Concept

Design tradeoff — where it appears

A pair of requirements that move one design quantity in opposite directions, so that satisfying either is measured as a cost to the other. Naming the two quantities and measuring the exchange rate between them is what this collection does instead of recommending a value.

Named by 174 essays across 14 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

What each family costs, at order 5. Measured on the solved networks. The Chebyshev is 36 dB further down at three times the corner than the Bessel, and pays for it in delay: its group delay varies 49.0% across the passband against the Bessel's 0.06%.

What a steep skirt costs

A filter's order buys attenuation at a known rate — twenty decibels per decade per pole, and no arrangement of components changes it. What varies between families is how quickly the slope is reached, and the currency it is paid for in is delay: the steepest of the three distorts delay eight hundred times more than the gentlest.

filters · Filter tradeoff
The limit cycle's spectrum at a gain of 3.20. Ten lines of the settled waveform. The third is 5.692% of the fundamental and the fifth 0.982%; the second and fourth are 6.8e-7, which is the arithmetic's floor and not a small residue. Two diodes facing opposite ways make a symmetric characteristic and a symmetric characteristic produces no even harmonic at all.

What the limiter charges for

The diodes that set the amplitude are the only nonlinear thing in the loop, so every harmonic in the output is theirs. Across the gain slider the amplitude rises by a factor of 1.51 and the distortion by 15.4 — an amplitude that goes as the 0.11 power of the excess gain and a distortion that goes as the 0.74 power. Two diodes facing opposite ways produce no even harmonic at all, at seven parts in ten million, which is the arithmetic's floor rather than a small residue.

applied · Oscillator
How long a second-order step takes to arrive inside ±2%. computed by solving, not by drawing from the residue expansion at 260 damping ratios. The fastest is ζ = 0.780 at 3.60/ω₀; critical damping takes 5.83/ω₀, which is 62% longer. Between ζ = 0.775 and 0.780 the time falls by 33% in one step of the sweep, because which excursion is the last one outside the band changes there — the overshoot at the fastest damping is 1.99%, which is the band itself, and one step to the left it is larger. The faint curves are the other bands, each with its own step in a different place.

The cliff before the fastest settling

Settling time against damping is not a smooth curve with a minimum. It falls by a third in one step of a sweep of five thousandths, and the fastest damping sits on the edge of that step — so a design a hundredth of a damping ratio to the left of the optimum settles forty-eight per cent slower, with a waveform that looks no different.

transients · Damping
Two reasons the frequency is not 1/2πRC. The measured oscillation frequency sits below the network's own zero-phase frequency, and by two separate amounts. The amplifier's share falls as 1/ρ — the product of shift and ratio is constant to 6.7% over two decades — and the limiter's share is flat at 0.7713%. They are equal at ρ = 578, and above that a faster amplifier moves the frequency by nothing that matters.

The frequency that is not the formula

The Wien network's zero-phase frequency is one over two pi RC to every digit the arithmetic has. The circuit does not run there. With a perfect amplifier it runs 0.771 per cent low, because the limiter's harmonics are part of the waveform whose period is being measured; with a real one it runs lower still, by an amount inversely proportional to the gain-bandwidth product. The two are equal at a ratio of 578, and above that a faster amplifier buys nothing.

applied · Oscillator
Where a switch is a switch: a band, and the 6.43 MHz at which it closes. computed by solving, not by drawing. A switch of 0.5 Ω closed, 100 MΩ open and 5 pF across it is within 1.0% of being ideal only for loads between 49.5 Ω and 1.01 MΩ — 4.31 decades, and both edges are the same part. The upper edge is a frequency as well as a resistance, because the off-capacitance shunts the open switch: it falls a decade per decade above 318 Hz and meets the lower edge at 6.43 MHz, where the band closes and no load at all will do. Checked by scanning every load at 1.3 times that frequency and finding the best possible error to be 1.17%.

A band rather than an edge

Every other boundary in this collection is one-sided: a model is true below a frequency, or below an amplitude. A switch is a switch only for loads between 49.5 ohms and 1.01 megohms — bounded at both ends by the same part — and the upper end is a frequency as well as a resistance, so the band narrows as the frequency rises and shuts completely at 6.43 megahertz, above which no load resistance at all will do.

limits · Ideal switch
The load that takes the most power, and the load that wastes the least. computed by solving, not by drawing at 71 load values. The power into the load peaks at a ratio of 1.000000, which is the magnitude of the source impedance to six figures, and the efficiency there is 0.500000 — the source dissipates as much as the load receives. Ninety per cent efficiency needs a ratio of 9.7 and delivers 34% of the available power.

The load that takes the most

A load equal to the source resistance takes more power than any other, and it does so at exactly fifty per cent efficiency — the source burns as much as the load receives. Ninety per cent efficiency needs a load nine times the source and delivers 36% of what was available, and a load half the source resistance delivers exactly as much as one twice it.

power · Power transfer
The ideal amplifier is good to 1% over a region, and its corner is 21% inside the specifications. computed by solving, not by drawing. The 1 per cent contour of the ideal-amplifier model for a non-inverting stage of gain 2 built from a 10 MHz part, drawn over frequency and output amplitude at once. Each point is bisected on a marched circuit: the error is the root-mean-square difference between the marched output and 2 times the input, which counts the gain that is low, the phase that is late and the peak that is flat. Three mechanisms bound the region — finite gain–bandwidth on the left, the input pair's slew rate on the diagonal, and the rails at 12.19 V along the top. The two dashed lines are the numbers a data sheet gives: a small-signal edge at 48.8 kHz with no amplitude in it, and a full-power bandwidth of slew rate over 2πV̂ with no gain–bandwidth in it. They cross at 10.60 V and 48.8 kHz; the measured contour passes 38.5 kHz at that amplitude, which is 0.790 of it.

The edge that is a region

Every boundary drawn so far in this subject is a number on one axis, and the figure that gathers four of them admits in its own caption that the fifth is an amplitude and cannot go there. Drawn on both axes at once, the ideal amplifier's one per cent boundary is a region with three sides and a corner — and the corner sits at 38.5 kilohertz where the two numbers a data sheet quotes cross at 48.8, because the two mechanisms are lags on the same waveform and add as magnitudes rather than in quadrature.

limits · Model edges
Where four of these models stop being true. In order: the ideal operational amplifier at 1.42 kHz, a 10 V output at full amplitude at 7.96 kHz, Kirchhoff's laws on 10.0 cm at 3.97 MHz, the ideal 100 nF capacitor at 4.69 MHz. The fifth boundary is an amplitude rather than a frequency and cannot share this axis: a small-signal model is 1% wrong above 7.3 mV, at every frequency there is.

The edges that are lengths

Almost every boundary in this collection is a frequency or an amplitude, and both of those are things a circuit designer chooses. A handful are lengths — the 0.60 millimetres a gap's field reaches into a window, the 200 microns between a track and its plane, the 10 centimetres at which Kirchhoff's laws are a degree out — and they behave differently in one way that matters: nobody chooses them at the schematic, they are set by whoever builds the thing, and they appear in no netlist at all.

limits · Model edges
The window a 10 µF capacitor leaves. Above 939 mΩ the loop holds 45° of margin; below it the regulator rings and then oscillates. The droop after a 100 mA step is smallest at 817 mΩ — 129 mV — and by 19.9 Ω it is 1.468 V, because at the first instant of a step the capacitor cannot move and the whole step falls across its series resistance. Two requirements, opposite directions, and the useful values are between them.

Two requirements pulling one capacitor

The output capacitor's series resistance is a stability requirement and a transient requirement at once, and they pull it in opposite directions. Below 939 milliohms this loop has less than 45 degrees of margin; above about 850 the droop after a load step starts to grow, because at the first instant of a step the capacitor cannot move and the whole step falls across that resistance. The droop is smallest 10 per cent inside the unstable region, which means the best transient this design can have is one it must not be built with.

applied · Regulator
The best shunt drops 7.75 mV, whatever the current is. computed by solving, not by drawing. Two errors on one axis, both from solved networks: the shunt's own drop, which lowers the current that was to be measured, and the amplifier's 5.0 µV of offset divided by the voltage the shunt develops. The first rises with the burden voltage and the second falls, so the worst case has an interior minimum at 7.7460 mV — the geometric mean of the offset and the 12 V supply — where the error is 0.1291%, being twice the root of the offset over the supply. Neither the shunt's resistance nor the current appears in either number: at 1 A the answer is 7.75 mΩ, and at a hundred times the current it is the same burden voltage across a hundredth of the resistance. What does depend on the current is the 7.7 mW the shunt then dissipates, and 40 K of self-heating at 50 ppm/K is 0.2000% on its own. The third curve is the shunt's own Johnson noise in a kilohertz of measurement bandwidth, as a fraction of the current: it is 4.5e-6% at the best burden and is the only line here that moves with the current at all, falling as one over its square root — so above about an ampere it leaves the bottom of these axes entirely and is drawn nowhere rather than flattened onto the floor.

The ammeter that is a resistor

Every direct measurement of a current is a measurement of a voltage across something the current was made to flow through, so the instrument has two errors pointing opposite ways: a larger shunt changes the current, a smaller one leaves less for the amplifier's offset to be compared with. Written in the burden voltage they are the burden over the supply and the amplifier's offset over the burden, and the best of them is at the geometric mean — 7.75 millivolts on a twelve-volt rail, with a worst-case error of 0.129 per cent. Neither number contains a resistance, and neither contains the current: ten milliamps and a hundred amps want the same 7.75 millivolts.

instruments · Current sensing
25% compensation: 4.26% regulation, and a resonance at 25.0 Hz. computed by solving, not by drawing. The current a 230 V feeder draws, swept from two hertz to a hundred and fifty, with 25% of the line's reactance cancelled by a series capacitor. The regulation falls from 5.17% to 4.26%, which is what the capacitor was fitted for. What comes with it is a series resonance at 9.59 Hz with the load connected and 24.99 Hz with the far end shorted — the latter being exactly f₀√k = 25.00 Hz, a frequency the compensation fraction chooses on its own. The line's inductance does not appear in it and neither does the voltage. It is always below the fundamental, which is where the machines are.

The reactance cancelled, and the resonance it buys

Putting a capacitor in series with a feeder cancels part of its reactance and the far end falls less: five per cent of regulation becomes four and a quarter at a quarter compensation and 2.7 per cent at seventy per cent. What comes with it is a series resonance that was not there before, at the line frequency times the root of the fraction cancelled — so a quarter compensation resonates at exactly half the line frequency and a ninth at exactly a third. The line's own inductance is not in that answer and neither is the voltage.

power · Series compensation
A series-terminated net holds half a swing for 1.0 delays at 50% along it. computed by solving, not by drawing. What a receiver 50% of the way along one net sees under three terminations, from a lattice evaluated at that point rather than at the ends. The shaded strip is the interval in which a logic input has no defined answer — between 30% and 70% of the swing. The series-terminated net sits in it for 4.83 ns, which is 2(1 − x) delays exactly and is zero only at the far end; the unterminated net sits in it for 4.83 ns and then overshoots by 82%; the parallel-terminated net never does, and draws 60 mA down the line for as long as the level is held.

The resistor at the wrong end

A lattice diagram is read at the two ends of a line, and that is where the two respectable terminations look identical: a clean step, one delay late, at the receiver. Anyone standing halfway along a series-terminated net sees half the swing held for a full round trip, which for a logic input is not a level at all. The interval is 2(1−x) delays exactly, it is zero only at the far end, and the scheme that never has it draws sixty milliamperes for as long as the level is held.

lines · Termination
A divider of 4 equal 1.0% resistors, solved 3000 times. computed by solving, not by drawing. Every resistor drawn from its tolerance band and the divider solved, 3000 times. The worst case is ±1.000% — the part tolerance itself, and it does not improve when the divider is built from more parts — while the measured spread is 0.2944% and the worst of 3000 draws reached 82% of the bound. The root-sum-square, offered as though it were a standard deviation, is 1.70 of one here: for uniformly distributed parts it is √3 σ, a coverage of about 92%.

The tolerance that is not on any part

Four one per cent resistors in a divider give an answer whose worst case is one per cent, whose measured spread is 0.29 per cent, and whose root-sum-square bound — offered everywhere as though it were a standard deviation — is 1.70 of one. Adding parts does not move the worst case at all and shrinks the spread as one over their root, so the gap between the promise and the fact widens with every resistor. And the same arithmetic draws a boundary in tolerance rather than in frequency: an R–2R ladder is a twelve-bit converter only while its resistors are inside 0.14 per cent.

networks · Component tolerance
Five boundaries, one tolerance, and three exponents. computed by solving, not by drawing. Each of five model boundaries re-solved at forty-one tolerances from 0.1% to 30%, divided by its own value at 0.1% so that an amplitude in millivolts and four frequencies can share one axis — an exponent has no units. Fitted over the two decades to 10%: Kirchhoff's laws 1.000, the ideal amplifier 0.513, the small-signal model 0.497, the ideal capacitor 0.500, and the full-power bandwidth 0.000. A boundary set by a first-order departure moves in proportion to the tolerance, one set by a second-order departure moves as its square root, and a refusal does not move at all — so relaxing the tolerance from 0.1% to 10% buys a factor of 100 on the board and 10.0 on the capacitor.

A boundary is a model and a tolerance

Every edge in this collection is computed from a fraction of error nobody states, and the four on its opening axis use three different ones. Swept over two decades, each boundary moves as a power of that fraction — Kirchhoff's laws exactly as the first power, the amplifier and the capacitor and the small-signal model as its square root to within three per cent, and a full-power bandwidth not at all. The exponent identifies the mechanism, and it re-orders the axis twice: the board fails before the capacitor below 0.424 per cent, and the output before the amplifier above 21.7.

limits · Model edges
The switches set the floor below 60.2 MHz and the amplifier sets it above. computed by solving, not by drawing. The two contributions to a switched-capacitor stage's noise floor, against the clock frequency. √(kT/C) is 63.3 µV on a 1 pF hold capacitor and does not move with the clock at all. The amplifier's own 4 nV/√Hz is white and is sampled, so all of it folds into the band: settling to 12 bits in half a clock period needs 8.32 time constants, the closed loop's noise bandwidth is then 8.32 clocks over two, and the number of folds is 8.32 — the same number, exactly. The marched route is a seeded white sequence put through the settling exponential and sampled once per clock, and it agrees with the closed form to 0.05% of variance. The two floors are equal at 60.2 MHz, above which a larger capacitor buys nothing.

The amplifier inside the sample

kT/C is exactly independent of the clock, of the capacitor ratio and of the switch resistance — two essays measured that and found it identically true rather than nearly so. The amplifier in the same loop behaves in the opposite way in every respect: its noise is white, it is sampled, and the number of times it folds into the band is exactly the number of time constants the settling needs. So the switches set the floor below sixty megahertz and the amplifier sets it above, and asking for two more bits of settling costs fifteen per cent more noise before anything else has changed.

noise · kT/C noise
A stub holds the far end at two thirds for twice its own delay. computed by solving, not by drawing. A series-terminated net with a branch on it, marched as waves on a delay grid. Three lines of equal impedance meet at the junction, so each presents the others with Z₀/2 and a wave arriving is reflected by exactly −1/3 with two thirds going on. The far end therefore receives 66.7% of the swing at one line delay instead of all of it, and is held there for 0.400 line delays — twice the stub's own delay of 0.41 ns, being the round trip to its open end and back. The same net without the branch is drawn beside it and settles in one round trip, which is what a series termination is for. Each further round trip of the stub divides what is left of the error by three and turns it over, because the returning wave doubles at the open far end — so the receiver approaches its level alternately from below and from above.

The receiver that is a branch

A lattice diagram has two ends, and an interior receiver is not a point on a net — it is a short piece of track leading off it to a pin, open at the far end. Three lines of equal impedance meeting at a junction present each other with half the impedance, so a wave arriving is reflected by exactly minus a third and two thirds goes on: the far end receives two thirds of the swing and sits there for twice the stub's own delay, whatever the net is terminated with and wherever on it the branch is.

lines · Termination
9.9 Ω restores 45°, 23 Ω restores 60°, and the load pays for it in ohms. computed by solving, not by drawing. Phase margin against the resistor placed between a unity-gain inverter's output and 2.2 nF of load capacitance, with the feedback taken from the amplifier's own side of it. With no resistor the margin is 30.11°; 9.90 Ω restores 45° and 23.20 Ω restores 60°. The lower curve is the same resistor with the feedback taken from the load instead, where it makes every value worse — the pole is then inside the loop rather than outside it, and at 220 Ω the margin is 13.4°. The rising curve is what it costs: the loop no longer regulates the load's node, so 1 kΩ of resistive load pulls the output down by 0.990% at 10 Ω, uncorrected, at direct current.

The resistor that buys the margin back

Two point two nanofarads takes a unity-gain inverter's phase margin from ninety degrees to thirty. Ten ohms between the amplifier and the load restores forty-five, twenty-three restores sixty, and it works for a reason that reads as a cheat: the feedback is taken from the wrong side of the resistor, so its pole is outside the loop. Take the feedback from the load instead — which is what anyone controlling the load would do — and the same resistor makes every value worse. What it costs is that the loop no longer regulates the load's node at all: ten ohms is one per cent of error into a kilohm, at direct current, uncorrected.

feedback · Capacitive load
Below 910 kHz a trace is a diffusion, not a line — and its velocity goes as √f. computed by solving, not by drawing. The phase velocity of an ordinary FR-4 trace against frequency, computed from γ = √((R + jωL)(G + jωC)) with a series resistance that rises as √f above its skin-effect corner and a shunt conductance proportional to frequency. Above 910 kHz the velocity is 0.4767c and does not move, which is the number every other essay in this field uses. Below it the series resistance dominates the reactance, the line is a diffusion, and the velocity falls as the square root of frequency — measured at the 0.467 power. The characteristic impedance is not a constant down there either: 1508 Ω at a kilohertz against 50.0 Ω at ten gigahertz.

