21 Jul
2012
21 Jul
'12
4:33 p.m.
Hi all,
As far as I am aware, you are currently discussing how to improve
LMS6002 PLL phase noise. Below are some inputs from my side which may help.
Apart from playing with PLL registers we have two additional options.
1. Use clean TCXCO which provides 4 times higher reference followed by
divide by 4 to generate PLL reference clock. Recently, we experimented
with 30.72*4 MHz TCXCO. Dividing its output by 4 before going into LMS
chip we have got improvement of 6dB in phase noise plateau region.
2. Current PLL loop filter has been designed to cover the whole LMS
frequency range hence using kind of mid value for Kvco. We can customize
the loop filter for a particular band. To do that we need to know
frequency range China Mobile is looking for and reference clock you want
to use (26MHz, 26*4/4MHz, ...). Please note that PLL reference clock
does not need to be the same as system clock i.e. we can also use
30.72MHz, 30.72*4/4MHz etc.
Best regards, Srdjan
21 Jul
21 Jul
5:28 p.m.
Hi Srdjan,
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Srdjan Milenkovic
<s.milenkovic(a)limemicro.com> wrote:
Hi all,
As far as I am aware, you are currently discussing how to improve LMS6002
PLL phase noise. Below are some inputs from my side which may help.
Yes, here are some pictures of phase noise we have at UmTRX right now:
http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/umtrx/2012-July/000030.html
It looks like they're 5-12dB higher then data I saw in your
temperature measurement report. First thought is that this could be
due to a clock source. Did you use your EVB board for those
measurements?
Apart from playing with PLL registers we have two
additional options.
1. Use clean TCXCO which provides 4 times higher reference followed by
divide by 4 to generate PLL reference clock. Recently, we experimented with
30.72*4 MHz TCXCO. Dividing its output by 4 before going into LMS chip we
have got improvement of 6dB in phase noise plateau region.
2. Current PLL loop filter has been designed to cover the whole LMS
frequency range hence using kind of mid value for Kvco. We can customize the
loop filter for a particular band.
Well, we're working with GSM and it has only four main bands:
GSM-850: 824.2–849.2 UL / 869.2–894.2 DL
E-GSM 900: 880.0–915.0 UL / 925.0–960.0 DL
DCS-1800: 1,710.2–1,784.8 UL / 1,805.2–1,879.8 DL
PCS-1900: 1,850.2–1,909.8 UL / 1,930.2–1,989.8 DL
It would be great if we could optimize for the use in these bands
--
Regards,
Alexander Chemeris.
CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ООО УмРадио
http://fairwaves.ru
22 Jul
22 Jul
1:11 p.m.
On 21/07/2012 16:28, Alexander Chemeris wrote:
Let us first try
to recover 5-12dB PN as mentioned above. Redesigning
loop filter will not help at all if we are limited by TCXCO.
Hi Srdjan,
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Srdjan Milenkovic
<s.milenkovic(a)limemicro.com> wrote:
Yes, we used Lime EVB, 30.72MHz TCXCO. However, using 26MHz instead
of
30.72MHz TCXCO should not affect phase noise so much (5-12dB). Do you
have an alternative 26MHz TCXCO with better PN? As you quite rightly
mentioned, you are probably limited by TCXCO PN at the moment.
Hi all,
As far as I am aware, you are currently discussing how to improve LMS6002
PLL phase noise. Below are some inputs from my side which may help.
Yes, here are
some pictures of phase noise we have at UmTRX right now:
http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/umtrx/2012-July/000030.html
It looks like they're 5-12dB higher then data I saw in your
temperature measurement report. First thought is that this could be
due to a clock source. Did you use your EVB board for those
measurements? Apart from playing with PLL registers we have two
additional options.
1. Use clean TCXCO which provides 4 times higher reference followed by
divide by 4 to generate PLL reference clock. Recently, we experimented with
30.72*4 MHz TCXCO. Dividing its output by 4 before going into LMS chip we
have got improvement of 6dB in phase noise plateau region.
2. Current PLL loop filter has been designed to cover the whole LMS
frequency range hence using kind of mid value for Kvco. We can customize the
loop filter for a particular band.
Well, we're working with GSM and it has
only four main bands:
GSM-850: 824.2–849.2 UL / 869.2–894.2 DL
E-GSM 900: 880.0–915.0 UL / 925.0–960.0 DL
DCS-1800: 1,710.2–1,784.8 UL / 1,805.2–1,879.8 DL
PCS-1900: 1,850.2–1,909.8 UL / 1,930.2–1,989.8 DL
It would be great if we could optimize for the use in these bands
1:16 p.m.
