Hi Matt,

The Termination Insensitive Amplifier is a transistor circuit that uses 
feedback to present 50 ohms to the mixer IF port across a wide range of 
frequencies.

I've measured the return loss (i.e. match compared to a pure 50 ohm 
resistive load) of the input port of the TIA to be about 20dB between 
the IF frequency and twice the LO freq.

All - a little about the philosophy and aims of this project:

I'm not shooting for high end RF performance, e.g. contest grade IP3, 
low phase noise, high ACR, high tx power, multi-band operation.  There 
are others who can do that much better than I.

Rather, I want to use this radio to demonstrate advanced new VHF DV 
ideas, for example:

i) completely open source (hardware, software, codec, modem, protocol 
stack) VHF DV.
ii) Diplexor free TDMA repeaters on low cost hardware
iii) variable bit rate/quality speech codecs
iv) Diversity rx to address fading
v) a 10dB gain over analog FM and current, 1st gen VHF DV systems

(i) to (v) break a lot of new ground, and are "enough" for any one 
project.  To demonstrate them I feel I need a custom radio: for example 
TDMA timing means we need control by a bare metal uC (no operating 
system) to get the timing right.  I also need an up-conversion/SDR tx 
rather than direct FM to make sure the modem is done right.

Cheers,

David

On 29/10/15 15:26, Matthew Cook wrote:
> David,
>
> If you're going to use a diode mixer then terminating _is_ important,
> for your amusement/reading;
>
> http://www.robkalmeijer.nl/techniek/electronica/radiotechniek/hambladen/qex/2001/05_06/page45/index.html
>
> There are termination insensitive mixers to go with your termination
> insensitive amplifier;
>
> https://www.miteq.com/docs/MITEQ_Mixers_TermInsensitve.pdf
>
> But they cost a lot and don't really get you that much further than say
> terminating your mixer in a -6dB pad and living with the additional
> conversion loss.
>
> The mixer that Glen suggests is a nice unit with great specs, that
> sounds like a serious leg up to me.
>
> Also watch those IP3's from end to end.
>
> 73
>
> Matthew
> VK5ZM
>
> On 29 October 2015 at 12:01, David Rowe <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Guys,
>
>     Thanks again for all your tips and insight.  I'm following up yr
>     references and doing lots of reading.
>
>     Glen - I haven't decided if I'll undersample yet or use a 2nd mixer from
>     10.7MHz to low IF.
>
>     Steve - I have built up a spreadsheet to work out cascaded NF, MDS, and
>     ADC NF. Am working through each calculation step nice and slowly!  Also
>     prototyping some of this and getting results a few dB from my
>     calculations which is encouraging.
>
>     Matt I'm using a termination insensitive amp at the mixer IF port, have
>     measured it's return loss as 20dB between 10.7MHz and 300MHz (2LO is
>     272MHz).
>
>     Glen - what problems should I look out for with a limiting amp? Any
>     tests I can do to spot issues early?  I guess two-tone wouldn't work.
>
>     Cheers,
>
>     David
>
>     On 29/10/15 10:28, glen english wrote:
>      > Hi David
>      > Glad my description of NF made sense.
>      >
>      > If your limiter is perfectly doing its job,  then yes 1 bit is
>     all you need.
>      >
>      > I like seeing the xtal filter in there ! This reduces the  umming and
>      > ahhhing by two to three orders of magnitude.
>      >
>      > Of course the filter stop-bands are finite, so you must consider
>     this, also.
>      >
>      > I'm guessing you are going to undersample. Goes without saying
>     that ADC
>      > performance degrades quickly on super nyquist but this is
>     unlikely to be
>      > any issue in this design.
>      >
>      > Final sample rate needs to be at least two times the IF filter
>     BW, 4x if
>      > you want to not make life hell for your digital filters.
>      >
>      > My guess is, you could use a single  pin of the STM32
>     inconjunction with
>      > some timer  and input compare block to  get a very nice and
>     periodic 1
>      > bit sampler.
>      >
>      > Dont expect miracles though. Analog limiters are dreadful things.
>     if you
>      > want some REALLY good limiter lessons  tuition , go look at the FM
>      > limiter in a analog VIDEO CASSETTE RECORDER. They are the very best,
>      > high bandwidth (10 MHz) limiters around....
>      >
>      > For a IF width of 15kHz, I'd suggest a SR of about 60 k. ( an
>     enormous
>      > undersample) ..That will help also preventing strong adjacent
>     channels
>      > aliasing.
>      >
>      > regards
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      > On 29/10/2015 8:00 AM, David Rowe wrote:
>      >> Thank you Helmut, Glen, and Steve,
>      >>
>      >> 1/ Ok it's starting to make sense, lets see if I can work through a
>      >> contrived example:
>      >>
>      >> We have a 16 bit sound blaster ADC, with a SNR of 6*15 = 90dB.
>     Its FSD
>      >> is 1Vrms (10dBm). It samples at 48 kHz:
>      >>
>      >> The ADC noise floor is at 10-96=-86dBm.  This is in a Nyquist BW of
>      >> 48kHz, so the noise power normalised to a 1Hz BW is
>     -86-10*log10(24E3) =
>      >> -129.8dBm/Hz.  The thermal noise floor is -174dBm/Hz so our ADC
>     NF is
>      >> 174-129.8 = 44.2dB.
>      >>
>      >> Help me understand what NF is too, and why a filter has a
>     negative NF -
>      >> it moves the signal closer to the thermal noise floor.
>      >>
>      >> 2/ I'm actually working on narrow band constant envelope radio, So:
>      >>
>      >>      BPF- LNA - Mixer - Xtal filter - limiting amp - ADC
>      >>
>      >> If I am sampling a constant envelope signal (FM, FSK, GMSK),