The delay that is not one number

Nine essays in this field quote a delay: a length divided by a velocity, the same for every frequency, and the edge that comes out is the edge that went in. A real trace has a series resistance, and below the frequency where the reactance overtakes it — 910 kilohertz for ordinary copper — the line is a diffusion rather than a wave, with a velocity proportional to √f. What survives is that the arrival is still exactly linear in the length. What does not is the rise time, which grows as the square of it.

lines · Dispersion
Nine tenths of the heat is in the switch, and above 1.28 MHz there is no temperature at all. computed by solving, not by drawing. The junction temperature a recovering diode settles at, against switching frequency, with the carrier lifetime rising as the 1.8 power of absolute temperature so that the recovery gets worse as the junction gets hotter. Each event costs 15.43 µJ when cold, of which 90% is dissipated in whatever is pulling the current down rather than in the diode: while the junction is still conducting it holds almost no voltage, and the recovered charge is delivered through the switch at the full 100 V. That energy equals the diode's own conduction loss at 29.2 kHz. The fixed point T = Ta + Rth·P(T) is iterated from the ambient upward; the junction passes its rated 150 °C at 904 kHz, and above 1.28 MHz there is no temperature that satisfies it at all — the loop has gain and the solver reports the refusal rather than the last iterate.

The heat a recovery leaves behind

The essay below this one measured how much current a diode conducts backwards and for how long, and stopped there. Both numbers are multiplied by a voltage somewhere, and the surprise is where: while the junction is still conducting it holds almost nothing, so nine tenths of the energy is dissipated in the transistor pulling the current down and not in the diode. Repeat it a hundred thousand times a second and it is 1.5 watts, the lifetime rises with temperature, and above 1.28 megahertz the diode's own loop has no fixed point at all.

transients · Reverse recovery
The second path costs nothing at 12 pF and an order at 100 pF. computed by solving, not by drawing. Settling time to 0.01% of final value, marched on the closed loop, against the value of the second feedback path's capacitor — with the phase margin of the same circuit divided by ten drawn on the same axis so the two can be compared. The direct-current error the previous rung recorded as the isolation resistor's cost, 0.99% into 1 kΩ, falls to 1.20e-4% with the second path in. What the second path costs instead is a range: at 12 pF the circuit settles in 0.745 µs against the isolation resistor's 1.419 µs — faster than the thing it repairs — and at 100 pF it takes 9.18 µs, 12 times longer, at a phase margin of 47.9° that reports nothing whatever about it. What it is settling by there is one exponential of time constant 0.99 µs, which is the feedback network's own RC and contains no amplifier.

The path that buys the error back

An isolation resistor restores a capacitively loaded amplifier's phase margin and costs it the thing feedback was for: the loop stops regulating the node the load is on, and a kilohm of load pulls the output down by a per cent. The standard repair is a second feedback path, and its cost is not an error or a margin — it is a range. At twelve picofarads it settles to a hundredth of a per cent in 0.745 microseconds, faster than the circuit it repairs; at a hundred it takes 9.18, and the phase margin there is better.

feedback · Capacitive load
Subtracting removes kT/C entirely and doubles the amplifier — worth 31× at a megahertz and a loss above 60 MHz. computed by solving, not by drawing. The noise on one sample of a switched-capacitor stage, and on the difference of two samples taken a settled interval apart, against clock frequency. The reset level is the same number in both samples and cancels exactly; the amplifier's own noise is two independent samples and its variance doubles, measured at 2.000 against the 2 the correlation predicts. At a megahertz that is 63.8 µV down to 11.53 — 31 times in power. The two curves cross at 60.2 MHz, which is where the amplifier's own noise equals kT/C, and above it the subtraction costs more than it removes.

The sample that is subtracted

Three earlier measurements found floors that no gain moves and no filter reaches, because both arrive as numbers already sampled. One of them can be subtracted: the reset level a capacitor holds is the same number in two consecutive samples and cancels exactly. What it costs is that the amplifier's own noise is not — two samples of it are independent, so its variance doubles. That is thirty times better at a megahertz, a loss above sixty, and the crossing is the one an earlier essay computed for a different question.

noise · kT/C noise
Two of the three are one mechanism at 19.0°; the third arrives at ninety. computed by solving, not by drawing. The cosine between each pair of error waveforms at 30.0 kHz, against how much output the ideal model is asked for. Bandwidth and slewing sit at 0.9454 — 19.0 degrees — and close only slowly, reaching 0.8813 at 16 V. Clipping does not exist below 12.00 V, where its error is 4.0e-9 per cent of the signal and its direction is the direction of rounding; above it the mechanism is real — 18.1 per cent at the top of the sweep — and its cosine against both of the others stays under 0.0025. The bandwidth error is 0.615 per cent at every amplitude here, unchanged to 5.3e-15, because a linear stage's fractional error has no amplitude in it.

Where the mechanisms are one mechanism

An amplifier is said to run out of three separate things — bandwidth, slew rate and rails — and errors from separate mechanisms add in quadrature while errors from one mechanism add as magnitudes. Measured as waveforms rather than as numbers, two of the three sit 18.4349 degrees apart, which is exactly the angle between a sinusoid and its own cube, and the third sits at ninety: its cosine against both of the others stays under 0.0025 wherever it exists. So the arithmetic is neither of the two anybody reaches for, and a budget built the right way is within 2.9 per cent where quadrature is 17 per cent low and a straight sum 37 per cent high.

limits · Small-signal
A ±15% envelope on what a bridge reads permits 29 points of working capacitance. computed by solving, not by drawing. The charge-average capacitance between zero and the rated voltage — the number a reservoir or a hold capacitor obeys — against how the data sheet's stated temperature change is divided between the model's two parameters. Every point honours the envelope exactly: the measured value at zero bias with a one-volt test signal is 15 per cent from nominal at each point on each curve, by construction. The working capacitance is not. At the cold end it is anywhere from -42.9 to -13.9 per cent — 29.0 points of ambiguity at a temperature where the measured value is pinned exactly — and at the hot end from 13.9 to 36.2. Across the whole envelope that is 79.0 points against the 30 the specification bounds, a factor of 2.63. The left-hand end of the upper curve is missing because it is impossible: with the amplitude fixed, no characteristic voltage makes the measured value exceed the zero-bias capacitance.

The coefficient that is about one reading

A class II ceramic's temperature coefficient is a third printed number, and it is a coefficient of the one capacitance a data sheet reports: what a bridge sees at zero bias with a one-volt test. The model behind the part has two parameters, one number does not determine two, and every way of dividing a ±15 per cent envelope between them honours the envelope exactly while putting the working capacitance anywhere across twenty-nine points — and two parts a bridge cannot tell apart differ by 1.80 at the voltage they are used at.

frequency · Real capacitor
Matched parts cost nothing; a 2 dB difference between them sets a 112 dB ceiling. computed by solving, not by drawing. The common-mode rejection of a three-amplifier instrumentation amplifier against the gain of its input stage, with each amplifier's own rejection in the netlist as an input-referred error of the common-mode voltage over the rejection. The architecture's own figure rises decibel for decibel with the gain, because the difference stage sees a larger differential signal beside the same common-mode one. The parts' contribution does not rise with anything, and the part of it that matters is not their rejection but the difference between their rejections: two amplifiers of 98 dB that are identical cost 0.000 dB, while 100 dB against 98 dB leaves a ceiling of 111.7 dB with no gain in it. The two mechanisms cross: below a gain of 1903 the four resistors decide everything, and above it more gain buys no more rejection at all — 111.9 dB at a gain of 100000, where the arrangement alone would have been worth 148. The one place the instrument beats its own floor is a gain of 1000, where the two errors cancel; that is a coincidence of signs and not something a design can hold.

The rejection the parts have

Two essays measured the architecture: four resistors decide an instrumentation amplifier's rejection, two do not, and the answer is the one-amplifier figure plus twenty log of the first stage's gain — exactly, with amplifiers of infinite rejection. Give each amplifier its own and something unobvious happens: two matched but individually mediocre parts cost nothing at all, because their error is a common-mode signal at the difference stage and is rejected there. What costs is the difference between them, and it sets a ceiling with no gain in it.

instruments · Common-mode rejection
The quietest capacitor is 18× the fastest one, and the margin prefers neither. computed by solving, not by drawing. The total noise at the load of a capacitively loaded stage against its compensation capacitor, with the settling time on the same axis at ten microseconds to the microvolt. Three independent sources are put in the netlist and solved separately — the amplifier's own 4 nV/√Hz at its input, and √(4kTR) in series with each of the two feedback resistors — and added in power. The noise falls monotonically with the capacitor, from 50.7 µV at 1 pF to 12.1 µV at 220 pF. The peak in the noise gain falls with every larger capacitor and is gone entirely from 12 pF upward, where the uncompensated stage's peaks at 3.85 times its own low-frequency value. What the capacitor costs is settling: the fastest is 12 pF at 0.74 µs — the same capacitor that flattens the noise gain, because one handover decides both — and the quietest takes 20.3 µs, at a margin above 40° everywhere in that range.

What the second path costs at the floor

The arrangement that repaired a capacitively loaded amplifier was suspected of paying for itself in noise, because that is how compensations usually pay. It does not: it has no peak in its noise gain at all, and the total at the load falls from 54.9 microvolts to 28.9 as the capacitor is added. What it costs is settling, and the capacitor that is quietest is eighteen times the capacitor that settles fastest — a trade the phase margin says nothing about, because the margin is comfortable at both.

feedback · Capacitive load
Two loops on one heatsink give out at 135 kHz, and it is the switch that goes. computed by solving, not by drawing. The junction temperatures of the diode and the switch against switching frequency, with each device's own thermal resistance to a case they share. Each has a positive temperature loop and they are different loops — the diode's runs through its carrier lifetime and its recovery, the switch's through its on-resistance and its conduction — and the electrical coupling goes one way, since the charge the switch has to take at full supply is the diode's. The pair has no settled temperature above 135 kHz and the component that gives out is the switch, which has no exponential in it and is taking 84 per cent of the heat. The same two devices with the same total thermal resistance and no case in common survive to 485 kHz; the diode on its own to 1.28 MHz.

Two loops, and one heatsink

Nine tenths of a reverse recovery's energy is dissipated in the transistor and not in the diode, and the obvious calculation of the diode's junction temperature puts all of that energy in it anyway. Repaired, the diode alone survives to 1.28 megahertz instead of 128 kilohertz — a factor of exactly the ninety per cent. What replaces the number is the arrangement that exists: two devices with two different positive temperature loops on one piece of aluminium, giving out at 135 kilohertz, and it is the switch that goes.

transients · Reverse recovery
Sixteen more digits move the boundary by sixteen decades and leave it exactly where it was. computed by solving, not by drawing. The earlier essay's bridge, walked towards balance and solved twice: once in double precision and once with a pair of doubles carrying about 31 decimal digits, against a closed form that cannot lose any. The 33 per cent error at an imbalance of 10⁻¹⁵ becomes 7.0e-18 — so that loss was the arithmetic's and not the network's, which is what the earlier essay could not say. Each arithmetic's error is its own round-off divided by the imbalance, drawn as the two straight lines, so the second boundary is the first one moved by exactly the extra digits. The condition number is 505 in both cases and at every point, which is the diagnostic being blind twice over.

The digits the arithmetic did not have

Bounding the arithmetic of double-precision circuit solving finds two boundaries that cannot be attributed to it: a bridge with no correct figures left at an imbalance of 10⁻¹⁵, and a filter synthesis that stalls at order 14. An ill-conditioned problem stays ill-conditioned however many digits are used, and a well-conditioned one computed badly gets better — so adding digits is the experiment that tells them apart. The bridge's loss is entirely the arithmetic's. The synthesis's is mostly the data's, and doubling the digits makes it worse.

networks · Conditioning
At the order a cascade runs out, a ladder still has 4.2 decades of level. computed by solving, not by drawing. How many decades of impedance level each structure can be built at while staying inside 0.1 dB of its own design, against order. Both carry two picofarads of stray at every node. The cascade also carries fifty ohms of amplifier output resistance, a fixed resistance, which binds it from below; its floor rises 8.5× over the four orders drawn, to 0.114 dB at order eight. The ladder's inductors carry a fixed resistance per henry instead — a fixed quality factor, which scales with the design and bounds nothing — so what limits it from below is a few milliohms of track, and at order nine it still has 4.20 decades with a floor of 0.0337 dB, 3.3× its own floor at order three against the cascade's 8.5×.

The band that does not close

A cascade of active sections can be built at three decades of impedance level at second order, one at sixth, and none at all at eighth — the band shuts by half a decade per order because two fixed quantities bind it from opposite ends. A doubly terminated ladder has only one of those quantities, because an inductor's loss is a fixed quality factor rather than a fixed resistance and therefore scales with the design. At order nine it still has four decades.

filters · Impedance scaling
Alternating-current resistance against foil thickness, 4 layers. computed by solving, not by drawing. The falling dashed curve is the direct-current resistance, which is what more copper buys. The solid curve is the alternating-current resistance at 100 kHz for a portion of 4 layers, and it turns over: past ξ = 0.663 skin depths, thicker foil has MORE resistance, not less. The minimum sits at 1.3368 times the direct-current resistance of the same foil, which is four thirds and is the same number for every layer count above one. The resistance per turn there is 2.016 against √m = 2.000, which is the law the layer count obeys.

The copper that makes it worse

The rung below measured one conductor pushing its own current to its rim, and there is nothing to optimise in it: thicker wire is always less resistance. Stack the conductors and the quantity changes character. Each layer sits in the field of the ones below it, the loss that field drives has no upper bound in the thickness, and the product turns over — so a portion of four layers has a best foil thickness, and above it more copper is more resistance. The best thickness is the fourth root of three over the square root of the layer count, in skin depths, and the penalty at it is four thirds for every layer count above one.

magnetics · Winding
95 dB of instrument, 290 Hz corner — and the corner belongs to the source. computed by solving, not by drawing. The common-mode rejection of the same three-amplifier instrument measured earlier measured, with 1 kΩ of imbalance between the two source resistances and 10 pF at each input. The instrument's own curve is drawn beside it. Below 290 Hz the two agree; above it the measurement falls at twenty decibels a decade while the instrument does not, reaching 84.0 dB at a kilohertz against the instrument's 95.0. What converts common mode into differential is the difference of the two input time constants — 10.0 ns here — and once it is differential no rejection repairs it.

The corner the instrument has no part in

Three earlier essays measured a three-amplifier instrumentation amplifier's rejection at direct current and found 95 dB, of which the resistors' matching decides one part and the amplifiers' own mismatch another. Connect it to a source with a kilohm of imbalance and ten picofarads at each input and the rejection has a corner at 290 Hz and falls twenty decibels a decade after it — reaching 84 dB at a kilohertz on an instrument that is still doing 95. What converts common mode to differential is the difference of two time constants, and the cure is a capacitor on the quiet input.

instruments · Common-mode rejection
A second integrator is 5.8 more decibels an octave, and a third 5.4 more. computed by solving, not by drawing. Modulators of order 1, 2, 3 marched one sample at a time with a one-bit quantiser, their in-band noise read from the transform of the error with the test tone a quarter of the way up the band. The measured slopes are 8.17, 13.93, 19.33 decibels per doubling of the oversampling ratio, against the 9, 15, 21 the white-noise argument predicts and the 3.01 plain oversampling gives. Each order is short of its own prediction by about a decibel, in the same direction, which is the error in the band not being white. The straight lines are each order's prediction drawn through its own first point, so what is compared is a slope against a slope.

The loop that is worse at full scale

A second integrator in a one-bit loop takes the shaping law from nine decibels an octave to fourteen, and a third to nineteen. What it charges is not in decibels at all: past six tenths of full scale the ratio starts falling, and a fourth integrator's states run away at seven tenths. The best input to a second-order modulator is 0.6 of the reference it is measured against — an amplitude boundary of exactly the kind this collection is built for, on the one object in the field that has no continuous output to draw.

digital · Noise-shaping
Which resistor the noise of a Chebyshev 5 actually comes from. computed by solving, not by drawing, one solve per resistor. Each bar is that resistor's share of the noise power at the output, found by splitting its node, putting a source of √(4kTR) in series with it and re-solving the whole network — so what is drawn is not how much noise each resistor makes but how much of it arrives. The largest contributor is F2R at 64.1 per cent, the smallest F0R at 9.0, and the shares add to 1.000000000000 because noise powers add. A resistor's share of the noise is not its share of the resistance: the largest departure between the two is 3.9 percentage points.

The resistor the noise comes from

Two identical 1.59 kΩ resistors in one third-order filter contribute 60.0 and 40.0 per cent of its output noise, because a resistor's noise is filtered by everything after it and by nothing before it. Solved one resistor at a time, the rule everybody carries — the resistance in the noise bandwidth — comes out 1.551 times the truth on a seventh-order Chebyshev and 0.791 times on a sixth-order Bessel. It is wrong in both directions on the same axis, so no factor repairs it.

noise · Johnson noise
The load sees 10.0 Ω, 1.2e-3 Ω or 1.2e-3 Ω at direct current, and the peak is lowest for the arrangement with both paths. computed by solving, not by drawing. The impedance at the load node of all three arrangements, measured by grounding the input and driving a unit current into the load. Feedback from the amplifier leaves the load looking at the isolation resistor — 10.0 Ω, with no loop gain in it at all. Feedback from the load gives 1.2e-3 Ω, and the two-path arrangement has the same, which is what its direct-current path is for. All three resonate with the load capacitance near 3.2 MHz, and the two-path arrangement's peak is the lowest — 27.6 Ω against 37.4 and 59.2. What it gives up is between: above the 159 kHz handover it has let go of the load node.

