Simple Circuit could use improvement

This is the place for any magazine-related discussions that don't fit in any of the column discussion boards below.
Robert Reed
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Simple Circuit could use improvement

Post by Robert Reed »

I need to detect RF sine wave voltages into the VHF range. In the past (and also at present ) I am using this circuit:
Image

This uses the classic and often seen low junction drop of a germanium 1N34 diode. The Vf as measured on a Fluke DMM is 0.2 volts (not sure what current it injects to obtain this voltage). This gives me fairly linear responses in the Square Law region of 200 - 2000 mv P-P input and then when moving beyond the transition zone into the linear region - excellent response, but at the expense of requiring high RF level input. Before I delve into a lengthy search on low Vf diodes (and thus lower detection levels), I thoght I would pick the expertise of the forum for any knowledge of very low Vf diodes. Of course junction capacitance must be kept to a minimum (<2pf) due to the frequencies involved. I do remember HP having a diode with a Vf of 0.1 volt from years ago, but have long since lost track of it.
Also, I tried biasing this diode with a small positive voltage on its anode with some unexpected results-that being the only difference in operation was the addition of a DC Vf voltage appearing on the output leads and no change in signal detection performance. This may be due to the hi-'Z' environment in which the circuit operates in, greatly limiting the actual current thru the diode. Would like to keep ths as a simple two wire device, but I suppose I could add a third wire to it for biasing if warranted. Looking to detect 20 mv p-p RF and higher with some degree of accuracy and only need relative output values (not absolute) to the scope and temperature stability will be of little concern as it will be operated in a room temperature environment all the time.
User avatar
MrAl
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: NewJersey
Contact:

Post by MrAl »

Hi Robert,


I have a circuit for you to look at, but before i post it i want to mention
a couple of things...

First, i didnt design this circuit, it was given to me by someone.
Second, i never tried this circuit, but did simulate it and it does
seem to work.
Third, the original circuit appeared in QST magazine and it was
originally used at 150MHz as a field strength meter, so it should be
fairly sensitive.

Fourth, even though i am posting this solution i am really hoping that
other readers will post their circuits too as i too would like to see
other ideas, suggestions, circuits, and whatever else...thanks.

Image

Oh yeah, i would suspect that that coil could be made much lower
(10uH) and still have this circuit work at high frequencies. This would
allow a hand wound air core coil to be used.
I didnt do any analysis however.
LEDs vs Bulbs, LEDs are winning.
sghioto
Posts: 326
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 5:16 pm
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Post by sghioto »

Robert,
Thats a pretty low voltage to detect with just a simple diode probe. Probably will need a VHF wideband front end amplifier for best results.

My two cents worth,
Steve G
Dean Huster
Posts: 1263
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Harviell, MO (Poplar Bluff area)
Contact:

Post by Dean Huster »

You can run some DC bias on the diode to get it closer to the knee voltage so that it will "detect" lower input voltages.

Dean
Dean Huster, Electronics Curmudgeon
Contributing Editor emeritus, "Q & A", of the former "Poptronics" magazine (formerly "Popular Electronics" and "Electronics Now" magazines).

R.I.P.
Robert Reed
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Post by Robert Reed »

MrAl
I tried your circuit and it does not work right. If I eliminate the diode to ground, it behaves similar to the circuit I posted althogh slightly less sensitive. Upon connecting the diode to ground, the out put drops in half. I don't understand the purpose of that diode as it should have no effect on the circuit at all. The only reason I can see for the output reduction when it is connected would be a terribly leaky diode. My Fluke tested it as OK. I the then tested both diodes in my original circuit and its performance was the same, so both diodes appear to be functioning OK. What does your Sim show if you remove that diode? Also if the grounded diode were moved to the anode side of the seriesed diode it appears that it may work as a voltage doubler. Havn't checked that out yet.

Sghioto
Actually the circuit starts to respond at <5 mv rms, but until you pass 30 or 40 the out put is way down in the mud. If I have to go to a full blown active circuit on this, I will probably use another method of detection rather than the 1N34.

Dean
I had mentioned that I had biased the diode with no increase in performance. However the current would be limited to the 47K resistor and 1 meg scope impedance, which now that I think about it would have only allowed about 1 uA of current thru the diode, hardly enough to actually put it on the threshold of conduction. I don't know how I can build a dedicated current loop that would supply adequate bias current thru the diode and still maintain adequate signal impedance. Any ideas on that?
User avatar
MrAl
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: NewJersey
Contact:

Post by MrAl »

Hi Robert,

Here's the results of the simulation...