>     what are
>      >> the SNR/SFDR requirements for the ADC?  The limiting amp has
>     removed all
>      >> amplitude information.  So do we just need the sign bit of the ADC?
>      >> Could we just sample the signal with a flip flop?
>      >>
>      >> Thanks,
>      >>
>      >> David
>      >>
>      >>
>      >> On 28/10/15 17:03, glen english wrote:
>      >>> Howdy
>      >>> A good response Helmut
>      >>>
>      >>> The oversampling ratio  (OSR) , clock purity will dominate.
>      >>>
>      >>> What is your planned OSR , and sampler rate ?
>      >>> quadruple the sample rate , gain a bit of ADC of course.
>      >>>
>      >>> With an OSR = 1, for -120dBm , and full scale of say +12dBm
>     (roughly
>      >>> what you have) , and 60dB of SNR will put your noise floor at
>     12-60 =
>      >>> -48dBm, so you'll need 72dB of gain.  And so it will overload
>     on the
>      >>> slightest thing out there !
>      >>>
>      >>> With an OSR of 4x, you are 6dB or 1 bit better off, and so on.
>     I know
>      >>> you understand this stuff so I wont elaborate.
>      >>>
>      >>> The SFDR of the converter will dominate what it can USEFULLY hear,
>      >>> because below the SFDR , REGARDLESS of the OSR, there will be
>     all sorts
>      >>> of funny converter artifacts, and the intermods will be there also.
>      >>> So the SFDR , not the OSR ultimately determines the performance
>     capability.
>      >>>
>      >>> IE the SNR might be 60dB, say a 10 bit converter,
>      >>> if the OSR = 4 then you'll get 66dB SNR, BUTthe SFDR does not
>     change,
>      >>> the SFDR is still 60dB.  So you can improve dynamic range, but
>     not the
>      >>> SFDR. The SFDR, or more likely, where the third order two tone
>     intermods
>      >>> are, won't change. Some LT converters have incredibly good
>     SFDRs via
>      >>> internal digital dithering (later subtracted out in your
>     receiver) .
>      >>>
>      >>> For my commercial SDR, I use a 12 bit converter at 200 Msps.
>      >>> The SFDR is 96dB, approx.
>      >>>
>      >>> The converter input FSD is abotu +12dBm, so the IMD will be
>     always 12-96
>      >>> = -84dBm
>      >>>
>      >>> so if I want my IMD down at -120dBm, then I need 36dB gain in
>     front of
>      >>> the receiver.
>      >>> With such a high OSR (200M/ 10k)=43dB , the SNR is off in the
>      >>> stratosphere, but the IMD dominates....
>      >>>
>      >>> In my experience the SFDR is what will limit the sensitivity.
>      >>>
>      >>> Watch out for ALIASED noise also. don't forget your converter
>     is also
>      >>> equally (almost) bringing in noise form 2fs, 3fs 4fs etc. SO
>     important
>      >>> that the convertor is seeing a low pass (nyquist) or band pass
>     filter
>      >>> (super nyquist sampling)
>      >>>
>      >>> NOW what you can do is vary the voltage that the converter sees by
>      >>> fiddlign with the termination and the nosie figure can be usefully
>      >>> manipulated +/- 12dB (improved at the expense of full scale level)
>      >>>
>      >>> The noise figure of the converter is approx (the input level -
>     the SNR)
>      >>> - 174
>      >>>
>      >>> IE +12dBm FSD, SNR  = 70, noise floor = -58dBm.
>      >>> Now, that is for a 200 Msps, or 100 Msps nyquist bandwidth, that is
>      >>> 10log10(1e8) or 80dB
>      >>> so -58 - 80 = -138dBm dBcHzSNR or 174 - 138 = 36dB.
>      >>>
>      >>>
>      >>> cheers
>      >>>
>      >>>
>      >>>
>      >>>
>      >>>
>      >>>
>      >>> On 28/10/2015 6:47 AM, David Rowe wrote:
>      >>>> Hello Glen/Matt,
>      >>>>
>      >>>> I'm working on a VHF radio prototype for testing some of my
>     open source
>      >>>> DV ideas.  Could you pls explain how to work out the gain
>     required in
>      >>>> front of my ADC?
>      >>>>
>      >>>> For example if I have a MDS of -120dBm (0.224uV), and an ADC
>     with a 3Vpp
>      >>>> (1.06Vrms) clipping point, and SFDR of say 60dB.
>      >>>>
>      >>>> Is the gain rqd simply Av=1.06/0.224E-16?  That would mean the
>     minimum
>      >>>> signal would hit full scale on the ADC.  Perhaps we could
>     scale that
>      >>>> back by 60dB plus some margin such that the MDS is still a few
>     dB above
>      >>>> the floor of the ADC.
>      >>>>
>      >>>> I'm a bit mixed up by the idea of NF and ADCs.  A worked
>     example would help.
>      >>>>
>      >>>> Anyone else on the list with receiver design skills, pls feel
>     free to
>      >>>> comment. If a good reference exists I'm happy to dig that up.
>      >>>>
>      >>>> Thanks,
>      >>>>
>      >>>> David
>      >>>>
>      >>>>
>     
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>      >>>> _______________________________________________
>      >>>> Freetel-codec2 mailing list
>      >>>> [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>      >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
>      >>>>
>      >>
>     
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>      >> _______________________________________________
>      >> Freetel-codec2 mailing list
>      >> [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>      >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
>      >>
>      >
>
>     
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     _______________________________________________
>     Freetel-codec2 mailing list
>     [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freetel-codec2 mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Freetel-codec2 mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2

Reply via email to