What the load sees looking back

Four rungs of this argument have measured what the amplifier does to the signal — the margin, the settling, the error, the noise. None has asked the question from the other end. A load that draws its own current sees an impedance looking back, and with the feedback taken from the amplifier that impedance is the isolation resistor, with no loop gain in it whatever: ten ohms, and a load step leaves an error that never goes away. The two-path arrangement recovers to a thousandth of it and charges for that in a quantity none of the four rungs below measured.

feedback · Capacitive load
Every node of a Chebyshev 5, and the one that clips first. computed by solving, not by drawing. The largest signal each node of the realised network ever carries, over the whole frequency sweep, relative to the input. The output reaches 1.000 times the input and F0b reaches 4.537, so on a ±15 V supply the input can be driven to 3.31 V rather than 15.00 before something clips — and the thing that clips is not the output. With the floor at 249.7 nV that is 142.44 dB of range against the 155.57 dB an instrument on the output would report, a difference of 13.14 dB that no measurement at the output can see.

The ceiling is not at the output

A fifth-order Chebyshev's noisiest node is its output and its largest signal is not. F0b carries 4.537 times the input, so on ±15 V the range is 142.44 decibels and not the 155.57 an instrument on the output reports. Across fifteen realised filters the output reading spans 3.97 dB and the range they actually have spans 22.34 — and one family of the three has no internal peaking at all, at any order.

noise · Dynamic range
Where an amplifier's reading comes from, against the source it is reading. computed by solving, not by drawing. Three errors with three different dependences on the source, each measured by a solve with the other two set to zero. The offset voltage is flat — 50 microvolts wherever the source is. The bias current times the imbalance is linear in the source and is what balancing removes. The offset current times the source is linear too and is what balancing leaves. Unbalanced, the current overtakes the voltage at 1.77 kΩ; balanced, at 10.0 kΩ, which is the offset voltage divided by the OFFSET current and is the ratio of the two currents further along. Below about a kilohm, balancing makes the reading worse — the feedback network is already the larger resistance, and equalising means adding to the source.

The current the instrument draws

Every amplifier in this collection has had inputs that take no current, and that is not an idealisation of a small quantity — it is an idealisation of one whose size is decided by something outside the part. Fifty nanoamps is nothing until it flows in a megohm, and then it is fifty millivolts. The classical cure balances the two resistances and removes the bias current, leaving the offset current: worth a factor of ten, not a thousand, and it costs forty per cent of the noise density to get.

instruments · Input bias current
One part, three saturation currents: 1.90 A, 2.40 A, 2.69 A. computed by solving, not by drawing. B(H) is μ₀H plus a saturating magnetisation, written as a flux linkage, and the inductance drawn here is dλ/di — the slope of that flux, which is what a small signal on a direct current actually meets. It is 18.92 µH at no current, 16.73 µH at two amps and 10.43 µH at three, and it never reaches zero: the vacuum is still there, so the part falls to its air-core 0.05 µH and stays. The three marks are the ten, twenty and thirty per cent drops different manufacturers print as the saturation current — 1.896, 2.395, 2.694 amps, a spread of 42 per cent on one part.

The inductance the current decides

The rung below bounded the flux and the boundary is exact: the volt-seconds decide the flux swing whatever the material does, and a cycle whose current ripple runs from 519 mA to 75 A has the same flux excursion to better than two per cent. What saturation breaks is the relationship between that flux and the current — so a ripple the design expression puts at 514 mA is 1,022 mA at 2.56 A of load, the peak reaches 3.57 A where the part is at a fifth of its nameplate inductance, and the same part has three saturation currents depending on which per cent it was quoted at.

magnetics · Saturation
A pair's third-order intercept is 7.8 dB above anything it can produce. computed by solving, not by drawing. Two equal tones through a differential pair, transformed coherently so every product lands in a bin of its own. The fundamental rises with slope 1.000 and the third-order product with slope 3.000, both fitted over the decade marked, and the dashed extensions are the extrapolation a specification quotes. They meet at a drive of 4.00 thermal voltages and an output of 2.00 — against a largest output of 0.8108, which is 8/π² and is what two equal tones give through a limiter. The intercept is 7.84 dB above it, which is π²/4 exactly.

The point the device is never at

A device's linearity is specified by one number, and that number is a place on no curve. The third-order intercept is where two straight lines would cross if both went on being straight, and neither does. For a differential pair the crossing sits π²/4 — 7.84 decibels — above the largest output the device can produce at any drive whatever, and the arithmetic that says so contains no tail current and no temperature.

semiconductors · Distortion
The growth per cycle, and the form that is a fifth low at the top of the range. computed by solving, not by drawing. The factor the envelope is multiplied by each cycle, against the gain. The solid curve is exp(π(k−3)/√(1 − ((k−3)/2)²)), which is what the characteristic equation gives and what the netlist's own poles return to twelve digits; the dashed one is exp(π(k−3)), which drops the denominator. The circles are the marched envelope, fitted over the cycles that are still small — 80 of them at k = 3.01 and 4 at k = 3.2, and none at all above that. The two expressions differ by 3.9e-7 at k = 3.01 and by 20.462% at k = 3.8, so the approximation fails exactly where nothing is left to check it against.

Two exponentials, and where they meet

An oscillator's envelope grows by exp(π(k−3)/√(1 − ((k−3)/2)²)) a cycle, and the form usually quoted drops the denominator — exact to four parts in ten million at a hundredth above three, and 20.462 per cent low at 3.8, which is precisely where too few small cycles are left to measure it. Where the growth stops is the diode's own exponential: 108.5 millivolts of amplitude for every decade of saturation current, proportional to the ideality to four parts in a thousand. Above 60.121 nanoamperes the limiter is already conducting at zero signal and there is no oscillation at all.

applied · Oscillator
What a cascaded modulator is worth, against how well its two paths match. computed by solving, not by drawing. Two first-order loops marched sample by sample at an oversampling ratio of 64, with the first stage's quantisation error taken as the difference between what its comparator said and what was presented to it — nothing here reads a state a real converter could not. Perfectly matched, the cascade gives 72.5 decibels against the first stage's own 47.5: second-order shaping out of two first-order loops, neither of which can be unstable. The gain with which the first error reaches the second stage is then given an error, and the flat left-hand half of the curve is the arrangement working. It costs three decibels at 5.29 per cent, which is a capacitor ratio — achievable, and not free, and not something the digital side can measure or correct.

Two loops, and the mismatch between them

Single loops of second, third and fourth order, marched alone, each stop working above an amplitude that falls with the order — which is why nobody builds a fourth-order single loop. The standard answer is two first-order loops with the first one's error fed to the second and differentiated back out, giving second-order shaping out of parts that cannot be unstable. The cancellation is between an analogue path and a digital one, and it is worth 25 decibels until the two differ by five per cent.

digital · Noise-shaping
A photodiode's own capacitance sets the bandwidth, as its -0.50 power. computed by solving, not by drawing. The bandwidth of a 1.0 MΩ transimpedance stage against the capacitance of the diode driving it, with the feedback capacitor at each point bisected to give exactly forty-five degrees of phase margin on the solved loop. The classical expression √(GBW/2π·rf·cd) is drawn over it: the right shape, and conservative by about a fifth at every capacitance. The bandwidth falls as the -0.497 power of the capacitance — a square-root law, so a diode of four times the area costs half the bandwidth rather than three quarters of it. At 30 pF the compensation is 0.598 pF against the expression's 0.725, and the bandwidth 295 kHz against 220.

Where the trouble is at the input

Every other arrangement in this field has its difficulty at the output — a capacitive load, an isolation resistor, a load that draws current. A photodiode amplifier has it at the input, and the capacitance causing it is not a parasitic: it is the diode's junction, which is the price of its area, and area is what a photodiode is bought for. The feedback resistor's own noise is 127 nV/√Hz against the amplifier's 4, and the amplifier is still ninety-five per cent of the noise at a large diode.

feedback · Transimpedance
Terminated at both ends: no interval anywhere, at 1.65 V of 3.3. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same net as the three-way comparison, with a fourth trace: a series resistor at the driver AND a parallel one at the receiver. Both reflection coefficients are zero, so the wave that arrives at a receiver 50% of the way along is already the final value and there is no second arrival to wait for — the departure after the first edge is 0.0e+0 per cent, which is the arithmetic's floor. What it costs is the level: 1.650 V of 3.3, exactly half, because two equal resistances divide the supply and nothing reflects to double it back. The series scheme in the same place is undefined for 1.00 delays and the unterminated one overshoots by 82 per cent. The hold current is 33.0 mA against the parallel scheme's 60, because the path to ground now has two resistances in it.

Terminated at both ends

A series resistor at the driver and a parallel one at the receiver cost exactly half the swing — 1.650 volts of 3.300 — and no reflection ever gives it back, because there is no reflection. What the half buys is measured rather than assumed: a driver thirty per cent off its assumed impedance rings a series-terminated net by 16.3 per cent and a doubly terminated one by nothing at all, and an interior receiver on a series-terminated net sits in the undefined band for every far-end resistance above 125 ohms, which is Z₀/(1−2b) and contains no length, no driver and no frequency.

lines · Termination
The temperature through a 20 mm core that makes its own heat. computed by solving, not by drawing. Conduction with volumetric generation, solved on forty-one cells with a surface film at each face and the loss density evaluated at each cell's own temperature — so the middle of the core makes less heat than its faces do, which a closed form for uniform generation cannot express. The peak is 115.05 °C and the surface 112.45: a gradient of 2.59 kelvin, which is 2.9 per cent of the 90.0 kelvin rise. That share is Bi/(Bi + 2) — 3.0 per cent at a Biot number of 0.063 — so it is decided by how well the surface is cooled and not by how much heat is made.

The degrees a thermocouple cannot see

Every thermal answer in this collection has been one temperature, and a core makes its heat in its volume and loses it from a surface, so it has two. Solved as a conduction problem, a twenty-millimetre core in still air is 2.59 kelvin hotter in the middle than on the outside — 2.9 per cent of a ninety-kelvin rise, which is why the lumped answer has been good enough. Cool the same core on a plate and the gradient does not shrink; it grows to 3.37 kelvin and becomes 78 per cent of what is left.

power · Thermal feedback
A hold capacitor's band closes at 6.43 MHz, where a resistor's does. computed by solving, not by drawing. The switch of 0.5 Ω closed, 100 MΩ open and 5 pF across it, driving a capacitor. The lower edge is the smallest capacitance onto which the open switch feeds through no more than 1%: 495 pF far above 318 Hz, rising as the reciprocal of frequency below it because the leakage charges the capacitor. The upper edge is the largest capacitance the closed switch tracks to 1%, counted as a vector. The two meet at 6.43 MHz; a resistor on the same switch closes at 6.43 MHz, and counted as a magnitude the capacitor's band closes at 91.6 MHz. At the closure the closed switch's phase is 0.57 degrees.

The width no load can change

A switch's band was drawn against a load resistor and closed at 6.43 megahertz. Put a hold capacitor where the resistor was and the band changes axis and shape — a diagonal below 318 hertz, a floor of 495 picofarads above it — and stays exactly as wide: 1.8083 decades at 100 kilohertz for both loads, closing at 6.43 megahertz for both. Count the capacitor's error as a magnitude, as the resistor's always was, and the band appears to stay open to 91.6 megahertz. That extra room is 8.11 degrees of lag the count cannot see.

limits · Ideal switch
The null is a V and not a bowl: one per cent of ratio error is 5.0e-3 of the near end. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same twelve coupled sections read at 10.0 MHz, with the ratio of the two couplings swept across the null rather than sat at one setting. The far end divided by the near end is |1 − r|/(1 + r) at every point — a straight-sided V through zero, first order in the departure with a coefficient of one half, and not a rounded minimum with a flat bottom. So there is no tolerance band: a ratio one per cent off gives 4.98e-3 of the near end and ten per cent off gives 4.76e-2, and the exchange rate between them is fixed. The upper trace is the near end over the same sweep, which moves by 11 per cent while the lower one moves through 14 decades — the two ends are the same coupling read as a sum and as a difference, which is why one of them has a zero in it and the other cannot.

How wide a null is

A far end at 3.5×10⁻¹⁹ of the drive is a statement about arithmetic until somebody asks how far the two couplings may differ before it comes back. The answer has no flat bottom in it: the far end divided by the near end is |1−r|/(1+r) exactly, so the null is a V and a ratio one per cent off returns 4.98×10⁻³ of the near end. On the axis a board is built to that is a difference of 0.0081 between the two modes' effective permittivities, out of 3.99 — two parts in a thousand, and 0.675 picoseconds of mode skew over a hundred millimetres.

lines · Crosstalk
One component of a gyrator moves the response by 0.50; the passive ladder's inductor moves it by 3e-8. computed by solving, not by drawing. The magnitude sensitivity at the passband maximum of a gyrator ladder, against the resistance scale the gyrators are built at, for a single component and for the combination of both halves that actually changes the synthesised inductance. The passive ladder realising the identical response is at 3.2e-8. A single component sits at about a half whatever the resistance scale is, and the combination falls as one over it — the 0.97 power over 3 decades. So the stationarity has not been destroyed, it has become a statement about a combination of components rather than about a component, and independent parts do not come in combinations.

One inductor, and ten components

The rung below built an inductor out of an amplifier and ended with a boundary that is not a frequency: one end of it is soldered to ground. A ladder's series inductors are floating, so making one takes four amplifiers rather than two — and the four-amplifier version is exactly floating, to five figures, and reproduces the ladder's response to a hundredth of a decibel. It does not reproduce its stationarity. Each of a gyrator's ten components moves the response by exactly a half, where the inductor it replaced moved it by ten to the minus eight.

filters · Gyrator
Two curves that only rise, and the gap between them that has a minimum. computed by solving, not by drawing. The source's own Johnson density, √(4kTR), and the amplifier's total input-referred density, √(4kTR + eₙ² + (iₙR)²), for a part with 4 nV/√Hz and 0.6 pA/√Hz. Neither curve has a minimum: the total is 4 nV/√Hz at a source of nothing, is 4.196 at 100 Ω, and rises without limit. What has a minimum is the ratio, at 6.67 kΩ, where the noise figure is 1.138 dB and the total density is 11.780 nV/√Hz — 2.81 times noisier in volts than at 100 Ω, where the noise figure reads 10.41 dB. The two statements are about different questions and the figure is what stops them being confused.

The bowl, and the bottom of it

An amplifier's noise figure has a minimum against source resistance and its input-referred noise has none: the 4 nV/√Hz part reads 1.138 dB into 6.67 kΩ and 10.41 dB into 100 Ω, and is 2.81 times noisier in volts at the first. The bowl is one shape scaled by its own depth, so the quieter the part the flatter it is — ±30.1 times for a decibel on the best of four, ±2.16 on the worst — and three parts of equal eₙiₙ share a floor of 0.3138 dB at optima 16 times apart.

noise · Device noise
Which limit binds is a property of the load, and they change places near 22 nF. computed by solving, not by drawing. Each limit measured on its own, as the departure of its march from the linear one, at a load step of half the output stage's rating. The input pair's departure falls with load capacitance — a bigger reservoir holds the node while the loop responds, which is the sixth rung's own result — and the output stage's does not fall nearly as fast, because what it has to supply is the charge the capacitor wants. Below about 22 nanofarads the thermal voltage decides the answer and above it the output stage does, and nothing about the amplifier changed.

The current above which there is no impedance

The sixth rung found the impedance leaving at 10.6 mA, where the input pair's own tanh takes over and the slew rate is twice the thermal voltage times the gain-bandwidth in radians, with no design choice in it. A real output stage has a second limit that is nothing but design choice, and the two do not bind at the same load: at 0.47 nF the input pair's departure is 19.4 per cent against the output stage's 4.2, at 22 nF it is 0.9 against 2.3, and above the output stage's rating the excursion does not come back at all — 2,254 Ω for a quantity that was 37.

feedback · Capacitive load
The crest factor is 13.4 and the winding is sized by 3.01. computed by solving, not by drawing. Three ratios of the same settled march, against the reservoir. The crest factor — the peak diode current over the load's direct current — runs 6.43 to 24.25. The form factor, which is the root-mean-square current over the same direct current and is what a winding heats by, runs 2.114 to 4.077. Its square is the copper loss against a winding carrying the direct current alone, and that runs 4.47 to 16.62. The first ratio is 3.04 times the second at 220 µF and 5.95 times at 4700, so quoting one of them tells a reader nothing about the other.

The current that sizes the transformer

A reservoir's crest factor is 13.374 at a thousand microfarads and the winding is not sized by it. The root-mean-square of the same marched current is 3.0069 times the load's direct current, so the copper dissipates 9.0417 times what it would carrying the direct current alone — and the two ratios diverge, from 3.04 apart at 220 microfarads to 5.95 apart at 4700. The expression for the mean output is wrong in three places whose signs differ, and at 313.9 microfarads they cancel to six microvolts while the ripple expression inside it is still 32.3 per cent high.

applied · Unregulated supply
What one temperature costs the loop gain of a part that has a gradient. computed by solving, not by drawing. The thermal loop gain of a 30 mm core, solved as a body with its own internal temperature profile and again as a single lump at that profile's mean, against the Biot number. Both are negative, so the core is a stabilising feedback either way — but the body's loop is the more negative of the two at every point, by 3.0 per cent at a Biot number of 0.108 and 38 per cent at 10.8. A lumped calculation therefore understates how stable a wound part is, and the amount it understates by is not a property of the material but of how well the surface is cooled relative to how well the inside conducts. Below a Biot number of about a tenth it is worth under two per cent and the lump is the right model; at the cooled end the part has 7 kelvin inside it and half the feedback is invisible to a single temperature.

The loop gain one temperature understates

Every thermal loop gain this collection has computed was computed at a single temperature, because a lumped fixed point has only one — and the essay that measured the gradient inside a core recorded, without measuring it, that this makes each of those numbers a lower bound. It is a lower bound by three per cent where a ferrite usually sits and by thirty-eight per cent at the well-cooled end, always in the direction that makes the part safer than the calculation said. The obvious candidate for what decides it is refused: three geometries at one Biot number are 3.3 times apart.

power · Thermal feedback
What each factor of attenuation buys on a 2.0 kΩ source. computed by solving, not by drawing at 12 probe ratios: the one-per-cent frequency bisected on the node with and without the probe, against the frequency a tip capacitance alone would predict. A one-to-one probe reaches 6.79 kHz and a hundred-to-one 692 kHz. The first step, from 1× to 2×, multiplies the bandwidth by 2.03 for a factor of two in signal; the two routes differ by at most 1.8% across the sweep, and they differ at all only because the probe's 1.0 MΩ is already 0.20% of the reading before any frequency is applied.

The probe that takes a tenth

A ten-to-one probe buys an order of bandwidth for a tenth of the signal, and on a two-kilohm source the bandwidth is exact: 6.79 kHz becomes 69.2 kHz. The tenth of the signal is not a tenth of the signal-to-noise ratio. Solved resistor by resistor, the noise referred to the tip goes from 1.782 µV to 55.78 µV — a factor of 31.3 — because the divider that does the attenuating is nine megohms and a megohm, and √(n(n−1)kT/C) on the cable's own capacitance has no source resistance in it at all.

instruments · Probe loading
Where 8 channels leak to: 91.0 MHz from buffered sources, 901 kHz from 50 Ω. computed by solving, not by drawing. The frequency at which the open channels of a multiplexer built from the 0.5 Ω, 100 MΩ, 5 pF switch leak 1% of the signal onto the shared output, against the impedance of the source driving the selected channel, into 1 MΩ. 2 channels: 637 MHz buffered, 6.30 MHz from 50 Ω; 8 channels: 91.0 MHz buffered, 901 kHz from 50 Ω; 16 channels: 42.4 MHz buffered, 420 kHz from 50 Ω. Each falls as the reciprocal of the source impedance plus the on-resistance, and the single switch's own band closes at 6.43 MHz.

Where an open switch leaks to

A lone switch has a band whose width no load can change, because its open state leaks into the load. In a multiplexer the seven open channels leak into a node the selected channel holds, so the load leaves the answer and the source takes its place: one per cent of leak at 91.0 megahertz from buffered sources and 901 kilohertz from fifty ohms, moving as the first power of the tolerance rather than the second. Adding the channels' capacitance into one forty-picofarad switch puts it at 804 kilohertz, near the fifty-ohm figure by coincidence and a hundred and thirteen times low for a buffered one.

limits · Ideal switch
Twenty metres buys 20 dB of apparent match and costs 10 dB of noise figure. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same cable and the same 200 Ω load as the reading, with the amplifier that is actually behind the instrument. The rising trace is the return loss the instrument reads, which is the load's own 4.44 dB plus twice the one-way loss. The lower pair is the chain's noise figure: a 2 dB amplifier with the cable in front of it, counted as a matched attenuator whose noise factor is its loss, and counted honestly from the available gain of a lossy line driven by a source that reflects 0.60. The first says the exchange rate is exactly two decibels of match per decibel of noise figure, at every length here. The second is higher everywhere — by (1−Γ²u²)/(1−Γ²), which is 0.028 dB at five centimetres and 1.938 dB, the load's own mismatch loss, once the cable is long enough to have absorbed the reflection. At twenty metres the instrument reads 24.4 dB and the chain costs 13.92 dB against the amplifier's own 2.

The cable that hides two things

A length of cable improves a return-loss reading by twice its loss and raises a noise figure by once it, so the rule of thumb is two decibels of apparent match per decibel of floor. Both halves are owned here and neither essay had the other. Put together they say what an acceptance limit costs: making a 4.0:1 load read 1.50:1 spends 6.53 decibels of noise figure, against a mismatch that was itself costing 1.938 — and the exchange rate is not two but 2(1−Γ²)/(1+Γ²), which is 0.94 where a pad is actually short.

lines · Line loss
From 50 Ω into 50 Ω: a T isolates to 643 MHz, a changeover to 6.34 MHz. computed by solving, not by drawing. The fraction of the drive that arrives with the path open, against frequency, from a 50 Ω source into 50 Ω, for the 0.5 Ω, 100 MΩ, 5 pF switch used three ways. A T reaches 1% at 643 MHz; a changeover reaches 1% at 6.34 MHz; one switch reaches 1% at 3.18 MHz.

The capacitance a third switch moves

A changeover's open channel leaks into the source of the channel that is closed, so its isolation into fifty ohms falls from 643 megahertz with a buffered source to 6.34 megahertz with a fifty-ohm one. Put a third switch to ground between two series switches and the leak lands on half an ohm of closed switch instead: 814, 643 and 2,240 megahertz from sources of nothing, fifty ohms and a kilohm, rising forty decibels a decade where a changeover's rises twenty. The price is the shunt switch's own capacitance, moved under the closed path, which makes the T one per cent wrong as a waveform at 6.59 megahertz beside the changeover's 6.61.

limits · Ideal switch
A cascode multiplies rₒ by β, not by gₘrₒ — and the two are 21× apart. computed by solving, not by drawing. The output resistance of a cascode stage, measured by driving the output node with a current source and reading the voltage, against the current gain of the upper device. The plain stage's is 80 kΩ — rₒ and nothing else. The cascode's is 11.5 MΩ at β = 150, which is βrₒ to within a tenth and is 21 times below the gₘrₒ² every reference gives. The reason is in the netlist rather than in the algebra: the upper device's base draws current, so its rπ sits from the lower device's collector to signal ground and shunts the node the feedback works through. What the arrangement buys therefore scales with β and stops when β does, and the curve is the two expressions drawn against the measurement.

The device that never sees the swing

A second transistor standing between the first and the load does two things that every reference gives one expression each for, and one of the two expressions has no ceiling in it. The output resistance is not gₘrₒ² — that is 248 megohms here, and the measurement is 11.5 — it is βrₒ, because the upper device's base draws current and shunts the very node the feedback works through. The bandwidth really is fourteen times better, and what it costs is two volts of a five-volt supply.

semiconductors · Cascode
The ripple 1000 µF leaves, through the regulator: 60.62 mV rather than 21.11 mV. One settled cycle of the reservoir's output — 1.331 V peak to peak across 1000 µF — split into 1000 Fourier lines, each passed through the solved regulator's rail-to-output response, and summed. The output is 60.62 mV peak to peak. The ripple times the rejection at 100 Hz, -36.00 dB, gives 21.11 mV, which is 2.872 times too little: the rejection worsens at twenty decibels a decade, so each harmonic of the sawtooth arrives at nearly the size of the first. The 100 Hz line carries 23.4% of the output's mean square and the lines above 1 kHz 10.4%; the first three arrive at 7.731 mV at 100 Hz, 7.200 mV at 200 Hz, 6.388 mV at 300 Hz. The dashed curve is the 100 Hz line alone.

The ripple that arrives as a comb

The rejection essay multiplied two numbers: 1.331 volts of reservoir ripple and the regulator's 36.0 decibels of rejection at a hundred hertz, for 21 millivolts at the output. The ripple is a sawtooth, a comb of lines at every multiple of a hundred hertz, and the rejection worsens at twenty decibels a decade — so the second line arrives at nearly the size of the first, and the third too. Summed with their phases, the output is 60.62 millivolts, 2.87 times the estimate, and the hundred-hertz line carries only 23.4 per cent of it. A reservoir twenty-one times larger cuts the rail's ripple 14.8 times and the regulated ripple 5.95.

applied · Regulator
Four wires against a 10 MΩ voltmeter. computed by solving, not by drawing at 81 resistances, twice each, with a voltmeter of 10 MΩ and 50 mΩ in every lead. The four-wire error is not zero: it is the voltmeter's own divider, −(R + 2R_lead)/(R + 2R_lead + R_m), which grows with the resistance being measured rather than shrinking. The two-wire error is that same quantity plus the leads, so it passes through zero at 1000 Ω — where the reading is right to 1.8e-12 while the four-wire reading is 0.0100% low — and above 707 Ω the two-wire arrangement is the more accurate of the two at every resistance.

The voltmeter four wires do not remove

A four-terminal measurement is described everywhere as removing the leads from the answer. It moves them. What is left is the voltmeter's own input resistance, and it grows with the resistance being measured rather than shrinking: with a ten-megohm voltmeter and fifty milliohms of lead, the four-wire reading is 0.0100 per cent low at a kilohm, where the two-wire reading is exactly right — 1.8 × 10⁻¹² — because its lead error and its loading error cancel. Above 707 Ω the two-wire arrangement is the more accurate of the two at every resistance.

instruments · Four-terminal
Twenty-four orderings, and 11 of them are choices. computed by solving, not by drawing. Every ordering of the four sections of an eighth-order 0.5 dB Chebyshev, at 16 bits, drawn against the two things an ordering decides. The horizontal axis is the round-off floor the arrangement adds — 24.2 least significant bits at best and 99.8 at worst. The vertical axis is the largest value any section's output reaches, which is what decides whether a word overflows: 0.088 of full scale at best and 0.699 at worst, a range of 18.0 decibels. 13 of the twenty-four are beaten on both counts by another ordering and are simply mistakes; the 11 on the lower-left frontier are the actual choices, and no one of them is best.

Which section goes first

A cascade of four biquads can be assembled in twenty-four orders, all of which realise exactly the same transfer function. They do not cost the same: the round-off floor runs from 24 to 100 least significant bits and the largest value any section reaches runs over eighteen decibels — and the two go opposite ways, so eleven of the twenty-four are genuine choices and thirteen are beaten on both counts by another arrangement.

digital · Digital realisation
What the accuracy costs: dynamic range against the resistance scale. computed by solving, not by drawing. The earlier essay found the active realisation's response converging on the passive one's as the resistance scale rises. This is the price. The floor rises as the square root of the scale — fitted at 0.500 — because the resistors are the noise. The largest internal swing rises as the scale itself — fitted at 1.012 — because each gyrator forces the inductor's own current through its own resistors, so an amplifier inside it carries that current times R. Dynamic range on a ±15 V supply therefore falls as the three-halves power: 78 dB at 100 kΩ and 18 dB at 10 MΩ. The passive ladder realising the same response has 141 dB, and its worst internal node carries 1.10 times the input.

Eight amplifiers, and what they add

The rung below realised a Chebyshev ladder out of floating gyrators and found the response converging on the passive one's as the resistance scale rises — twenty-two decibels out at ten kilohms, a twentieth of a decibel at ten megohms. It closed by naming two quantities it had not measured. They are the same quantity: the resistors that buy the accuracy are the noise, and the amplifiers inside the gyrators carry the inductor's own current through them, so the floor rises as the square root of the scale and the ceiling falls as the scale.

filters · Gyrator
The capacitor across the upper resistor: 90.9° of margin at 836.5 pF, and less ripple past it. The regulator's phase margin against a capacitor across the upper divider resistor, with the output ripple the 1000 µF reservoir leaves beside it. With no capacitor the margin is 46.47° at a crossover of 9.73 kHz, the output impedance at 10 kHz is 1.95 Ω, the worst rail rejection is 5.79 dB and the ripple 60.62 mV. The margin is greatest, 90.929°, at 836.5 pF — a zero at 6.34 kHz and a pole at 25.4 kHz around a crossover moved to 16.9 kHz — where the output impedance at 10 kHz is 828 mΩ, the worst rail rejection -1.50 dB and the ripple 52.33 mV. At 10 nF the margin has fallen back to 66.34° and the ripple is 35.40 mV.

The capacitor across the upper resistor

The rejection essay said a regulator reproduces its reference times its divider's four, and that a capacitor across the lower divider resistor brings that down to one at high frequency. Measured, the loop peaks the reference's gain to 5.68 near its crossover before any capacitor is added; a nanofarad across the lower resistor raises the peak to 11.2; and the capacitor that brings it down belongs across the upper resistor, where a nanofarad keeps the gain from ever exceeding four. The same capacitor is a lead pair in the loop: 836.5 picofarads takes the phase margin from 46.5 to 90.9 degrees, and ten nanofarads, past that optimum, still holds 66 while cutting the output ripple from 60.6 millivolts to 35.4.

applied · Regulator
Two of the four errors are divided by the gain; the best the instrument gets is 110.1 dB, at ×776. computed by solving, not by drawing. The four mechanisms that limit a three-amplifier instrumentation amplifier's common-mode rejection, each measured alone against the gain of its input stage and then all four together, at 50.0 Hz with 1 kΩ of imbalance between the source resistances and 10 pF at each input. The difference stage's four resistors and the difference amplifier's own rejection are injected after the gain, so their common-mode gain is a constant — 1.998 mV/V and 0.0100 mV/V — and the rejection they allow rises decibel for decibel with the gain. The input pair's mismatch and the source's time-constant gap are injected before it, so they are amplified by exactly the gain the signal is and the rejection they allow is flat. The four add as complex numbers: the two largest are real and of opposite sign, they cancel at a gain of 776, and what is left there is the source's 3.142 µV/V, which is purely imaginary because it is ωΔτ. The instrument's best is 110.07 dB against the source's own 110.06, and above that gain more of it buys nothing.

The errors that arrive before the gain

Four earlier measurements each found a different owner of one instrument's common-mode rejection and each measured it alone. Solved together, the four are complex numbers that add — to 1.25 parts in ten thousand — and two of them carry a factor of the first stage's gain while two do not. The two that do cancel the two that do not at a gain of 776, and what is left there is 110.066 decibels, which is exactly the number the cable sets. Better-matched amplifiers move that gain from 93 to 3392 and do not move the ceiling by a hundredth of a decibel.

instruments · Common-mode rejection
One switch is never better than 70.71 ppm; a T of three reaches 10 ppb only into 200 MΩ. computed by solving, not by drawing, at direct current. The worse of a switch's two errors — closed, the fraction the load fails to receive; open, the fraction it receives anyway — against the load, for one 0.5 Ω, 100 MΩ switch and for a T of three, from a buffered source. The lone switch is best at 7.07 kΩ, the geometric mean of its two resistances, where both errors are 70.71 ppm, 13.79 bits: no load does better. The T has no best load. Its worse error falls with the load towards Rₒₙ/(Rₒₙ + Rₒff) = 5 ppb, the square of the lone switch's resistance ratio rather than its root; it is within twice that from 200 MΩ, it passes the lone switch's floor only above 14.1 kΩ, and into 7.07 kΩ it is 141.4 ppm, worse than one switch. Solved on the network up to 1000 MΩ and continued, dashed, from the closed form it matches.

The floor below any load

A switch of half an ohm closed and a hundred megohms open is within one per cent of ideal for loads between two edges, and the edges close on each other as the tolerance tightens. At direct current they meet at 70.71 parts per million, into 7.07 kilohms: no load makes that switch better, which is 13.79 bits and a boundary with no frequency in it. A T of three such switches has no best load at all. Its error falls with the load towards five parts per billion — the square of the lone switch's resistance ratio rather than its root — and reaches ten only into two hundred megohms. Into the 7.07 kilohms that suited one switch, the T is worse than one switch.

limits · Ideal switch
A cascoded mirror is 90× the output resistance, and 43% of it goes back into the reference. computed by solving, not by drawing. The output resistance of a two-transistor mirror and of the same mirror with a cascode on each branch, measured by moving the output a little either side of its operating point and reading the current, against the current gain of every device. The plain mirror sits at rₒ = 89 kΩ and does not move. The cascoded one reaches 7.39 MΩ at β = 150 and rises with β until β stops being the smaller of the two quantities, where it saturates on gₘrₒ² = 268 MΩ. The third curve replaces the diode-connected upper device with a held voltage at the same potential and recovers 1.76 times the resistance, which is the upper device's base current being charged a second time — to the reference branch, where it moves the mirror's own bias.

The source that holds to the supply

Putting a second transistor on each branch of a current mirror is always described as buying output resistance and costing headroom, and both halves of that are measured here rather than repeated. The resistance goes from 82 kΩ to 7.39 MΩ, the floor rises by 0.71 volts — and the range over which the current is actually what it was set to goes from 1.70 volts to 9.09, because a plain mirror's current never stops climbing. Forty-three per cent of the resistance that should be there is missing, and it is in the reference branch.

semiconductors · Cascode
The resistors own the floor between 2.91k Ω and 85.9k Ω, and the part owns it outside. computed by solving, not by drawing. The noise at the load of the two-path compensation against the impedance of its own feedback network, with the resistors scaled together and the compensation capacitor taken down in proportion so that Rf·Cf — the handover between the two feedback paths — does not move. Four contributions are integrated over 10 Hz to 100 MHz: the amplifier's 4 nV/√Hz, fitted as the 0.005 power of the impedance and so flat; the two resistors' √(4kTR), the 0.501 power; and the amplifier's 0.60 pA/√Hz flowing in the feedback resistor, the 0.997 power. Two different powers of one quantity cross twice. The resistors carry more than half the power only between 2.91k Ω and 85.9k Ω; outside that window, in both directions, the part does. The part's share is least at 15.8k Ω, which is not eₙ/iₙ — it is that ratio multiplied by the noise gain of 2.000 and again by 1.187, the square root of the ratio of the bandwidths the two generators actually see; there it carries 26.26 per cent. The model stops where the amplifier's output current does: at 100 Ω the feedback resistor alone draws 10 mA a volt.

The window the resistors own

Eight essays have priced one compensated stage, and the fourth of them left two of the amplifier's own generators named and uncounted. With the current generator put in the netlist the floor at ten kilohms goes from 28.88 microvolts to 30.13, and the resistors carry more than half the noise power only between 2.91 kΩ and 85.9 kΩ — outside that window, in both directions, the part does. The flicker corner turns out to be worth 1.00009 in this stage's own band, and 3.474 one band away.

feedback · Capacitive load
The same core at the same current has two inductances, 1.80 times apart. computed by solving, not by drawing. The small-signal inductance of a sixty-turn winding on a core walked down from 400 amperes per metre, measured by pushing the excitation up and by pushing it down at each bias. They are never the same: 14.899 millihenries against 8.297 at zero bias, a factor of 1.796, and up to 1.796 across the sweep. The mechanism is that an operator held inside its own backlash contributes nothing to dB/dH, so a reversal is measured by whichever operators are still moving, and that is a different set in each direction. The single-valued curve the field already had is drawn above both, which is what it is: an optimistic reading of an object with two answers.

Two inductances at one current

A data sheet prints one L(i) curve and there are two. An operator sitting inside its own backlash contributes nothing to dB/dH, so a small excitation sees only the operators still moving — every one at the tip of a loop, none just after a reversal — and the same core at zero bias measures 14.90 millihenries pushed downward and 8.30 pushed upward, a factor of 1.80. The same split decides what a converter's ripple costs: held at the flux swing volt-seconds actually fix, a twenty-millitesla ripple costs twelve times more at a hundred and seventy-five amperes per metre of bias than at none, and above a hundred and eighty-three the question has no answer at all.

magnetics · Magnetic loss
The fastest damping is a surface, and the band is worth 5 times the third pole. computed by solving, not by drawing. Each point is the last settling cliff, bisected — the damping at which the first overshoot's peak lands exactly on the band's edge, which is where the fastest settling is. Across the five bands the optimum moves by 0.231 of damping ratio; across a third pole from 1.5 times the natural frequency out to a second-order response it moves by 0.047. The two axes are worth 5.0 to one, and the expensive one is the specification rather than the parasitic. The classic 0.78 for fastest two per cent settling is the second-order curve's value at ±2%, 0.7797; at ±1% the same response wants 0.8261.

The best damping is not the one to build

The fastest settling damping is the right-hand limit at a discontinuity, so two thousandths below it costs 41 per cent and two thousandths above it costs 0.34 — a ratio of 120 in the penalty for the same error. With ±2 per cent on the damping ratio the nominal that minimises the worst case is 0.7927 rather than the optimum's 0.7734, and it guarantees 4.243/ωₙ against 5.943. The band moves the optimum by 0.231 of damping ratio and the third pole by 0.047, and 0.78 is exact at ±2% and 55 per cent slow at ±1%.

transients · Damping
The cure changes shape at 909 Ω, which is a property of the feedback network and of nothing else. computed by solving, not by drawing. What balancing actually does to the circuit, against the source resistance it is done for, at a gain of 11 with a 1.0 kΩ bottom resistor. The inverting input looks back into 909 Ω — the bottom resistor times (G−1)/G — and that number is the whole of the knee. Below it the cure is a resistor in series with the source and the feedback network is untouched. Above it there is no resistor to add, and the network is scaled up to meet the source instead: 1100× at 1.0 MΩ, which puts 11 MΩ in the feedback path. The scaled feedback resistor is the source resistance times the gain exactly, so the network's own size has left the answer — it decided where the knee was and nothing after it.

The cure that becomes a different circuit

The classical cure for an amplifier's input current is to make the two resistances its inputs look back into equal, and it reads as one instruction. Solved, it is two circuits meeting at 909 ohms — the feedback network's bottom resistor times (G−1)/G — and above that knee there is no resistor to add: the network is scaled to the source, which at a megohm means 11 megohms of feedback and at a gain of 1001 means 1001. Above the knee three different networks become one instrument to twelve figures, the noise penalty settles at 1.41420 against a √2 of 1.41421, and the benefit at 10.49 against two currents whose ratio is ten.

instruments · Input bias current
The period's spread is 1.20 times what counting two crossings gives. computed by solving, not by drawing. 19999 periods of a relaxation oscillator with 5 mV rms of noise on its thresholds, computed from the exact flip instants rather than marched, at β = 0.5. The measured standard deviation is 3.4 ns and the closed form — three partial derivatives of the period with respect to the three draws it depends on — gives 3.4 ns. The estimate that counts two threshold crossings and divides the noise by the slope at each gives 2.83 ns, which is 17 per cent low. The curve is the closed form's Gaussian, drawn on the measured histogram rather than fitted to it.

The decision taken where the ramp is slowest

A relaxation oscillator decides at its thresholds, and a threshold is the one place on a charging exponential where the slope is smallest. Noise there costs 3.399 units of period against the 2.828 that counting two crossings gives, because a draw moves the crossing it is armed for and the level the next ramp starts from. Consecutive periods share that draw, so they are positively correlated and the jitter accumulates at 3.771 per root period rather than at 3.399. And at a fixed frequency there is a best hysteresis: β = 0.648, where β·ln((1+β)/(1−β)) = 1.

applied · Hysteresis
300 mirrors built to one design, with 2% device mismatch. computed by solving, not by drawing. Every pair in the population is a full Newton solve of the same netlist with two saturation currents drawn from a normal distribution, the Early conductances iterated to self-consistency for each. The mean is 3.836 per cent, which is the systematic error the rung below computed with identical devices (3.937 per cent) — the mismatch does not move it. The spread about it is 1.955 per cent, which is the device mismatch arriving with nothing dividing it, and the worst pair of the 300 is 8.43 per cent out. A design whose specification is the mean has specified the one mirror nobody has.

The error that is a distribution

The rung below solved a mirror and separated two errors — one that falls with beta and one that does not. Neither is what limits a real mirror. Two transistors on the same die differ, a fractional difference in saturation current is a fractional difference in collector current with nothing dividing it, and the honest object is a spread rather than a number: mean 3.84 per cent, standard deviation 1.96, worst of three hundred 8.43. Degeneration divides it by one plus gm·R and stops at the resistors' own tolerance, and where it stops is a voltage — a hundred millivolts, containing nothing but the ratio of two tolerances.

semiconductors · Current mirror
One capacitor moves three quantities, and the expression's own answer peaks by 1.18 dB. computed by solving, not by drawing. The bandwidth, the peaking and the total output noise of a 1.0 MΩ transimpedance stage against its feedback capacitor, swept from 0.30 to 4.20 times what the classical expression asks for. Over that factor of fourteen the bandwidth falls from 334 to 55.4 kHz, the total noise from 230 to 65 µV, and the peaking from 10.0 dB to nothing. The expression's own answer sits at 1.18 dB of peaking, 0.82× is where the loop reaches forty-five degrees, and √2× is where the response is flat — so the choice usually quoted as maximally flat is neither of the two conditions it is quoted for. The faint families are the same three quantities at 3 pF and 300 pF of diode: normalised this way they are one curve, so the diode sets the scale and the multiple sets the shape.

The factor the expression leaves out

The classical compensation for a photodiode amplifier is quoted both as the forty-five degree choice and as the maximally flat one, and it is neither: it leaves 1.18 dB of peaking and 52.4° of margin. Flat is at exactly √2 times it — fitted at 1.4186 against 1.4142, at every detector from 3 pF to 1 nF. And the third quantity the capacitor is supposed to trade, the noise, does not move at all inside the signal band: three compensations spanning a factor of fourteen give 8.37 against 8.36 µV in a 4.36 kHz measurement and 230 against 65 µV over the whole plane.

feedback · Transimpedance
The load that takes the most power is 3.67 Ω, and the open-circuit voltage over the short-circuit current is 3.97 Ω. computed by solving, not by drawing. The terminal characteristic of a photocurrent with a junction across it, with the power along it drawn on the same axes and scaled to fill them. The most power, 80.99 W, is delivered at 17.244 V and 4.696 A, which is a load of 3.67 Ω. The incremental resistance of the source there — the negative of the characteristic's own slope — is 3.67 Ω, the same number to four figures. A straight line drawn between the two end points has a resistance of 3.97 Ω and would promise 24.81 W. The ratio of the true maximum to that promise is 3.264, and its reciprocal is the fill factor, 0.8160.

The load a curve recommends

The maximum power theorem says to match the load to the source's internal resistance, and for a straight-line source the internal resistance, the slope and the open-circuit voltage over the short-circuit current are one number. On a photovoltaic panel they are three: the slope at the maximum is 3.6717 ohms, the load there is 3.6717, and the open-circuit voltage over the short-circuit current is 3.9709 — and a quarter of the open-circuit voltage times the short-circuit current, which is what a straight line would deliver, is 24.81 watts against the 80.99 that is there. The theorem survives with the incremental resistance in place of the internal one, and it survives only where the characteristic has a slope: on a supply whose current limit folds back, the most power is delivered at a corner.

networks · Source model
A transistor's two noise generators are one current: their product is 0.8008 nV·pA/Hz at every bias. computed by solving, not by drawing. The input voltage noise of a bipolar stage, √(2kT·rₑ), is its collector current's shot noise referred through gₘ, and falls as the current rises; its input current noise, √(2qI_C/β), is its base current's, and rises. At β = 100 their product is 2kT/√β = 0.8008 nV·pA/Hz at every collector current from a microampere to ten milliamps, so the best noise figure, 0.4139 dB, does not depend on the bias. What does is where it is: the optimum source resistance times the current is √β·Vt = 249.9 mV, and the two lines cross where that resistance is a kilohm, at 250 µA.

The two generators that are one current

An amplifier's noise is two generators, a voltage in series with its input and a current across it, and the essays on its noise figure treat them as independent numbers. In a bipolar input stage they are one current's shot noise divided two ways, by the collector and the base, and their product is 2kT/√β at every collector current: 0.8008 nV·pA per hertz at a current gain of a hundred, from a microampere to ten milliamps. The best noise figure, 0.4139 dB, does not depend on the bias. The bias decides only where the best source is, and 50 ohms of base resistance decides what the best actually is below 500.

noise · Shot noise
A whole number of steps: 1, 2, 3 and 4 agree to 7% and a step and a half is 1.9× worse. computed by solving, not by drawing. The upper panel is the share of the quantisation error sitting in harmonics of the input against the amount of dither added — the upper curve the largest share anywhere on the amplitude sweep, with the spread across the five tones each point averages drawn as a bar, and the lower curve that sweep's mean. Undithered the worst is 76.5 per cent. It falls steeply up to one whole step (4.70 per cent at three quarters, 0.34 at one) and then stops improving — but only AT whole steps. The sweep means at 1, 2, 3, 4 steps are 0.283, 0.297, 0.297, 0.301 per cent, flat to 7 per cent; at 1.5, 2.5, 3.5 they are 0.526, 0.345, 0.311, each above both whole steps beside it. The lower panel is what each costs in signal-to-noise ratio, with 10·log₁₀(1 + L²) drawn through it — the measurement is that curve to 0.118 dB everywhere, so the price is known in advance and only the benefit has to be measured. The choice is a corner and a comb: nothing here is minimised, something stops improving, and between the places where it has stopped it is worse again.

The dither that is a decision

One whole least significant bit is quoted everywhere as the dither, which makes a decision look like a constant. Swept, the axis is a corner and a comb. An eighth of a step leaves 64.5 per cent of the error locked to the signal and one whole step leaves 0.34; above that the sweep mean is 0.283, 0.297, 0.297 and 0.301 per cent at one, two, three and four steps and 0.526 at a step and a half, which fails at exactly the small amplitudes dither exists for. The price is 10·log₁₀(1 + L²) to 0.118 of a decibel, and four steps cost 12.41 for nothing.

digital · Quantisation
A capacitor across the upper divider resistor removes the output capacitor's resistance floor. computed by solving, not by drawing. Two series resistances against the capacitance across the upper divider resistor: the smallest the loop tolerates at 45° of margin (lower curve), and the one that gives the smallest droop after a 100 mA load step (upper). With no capacitor they are 939 mΩ and 885 mΩ — the second BELOW the first, which is the conflict this design has: the best transient is one the loop refuses. The floor falls as the capacitor grows and between 500 and 836.5 pF it leaves the sweep altogether, so every series resistance down to a milliohm is stable. Past about 5000 pF the floor climbs back and overtakes the optimum again. The shaded band is where the design a transient wants is one the loop allows.

The floor a second capacitor removes

Two requirements pulling one capacitor found a regulator whose best transient is one it must not be built with: below 939 milliohms of output-capacitor series resistance the loop has under 45 degrees of margin, and the droop is smallest at 885. The capacitor across the upper divider resistor, added for the reference's sake, dissolves that conflict. At 836.5 picofarads the 45-degree floor leaves the sweep entirely — every series resistance down to a milliohm is stable — and the droop falls 40 per cent at the same time. The band of capacitances that do it runs from 100 picofarads to 5 nanofarads, and above it the conflict returns.

applied · Regulator
Over one decade a constant is out by ±29.76 mV and a drop plus a resistance by ±8.002 mV. computed by solving, not by drawing. The forward drop of a pure exponential junction over the decade from 1e-3 to 1e-2 amperes, with the best constant drop and the best drop-plus-resistance drawn across it. Both are fitted minimax — the model whose WORST error over the window is smallest, which is what a design has to tolerate — rather than by least squares. The constant is 684.6 mV and is out by ±29.76 mV; the line is 656.2 mV plus 6.61 Ω and is out by ±8.002 mV, which is 3.72 times better. The best constant needs no search: it is the midpoint of the window's highest and lowest voltage, and its error is half their difference.

The straight line between two models

Between a constant seven-tenths of a volt and an exponential sits the model a designer actually reaches for: a drop plus a resistance. Fitted so that its worst error over a decade of current is as small as it can be, it is out by ±8.00 millivolts where the best constant is out by ±29.76 — and both numbers are the same over every decade, because a decade of a logarithm is the same shape wherever it is taken. On a real two-mechanism junction the line does best in the top decade, ±8.71 against a constant's ±58.53, because a series resistance is exactly the term the line has and the constant has none. And the resistance the fit returns is the part's plus 701 milliohms that is not there.

limits · Diode model
The load that may be complex, and what a resistor alone gives up. computed by solving, not by drawing, with the best load searched over BOTH of its parts on the solved network rather than substituted. Against a source of 50 Ω + j100 Ω the search returns 50.00 − j100.0 Ω — the conjugate — which delivers the available 500.00 mW at exactly 50.00% efficiency, and does so at every source reactance. A load that may only be a resistance takes 2/(1 + √(1 + x²)) of that, matching the solved answer to 4.4e-16 at ten reactances — and at x = 2 that fraction is exactly the golden ratio less one, 0.618034. The resistor-only load is the MORE efficient of the two at every non-zero reactance, rising towards one while the conjugate match sits at a half for ever, so the familiar "maximum power at fifty per cent" belongs to the conjugate and not to the load.

The load that may be complex

Freed of the constraint that it be a resistance, the best load is the source's conjugate — found here by a two-dimensional search on the solved network rather than assumed — and it takes the available power at exactly fifty per cent efficiency whatever the source's reactance. A load that may only be a resistance takes 2/(1 + √(1+x²)) of that, and at a source reactance of twice its resistance that is exactly the golden ratio less one, 0.618034. The resistor-only load is also the MORE efficient of the two, rising towards one while the conjugate sits at a half for ever.

power · Power transfer
Two large-signal limits, each alone and then both, at 20 mA and half of it. computed by solving, not by drawing. Four marches of one netlist at each load: neither limit, the input pair's tanh alone, the output stage's 20 mA alone, and both, driven by a 10 mA step. The three curves are each limit's departure from the linear march and the departure with both present; the faint line is the two singles added. Both lies on the sum and a little above it — 1.112 times it at 0.47 nF and 1.022 at 47 nF — so the limits are present together rather than taking turns. Where the two singles cross, near 10 nanofarads, the pair costs 1.88 times what the worse of them costs alone.

The load that neither limit owns

Nine rungs of this argument asked which of an amplifier's two large-signal limits binds, and drew the load capacitance where the answer changes hands. Both are present at every load: the excursion with both in the netlist is the two departures added and between 2 and 12 per cent more, never the larger of them. So the crossing is not a handover but a maximum — at 12 nanofarads the pair costs 2.084 times what the worse of them costs alone, against 1.35 at 2.2 nanofarads and 1.07 at 47 — and the same peak sits on the resistance axis at 20 ohms and the gain-bandwidth axis at 50 megahertz.

feedback · Capacitive load
The corner a 2 nH shunt has, against the current it is sized for. computed by solving, not by drawing. A shunt held at the best burden voltage of 7.75 mV has R = u⁄I, so its own 2 nH of series inductance puts a corner at u⁄(2πLI) — 616 kHz at an ampere and 6.16 kHz at a hundred, for the same piece of metal. The optimum that contains no current at all therefore hands the bandwidth a current dependence: the corner falls in exact proportion. At 1 A the shunt is 7.75 mΩ with a time constant of 258.2 ns, so a 10 ns edge is read 2.58e+3% high and a 1 ns edge 259.20 times too large. A resistor and a 258.2 pF capacitor across it — the value found by search on the solved response, agreeing with L/(R·Rc) to 7.9e-5% — flatten the reading to 7.8e-5% across six decades, and a fifth too much makes it ten times worse. The dots are the corner bisected on the solved impedance rather than taken from R/2πL.

The optimum that hands back a bandwidth

The best burden voltage across a shunt is 7.75 mV and contains neither the current nor the resistance, which is what made it worth having. A shunt has two nanohenries whatever it is made of, so holding the burden fixed fixes the resistance at u*/I — and the corner R/2πL then falls in exact proportion to the current: 6.16 MHz at a tenth of an ampere, 616 kHz at one, 6.16 kHz at a hundred. A resistor and a 258.2 pF capacitor across it, found by search on the solved response, flatten the reading to 8×10⁻⁵ per cent across six decades.

instruments · Current sensing
What flatness costs, in the two places it can be bought. computed by solving, not by drawing. The hold's sinc across a band ending at 0.40 of the sample rate, and the same sinc with a one-zero one-pole shelf fitted to its reciprocal over that band. The droop to be removed is 2.420 dB. Corrected digitally the band comes flat exactly and the flat level sits 2.420 dB below what the uncorrected converter gave at direct current, because nothing may exceed full scale — the price is the disease. Corrected in analogue the band comes flat to 0.2308 dB and the shelf is still rising where the images are, so the worst image at 0.60 fs comes up by 3.799 dB, which is 1.57 times the droop it removed — and that boost is between 3.4 and 4.7 dB at every band on the slider, while the droop it cures runs from 0.58 to 3.75. Neither correction changes the signal-to-noise ratio, because the droop never cost any.