Code: Select all

 IN      OUT
0.010v  0.20ua
0.020v  0.83ua
0.030v  1.8ua
0.040v  3.2ua
0.060v  7.0ua
0.080v  12ua
0.100v  17ua
I hope you were not expecting a linear response down that low?
Im sure you have to use an active circuit to get something like that.
What is done in the case of the non linear response sometimes is
the input is driven with a known voltage and the output response
noted. This forms a calibration that can be used to compare to
actual unknown measurements in the field. This is what we did
a while back on a group web project where we had to measure
the output ripple of a power supply circuit. A wave generator is
used to calibrate the detector, then the actual readings are compared
to the calibration readings and inbetween values are calculated
using linear interpolation. This is not an exact method but it helps.
These measurements, although not exact, still led us to a go/no-go kind
of logistic where we knew if the circuit needed a component change or
not.

Circuit parameters:

Diodes: 1N5817
Meter internal R: 3500 ohms
Note also the connection was changed as you noticed too, i had forgot
about that. The lower diode is connected to the anode of the series
diode, not the cathode. Thus, the lower diode cathode connects to
the series diode anode. That's the only thing different.
The output 'pot' was adjusted to the full 10k.
To compute output voltage at the right side of the inductor, multiply
the output current readings shown above by the internal resistance
of the meter, which is 3500 ohms (E=I*R).

Time profile:
The output reaches at least to 90 percent of full output in 100us,
and up to 99.9 percent of full output in 200us. This does not include
the response time of the meter movement which was not considered.

Updated schematic:


Image
LEDs vs Bulbs, LEDs are winning.
Robert Reed
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Post by Robert Reed »

Thanks MrAl- I will take this info and run some tests and get back to you to compare notes. Actually I am trying to determine the optimum operating region for relative measurments with a moderate degree of accuracy, maybe a 20 or 30 db range at best. Stay tuned.
User avatar
Bob Scott
Posts: 1192
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Vancouver, BC
Contact:

Post by Bob Scott »

How about this? You've probably thought of it already.

Image

Where it says +.3V, I mean just a resistor (at least 47K per DC volt) to bias the diodes to a higher voltage source. Add another 10000pF across the added diode to ground.
Robert Reed
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Post by Robert Reed »

Bob
Not sure I am looking at this right, but it looks like my original circuit (upper half) with the upper diode doing all the detection and the RF input path thru the 1000 pf input cap, diode and 10000?pf cap to ground return in half wave fashion. The lower components are there only for biasing the detector (upper) diode at its threshold of conduction. The scope attaches to the out put of the upper 47K resistor and ground. Is that correct? Any how in the meantime, I will cobble this up and test it.

MrAl
Well I ran some comparison tests on both circuits. Yours was modified onlly to the extent of having a scope for the load rather than meter.They came out as follows:

Results at bottom of page


The doubler has a lot more sensitivity but slightly less linearity ( althogh, understandably neither is linear) . Tests were run at 1MHz for now and neither circuit appeared to load the source. I wish I had some 1N5817s to try for comparison, but at $7-$8 S&H, I don't want to place an order just for them.
My only concern about the doubler is the possible extra loading it may present. I calculate about 1.8 pf for the original and 3.6 pf for the doubler.Don't know if that may be too severe, but further testing will bear that out.

Image
rshayes
Posts: 1286
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 1:01 am
Contact:

Post by rshayes »

The solution might be more in the way the circuit is used rather than the specific circuit. An old vacuum tube instrument, the Hewlett-Packard 411A, had full scale ranges from 10 mV to 10 V. The detector was a simple diode detector, similar to the conventional shunt rectifier. The trick was to use two matched detectors and compare their outputs. One detector sensed the input signal. The other detector was fed by a 100 KHz feedback signal. The feedback signal was adjusted in amplitude until the two detector readings were equal. This cancelled the non-linearity of the detectors. The feedback signal was generated as a variable signal matching the 10 volt range. The signal level was measured with an AC voltmeter. For lower ranges, an attenuator was used to drop the signal level fed to the second detector. The voltmeter continued to read the unattenuated signal.

The comparison was done with a chopper type of amplifier using photoconductive cells as choppers and a vacuum tube amplifier. The offset of this type of amplifier was stable to about the microvolt level. Similar, if not better, performance is now available in integrated circuit op amps of either the chopper stabilized or autozeroed type. The 100 KHz feedback signal can be generated using a multiplier chip instead of the modulated class C amplifier that Hewlett-Packard used.