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Srdjan Milenkovic
<s.milenkovic(a)limemicro.com> wrote:
On 21/07/2012 16:28, Alexander Chemeris wrote:
We'll look for a one. UmTRX has Clock In connector, so it should not
be an issue to feed it with an other clock source.
Btw, for everyone's reference, the aforementioned document with LMS
performance measurements is now published here:
https://github.com/chemeris/lms6002-documentation/blob/master/LMS6002D-Temp…
--
Regards,
Alexander Chemeris.
CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ООО УмРадио
http://fairwaves.ru
Hi Srdjan,
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Srdjan Milenkovic
<s.milenkovic(a)limemicro.com> wrote:
Yes, we used Lime EVB, 30.72MHz TCXCO. However, using 26MHz instead of
30.72MHz TCXCO should not affect phase noise so much (5-12dB). Do you have
an alternative 26MHz TCXCO with better PN? As you quite rightly mentioned,
you are probably limited by TCXCO PN at the moment.
Hi all,
As far as I am aware, you are currently discussing how to improve LMS6002
PLL phase noise. Below are some inputs from my side which may help.
Yes, here are some pictures of phase noise we have at UmTRX right now:
http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/umtrx/2012-July/000030.html
It looks like they're 5-12dB higher then data I saw in your
temperature measurement report. First thought is that this could be
due to a clock source. Did you use your EVB board for those
measurements?
4:16 p.m.
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Srdjan Milenkovic
<s.milenkovic(a)limemicro.com> wrote:
On 21/07/2012 16:28, Alexander Chemeris wrote:
Could you please share LMS configuration you used during this test, so
we could re-create it locally with the EVB we have. A full register
dump of the chip would be ideal.
--
Regards,
Alexander Chemeris.
CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ООО УмРадио
http://fairwaves.ru
Hi Srdjan,
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Srdjan Milenkovic
<s.milenkovic(a)limemicro.com> wrote:
Yes, we used Lime EVB, 30.72MHz TCXCO. However, using 26MHz instead of
30.72MHz TCXCO should not affect phase noise so much (5-12dB). Do you have
an alternative 26MHz TCXCO with better PN? As you quite rightly mentioned,
you are probably limited by TCXCO PN at the moment.
Hi all,
As far as I am aware, you are currently discussing how to improve LMS6002
PLL phase noise. Below are some inputs from my side which may help.
Yes, here are some pictures of phase noise we have at UmTRX right now:
http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/umtrx/2012-July/000030.html
It looks like they're 5-12dB higher then data I saw in your
temperature measurement report. First thought is that this could be
due to a clock source. Did you use your EVB board for those
measurements?
5:38 p.m.
Hi Alexander,
We usually do chip tests as close to the defaults as possible. All the
changes from the defaults which lead to significant improvement would be
recorded and shared with customers. Below is test description. I do not
see any major changes from the defaults.
We do not have register dump. However, Lime GUI project file used in
this experiment is attached. You can use GUI File->Open Project option
to import it. I see Ichp and Ichp offset currents are different from
defaults but these still do not justify 5-12dB worse PN in your reports.
You can give it a try though before changing TCXCO.
Best regards, Srdjan
*Test Description:*
* DC MAX applied through analogue inputs, DACs off
* TXVGA1 and TXVGA2 at max gain
* Loop filter redesigned for 100kHz loop bandwidth and 40MHz reference
* Icp and Icp offset optimized at 25 deg. Same set up used at all
other temperatures
* Cap code and VCO picked up by PLL tune routine
* Span 1kHz to 10 MHz
* Measure integrated PN
* Measure PN at decade frequency points
* Measure LO level
* Record VCOCAP code
* Using Tune log, record VCOCAP code range
* Record VCO and FF divider
Dr Srdjan Milenkovic
On 22/07/2012 15:16, Alexander Chemeris wrote:
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Srdjan Milenkovic
<s.milenkovic(a)limemicro.com> wrote:
On 21/07/2012 16:28, Alexander Chemeris wrote:
Could you please share LMS
configuration you used during this test, so
we could re-create it locally with the EVB we have. A full register
dump of the chip would be ideal.
