Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
rickman wrote in :
Before integration comes demodulation. How would you demodulate and integrate in the analog domain on a 100 uW power budget? The signal is PSK. But that is not the real reason. My goal is to show it is possible to do this entirely in the digital domain. Low Vf diode in feedback loop of op-amp? I'm curious though, it's an interesting thought, doing it all in digital equipment, but why? The main drive behind me 'off-shelf' remark is that I suspect the best answer already exists in many forms. I'm curious about what makes a need to keep searching. ![]() do something, I'm just not sure what the differentiating factor is in this case. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 10/30/2014 1:02 PM, Lostgallifreyan wrote:
rickman wrote in : Before integration comes demodulation. How would you demodulate and integrate in the analog domain on a 100 uW power budget? The signal is PSK. But that is not the real reason. My goal is to show it is possible to do this entirely in the digital domain. Low Vf diode in feedback loop of op-amp? I'm curious though, it's an interesting thought, doing it all in digital equipment, but why? The main drive behind me 'off-shelf' remark is that I suspect the best answer already exists in many forms. I'm curious about what makes a need to keep searching. ![]() do something, I'm just not sure what the differentiating factor is in this case. I don't know about "best" but you can buy a time code receiver chip that spits out a demodulated signal to be decoded by an MCU. At that point the data rate is pretty low so an MCU can run at very low power levels, likely dominated by the quiescent current. When you suggest an op amp, we already covered that ground and they aren't low power enough. I'm curious how they amplify the signal in the receiver chip with the whole circuit drawing a very low power level. -- Rick |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 10/30/2014 01:27 PM, rickman wrote:
On 10/30/2014 1:02 PM, Lostgallifreyan wrote: rickman wrote in : Before integration comes demodulation. How would you demodulate and integrate in the analog domain on a 100 uW power budget? The signal is PSK. But that is not the real reason. My goal is to show it is possible to do this entirely in the digital domain. Low Vf diode in feedback loop of op-amp? I'm curious though, it's an interesting thought, doing it all in digital equipment, but why? The main drive behind me 'off-shelf' remark is that I suspect the best answer already exists in many forms. I'm curious about what makes a need to keep searching. ![]() do something, I'm just not sure what the differentiating factor is in this case. I don't know about "best" but you can buy a time code receiver chip that spits out a demodulated signal to be decoded by an MCU. At that point the data rate is pretty low so an MCU can run at very low power levels, likely dominated by the quiescent current. When you suggest an op amp, we already covered that ground and they aren't low power enough. I'm curious how they amplify the signal in the receiver chip with the whole circuit drawing a very low power level. Motorola's app notes on the old 4000 series CMOS included various analog circuits, including use of a CMOS inverter as an amplifier. I'm enough of a packrat that I keep those things. 4000 series may not be useful in your case, but the circuits or variants of them may apply in newer CMOS implementations. 'Course calling it all digital may be just a game if your input stage is a digital circuit biased to operate in an analog mode. George |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
George Cornelius wrote:
Motorola's app notes on the old 4000 series CMOS included various analog circuits, including use of a CMOS inverter as an amplifier. I'm enough of a packrat that I keep those things. I'm sure this guy (who is coming back on this subject regularly) is not going to consider that low-power. The inverter was driven into the area between switching to '1' and to '0' by using a feedback resistor, and so both output fets are conducting and drawing current from Vcc to Gnd. |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 11/3/2014 3:08 AM, Rob wrote:
George Cornelius wrote: Motorola's app notes on the old 4000 series CMOS included various analog circuits, including use of a CMOS inverter as an amplifier. I'm enough of a packrat that I keep those things. I'm sure this guy (who is coming back on this subject regularly) is not going to consider that low-power. The inverter was driven into the area between switching to '1' and to '0' by using a feedback resistor, and so both output fets are conducting and drawing current from Vcc to Gnd. If you I am "the guy", whether or not this is low power enough depends on the power. My understanding is that when operated in the linear mode significant current can flow in a CMOS device. So likely this isn't low enough power, no. I'm very curious about how they do it in the commercial chips. I have seen block diagrams and they show an amplifier as the first part of the chip. Maybe the design really isn't all that low power. Rather than running at low power all the time, they just limit the duty cycle of the receiver. "Atomic" clocks don't need to monitor the signal except for a few minutes each day. -- Rick |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
rickman wrote:
On 11/3/2014 3:08 AM, Rob wrote: George Cornelius wrote: Motorola's app notes on the old 4000 series CMOS included various analog circuits, including use of a CMOS inverter as an amplifier. I'm enough of a packrat that I keep those things. I'm sure this guy (who is coming back on this subject regularly) is not going to consider that low-power. The inverter was driven into the area between switching to '1' and to '0' by using a feedback resistor, and so both output fets are conducting and drawing current from Vcc to Gnd. If you I am "the guy", whether or not this is low power enough depends on the power. My understanding is that when operated in the linear mode significant current can flow in a CMOS device. So likely this isn't low enough power, no. I'm very curious about how they do it in the commercial chips. I have seen block diagrams and they show an amplifier as the first part of the chip. Maybe the design really isn't all that low power. Rather than running at low power all the time, they just limit the duty cycle of the receiver. "Atomic" clocks don't need to monitor the signal except for a few minutes each day. I have several battery-powered "atomic clocks" and all of them enable the receiver only for a few minutes, either every hour or twice a day depending on the particular design. The receiver I have connected to my computer is of course enabled all the time. Many years ago I worked on a "shop-shelf tag" system that used a low frequency receiver in a single-chip design, and it also had a power saving mechanism. The tags (powered by single lithium cell like those used as a BIOS backup battery) were usually in a sleep mode only driving the LCD, and once every so many seconds they briefly enabled the receiver. To run an update, the controller sent a wakeup signal that lasted long enough to get the attention of all tags, then it sent the updates addressed to each tag, and finally an end-of-transmission signal that put everything back into sleep mode. The lithium cell lasted several years, I think. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|