The Designer's Guide Community
Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register. Please follow the Forum guidelines.
Jul 19th, 2024, 11:17am
Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
Comparison between Middlebrook analysis and Spectr (Read 4180 times)
ee484
New Member
*
Offline



Posts: 7

Comparison between Middlebrook analysis and Spectr
Mar 17th, 2006, 2:04pm
 
Dear all,

I have a question about why the loop gain resluts from Middle brook analysis and Spectre embeded are different.
Both seem to agree each other well up to 1GHz (in my case), but at higher frequencies they look different.
Any comments are welcome!!!

How other analog experts do analyze the loop gain?

Do they just do the time-domain (such as a step response) analysis? or do they just find closed loop response and infer the phase margin information from it??

I am attaching zip file showing simulation setup and results.

Thanks in advance!

ee484 Undecided
Back to top
 
View Profile   IP Logged
sheldon
Community Fellow
*****
Offline



Posts: 751

Re: Comparison between Middlebrook analysis and Sp
Reply #1 - Mar 19th, 2006, 7:24am
 
ee484,

  Quoting from "Striving for Small-Signal Stability", M. Tian, et al., Circuits
and Devices Magazine, Jan. 2001, page 31-41

    The return-loop model used in Middlebrook’s approach implicitly
    assumes that signals flow through the feedback loop unilaterally.
    This is a reasonable assumption for most low-frequency
    applications.


The issue is that at high frequencies the loading and the reverse return
ratio may effect the results. If you look at section 3.4.1.4, Feedback
Parameters of Real Circuits, in Ken's book, it discusses using four parameter
characterization of blocks[z-parameter, g-parameter, ...] to isolate the
contribution to the loop gain from the op-amp from the contribution to the
loop gain due to loading, ... This approach correctly accounts for high frequency
effects and should produce results consistent with the results from the approach
implemented in the Spectre's stability analysis.

                                                                   Best Regards,

                                                                      Sheldon
Back to top
 
 
View Profile   IP Logged
ee484
New Member
*
Offline



Posts: 7

Re: Comparison between Middlebrook analysis and Sp
Reply #2 - Mar 19th, 2006, 8:08am
 
I see...

I am a beginner is this area and guess many many things to learn. (I am also a new to this site)

So, the bottom line is Middlebrook's method works well in low-frequencies. However, in high frequencies, other loading effect with bilateral effect should be accounted.

Thank you for your explanation

PS:
Just wondering..if I simulate the circuit with loading effect, then bilater effect also gets counted?
I guess the answer is no. Then, if Middlebrook's method fails because it doesn't account for bilateral effect. Just counting loading effect will solve this problem?

Back to top
 
 
View Profile   IP Logged
sheldon
Community Fellow
*****
Offline



Posts: 751

Re: Comparison between Middlebrook analysis and Sp
Reply #3 - Mar 19th, 2006, 4:09pm
 
ee484,

  First just to be clear, the loading effect refers to parasitic capacitances "loading"
the feedback network and modifying the return ratio as a function of frequency.
The classic example is the board capacitance at the inverting input of the op-amp
and the gain setting resistor in the feedback network. At high frequencies the stray
capacitance shorts the gain setting resistor, creating a zero in the return ratio at high
frequencies. Don't know if it is still in print but the Analog Devices High Speed Seminar
used to have a detailed discussion of this issue. If you want to eliminate this effect
then use a the ideal component method of setting gain described in Ken's book.
For example, by replacing resistor feedback with a voltage-controlled, voltage-source
to set the return ratio creates a unilateral feedback path.

So if you use an ideal component to feedback the output, then you can create a
unitlateral return ratio. In this case, the Middlebrook results should correlate
better with Spectre's stability analysis.

                                                                  Best Case,

                                                                      Art Schaldenbrand


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.