The Designer's Guide Community
Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register. Please follow the Forum guidelines.
Mar 28th, 2024, 4:52am
Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
pnoise with noisetype=correlations (Read 4512 times)
am
New Member
*
Offline



Posts: 2

pnoise with noisetype=correlations
Nov 16th, 2002, 9:19am
 
Hi,

Let me start by clarifing my understanding of pnoise calculations:

1. pnoise with noisetype=correlations
   I thought that in this case the simulator would compute:
E{X(relharmnum*fund+df) * conjugate(X(relharmnum*fund+df+cycles*fund))}

2. pnoise with noisetype=sources
   In this case I expected the simulator to simply compute:
E{X(relharmnum*fund+df) * conjugate(X(relharmnum*fund+df))}

Under this assumptions pnoise with noisetype=correlations and with cycles=0 would be exactly the same as pnoise with noisetype=sources.

Well, I have written an simple behavioral model to check this (first I did an AM modulator and then a PM modulator), and in fact this is the case in my simple test circuit.

Then, I tried this with a simple VCO circuit (a simple amplifier and an LC tank). In this case I run the circuit in autonomous mode and now the values of the pnoise with noisetype=sources and pnoise with noisetype=correlations and cycles=0 are very much different.

I would also like to clarify that I was careful in the following aspects:
- in pnoise with noisetype=sources I square the result (in order to compute power) and then compare it to the other simulation
- since the output of the VCO is differential and in order to avoid errors with factors of two, I convert the differential signal to a single ended signal with a simple behavioral model.

At the end I am left with a discrepancy between the two results. I beleive the one with noisetype=sources is right.

So,
1. Am I wrong in my understanding of pnoise?
2. Is there something different in the way pnoise works in an autonomous circuit considering that my test case worked fine?


Thanks,

AM

Back to top
 
 
View Profile   IP Logged
Sergei Pevchin
Guest




Re: pnoise with noisetype=correlations
Reply #1 - Nov 18th, 2002, 2:04pm
 
I would suggest to try the latest version of SpectreRF. We finally fixed one problem with autonomous pac/pnoise_corr analyses.
This was released in 4.4.6.100.83 and later versions, and in
5.0 version of SpectreRF. If this will not help, we will have to look more closely at the problem.

Thanks,
Sergei.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
am
New Member
*
Offline



Posts: 2

Re: pnoise with noisetype=correlations
Reply #2 - Nov 18th, 2002, 7:30pm
 
I have tried this both with Spectre RF 4.4.6 and with 5.0
In both cases the results of pnoise with noisetype=correlations and cycles=0 is incorrect.
Furthermore, the result of pnoise with noisetype=correlations and cycles=-2 seems to be correct (the cross correlation seems to be correct for the case of a VCO, where we do not have AM noise close in).

Even more strange is the fact that I can not find out what is the correct carrier phase considered for the correlations (I need this to separate AM and PM noise).
The results make sense when I run it in driven mode (I have a very simple code that breaks the AM and PM noise based on the USB, LSB and the correlation between USB/LSB), but in autonomous mode the phase reported in pss-fd does not make sense (it actually looks like if the phase carrier phase was normalized to +90 degrees).

AM
Back to top
 
 
View Profile   IP Logged
Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
Copyright 2002-2024 Designer’s Guide Consulting, Inc. Designer’s Guide® is a registered trademark of Designer’s Guide Consulting, Inc. All rights reserved. Send comments or questions to editor@designers-guide.org. Consider submitting a paper or model.