Schottky barrier diodes have forward voltages in the same range as germanium point contact diodes so there might be a small improvement in sensitivity, but probably not enough to give good performance at the 20 mV level. Matching between two detectors might be much better with the schottky diodes, and this would be ideal for the technique that Hewlett-Packard used.

Another method was to modulate the signal to be measured at 1000 Hz and use a selective amplifier with high gain to read the demodulated signal. These amplifiers were called SWR meters and were usually calibrated for use with a square-law detector. They were usually used in the microwave region with slotted lines.
Robert Reed
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Post by Robert Reed »

RS
Yes I am Familiar with that instrument. As usual HP technology is quite unique. I really did not want to get into a large scale project on this as extreme accurracy is not important. Also, althogh the circuit could be built, the Devil is always in the details and copy cat design is never as easy as first looks.
mmmmm----A 6AL5 :grin:
User avatar
MrAl
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: NewJersey
Contact:

Post by MrAl »

Hi again,

Robert:
rshayes excellent post on the working of the HP gave me an idea
you may want to try.

Build up three identical detectors the same as the one we have
been talking about, with no meters and 100k on the output instead
of the pot and meter.
Connect det1 to the signal source.
Connect det2 to the output of a resistive divider set to divide by 100
(990 ohms in series with 10 ohms for nice low Z) and driven from
a 100kHz sine source.
Connect det3 directly to the 100kHz sine source.
You may be able to connect the 50ua meter across outputs of
det1 and det2, or simply measure their outputs to compare.

Now when you turn up the 100kHz sine to 1v peak, the output of the
divider is 0.01v peak, and that gets applied to the input of det2 and
the output of det1 and det2 are compared, but the output of det3
is measured with a DC volt meter. When the 100kHz amplitude is
adjusted so that the outputs of det1 and det2 are equal, the source
AC input is equal to the DC meter reading divided by 100.

There is one modification required however, to det3. That is, the
lower diode gets a 10k resistor in series with it to linearize the circuit
somewhat. The results of the readings on the DC volt meter would
look something like this:

Code: Select all

(mod R=10k in series with lower diode of det3 only)
IN          OUT
0.01       0.9v
0.02       2.0v
0.03       3.2v
0.04       4.4v
Note the output levels are more linear now and are related to
the input source voltage. In fact, between 0.02v and 0.04v (and
maybe higher) the result is VERY linear.
LEDs vs Bulbs, LEDs are winning.
Robert Reed
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Post by Robert Reed »

MrAl
Looks like an interesting concept. Do you have a schematic that you could post (i keep getting lost in the 1,2,3 ).

As a matter of interest, here is where I am at right now:
Biased diode-
Merely placing a bias voltage on the diode's anode does not neccessarily put it on the threshold of conduction. In these circuits, there is over 1 meg of series resistance and almost the whole bias voltage appears at the scopes input with almost no drop across the diode due to just 1-2 uA thru it. A resistor ( I chose 15 K) was placed from kathode to ground with a bias voltage supplied to the anode so as to form a current loop to bias the diode. Various currents were injected between 10 to 200 uA. The results were still the same - no change in detector performance and a lot of bias voltge appearing at the scopes input. Lowering the loop resistor might help this, but the circuits input 'Z' now becomes too low. Increasing the loop resistor would require increasing bias voltage to maintain bias current thru the diode, which also presents a demand for nulling that DC voltage at the scope input. Finally gave up on this method.

Going with original half wave plan-
Built this circuit up in proper RF fashion similar to a "Microwave Launching Board". I was amazed that the output DC remained flat within 0.5 db all the way to 500 MHz. The input RF peak range of 100 -1000 mv is fairly linear (+/- 10%) which is adequate for this application. The input range of 10-100 mv is close to Square law. I suppose I could read the lower range in db and the upper in linear
:grin:
Input impedance is 12K@1 MHz. Will have spot check this from 1-100 MHz. Of the 3 1N34s I had in stock, they all gave different output voltages, but their response knees were very similar.
User avatar
MrAl
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: NewJersey
Contact:

Post by MrAl »

Hi Robert,

Here is a schematic...


Image
LEDs vs Bulbs, LEDs are winning.
Robert Reed
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Post by Robert Reed »

MrAl
Thats a neat circuit. I take it that you read corrected value right off the meter which is calibrated in millivolts DC. One problem occurs to me. Given that the Knee off all the diodes will probably be somewhat different, I am wondering if calibration would be required at at each point of measurment. I suppose a handful of diodes could be purchased and selected with a curve tracer. The detector will be used in a dynamic environment (sweeping a wide range of frequencys) so stop and go calibration might bog down testing speed.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests