on the operation
of the phase frequency detector. IMHO if the phase detector has a tri-state
output then the loop over time must lock with no phase difference between the
reference and controlled signals, ie 0 degrees.
73 John KC0GGH
Reply With Quote