Hi Srdjan,
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Srdjan Milenkovic
<s.milenkovic(a)limemicro.com> wrote:
Yes, we used Lime EVB, 30.72MHz TCXCO. However, using 26MHz instead
of
30.72MHz TCXCO should not affect phase noise so much (5-12dB). Do you have
an alternative 26MHz TCXCO with better PN? As you quite rightly mentioned,
you are probably limited by TCXCO PN at the moment. Hi all,
As far as I am aware, you are currently discussing how to improve LMS6002
PLL phase noise. Below are some inputs from my side which may help.
Yes, here are
some pictures of phase noise we have at UmTRX right now:
http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/umtrx/2012-July/000030.html
It looks like they're 5-12dB higher then data I saw in your
temperature measurement report. First thought is that this could be
due to a clock source. Did you use your EVB board for those
measurements? 
9:53 p.m.
Hi Srdjan.
First of all thank you for support.
We do not have register dump. However, Lime GUI project file used in this
experiment is attached. You can use GUI File->Open
Project option to import
it. I see Ichp and Ichp offset currents are different from defaults but
these still do not justify 5-12dB worse PN in your reports. You can give it
a try though before changing TCXCO.
We will try to adjust Ichp and offset first off all. Thank you for hint.
*Test Description:*
- DC MAX applied through analogue inputs, DACs off
It is quite important detail too.
- TXVGA1 and TXVGA2 at max gain
Similar.
- Loop filter redesigned for 100kHz loop bandwidth and 40MHz reference
- Icp and Icp offset optimized at 25 deg. Same set up used at all
other temperatures
Please inform us values of components for 100kHz BW filter.
But we are forced to
use one clock 26MHz for all because of target price.
- Cap code and VCO picked up by PLL tune routine
I implemented 10kHz BW filter for PLL and found that frequency locking
become
unstable because of calculated VCOCAP value a bit lower then
required (too high capacity).
If VCOCAP incremented manualy (after auto-tuned) then no any problems.
What do you think about it.
And could you please inform me values for 10 kHz BW filter, just to compare
with my calculations.
Best regards,
Andrey Sviyazov.
9:59 p.m.
Hi Srdjan.
First of all thank you for support.
We do not have register dump. However, Lime GUI project file used in this
experiment is attached. You can use GUI File->Open
Project option to import
it. I see Ichp and Ichp offset currents are different from defaults but
these still do not justify 5-12dB worse PN in your reports. You can give it
a try though before changing TCXCO.
We will try to adjust Ichp and offset first off all. Thank you for hint.
*Test Description:*
- DC MAX applied through analogue inputs, DACs off
It is quite important detail too.
- TXVGA1 and TXVGA2 at max gain
Similar.
- Loop filter redesigned for 100kHz loop bandwidth and 40MHz reference
- Icp and Icp offset optimized at 25 deg. Same set up used at all
other temperatures
Please inform us values of components for 100kHz BW filter.
But we are forced to
use one clock 26MHz for all because of target price.
- Cap code and VCO picked up by PLL tune routine
I implemented 10kHz BW filter for PLL and found that frequency locking
become
unstable because of calculated VCOCAP value a bit lower then
required (too high capacity).
If VCOCAP incremented manualy (after auto-tuned) then no any problems.
What do you think about it.
And could you please inform me values for 10 kHz BW filter, just to compare
with my calculations.
Best regards,
Andrey Sviyazov.
23 Jul
23 Jul
11:30 a.m.
Hi Andrey,
Below is the loop filter for 100kHz loop bandwidth, 26MHz reference
clock, 400uA charge pump current. It has been tested and should give you
around -90dBc/Hz plateau.
C1 R2 C2 R3 C3
9.01E-11 2.46E+03 1.42E-09 3280.93 2.56E-11
Loop filter components for 10kHz bandwidth, 26MHz reference clock, 400uA
charge pump current are below:
C1 R2 C2 R3 C3
9.01E-09 2.46E+02 1.42E-07 328.09 2.56E-09
There should not be any issue with loop stability even with 10kHz
filter. However, PLL settling time is increased so you have to slow down
VCOCAP auto-tune.
I would recommend to use 100kHz filter.
Regards, Srdjan
On 22/07/2012 20:53, Andrey Sviyazov wrote:
Hi Srdjan.
First of all thank you for support.
We do not have register dump. However, Lime GUI project file used
in this experiment is attached. You can use GUI File->Open Project
option to import it. I see Ichp and Ichp offset currents are
different from defaults but these still do not justify 5-12dB
worse PN in your reports. You can give it a try though before
changing TCXCO.
We will try to adjust Ichp and offset first off all. Thank you for hint.
*Test Description:*
* DC MAX applied through analogue inputs, DACs off
It is quite important detail too.
* TXVGA1 and TXVGA2 at max gain
Similar.
* Loop filter redesigned for 100kHz loop bandwidth and 40MHz
reference
* Icp and Icp offset optimized at 25 deg. Same set up used at
all other temperatures
Please inform us values of components for 100kHz BW filter.
But we are forced to use one clock 26MHz for all because of target price.
* Cap code and VCO picked up by PLL tune routine
I implemented 10kHz BW filter for PLL and found that frequency locking
become unstable because of calculated VCOCAP value a bit lower then
required (too high capacity).
If VCOCAP incremented manualy (after auto-tuned) then no any problems.
What do you think about it.
And could you please inform me values for 10 kHz BW filter, just to
compare with my calculations.
Best regards,
Andrey Sviyazov.
8:44 p.m.
Hi Srdjan.
Today I found why noises and spurs are really happens in UmTRXv1.
1) Only full disabling (no power) GPS module can kill all near spurs.
2) To get good noises the next changes are required:
- replace choke L6 by capacitor 10nF..0.1uF.
- remove C45.
I've assembled 100kHz loop filter with the next components:
C82 = 100pF, C83=1500pF, C84=33pF, R106=2.2k, R109=3.3k.
Result without GPS for IChP=0.4mA and due to several XO attached here.
Also attached comparison of 50kHz/100kHz loop filters with optimal IChp
1.2mA/0.4mA but with GPS module (no antenna).
So, now we need to measure integrated LO noise (degrees) to understand
which filter and IChP better.
Best regards,
Andrey Sviyazov.
2012/7/23 Srdjan Milenkovic <s.milenkovic(a)limemicro.com>
Hi Andrey,
Below is the loop filter for 100kHz loop bandwidth, 26MHz reference clock,
400uA charge pump current. It has been tested and should give you around
-90dBc/Hz plateau.
C1 R2 C2 R3 C3 9.01E-11 2.46E+03 1.42E-09 3280.93 2.56E-11
Loop filter components for 10kHz bandwidth, 26MHz reference clock, 400uA
charge pump current are below:
C1 R2 C2 R3 C3 9.01E-09 2.46E+02 1.42E-07 328.09 2.56E-09
There should not be any issue with loop stability even with 10kHz filter.
However, PLL settling time is increased so you have to slow down VCOCAP
auto-tune.
I would recommend to use 100kHz filter.
Regards, Srdjan
**** ****
On 22/07/2012 20:53, Andrey Sviyazov wrote:
Hi Srdjan.
First of all thank you for support.
We do not have register dump. However, Lime GUI project file used in
this experiment is attached. You can use GUI
File->Open Project option to
import it. I see Ichp and Ichp offset currents are different from defaults
but these still do not justify 5-12dB worse PN in your reports. You can
give it a try though before changing TCXCO.
We will try to adjust Ichp and offset first off all. Thank you for hint.
*Test Description:*
- DC MAX applied through analogue inputs, DACs off
It is quite important detail too.
- TXVGA1 and TXVGA2 at max gain
Similar.
- Loop filter redesigned for 100kHz loop bandwidth and 40MHz reference
- Icp and Icp offset optimized at 25 deg. Same set up used at all
other temperatures
Please inform us values of components for 100kHz BW filter.
But we are forced to
use one clock 26MHz for all because of target price.
- Cap code and VCO picked up by PLL tune routine
I implemented 10kHz BW filter for PLL and found that frequency locking
become
unstable because of calculated VCOCAP value a bit lower then
required (too high capacity).
If VCOCAP incremented manualy (after auto-tuned) then no any problems.
What do you think about it.
And could you please inform me values for 10 kHz BW filter, just to
compare with my calculations.
Best regards,
Andrey Sviyazov.
9:43 p.m.
Hi Andrey,
Plots are looking good. Just for your information, we reduced Ichp to
400uA to reduce close to integer i.e. fractional spurs which you may
have not seen yet but they are there. These have noting to do with GPS
module on UmTRX board neither with LMS chip, it is just PLL nature.
Please be aware of this while comparing different loop filters,
especially different Ichp values, ...
Best regards, Srdjan
On 23/07/2012 19:44, Andrey Sviyazov wrote:
Hi Srdjan.
Today I found why noises and spurs are really happens in UmTRXv1.
1) Only full disabling (no power) GPS module can kill all near spurs.
2) To get good noises the next changes are required:
- replace choke L6 by capacitor 10nF..0.1uF.
- remove C45.