Flatness, and the two currencies it is bought in

The hold's droop takes the signal and everything arriving with it down together, so it costs no signal-to-noise ratio at all — a fact that is never stated and settles what correcting it can possibly be worth. Corrected digitally the price is headroom and is exactly the disease: 2.42 dB of flatness for 2.42 dB of output level. Corrected by an analogue shelf the price is image rejection and is nearly a constant: between 3.4 and 4.7 decibels whatever the band, so it is eight times the droop at a fifth of the clock and nine tenths of it at forty-nine hundredths.

digital · Reconstruction
What an L-section costs when its parts have a quality factor of 100. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same L-section as the ideal one, with each component given a series resistance of its own reactance over 100, and the efficiency read off a solve rather than from an expression. The section circulates Qₛ times the load's current through its own parts, and Qₛ is √(ratio − 1) with nothing left to choose, so the loss is TWICE Qₛ/100 — once in the inductor and once in the capacitor — to 4.40% wherever it is small. The consequence is that a match starts to cost something at a ratio nobody would call demanding: one per cent at a ratio of 1.253 — which is fifty ohms to 62.7, and is 1 + (Q/200)² to 0.25%. Splitting the match buys efficiency only above a ratio of 10.0: at a ratio of three one section loses 2.76% against 3.35% in two, and at a hundred 16.6% against 11.2%. The best number of sections for efficiency is 2 at a ratio of twenty and 4 at a ratio of a thousand — which is not the answer the band gives, where the band keeps improving with every section.

The efficiency a fixed Q costs

An L-section's quality factor is √(ratio − 1) with nothing left to choose, and the same fixed Q that decides its band decides what it dissipates. The circulating current is Q times the load's and it goes through both components, so the loss is twice Qₛ over the components' own Q — measured to 0.03 per cent. With parts of Q 100 that is one per cent at a resistance ratio of 1.253, which is fifty ohms to sixty-three. And splitting the match buys efficiency only above a ratio of 10.02: below it a second section adds two more lossy parts for less than it takes off anybody's Q.

frequency · Series-parallel
The direct-current error a bigger feedback resistor does not fix. computed by solving, not by drawing, at direct current with the amplifier in the netlist. A 1.0 nA photocurrent into 100 MΩ gives -0.100 V. The bias current flows in the same resistor, so its contribution is the ratio of the two currents — 0.1000% at 25 °C, and the same percentage at 1 MΩ and at 1 GΩ, which is checked by changing the resistor rather than by reading an expression. The amplifier's 100 µV of offset behaves the other way: it is multiplied by one plus the resistor over the diode's own leakage, so it grows with the resistor and with temperature. Both terms double every ten kelvin, for two different reasons, and at 85 °C they are 6.40% and 0.740% against 0.100% and 0.110% at 25.

The error a bigger resistor cannot help

Every other quantity in a photodiode amplifier improves with a larger feedback resistor: the signal grows as R and the resistor's own noise as √R, so the ratio goes as √R. The bias current does not behave like either — it flows in the same resistor the signal does, so its contribution is the ratio of the two currents with the resistance cancelled, 0.1 per cent at 25 °C and the same 0.1 per cent at a megohm and at a gigohm. The offset behaves the other way, growing as one plus the resistor over the diode's own leakage, and at 85 °C the two are 6.40 and 0.74 per cent against 0.10 and 0.11 at room temperature.

feedback · Transimpedance
The floor a biased resistor is not standing on. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 100 kΩ resistor with 10 V across it. Its Johnson noise is 40.02 nV/√Hz and does not depend on the voltage; its excess noise is a 1/f density proportional to that voltage, 0.1 µV per volt per decade here, and the two are equal at 271 Hz. Below that the resistor is dominated by a generator that is a property of how it was made rather than of its resistance, and the crossover moves with the SQUARE of the voltage. Splitting the same total resistance into eight parts in series leaves the Johnson noise exactly where it was and divides the excess by √8 = 2.828, taking the total at 1 Hz from 660.2 to 236.4 nV/√Hz. With no voltage across it the second generator is absent rather than small.

The floor that is only a floor while nothing flows

Johnson noise depends on a resistance and a temperature and on nothing else, which is what makes it a floor. A real resistor has a second generator that depends on how it was made and on the voltage across it: 0.1 µV per volt per decade for a metal film, rising as 1/√f. On 100 kΩ with 10 V across it the two are equal at 271 Hz, and the crossover moves with the SQUARE of the voltage — 0.678 Hz at half a volt, 2.44 kHz at thirty. Splitting the same total resistance into eight parts in series divides the excess by exactly √8 and leaves the Johnson noise where it was.

noise · Johnson noise
What a high-side shunt's optimum is made of, at 100 dB of rejection. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same two errors as a low-side shunt, with the amplifier now standing at the rail rather than at the return. 100 dB of rejection turns 12 V of common mode into 120.0 µV of equivalent input error, which is 24 times the amplifier's own 5.0 µV of offset. The optimum keeps its form — the geometric mean of an input error and the supply, golden-sectioned on the solved worst case rather than substituted — and changes its value: 38.73 mV of burden and 0.6440% of error, against 7.75 mV and 0.129% low-side. A shunt sized by the low-side answer reads 1.678% wrong. With the common-mode term removed the optimum returns to the low-side value exactly, which is what says the term is the whole of the difference.

The rail that is an input error

The best burden voltage across a shunt is the geometric mean of the amplifier's offset and the supply, and moving the shunt to the high side does not change that form — it changes what the offset is. A hundred-decibel amplifier on a twelve-volt rail turns the rail into 120 µV of equivalent input error, twenty-four times its own five, so the optimum moves from 7.75 mV and 0.129 per cent to 38.73 mV and 0.644. The two are equal only at 128 dB, and with the common-mode term removed the optimum returns to the low-side value exactly.

instruments · Current sensing
The series resistance that makes the ripple smaller. computed by solving, not by drawing, marched with the diodes in the netlist. A 1000 µF reservoir with 30 mΩ of its own series resistance. The resistance adds a step of ESR times the diode's peak current to the output and at the same time limits that peak current, and the two nearly cancel: the ripple has an interior minimum of 1.330 V at 17.0 mΩ, BELOW the 1.331 V a perfect capacitor gives, and rises to 1.711 V at an ohm. What the resistance buys monotonically is the peak current: the crest factor falls from 13.37 to 6.550 at an ohm, which more than halves the current that sizes the transformer, for 380 mV of mean output and a root-mean-square diode current that falls from 0.4717 A to 0.3484. The textbook ripple expression says 1.568 V here and moves by 2.4% across the whole axis, because it has no term for a series resistance at all.

The resistance that lowers the ripple

Two earlier essays here marched a reservoir with a perfect capacitor. A real one has tens of milliohms of its own, and the obvious expectation — that the resistive step it adds makes the ripple worse — is wrong in an interesting direction: the resistance also limits the charging current, and the ripple has an interior minimum of 1.3303 V at 17.0 mΩ, below the 1.3312 V a perfect capacitor gives. What the resistance buys monotonically is the peak current, which falls from 13.37 times the load's to 6.55 at an ohm, for 380 mV of mean output.

applied · Unregulated supply
At Q = 2 and a hundred times the corner, one arrangement is 1.97% out and the other 2.83%. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same second-order section designed twice — a follower with a capacitance ratio, and equal passives with the Q supplied by a closed-loop gain of 2.5000 — built with the same one-pole amplifier and swept over its gain-bandwidth, with both pole pairs recovered by rooting the determinant. The unity-gain arrangement's error is Q over the ratio: 2.00 per cent at a hundred times the corner. The equal-component arrangement's is K²/2 over the ratio, 3.13 per cent, because its amplifier is a gain-of-K stage and therefore has K times less bandwidth to spend. Below about thirty times the corner both laws fail, and the second one changes sign.

Where the Q comes from

Two second-order sections with no component value in common have the same transfer function to 1.8×10⁻¹⁰ of a decibel, and are not the same circuit. Against a slow amplifier the follower's Q error is Q over the gain-bandwidth ratio and the gain stage's is K²/2 over it — so the second is worse below Q = 3.08 and better above it. Against component tolerance the follower's worst element carries ½ and the gain stage's carries 2Q − ½, nineteen times as much at Q = 5. Neither oscillates at any gain-bandwidth at all.

filters · Q enhancement
What an oversampling ratio buys, and at two different rates. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 20 kHz band on a 48 kHz base clock, interpolated by ratios from 1 to 64. The hold's droop at the band edge falls with the SQUARE of the ratio — the fitted exponent over six doublings is -2.0113 — from 2.640 dB at the Nyquist rate to 0.0097 at sixteen times it. The nearest image moves out with the FIRST power, exponent 1.0222, from 1.40 times the band edge to 37.4. So one decision buys two things at rates differing by a factor of two in the exponent, and the third quantity — the poles a reconstruction filter needs for sixty decibels — collapses from 20.5 to 3.21 by a ratio of four alone.

One knob, and the two exponents it turns

Oversampling is quoted as buying one thing and buys two that improve at different rates. The hold's droop at the band edge falls with the SQUARE of the ratio — fitted exponent −2.011 over six doublings, from 2.640 dB at the Nyquist rate to 0.0097 at sixteen times it — while the nearest image moves out with the first power, exponent 1.022. The third quantity, the poles a reconstruction filter needs for sixty decibels, collapses from 20.5 to 3.21 by a ratio of four alone, because it is a logarithm of the second.

digital · Reconstruction
The winding window solved in two dimensions, copper filling 100% of it. computed by solving, not by drawing. The grey frame is iron of infinite permeability, which in this formulation is a Neumann boundary — flux enters it at right angles and pays nothing. The thin curves are flux lines, which are contours of the vector potential, so equal spacing is equal flux. The copper is shaded by its own share of the loss. At 100 per cent fill the solved ratio is 16.280 against Dowell's 16.382, and the difference is entirely the flux that curls round the ends of the foils — which the one-dimensional model has no way to hold.

The assumption that is a geometry

Every alternating-resistance number this collection has computed for a winding rests on one sentence — the field is parallel to the layers everywhere — and the sentence has never been tested, because testing it needs a field. Solved as one, a portion of foils that fills its window returns Dowell's expression to 0.155 per cent; the same copper filling a quarter of it returns 9.00 against the expression's 16.38, and dissipates 0.528 watts a metre against 0.232. The ratio falls by 45 per cent and the loss more than doubles.

magnetics · Winding field
The band closes over a stage's own bias at 7.93 microns. computed by solving, not by drawing. The overdrive over which the square law is within 1.0 per cent, against the channel length that sets it — the velocity-saturation voltage is Ec·L, so the axis is a size and not a bias. The shaded region is the band; the curve through it is the overdrive at which the square law is exact, which exists at every length because the subthreshold and velocity-saturation errors have opposite signs. Both edges move: the lower one from 79.6 mV to 252.9 mV and the upper from 81.2 mV to 1200.0 mV, so the band is a factor of 1.021 at 0.050 µm and 4.7 at 30 µm. The fourth curve is the overdrive a common-source stage with a fixed gate voltage and a fixed source resistor solves to, which barely moves at all; it leaves the band at 7.929 microns and is outside it for every shorter device. What the square law would have said about that stage is the last two rows: 220 per cent too much current on the 0.050 µm device and 53 per cent too much efficiency, against 0.15 and 0.66 per cent at 30 µm.

The length that is a voltage

The square law's band is closed from above by a parameter that is not a bias, a current or a temperature: it is the channel length, wearing a voltage's units. Swept, the band goes from a factor of 4.74 on a thirty-micron device to 1.021 at fifty nanometres — and the overdrive a stage actually biases itself to barely moves at all, so the two cross at 7.93 microns and every shorter device is biased outside the band. The band was also measured in the wrong quantity: the square law is exact in the current somewhere at every length, and its error in the transconductance is never below 42.5 per cent at fifty nanometres and reaches one per cent only above 6.502 microns.

semiconductors · Square law
The same 100 mΩ in the winding instead of the capacitor: 1.317 V of ripple against 1.335 V, at the same crest factor of 11.15. computed by solving, not by drawing, marched with the diodes in the netlist: a 1000 µF reservoir behind a centre-tapped rectifier, with a series resistance from 1 mΩ to 1 Ω placed either in the capacitor or in each half-winding. The crest factor is the same in both places to two parts in a thousand at every resistance — 13.34, 13.26, 13.03, 12.49, 11.15, 9.069, 6.548 — because both limit the charging current alike. The ripple is not: in the capacitor it has a minimum and rises to 1.711 V at an ohm; in the winding it falls throughout, to 1.172 V, against 1.331 V with no resistance. At an ohm the winding costs 534 mV of mean output and the capacitor 380 mV. The diode's root-mean-square current at an ohm is 0.3449 A with the resistance in the winding and 0.3484 A with it in the capacitor.

The resistance that belongs in the winding

A reservoir capacitor's series resistance lowers the ripple to a minimum of 1.3303 V at 17 mΩ and raises it past that. The same resistance moved into the transformer's winding limits the peak current by the same amount — the crest factor agrees to two parts in a thousand at every value from a milliohm to an ohm — and the minimum is gone: the ripple falls throughout, to 1.172 V at an ohm against 1.711 V in the capacitor. The two resistances each carry a current the other does not, and that one asymmetry decides where a deliberate one should go.

applied · Unregulated supply
An order buys 38.7 dB at 1.25× the corner and 56.6 at 1.67×. computed by solving, not by drawing. The degree equation for an order-5 elliptic filter, swept over the two quantities a designer sets. The horizontal axis is where the stopband is required to begin; the five curves are passband ripples from 0.01 to 3 decibels. Nothing on this page is a choice: pick a ripple and a transition width and the attenuation is decided. At a half decibel of ripple, order 5 gives 38.68 dB with the stopband beginning at 1.25 times the corner and 66.09 dB with it beginning at twice — a factor of two in transition width for 27.4 decibels. The vertical spacing between the curves is the ripple's own term and is the same at every transition width: relaxing from a half decibel to three buys 9.12 dB wherever it is spent.

The selectivity that is not free

The filter trade is normally drawn with two quantities in it. It has three, and an order fixes a relation between all of them: at order five and half a decibel of ripple, a stopband asked to begin at twice the corner is worth 66.1 decibels and one asked to begin at 1.25 times is worth 38.7. The exchange is exact addition in decibels — relaxing the ripple from a half to three buys 9.12 dB wherever it is spent — and there is a fourth price nobody writes down: settling to a tenth of a per cent goes from 9.04 milliseconds to 23.23 while the overshoot does not move.

filters · Filter tradeoff
The best shunt switch for a T is 3.8×, 0.33×, 0.082× a series switch from sources of 0 Ω, 50 Ω, 1 kΩ. computed by solving, not by drawing. The frequency at which the band of a T closes — where no load leaves it within 1% of ideal in both states, the closed state counted as a shortfall in amplitude — against the size of its shunt switch, as a multiple of the 0.5 Ω, 100 MΩ, 5 pF series switches, with every conductance and the capacitance scaled together. From a 0 Ω source the band closes latest with a shunt 3.775 times the series switch, at 2.40 GHz, against 702 MHz with three identical switches — 3.42 times later. From a 50 Ω source the band closes latest with a shunt 0.325 times the series switch, at 243 MHz, against 89.8 MHz with three identical switches — 2.71 times later. From a 1 kΩ source the band closes latest with a shunt 0.082 times the series switch, at 59.4 MHz, against 4.53 MHz with three identical switches — 13.12 times later. A larger shunt holds the open node harder and hangs more capacitance on the closed path, and the source decides where the two meet.

The shunt switch the source sizes

A T is two series switches and a third to ground, and it is always drawn with three of the same part. The shunt switch pulls its own size two ways: larger, it holds the open node harder; larger, it hangs more capacitance on the closed path. The size at which the band closes latest is a balance of the two — the fourth root of 2/ε times √(Rₒₙ/(Rₛ + Rₒₙ)) — when the closed state is counted as an amplitude — 3.8 times a series switch from a buffered source, a third of one from fifty ohms, a twelfth from a kilohm — and it buys a band 3.4, 2.7 and 13 times wider. Counted as a waveform the root of ε goes, and from a buffered source the best shunt is exactly the series switch.

limits · Ideal switch
What a feedback tee buys, and the single thing it charges. computed by solving, not by drawing. Two 50 kΩ resistors with a 6.250 kΩ tap give 500.0 kΩ of transimpedance, which is R₁(1 + R₂/R₃) + R₂ solved on the netlist. That expression has no term for the noise gain, and the tap sets it to 1 + R₁/R₃ = ×9.00 — against exactly one for a single resistor of any value, because at direct current the source is a capacitor. One quantity then does all three things at once. The signal and R₁'s own noise are multiplied together, so the tee buys no signal-to-noise ratio at all: 1846 against 5582 in a hertz at a nanoamp for one resistor of the same transimpedance, a factor of 3.02 which is the square root of the noise gain. The amplifier's own voltage noise and offset are multiplied where they were not before. And the phase margin RISES, from 1.8° to 15.9°, because starting the noise gain high shortens its climb to the peak — so the tee is a compensation that charges for itself in noise, and a capacitor across the feedback is the same compensation for nothing. With no tap the three effects are absent rather than small.

