Compensating frequency response of wideband amplifiers
 

Could someone point me in the direction of how you might go about flattening
the frequency response of a wideband amplifier MMIC? I'm looking at something
like the Watkin-Johnson ECG003 (http://www.wj.com/pdf/ECG003.pdf) and noticing
that the response drops a little over 2dB from 500MHz to 2.5GHz. Assuming
that I've got plenty of SNR, component count isn't a big deal, and I don't
mind tweaking trimmers, how might I go about flattening that respone to, say,
0.5dB or better across that range? Or is it just not very practical?

Thanks,
---Joel Kolstad

Compensating frequency response of wideband amplifiers
 

In article ,
says...
Could someone point me in the direction of how you might go about flattening
the frequency response of a wideband amplifier MMIC? I'm looking at something
like the Watkin-Johnson ECG003 (http://www.wj.com/pdf/ECG003.pdf) and noticing
that the response drops a little over 2dB from 500MHz to 2.5GHz. Assuming
that I've got plenty of SNR, component count isn't a big deal, and I don't
mind tweaking trimmers, how might I go about flattening that respone to, say,
0.5dB or better across that range? Or is it just not very practical?

Thanks,
---Joel Kolstad





Why would you need specs like that? You don't ordinary rely on an
amplifier to provide that kind of flatness. You need a detector and a
PIN modulator in a closed loop.

-- jm

------------------------------------------------------
http://www.qsl.net/ke5fx
Note: My E-mail address has been altered to avoid spam
------------------------------------------------------

Compensating frequency response of wideband amplifiers
 

"John Miles" wrote in message
...
Why would you need specs like that?

Obscenely wideband (500MHz) software-defined radios. There are people out
there asking for such things to be built -- hence the question! (And
wondering whether or they're just having pipe dreams and technology just
isn't there yet...)

Compensating frequency response of wideband amplifiers
 

Joel Kolstad wrote:

Could someone point me in the direction of how you might go about flattening
the frequency response of a wideband amplifier MMIC? I'm looking at something
like the Watkin-Johnson ECG003 (http://www.wj.com/pdf/ECG003.pdf) and noticing
that the response drops a little over 2dB from 500MHz to 2.5GHz. Assuming
that I've got plenty of SNR, component count isn't a big deal, and I don't
mind tweaking trimmers, how might I go about flattening that respone to, say,
0.5dB or better across that range? Or is it just not very practical?

Thanks,
---Joel Kolstad



A lead-lag filter with the pole out beyond 2.5GHz may do it for you, but
I have no idea how you'd actually implement it.

Ditto for cleverly placed stubs.

And don't call me when the next batch has slightly different
characteristics, or when the one you have varies with temperature.

I recall someone writing about this in QEX quite a while back -- it was
his first time designing an IF for a radar, and it had to be WIDE band.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Compensating frequency response of wideband amplifiers
 

Joel Kolstad wrote:

"John Miles" wrote in message
...

Why would you need specs like that?


Obscenely wideband (500MHz) software-defined radios. There are people out
there asking for such things to be built -- hence the question! (And
wondering whether or they're just having pipe dreams and technology just
isn't there yet...)



You have a digital system, which can presumably fix this in software,
and you want to go sticking _trimmers_ in your circuit?!?

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Compensating frequency response of wideband amplifiers
 

Hi Tim,

"Tim Wescott" wrote in message
...
You have a digital system, which can presumably fix this in software, and
you want to go sticking _trimmers_ in your circuit?!?

The amps are well before the ADCs -- ADCs that sample at anything approaching
1Gsps have atrocious dynamic range compared to an analog signal processing
chain with a decent noise floor (e.g., 6 bits giving about 40dB dynamic range
vs. 80-100dB dynamic range back in the analog domain).

Compensating frequency response of wideband amplifiers
 

Wouldn't it be a lot easier to just use a part that's inherently
flatter? How about a Sirenza SBB-4089, for example.

If you really want to compensate a part that has some rolloff, you
could try, along your 50 ohm transmission line, putting in series a
shunt combination of an R and a C. The R adds some attenuation, and
the C shorts it out at high frequencies. You need to use tiny parts to
avoid problems with parasitic C and L. 0603 or 0402 should work OK.
You need to take into account the driving amplifier's output impedance,
and the load's impedance, and their variation with frequency. If you
use multiple sections like that, you can tailor the response better
than you can do with a single section. You could add in some
inductance in series with resistance, shunt to ground, if you could
find some inductance that behaves nicely at 2.5GHz. Maybe a shorted
stub? That would let you keep a more constant load impedance versus
frequency for the driving amplifier.

And what use would a 6 bit wideband system be anyway? What are you
receiving with it that doesn't require more dynamic range than you'll
get with 6 bits? And if you're only sampling at 1GHz, why are you
worried about anything more than about 400MHz bandwidth?

Much more interesting to be looking at 14 or more bits...I keep telling
the ADC manufacturers that I'd like 18 bits, with noise and distortion
to match. Haven't been demanding a 5Gs/s rate yet though. Wouldn't
quite know what to do with the data stream.

Cheers,
Tom

Compensating frequency response of wideband amplifiers
 

Further to the frequency response compensation:

In a world of ideal R, L and C components, you can insert an attenuator
into a transmission line, matched to the line's characteristic
impedance, to get frequency-independent attenuation while maintaining
good return-loss from both input and output ports. If you then modify
that circuit by shunting a capacitor across the attenuator, and lifting
the ground-return of the attenuator and inserting an inductor in series
to ground, and the inductor and capacitor each have reactances equal in
magnitude to the line's impedance at some frequency F (assuming a
non-reactive, constant impedance line here), the system will still have
good return loss at all frequencies, and will have attenuation equal to
that of the attenuator alone at DC, and no attenuation at frequencies
far enough above F. In the transition region, the maximum slope of the
attenuation will be 6dB/octave. That maximum will not be reached for
low values of attenuation. If you cascade such sections, with each
section having a different frequency F and perhaps differing
attenuations, you can make a tailored response adjustment. Cascading
identical sections of high enough ultimate attenuation results in
maximum slopes in excess of 6dB/octave. Obviously trading the places
of the inductor and capacitor give you the opposite shape: more
attenuation at higher frequencies.

I have a little RFSim99 circuit that illustrates this idea--email if
you'd like the file.

It's going to get really difficult to make this work right at high
frequencies, because of the size of the parts and the parasitics
involved. But with modern parts, you might be able to make it work
well out to a couple GHz.

Cheers,
Tom

Compensating frequency response of wideband amplifiers
 

Thanks for the hints, Tom, I'll look into them.

"K7ITM" wrote in message
oups.com...
And what use would a 6 bit wideband system be anyway? What are you
receiving with it that doesn't require more dynamic range than you'll
get with 6 bits?

As far as I'm aware, pretty much all high data rate digital modulation
schemes can be recovered with 6 bits (or less).

And if you're only sampling at 1GHz, why are you
worried about anything more than about 400MHz bandwidth?

OK, 1.25Gsps? :-) I'm just talking ballpark figures.

---Joel

Compensating frequency response of wideband amplifiers
 

"radio" implied to me that you are dealing with a multitude of signals
in that bandwidth, not just one, and my practical experience tells me
that you will have to deal with a wide dynamic range. What do you do
with the interfering signal that's 20dB above your signal of interest?
If you're wired between the source and the receiver with no outside
signals getting in, I wonder if you're engaging in overkill for the
receiver...

OK, so 1.25Gsps gets you to maybe 500MHz bandwidth. That's still a far
cry from 2GHz. Why would you be worried about the flatness over 2GHz
when your bandwidth is "only" 500MHz?

Of course, there are 'scopes available these days that sample a lot
faster than that.

Cheers,
Tom