Stats

  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 6
  • Subscribers 64
  • Views 16356
  • Members are here 0
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Blocker Noise Figure / Reciprocal Mixing Noise test using SpectreRF (MMSIM14)

RFStuff

Dear All,

I want to see/simulate how a close in blocker affects my receiver noise in the presence of LO-phase noise.

I provide a square LO to my receiver Mixer and a Blocker at the receiver input.

May be I have to model the LO phase noise in Verilog-A & then do a Pnoise analysis. ( But beat frequency reduces quite considerably with respect to LO frequency because of close in Blocker )

Can anybody please comment and give suggestion how to do this type of simulation efficiently in SpectreRF  ?


Kind Regards,

Parents

  • Dear Andrew,

    I have so far NOT used HB analysis as I use sharp square clock and my mixer is a switching passive mixer.

    So far PSS shooting method  has been fine for PSS-PNOISE analysis.

    But with close-in blocker,  pss-shooting method becomes slow.

    I have some queries about your suggestions:-

    1:- Reasonable number of harmonics :- will it be OK if I take 50 ( this is typically I take for Pnoise-PSS-shooting analysis).

    2:-  I couldn't understand your comment :-

    "This way you are not trying to combine all the frequencies into a single beat frequency, but can trade off the number of harmonics for each of the two fundamentals"

    Could you please elaborate in more detail ?

    Kind Regards,

Reply

  • Dear Andrew,

    I have so far NOT used HB analysis as I use sharp square clock and my mixer is a switching passive mixer.

    So far PSS shooting method  has been fine for PSS-PNOISE analysis.

    But with close-in blocker,  pss-shooting method becomes slow.

    I have some queries about your suggestions:-

    1:- Reasonable number of harmonics :- will it be OK if I take 50 ( this is typically I take for Pnoise-PSS-shooting analysis).

    2:-  I couldn't understand your comment :-

    "This way you are not trying to combine all the frequencies into a single beat frequency, but can trade off the number of harmonics for each of the two fundamentals"

    Could you please elaborate in more detail ?

    Kind Regards,

Children
No Data

Community Guidelines

The Cadence Design Communities support Cadence users and technologists interacting to exchange ideas, news, technical information, and best practices to solve problems and get the most from Cadence technology. The community is open to everyone, and to provide the most value, we require participants to follow our Community Guidelines that facilitate a quality exchange of ideas and information. By accessing, contributing, using or downloading any materials from the site, you agree to be bound by the full Community Guidelines.