Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. Motorola had some patents on the circuits in its MC145159 that dealt with the dead zone and sampling sidebands. It also used a divide by 2 technique, that was not documented; (we figured it out by observing the chip's output). That chip may have been inherited by On Semiconductor. It was originally developed for some division of GE. The "dead zone problem" is less a problem and more a state of mind. :-) When implemented with a charge-pump circuit (voltage & time converter to current) between the PFD and loop filter, it rather disappears into the woodwork of the whole PLL. The phase difference between signal and reference is proportional to the control voltage of the VCO producing the basic frequency. There is ALWAYS going to be a signal versus reference phase offset when the entire loop is in lock so this dreaded "dead zone problem" will only show up in a very narrow range of controlled frequency. General intuitive thought on any PLL or other synthesizer closed loop is that the relative phase between signal and reference is zero. It isn't. If it was, then the VCO could not be controlled. As a very rough indicator of VCO frequency, that signal v. reference offset phase exists for quick scope checking...when the control voltage range of the VCO is known. Good for a quick bench check. In practical terms, that dreaded "dead zone" isn't visible in a real-world example. Case in point: 23+ years ago, Rocketdyne Division of Rockwell International (now a Division of Boeing) was beginning work on a Deformable Mirror for laser work (they had a sizeable optics group) that used a 1 MHz signal out of optics to indicate the light phase error of an optical interferometer. I rigged up a 74H family phase-frequency detector circuit as the heart of that, an integrator out of that into an A-to-D converter to get a digital version for computer data manipulation. By all the careful measurement, the expected dead zone didn't show up on any graphing and the standard lab time interval counters could resolve, accurately, 2 nanoseconds using time averaging. [translates to rather less than a degree of phase error] The optical physicists had been hopping up and down about "dead zone" in meetings but the actual circuit performance didn't show it. One reason for the non-observation of any dead zone is that the digital gates forming the PFD were so lightly loaded in other-gate capacitance that their propagation delays all tended to be the same. Datasheet values of propagation delay of gates are all given as maximums, rather worst-case things with lots of pFds connected to outputs, etc. Put on half a prototype board, loaded only by other gates of the PFD and the resistor input of an op-amp integrator, the capacitance loading was minimal. [project was successful, and spawned more work on deformable mirrors] It can be an interesting academic problem to achieve a zero dead- dead zone effect in a PFD, but thats about it. When working at the comparison frequency of less than a few MHz, the PFD dead zone due to differential propagation delays of the gates disappears into the woodwork when using 74LS or faster digital families. There's plenty to be concerned about in any frequency synthesizer subsystem, but a phase-frequency detector gate structure is a very minor problem in my opinion. DDS and fractional-N loops in synthesizers have their own problems such as spurious output, but those problems can't really be traced to any PFD dead-zone effect. A PFD is wonderful as a control loop element in that it can control a VCO (of the loop) from way off the frequency and bring it into a lock phase range...from either worst- case start-up frequency. [way back in the beginning of radio time, lock loops had to use sawtooth sweep circuits to cure that start-up condition, and couldn't control beyond +/- 90 degrees of phase shift...PFDs easily handle +/-180 degrees] Len Anderson retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Phase differences in direct conversion receivers | Homebrew | |||
V and I not in phase at resonance Frequency in RLC network? | Homebrew |