^saint^
Newbie level 6
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2010
- Messages
- 11
- Helped
- 0
- Reputation
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
- Trophy points
- 1,281
- Activity points
- 1,404
Exactly" that are 90 deg out of phase ", then you say " if wave A is currently leading or trailing wave B " . So you know that they are 90 degrees out of phase but you don't know which one is leading?
It might but I don't think it is correct, it should be the other way around or the change at PC2 will be very small. Parallel connected resistors 20k with 2k won't will still give a Rs close to 2k (when it's PC2 -> 20k -> 2k/2k), so instead it should be PC2 -> 2k -> 20k/20k or better yet PC2 -> 20k -> 1M/1M so it won't source too much current from PC2.That data sheet I looked at loaded the PCII output with 20k and 2k/2k not 1meg and 2k/2k.
Will try this as I've seen someone using a dual D flip-flop for this.Use a D flipflop.
Put one signal on the clock of the DFF,
Put the other to the D input of the DFF
Isn't this exactly the same as PCP output of 4046? The only difference is they are using a bunch of NOT gates but I'm guessing it's just for amplifying the current.Everyone is right!
Use a D flip-flop as Klaus suggests to determine whether it is leading or lagging the reference signal and also connect the two signals to an XOR gate to determine the relative phase difference as Frank suggests. It should work from near DC to 10s of MHz using this method.
Brian.
I've got that. I was simply interested what those NOT gates are doing in PCP.The phase pulses output indicates whether there is a phase difference or not. The main PC II output will, as Crutschow indicated, whether it is leading or lagging.
The problem is that after putting sin waves A and B through a comparator the square waves aren't shifted 1/4 of HIGH-state (the waves change amplitudes but when they are present).You need to take the mean voltage (try an RC network) which is proportional to their phase difference rather than use the instantaneous logic output.
Brian.
This is all fine the only problem is that the sin/square waves arent always present, the problem is that if you look at #1 the consecutive XOR high states are actually for one pair of A,B high pulses. Sampling Q at both consecutive Hi states will actually gave a false resoult as Lead + Lag when in fact only the first is true.An XOR can tell you the phase difference but it cannot tell which input is leading and which is lagging just my looking at its output. The FF based phase-detectors can.
This has already been suggested the only problem is knowing when to sample Q output as the A and B waves arent always present and the XOR is triggered twice with each A,B pair.Use 74*74 and connect D and CK to signals. Q output will show you which signal is leading or lagging.
**broken link removed** for the module I'm working with it's a doppler radar, **broken link removed** explaining the circuit (Fig. 3 - my simple comparator, 5 & 6). I'm trying to determine which of the I/Q sine waves is leading. The problem is that gain of op amps is fixed but as the object approaches the amplitude of of I/Q increases so does the duty from comparator(s). The frequency is proportional to object speed.What is your App? Noise level & how often? Do you use the PLL mode?
1. I'll set it for something like 44Hz-4.4kHz which would correspond to 1-100 km/h; person and car detection.1. Matching your receiver filter bandwidth to match the signal content and thus maximize SNR.
2. Make the Sine signal constant to avoid shift in edges from asymmetry using wide range AGC ( 60dB?)
3. Make Comparator noise free slice at 50% of sine p-p with low error <1%? and not >10% phase error. This requires linear amplification, low offset voltage and speed >50x than signal bandwidth.
Could you provide an example?Then use another comparator for AGC voltage to disable signal or indicate noisy level. SOme applications use SNR or AGC level to reduce PLL bandwidth, so there is less jitter. but more tracking error.. It is a compromise that can be tweaked with above 1,2,3
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?