I've assembled 100kHz loop filter with the next components:
C82 = 100pF, C83=1500pF, C84=33pF, R106=2.2k, R109=3.3k.
Result without GPS for IChP=0.4mA and due to several XO attached here.
Also attached comparison of 50kHz/100kHz loop filters with optimal
IChp 1.2mA/0.4mA but with GPS module (no antenna).
So, now we need to measure integrated LO noise (degrees) to understand
which filter and IChP better.
Best regards,
Andrey Sviyazov.
2012/7/23 Srdjan Milenkovic <s.milenkovic(a)limemicro.com
<mailto:s.milenkovic@limemicro.com>>
Hi Andrey,
Below is the loop filter for 100kHz loop bandwidth, 26MHz
reference clock, 400uA charge pump current. It has been tested and
should give you around -90dBc/Hz plateau.
C1 R2 C2 R3 C3
9.01E-11 2.46E+03 1.42E-09 3280.93 2.56E-11
Loop filter components for 10kHz bandwidth, 26MHz reference clock,
400uA charge pump current are below:
C1 R2 C2 R3 C3
9.01E-09 2.46E+02 1.42E-07 328.09 2.56E-09
There should not be any issue with loop stability even with 10kHz
filter. However, PLL settling time is increased so you have to
slow down VCOCAP auto-tune.
I would recommend to use 100kHz filter.
Regards, Srdjan
On 22/07/2012 20:53, Andrey Sviyazov wrote:
Hi Srdjan.
First of all thank you for support.
We do not have register dump. However, Lime GUI project file
used in this experiment is attached. You can use GUI
File->Open Project option to import it. I see Ichp and Ichp
offset currents are different from defaults but these still
do not justify 5-12dB worse PN in your reports. You can give
it a try though before changing TCXCO.
We will try to adjust Ichp and offset first off all. Thank you
for hint.
*Test Description:*
* DC MAX applied through analogue inputs, DACs off
It is quite important detail too.
* TXVGA1 and TXVGA2 at max gain
Similar.
* Loop filter redesigned for 100kHz loop bandwidth and
40MHz reference
* Icp and Icp offset optimized at 25 deg. Same set up used
at all other temperatures
Please inform us values of components for 100kHz BW filter.
But we are forced to use one clock 26MHz for all because of
target price.
* Cap code and VCO picked up by PLL tune routine
I implemented 10kHz BW filter for PLL and found that frequency
locking become unstable because of calculated VCOCAP value a bit
lower then required (too high capacity).
If VCOCAP incremented manualy (after auto-tuned) then no any
problems.
What do you think about it.
And could you please inform me values for 10 kHz BW filter, just
to compare with my calculations.
Best regards,
Andrey Sviyazov.
10:25 p.m.
Hi Andrey,
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Andrey Sviyazov
<andrey.sviyazov(a)fairwaves.ru> wrote:
Today I found why noises and spurs are really happens
in UmTRXv1.
Finally, we could say UmTRX is good at phase noise.
1) Only full disabling (no power) GPS module can kill
all near spurs.
I wonder whether EB-570 is any better. And if EB-570 is no better -
how could we protect LMS from this noise?
2) To get good noises the next changes are required:
- replace choke L6 by capacitor 10nF..0.1uF.
- remove C45.
Is it possible to apply those changes for UmTRXv2 without PCB changes?
--
Regards,
Alexander Chemeris.
CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ООО УмРадио
http://fairwaves.ru
10:32 p.m.
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:25 AM, Alexander Chemeris
<Alexander.Chemeris(a)fairwaves.ru> wrote:
Hi Andrey,
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Andrey Sviyazov
<andrey.sviyazov(a)fairwaves.ru> wrote:
PS Please add both points to the tracker, so we don't forget.
--
Regards,
Alexander Chemeris.
CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ООО УмРадио
http://fairwaves.ru
Today I found why noises and spurs are really
happens in UmTRXv1.
Finally, we could say UmTRX is good at phase noise.
1) Only full disabling (no power) GPS module can
kill all near spurs.
I wonder whether EB-570 is any better. And if EB-570 is no better -
how could we protect LMS from this noise?
2) To get good noises the next changes are
required:
- replace choke L6 by capacitor 10nF..0.1uF.
- remove C45.
Is it possible to apply those changes for UmTRXv2 without PCB changes?
4303
days inactive
4305
days old
12 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Alexander Chemeris -
Alexander Chemeris -
Andrey Sviyazov -
Andrey Sviyazov -
Srdjan Milenkovic