The tee that charges for its own compensation

A feedback tee makes a large transimpedance out of small resistors, and R₁(1 + R₂/R₃) + R₂ is the whole of what is usually said about it. The expression has no term for the noise gain, and the tap sets that to 1 + R₁/R₃ — nine, where a single feedback resistor of any value gives exactly one, because at direct current the source is a capacitor. One quantity then does everything: the signal and R₁'s own noise are multiplied together so the tee buys no signal-to-noise ratio at all, and the phase margin RISES from 1.8° to 15.9°.

feedback · Transimpedance
A regulator holding 10 V on a load that asks for 101% of the nose power collapses it in 256 s; at 110%, in 79 s. Marched with a fourth-order rule. A 10 V source behind 1 Ω feeds a load resistance through an ideal ratio n, and a regulator raises n at 0.05 per volt-second of error to hold the load at 10 V. The load's resistance is chosen so that at 10 V it takes the stated fraction of the most the line can deliver, 25 W. At 90% the regulator settles at n = 1.5195, below the nose ratio √(Rₗ/R) = 2.1082. At 99% the regulator settles at n = 1.8182, below the nose ratio √(Rₗ/R) = 2.0101. At 101% the voltage climbs to 9.950 V — the most the line allows that load, V₀√(Rₗ/R)/2 — at 101.7 s, and falls below half the setpoint at 256.3 s while the regulator keeps raising the ratio. At 110% the voltage climbs to 9.535 V — the most the line allows that load, V₀√(Rₗ/R)/2 — at 23.5 s, and falls below half the setpoint at 78.6 s while the regulator keeps raising the ratio. The regulator's gain, the slope of the load's voltage against the ratio, is positive below √(Rₗ/R) and negative above it.

The regulator that pushes past the nose

A regulator that raises a ratio whenever its load's voltage is low is a stabiliser only while raising the ratio raises the voltage, and on a line that stops being true at exactly the nose: the load's voltage, n·V₀ times the load resistance over n²R plus that resistance, peaks at a turns ratio of the square root of the load over the line and falls beyond it. Ask the load for 90 per cent of the nose power and the regulator settles at n = 1.519 — unless it starts above n = 2.925, where the same setpoint is met on the wrong side of the peak, and then it collapses the voltage. Ask for 101 per cent and the voltage climbs to 9.950 volts, the most the line allows, and is below half its setpoint 256 seconds later. Near the nose the collapse takes a time that grows as the inverse square root of the excess: 2,521 seconds at a hundredth of a per cent.

power · Voltage regulation
An on-resistance 10% highest at mid-range: 74.16 ppm uncalibrated, 13.89 ppm once the straight line is removed. computed by solving, not by drawing, at direct current, at 41 levels across the range. A 0.5 Ω, 100 MΩ switch whose on-resistance moves by 10%, highest at mid-range, against the load. Uncalibrated, the worse of its closed error at the worst level and its open leak is least at 7.42 kΩ, 74.16 ppm — 13.72 bits, the lone switch's floor at its largest on-resistance, against 70.71 ppm for a constant one. With the gain and offset calibrated away, what is left of the closed error is the curvature, and against the leak it is least at 1.39 kΩ: 13.89 ppm, 16.14 bits.

The resistance that bends the signal

A switch of half an ohm and a hundred megohms has a floor of 70.71 parts per million, 13.79 bits, because its on-resistance and its off-resistance cannot both be small beside one load. Most of that floor is a gain error, and a gain error calibrates away. Give the on-resistance a realistic ten per cent of movement across the signal range and the uncalibrated floor slips to 74.16 parts per million, while the part no calibration can touch — the curvature — balances the leak at 13.89 parts per million, 16.14 bits, into 1.39 kilohms. The floor was never set by the on-resistance. It is set by how much the on-resistance moves, as its square root.

limits · Ideal switch
The fringing field, and the turns standing in it. computed by solving, not by drawing. The slot on the left is the gap, cut through the centre leg to the core's own symmetry plane where the potential is zero. Flux crossing it does not stay in the slot: it bulges into the window and crosses the copper at right angles to the layers, which is the one direction Dowell's expression and every one-dimensional winding model assumes has no field in it. The turns are shaded by their own loss. The worst is turn 4, level with the gap, at 32.5 times its direct-current dissipation; the best is 1.39 times. Same wire, same current, same winding, and a spread of 23.4 between them.

The turns nearest the gap

A gapped inductor's flux does not turn a corner into the iron on its way out of the gap; it bulges into the window and crosses the copper at right angles to the layers. Four tenths of a millimetre from a one-millimetre gap, the worst turn of an eight-turn winding dissipates 37.5 times its direct-current loss and the winding as a whole 14.1 times. Move the same winding three millimetres further out and those become 2.9 and 2.4 — and the distance that governs it is 0.60 millimetres, which is not the gap length and does not scale with it.

magnetics · Winding field
Two 1000 µF parts of 100 mΩ each against one 2000 µF part of 100 mΩ: 709 mV against 728 mV of ripple, and a crest factor of 14.41 against 12.61. computed by solving, not by drawing, marched with each capacitor behind its own series resistance. Two identical 500 µF, 60 mΩ parts give 1.330303 V of ripple and one 1000 µF, 30 mΩ part 1.330303 V — the same network. Two 1000 µF parts of a stated resistance each, against one 2000 µF part of the same resistance: at 10 mΩ, 704 mV against 704 mV of ripple and a crest factor of 17.40 against 16.93; at 30 mΩ, 704 mV against 705 mV of ripple and a crest factor of 16.51 against 15.48; at 100 mΩ, 709 mV against 728 mV of ripple and a crest factor of 14.41 against 12.61; at 300 mΩ, 758 mV against 867 mV of ripple and a crest factor of 11.45 against 9.490; at 1000 mΩ, 1.013 V against 1.334 V of ripple and a crest factor of 8.170 against 6.620. The pair's ripple is lower only where one part's resistance is past the ripple's minimum, and its peak current is higher at every resistance.

Two capacitors that are one

Two identical reservoir capacitors in parallel are not a new circuit to be marched: 500 µF at 60 mΩ twice gives 1.330303 V of ripple and so does 1000 µF at 30 mΩ once, to the sixth decimal. So a pair against one part of the same capacitance is one curve read at two resistances, and the pair always sits at the lower one — which lowers the ripple only past the curve's minimum, 709 mV against 728 at 100 mΩ a part, and raises the peak current at every value, a crest factor of 14.41 against 12.61. Mismatch the pair and the current still divides by capacitance, so a part with twice the resistance carries 2% less current and 1.93 times the heat.

applied · Unregulated supply
The resistance that just stabilises it is 17 times smaller than the one that damps it. computed by solving, not by drawing. Two consequences of one base resistor, against how much of it there is, for a follower fed through 100 nH of wire with 47 pF on its emitter. The falling curve is the Q of the worst pole pair, rooted from the determinant so that no frequency grid is involved; the rising one is the output impedance the stage presents at low frequency. Bisecting on the SIGN of the pole's real part returns 69.7 Ω — at which the pair is stable with a Q of 1.7e+15, which is to say no damping and a peak whose height belongs to the arithmetic. A Q of one needs 1.15 kΩ, 16.6 times more, and that resistor takes the output impedance from 5.66 to 13.10 Ω — exactly R/(β+1) added, which is the bare follower's own expression with the base resistance in the place of the source resistance.

What the cure at the base costs

Bisecting for the smallest base resistor that stops an emitter follower oscillating gives 8 to 79 ohms. That bisection stops at the sign change, so at the value it returns the pole pair sits on the imaginary axis with a real part of 10⁻⁷ per second and a quality factor of 1.7 × 10¹⁵ — stable, and undamped. A quality factor of one needs 1.15 kΩ at 47 pF, sixteen times more, and that resistor takes the output impedance from 5.66 to 13.10 ohms. The other cure the model has always accepted and nothing has ever used is a resistor at the emitter: it reaches the same damping with 5.68 ohms and costs half the signal.

semiconductors · Emitter follower
With 100 pA of junction leakage at 25 °C, a T keeps 2.8 bits over one switch and loses them all by 91 °C. computed by solving, not by drawing, at direct current, at every five kelvin from 0 to 150 °C. The floor — the least worse-of-two error any load gives — of a 0.5 Ω, 100 MΩ switch alone and as a T of three, from a buffered source, with a junction leakage of 100 pA at 25 °C on every terminal, doubling every 10 K, the worse sign taken. At 25 °C the lone switch's floor is 71.06 ppm (13.78 bits) and the T's 9.998 ppm (16.61 bits). The T is worse than one switch above 91.4 °C, where the junction current equals the off-resistance's conductance at one volt. The lone switch drops below 13 bits at 101.3 °C and below 12 at 125.9 °C; the T below 16 at 37.2 °C.

The leak no switch can hold

A T of three switches reaches five parts per billion because its shunt switch holds the node a leak has to cross. A junction leakage does not cross anything: it flows out of the outer switch's terminal straight into the load. With 100 picoamperes of it at 25 °C, doubling every ten kelvin, the T's floor is 9.998 parts per million rather than five parts per billion — 16.61 bits, not 27.6 — and it has a best load again, at 100 kilohms. A lone switch loses nothing at room temperature. Above 91.4 °C, where the junction current reaches the off-resistance's conductance at one volt, the T is worse than one switch.

limits · Ideal switch
Degeneration removes the second-order product 9 times less well than the third. computed by solving, not by drawing. Both intermodulation products of a degenerated stage at 5 mV a tone, against the degeneration factor. The second-order product falls as D⁻² — the straight reference is exactly that law, anchored at D = 1 — and the fitted exponent is -2.000. The third-order product falls faster, as D⁴/|3 − 2D|, which is one more power of D at large factors, and it collapses altogether at D = 1.5 where its coefficient changes sign. So the ratio between the two goes from 20.7 at D = 1 to 183 at D = 16: the more linear the stage is made, the more completely its distortion is the product a third-order account never measures.

The product that is not the third

Every distortion result in this field is odd-order, and every two-tone calculation behind those results computed the second-order product and threw it away. On a bare exponential it is the drive over twice the thermal voltage — 1.934 × 10⁻² of the fundamental at a millivolt, against 1.870 × 10⁻⁴ for the third-order product, a ratio of 4Vₜ/a and a hundred and three to one. A differential pair puts it at 6.2 × 10⁻¹⁶. And degeneration removes it as D⁻² where it removes the third order as D⁴/|3 − 2D|, so a stage linearised until its third-order product is negligible is a stage whose distortion is almost entirely the one nobody measured.

semiconductors · Distortion
At β = 0.5, the duty error scatters by 2.49 ns a period against the period's 3.39 ns — and consecutive duty errors are anticorrelated, −0.217. Seeded: forty thousand periods of the event map with 5 mV of threshold noise, β = 0.5. The period scatters by 3.39 ns against σ√(A² + (A+B)² + B²) = 3.4 ns; the high half less the low half scatters by 2.49 ns against σ√(A² + (B−A)² + B²) = 2.49 ns, with A = RC/V(1+β) and B = RC/V(1−β) — 0.667 and 2.000 in units of RC/V. The draw both halves share enters the period with A + B and the difference with B − A. Consecutive periods correlate by 0.107 (closed form 0.115); consecutive duty errors by −0.217 (closed form −0.214).

The walk the core sees

Threshold noise in a relaxation oscillator walks its timing at 3.77 nanoseconds per root period at β = 0.5, because the draw two half cycles share adds. A transformer driven by the same square wave sees the difference of the halves instead, where the shared draw subtracts, and that walks at 1.89 — exactly β times the timing, 18.3 ns against 35.9 after a hundred periods over six hundred seeded runs. The per-period duty error does not vanish with the hysteresis and the walk does, consecutive duty errors are anticorrelated where consecutive periods are not, a comparator skew outruns the walk after 2(σB/d)² periods, and at a fixed frequency the core wants less hysteresis than the clock does.

applied · Hysteresis
Three mismatches, and only one of them reaches the output. computed by solving, not by drawing. Each of the three quantities that can differ between the two transistors is given a spread of its own, one at a time, and 200 pairs are solved at each. The saturation currents produce a spread that follows them exactly — exponent 0.998, so 1.910 per cent of copy error for two per cent of mismatch. The current gains produce a line of slope 2.003, which is second order rather than first, and land at 2.20e-4 per cent for the same two. There is no third line because there is no third component: with no emitter resistors there is nothing for a resistor tolerance to be a tolerance of, and matching a mirror is a statement about emitter area and about nothing else.

The mismatch that cancels itself

A current mirror's copy error is spread by three things the two transistors can differ in, and the population that measures it has always drawn all three at once. Turned on one at a time, a two per cent spread of saturation currents gives 1.910 per cent of copy error and a two per cent spread of current gains gives 0.00022 — because the gains enter only as a sum of reciprocals, which has no first derivative where they are equal. Then the standard cure un-cancels it, by a factor of 86.

semiconductors · Current mirror
Where a transformer's leakage inductance actually is. computed by solving, not by drawing. Both windings carry the same ampere-turns in opposite directions, which is the short-circuit condition a leakage measurement is made under, so the flux drawn here is the flux that fails to link the two — the leakage field, and nothing else. It is largest in the insulation between the portions, where the magnetomotive force is at its full value and there is no copper to be in. The energy in this window is 2.058 microjoules per metre, which is 4.116 microhenries per metre referred to the primary against a closed form of 5.213.

The inductance that is a shape

Leakage inductance is the one transformer parameter that belongs to the geometry rather than to the material: twice the magnetic energy in the window under equal and opposite ampere-turns, divided by the square of the current. Solved as a field it is 3.086 microhenries a metre against a closed form's 3.128 when the copper fills the window, and 4.608 against 6.255 when it fills half of it. Interleaving is worth 3.11 times and not the four it is quoted as, and the missing 0.89 is the insulation nobody puts in the formula.

magnetics · Transformer
A lossy cancelling capacitor beats a resistor alone only above Q = 3.236 if it cancels everything, and only above 1.618 at all. computed by solving, not by drawing. A source of 50 Ω + j100 Ω, its reactance cancelled by a capacitor whose quality factor is Q, so that the capacitor carries a series resistance of its reactance over Q. Cancelling fully, with the load resistor matched to the source and capacitor resistances together, the load takes 1/(1 + x/Q) of the available power, at exactly half efficiency; a resistor alone takes 0.6180, 2/(1 + √(1 + x²)). They are equal at Q = 3.2361, twice the golden ratio. Cancelling only part of the reactance does better than either: it helps at all above Q = (√(1 + x²) + 1)/x = 1.6180, and at Q = 3 takes 0.6650 against 0.5971 cancelled fully.

The reactance that is not free

A conjugate match cancels the source's reactance with an opposite one and takes all the available power, where a resistor alone takes 2/(1 + √(1 + x²)), 0.618 of it when the reactance is twice the resistance. The cancelling capacitor is not free. With quality factor Q it carries a resistance of its reactance over Q, and cancelling fully then delivers 1/(1 + x/Q). That beats the resistor alone only above Q = 2(√(1 + x²) + 1)/x, 3.236 here, twice the golden ratio. But full cancellation is not the best use of a lossy capacitor. Cancelling part of the reactance beats both, and helps at all above Q = (√(1 + x²) + 1)/x, the golden ratio itself. Below that, the right amount to cancel is none.

power · Power transfer
Losing capacitance to bias raises this loop's margin; the corner that binds is the ceramic at full value. computed by solving, not by drawing. Phase margin of the five-volt regulator with a 5.00 mΩ ceramic output capacitor, against the capacitance that capacitor keeps at the working voltage, from the full 10 µF down to 1.5 µF, for five capacitors across the upper divider resistor. With none, the margin climbs from 18.0° at full value to 43.6° at 15% kept, so the lost capacitance is stabilising rather than the reverse. 630 pF holds at least 49.7° across the whole range. 836.5 pF, the value that removed the resistance floor at the nominal capacitance, gives 48.8° at full value and 44.3° at 15%: the capacitor that has lost the most is the one it fails on.

The capacitance the bias takes away

A ceramic output capacitor has a few milliohms of series resistance, which a capacitor across the upper divider resistor made legal, and a capacitance that falls with the voltage across it — a ten-microfarad part at five volts is two microfarads to a small signal. Swept from the full ten down to that fifth, the regulator's margin does not collapse. It rises: with no divider capacitor from 18.0° to 38.5°, because the output pole climbs away from the amplifier's. The corner that binds is the capacitor at full value. One divider capacitor, 423 to 808 pF, holds 45° at every capacitance between. The 836.5 pF that removed the resistance floor sits just above that band, and the lost capacitance is paid for in droop: 103 mV at full value, 202 mV at a fifth.

applied · Regulator
6 straight lines over six decades of a diode: ±8.002 mV everywhere, and they meet at every join. computed by solving, not by drawing. A pure exponential junction from a nanoamp to a milliamp, modelled by 6 drop-plus-resistance segments each spanning a current ratio of 10.00, each fitted minimax on its own window. The model's error swings between +8.002 mV and −8.002 mV in every segment, which is the closed form for that ratio, because a span of a logarithm is the same shape wherever it is taken. The dots are the joins: at each one the two neighbouring segments are off by the same amount in the same direction, so they meet, and the chain is continuous although no segment was asked to be.

How many straight lines a diode is

One drop-plus-resistance line fitted minimax over a decade of a diode's current is out by ±8.00 millivolts, and it is the same over every decade. Chain such segments over six decades, a nanoamp to a milliamp, and the error of each is a closed form in its current ratio alone. Minimax segments meet at their joins without being asked to, so the chain is a continuous piecewise-linear model for free. The error falls as the inverse square of the segment count: one segment is out by 132 mV, six by 8.00, eighteen by 0.94. A millivolt takes 18 segments and a tenth of one takes 56. A real junction needs more, 23 and 72, because recombination gives it an ideality near two over most of the range and each segment narrows by the square root of the local ideality.

limits · Diode model
Joining the samples with straight lines squares the hold's sinc: 5.28 dB of droop and 5.8 dB of image rejection, both doubled. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 20 kHz tone on a 48 kHz clock, reconstructed two ways: held for a whole clock period (dashed envelope, open stems) and joined sample to sample by straight lines (solid envelope, filled stems). Every line is read from a transform of that waveform itself. The held one comes out 2.640 dB down and its nearest image 2.92 dB below it; the interpolated one 5.280 dB down with the image 5.85 dB below. A straight line between samples is a triangle two clocks wide, which is a rectangle convolved with itself, so its transform is the sinc squared: every decibel doubles and the nulls stay where they were.

