Hi Karl,

 

It’s perhaps a naïve question, but how far can you get in measuring phase noise 
using a good spectrum analyser?

 

I’ve an old HP dial up oscillator up to 40 GHz tube source that has phase noise 
-107 dBc/Hz 100 kHz from the carrier. 

 

Cheers, Neil

 

From: casper@lists.berkeley.edu <casper@lists.berkeley.edu> On Behalf Of Daniel 
Blakley
Sent: 21 August 2024 05:57
To: casper@lists.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [casper] Low cost phase noise analysis

 

Dear Karl,

 

   I definitely don't have a simple quick answer to your question, so this is a 
good place to ask others who may. 

 

   I find and found Phase Noise analysis and its measurement to be very 
interesting.  As you know, fundamentally, phase noise and Alan Deviation are 
very closely related, as is the measurement of clock jitter.  It is significant 
to note that NIST (Boulder CO) historically has made significant contributions 
to Phase Noise Analysis, beginning long ago with the work of David Alan (to 
which Alan Deviation owes its namesake).  More recently (several years ago) 
again in significant work in phase noise measurement, NIST introduced a new, 
more accurate, phase noise measurement architecture and method.  Out of this 
work, came to pass several instruments which largely emulated or followed this 
new architecture that is evident in some of the Keysight phase noise offerings 
as well as other instruments from manufacturers such as Holzworth, Rhode & 
Schwartz, et al. 

 

  -Daniel Blakley

 

On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 2:37 PM Karl Warnick <warn...@ee.byu.edu 
<mailto:warn...@ee.byu.edu> > wrote:

Hi all,

I've spent some time this summer as part of a radar project digging into 
calculating phase noise for highly stable tones. I have implemented what 
I think is a decent algorithm. My next steps are to look for test data 
sets and tips for the hardware.

Do you have a file of samples of a stable tone? If anyone has a test 
data set consisting of samples of a pure tone that they would like to 
share as a test data set, I'd like to apply my codes to that and check 
the phase noise. Both the tone generator and the ADC sample clock should 
be phase stable to the order of a Keysight signal generator, or ideally 
better. The data set length should be a reasonable fraction of a second 
for ~1 Hz phase noise resolution. The frequency of the tone and the 
sample rate are fairly arbitrary as I'm mainly looking to benchmark the 
algorithm.

How cheaply can stable samples be acquired? I'm looking for low cost 
hardware (a few $100s up to a few $k) that is stable enough to measure 
phase noise comparable to a Keysight source or better. Phase noise can 
be measured with an expensive phase noise analyzer, but I believe it 
should be possible to do this with a low cost digitizer with a suitably 
stable sample clock. The sample clock could (or perhaps must) be 
external. The sample rate should be around 80-100 Msps or higher and the 
platform should be able to store a burst of samples of length on the 
order of 1 sec. We have done this using a ZCU 216 and it seems to work, 
but that isn't really a low cost board. I've looked into Picoscope 
products, which might be ideal, but their support people don't know 
anything about the phase noise properties of their samplers.

Thanks in advance to anyone whose interest is piqued enough to respond.

Best,
Karl

-- 
Karl F. Warnick
Parkinson Engineering Research Professor
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Brigham Young University
450 Engineering Building
Provo, UT 84602
(801) 422-1732





-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"casper@lists.berkeley.edu <mailto:casper@lists.berkeley.edu> " group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to casper+unsubscr...@lists.berkeley.edu 
<mailto:casper%2bunsubscr...@lists.berkeley.edu> .
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/lists.berkeley.edu/d/msgid/casper/8839ddb3-83fd-40be-8a9d-c90ae6f9678e%40ee.byu.edu.




 

-- 

-Daniel Blakley

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"casper@lists.berkeley.edu <mailto:casper@lists.berkeley.edu> " group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to casper+unsubscr...@lists.berkeley.edu 
<mailto:casper+unsubscr...@lists.berkeley.edu> .
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/lists.berkeley.edu/d/msgid/casper/CAJa6%3DL1qhK7U6BZCpKxcVq6R_jiUyVtOF11Sy7rxaojsVt_OhQ%40mail.gmail.com
 
<https://groups.google.com/a/lists.berkeley.edu/d/msgid/casper/CAJa6%3DL1qhK7U6BZCpKxcVq6R_jiUyVtOF11Sy7rxaojsVt_OhQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
 .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"casper@lists.berkeley.edu" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to casper+unsubscr...@lists.berkeley.edu.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/lists.berkeley.edu/d/msgid/casper/001a01daf3a0%2473c331e0%245b4995a0%24%40tiscali.co.uk.

Reply via email to