The pole a straight line is worth

A converter that joins its samples with straight lines instead of holding each one is convolving with a triangle rather than a rectangle, and its transform is the hold's sinc squared. Every decibel doubles: 5.28 dB of droop at a 20 kHz band edge on a 48 kHz clock instead of 2.64, and 5.85 dB of image rejection instead of 2.92. Both exponents of the oversampling ratio are unchanged. The second sinc is worth exactly one pole of reconstruction filter at every ratio, because a sinc's rejection of the nearest image is twenty times the log of that image's distance from the band edge, identically. A single analogue pole allowed the same droop gives a fraction of that rejection. The price is a whole clock of delay rather than half.

digital · Reconstruction
Inside a loop of gain 1000, a twin-T error of +0.10% raises the peak's Q from 250 to 333, and the same error the other way lowers it to 200. computed by solving, not by drawing. An amplifier of gain 1000 with a 10 kΩ, 10 nF twin-T as its feedback network, whose closed-loop gain A/(1 + A·T) peaks at the null, 1591.5 Hz. With exact components the peak is 1000 and its quality factor 250.2, a quarter of one more than the gain. With the twin-T's shunt elements −0.10% out the other way the peak falls to 800 and the Q to 200.2; +0.10% raises them to 1333 and 333.5, and +0.30% to 3973 and 994. At +0.40% the loop oscillates.

The sign the null leaves behind

Put a twin-T in the feedback path of an amplifier of gain A and its null becomes a peak with a quality factor of (A + 1)/4. A filled null is not a small phasor of any phase. It is a real number, minus a quarter of the error in the shunt elements, and once the loop multiplies it by A its sign decides everything. At a gain of a thousand a 0.1 per cent error lowers the Q from 250 to 200 one way and raises it to 334 the other, and at 0.4 per cent the second direction oscillates. Every gain falls on one curve, the exact-null Q divided by 1 − A·t/4. So a Q is set to ten per cent only by a null deeper than 20 log(44·Q): one per cent parts allow a Q of 9.6.

filters · Null depth
At 50° of margin a capacitor across the resistor carries 85.2 µV and a tee 347 µV: the tee is dominated everywhere. computed by solving, not by drawing. A photodiode amplifier of 500 kΩ transimpedance on 33 pF of detector, behind a 10 MHz amplifier with 4 nV/√Hz of voltage noise, compensated either by a capacitor across a single feedback resistor, swept from none to 4 pF, or by a tee of the same transimpedance and factor 3 to 64. Each design's phase margin is drawn against its output noise integrated to its own bandwidth. At every margin a tee reaches, the capacitor reaches it with less noise: at 50.4° the capacitor's design (0.97 pF) carries 85.2 µV in 396 kHz and the tee (factor 32) 347 µV in 401 kHz, 4.1 times more. The ratio runs from 1.29 to 7.47 across the margins compared.

The compensation that costs nothing

A photodiode amplifier can be compensated with a capacitor across its feedback resistor, or with a feedback tee, whose raised noise gain also raises the phase margin. At one transimpedance, 500 kΩ on 33 pF of detector, each design's margin is drawn against its output noise over its own bandwidth. The capacitor dominates at every margin the tee can reach: at 50° it carries 85 µV where the tee carries 347, in the same 400 kHz. The two keep the same band to within 1.3 per cent at equal margin, so the tee's noise buys no bandwidth. The conjecture that the answer would turn on which noise dominates does not survive either. With the amplifier's voltage noise cut tenfold, the tee is still 5.6 times worse.

feedback · Transimpedance
The temperature a part cannot come back from, and how long it takes to leave. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same fixed-point equation as the rung below, marched in time with a thermal capacitance rather than solved for its steady states: C dT/dt = P(T) − (T − T_a)/R_th, stepped adaptively on the temperature change because dT/dt goes through zero at each fixed point. Every trajectory starting below 191.1 °C returns to 88.8, however far above the operating point it began; every one starting above it leaves the material's range entirely, the closest in 0.2 minutes. The two nearest starts are 3.0 kelvin apart. The ignition temperature is a boundary in the STARTING CONDITION, and no steady-state analysis contains one.

The boundary that is a starting point

A wound part with a stable operating point at 88.8 degrees and an ignition temperature at 191.1 will never reach the second, because nothing takes it there. Marched in time rather than solved for its steady states, the same equation says what does: a trajectory starting at 189.6 degrees settles back and one starting at 192.6 leaves the material's range in twelve seconds — two starts three kelvin apart. And an overload of four times the normal loss is survivable for ever, while seven times is survivable for seventeen minutes.

magnetics · Thermal feedback
Matched at 1 kHz, the conjugate load wins only from 730 Hz to 1.84 kHz; the resistor-only load is a low-pass, not a broadband answer. computed by solving, not by drawing. A source of 50 Ω and an inductance of 100 Ω at 1 kHz, with the conjugate load for 1 kHz — 50 Ω and a capacitor of −j100 Ω — and the resistor-only load for 1 kHz, 111.8 Ω, both held fixed while the frequency moves. The conjugate match takes all the available power at 1 kHz and stays within a decibel of it from 777 Hz to 1.29 kHz, a band of 50.9% of the centre, 1.0176/x. The resistor-only load takes 0.6180 at 1 kHz, 0.8509 at 100 Hz, and less at every frequency above: a low-pass whose peak is at direct current. The conjugate load is the better of the two only between 730 Hz and 1.84 kHz.

The load for a source that will not hold still

A conjugate match is exact at one frequency. Held fixed while the frequency moves, it stays within a decibel of the available power over 1.0176/x of the centre: 51 per cent of it when the source's reactance is twice its resistance, 12.7 per cent at eight times. It beats the resistor-only load only between 0.73 and 1.84 of the centre frequency. The resistor-only load is not a broadband answer, as it is usually called. It is a low-pass whose best frequency is direct current. And for a source whose reactance could be anywhere within ±Δx of a centre, the fixed load that guarantees the most power cancels the centre exactly and takes a resistance of √(1 + Δx²) times the source's. That guarantees 2/(1 + √(1 + Δx²)): the resistor-only rule, applied to the uncertainty instead of to the reactance.

power · Power transfer
4 rectangles: the hold's sinc to the power 4, 10.56 dB of droop and the first image 11.7 dB down. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 20 kHz tone on a 48 kHz clock, reconstructed by a pulse of 4 rectangles convolved together — the hold, the straight line, the quadratic and the cubic B-spline for one to four — with the envelopes of all four drawn and the lines of the 4-rectangle waveform read from its own transform (stems). They agree with the sinc to the 4th power to 0.000 per cent. Droop 10.560 dB; the nearest image 11.69 dB below the signal, 4 times the hold's 2.92. The nulls stay on the multiples of the clock; each rectangle deepens everything else.

Four rectangles and no filter

A converter's output pulse can be any number of one-clock rectangles convolved together: one is the hold, two the straight line, four the cubic B-spline. Measured on its own waveform, n rectangles give the hold's sinc to the n-th power to a few parts in ten million, so each one rejects the nearest image by exactly what one analogue pole could at best — and each saves exactly one pole of reconstruction filter until none is left. At the Nyquist rate that is three poles of nineteen and a half, bought with 10.56 dB of droop. From about 2.8 times oversampling the cubic pulse needs no analogue filter at all for 60 dB, for 0.62 dB of droop at four times and two clocks of delay. The cost is that from three rectangles on the output no longer passes through its samples.

digital · Reconstruction
On a 300 kHz amplifier the stage lags 27.9° at the null: the Q stays at 25.4 and the peak moves 1.02% below it. computed by solving, not by drawing. The 10 kΩ, 10 nF twin-T, exact, as the feedback network of a stage of gain 100 whose own bandwidth is the amplifier's gain–bandwidth over 100, so that at the null, 1591.5 Hz, it lags 27.95° (solid); dashed is an ideal stage. The quality factor is 25.440 against 25.247 — hardly moved — and so is the peak's height, 99.7 against 100.0. What moves is where the peak is: 1.024% below the null, where 2·f₀/GBW is 1.061%. At the null itself the gain is 88.3, 0.886 of the peak. With the shunt elements 1% out, the Q is 33.72 against 33.50.

The peak the amplifier moves

A twin-T around a stage of gain A makes a peak of quality factor (A + 1)/4, and a real stage has a bandwidth of its own, so its gain at the null is complex. The expectation is that the lag turns the loop's gain and the Q rises by 1/cos φ, doubling at 60°. It does not: a single pole that turns the gain by φ also shrinks it by cos φ, and the two cancel in the width of the peak — the Q holds to about one part in the gain up to 60°, and the loop still oscillates at the same shunt error, 4.1% at a gain of 100, to three per cent. What the stage's bandwidth moves is the peak itself: 2·f₀/GBW below the null, with the gain nowhere in it. At 45° of lag the frequency the circuit was built to select sits on its own −3 dB edge.

filters · Null depth
At full capacitance the margin falls with the load, and below a tenth of an ampere no divider capacitor gets it past 36.9°. computed by solving, not by drawing. Phase margin of the five-volt regulator with a 5 mΩ ceramic keeping 10 µF, against the load current from 5 mA to 1 A, for four capacitors across the upper divider resistor. 630 pF, which held 45° at every capacitance at an ampere, gives 49.7° at 1 A and 36.0° at 5 mA. With no capacitor the margin at 5 mA is 0.1°. The dotted level is 36.87°, the most phase a zero and a pole four times apart can ever lead by, and every curve ends under it. The crossover stays between 12.9 kHz and 13.2 kHz over the whole range.

The lead a divider can give

At an ampere one capacitor across the upper divider resistor holds this ceramic regulator above 45° at every capacitance the part keeps. At 5 mA nothing does. The crossover stays at 13 kHz while the output pole falls from 3.20 kHz to 31.8 Hz, so the loop arrives at unity with every lag it has and the only phase left is the lead the divider capacitor makes — and that lead has a ceiling, arcsin((G − 1)/(G + 1)), set by the divider's ratio alone. For a five-volt output from a 1.25 V reference it is 36.87°, and the best capacitor reaches 36.83°. Over the rectangle from 5 mA to an ampere and ten microfarads to two, the best single capacitor gives 32.4°. Putting 416 mΩ back in series with the ceramic restores 45° over all of it, and lowers the droop rather than raising it.

applied · Regulator
The one number the window does not move. computed by solving, not by drawing. Loss against foil thickness, at three window fills, with each curve's minimum located by a parabola through its three lowest points rather than read off the grid. The optimum sits at 0.654 skin depths at full fill, 0.708 at forty per cent, against the closed form's 0.663 — a drift of 8.3 per cent while the ratio the same winding carries moves by eighty. The alternating-current resistance at the optimum is 1.340, 1.351, 1.406, against four thirds. What did move is the loss it costs: 0.0555 watts a metre at full fill and 0.1383 at forty per cent, for the same current in the same number of layers.

The optimum that does not move

A foil winding has a best thickness — past it, more copper is more resistance — and at that thickness the alternating-current resistance is four thirds of the direct-current resistance, whatever the layer count. Both of those are one-dimensional results, and this ladder has spent three rungs finding that the one-dimensional picture is 82 per cent wrong about the resistance ratio. Solved as a field, the optimum drifts by 8.3 per cent between a full window and a quarter-full one, and four thirds becomes 1.34, 1.35, 1.41. The trade barely moves while everything it is made of moves a great deal.

magnetics · Winding
With the crossover at 10% of the clock the straight line overshoots 13.7%, the hold with its pole 32.8%. computed by solving, not by drawing, marched at 160 steps a clock. A unit step through a loop whose plant is an integrator crossing over at 10% of the sample rate, reconstructed three ways: held (dotted), joined by straight lines (solid), and held then passed through the analogue pole that attenuates the nearest image, at 90% of the clock, exactly as much as the straight line's second sinc does (dashed) — a pole at 9.90% of the clock, at the crossover itself. Overshoot: 0.0%, 13.7% and 32.8%. The straight line buys the same image rejection for half a clock of delay; the pole buys it for forty-five degrees.

Half a clock against a pole

Inside a digitally controlled loop a converter's delay is phase at the crossover, and a straight-line output pays one more half clock than a hold: 180 degrees times the crossover over the clock. The analogue pole that rejects the nearest image as much as the straight line's second sinc does turns out to sit at the crossover itself — 0.990 of it when the loop crosses over at a tenth of its clock, sinc(r) of it in general — so it costs forty-five degrees however slow the loop is. By the phase estimate the half clock is the cheaper filter below 26% of the clock. Marched as a sampled loop the answer is 17.6%, and at a tenth of the clock a step overshoots 13.7% through the straight line against 32.8% through the hold and its pole, for the same image rejection measured on both waveforms.

digital · Reconstruction
A bridged-T with R₁/R₂ = 100 bottoms out at 34.2 dB, and in a loop of gain 1000 it makes a Q of 4.76. computed by solving, not by drawing. A bridged-T of two 10 nF capacitors, R₁ = 100 kΩ bridging them and R₂ = 1.00 kΩ from their junction to ground, which puts its minimum at the twin-T's 1591.5 Hz: its own transfer (dashed), bottoming at 0.0196, 34.2 dB, rather than a null; and the loop it makes as the feedback network of a gain of 1000 (solid), a peak of 48.5 with a Q of 4.760. Dotted, for scale, is the exact twin-T in a loop of gain 100: a Q of 25.2.

The residue that has only one sign

A bridged-T puts its minimum where a twin-T puts its null, with one fewer part, and its residue there is exactly 2R₂/(2R₂ + R₁): real, like the twin-T's, but positive for any values the parts can take. In a loop of gain A the two networks follow one law — the Q falls by 1 + A·ρ — and they sit on opposite sides of it. The twin-T's residue is zero with exact parts and either sign with real ones, so its loop's Q can be anything, up to oscillation. The bridged-T's loop is always damped: it rises with the gain and stops at a ceiling near √(R₁/R₂)/2, 5.00 for a ratio of 100, with no gain up to a million able to make it oscillate. What the ceiling buys is steadiness: at a Q of five, ±1% parts move the twin-T's loop by 9.1% and the bridged-T's by 2.0%.

filters · Null depth
A 100 kΩ resistor across the capacitor: the node rises a decade per decade and stops at the shelf. computed by solving, not by drawing. The summing-junction impedance of the integrator (1 kΩ in, 10 nF feedback, 1 MHz amplifier) with 100 kΩ across its capacitor (solid), beside the ideal integrator (dashed) and the 10 kΩ inverting stage (dotted). At the lowest frequencies the resistor closes a direct-current loop and the node is 0.999 Ω; it rises a decade per decade, as a resistive stage's does, and stops on the integrator's shelf of 15.9 Ω at the feedback's own corner, 1/(2π·Rp·Cf) = 159 Hz. Its highest point below a tenth of the amplifier's bandwidth is 16.3 Ω.

The resistor that holds the bottom of the shelf

An integrator's summing junction sits on a flat shelf, 1/(2π·GBW·Cf), over its working band, and at direct current it is nearly its whole input resistor, because a capacitor closes no loop there. A resistor across the capacitor closes one. Below the feedback's own corner the node is then an inverting stage's, rising a decade per decade from Rp/A₀, and the rise meets the shelf exactly at that corner, 1/(2π·Rp·Cf), for any resistor and any amplifier — so the node never rises above its shelf at all. That holds for every resistor below 1/(2π·f₁·Cf), the one that puts the feedback's corner on the amplifier's own pole: 1.59 MΩ here. Above it the bottom climbs past the shelf. The same 1.59 MΩ is where a millivolt of offset becomes 1.58 V at the output, and the price below it is a flat gain of Rp/Rin and arctan(1/(2π·f·Rp·Cf)) of phase.

feedback · Virtual earth
3 gaps of 0.40 mm, where one of 1.20 would do. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same total gap, the same turns, the same core, and very nearly the same inductance — cut into 3 instead of one. Each gap now drops one part in 3 of the magnetomotive force, so the field it throws into the window is that much weaker; and because the field's own energy goes as its square, the loss it causes falls faster than the field does. The winding dissipates 3.00 times its direct-current loss here against 6.52 with a single gap, and its worst turn 3.7 against 13.3.

The gap that is three gaps

Reluctances in series add, so one gap of 1.2 millimetres and three of 0.4 are the same magnetic circuit: the same inductance, the same saturation current, the same energy in the air. They are not the same field. Solved in two dimensions, the winding beside the single gap dissipates 6.52 times its direct-current loss and its worst turn 13.3; beside three gaps those are 3.00 and 3.7. And there is a best number of gaps rather than a monotone gain — past three, spreading them along the leg brings each one close to a different part of the winding.

magnetics · Magnetic path
Four 1% parts spread evenly across their band: the divider's error has a spread of 0.289%, and 8.6% of builds are beyond ±0.5%. computed by solving, not by drawing: a divider of four equal 10 kΩ resistors tapped at the middle, built 6000 times from seeded parts uniform across ±1%, each copy's output error taken from the ratio in closed form and the first four hundred also solved on the netlist, agreeing to 7e-16. The inset is the parts' own distribution; the histogram is the divider's error. Its standard deviation is 0.2894%, half the parts' 0.5780%, because each part moves the output by a quarter of its own error and four quarters add in quadrature to a half. 8.60% of builds fall beyond ±0.5%, which is half the worst case the printed tolerance allows.

The shape a tolerance does not print

A resistor marked 1% promises only that its value lies within one per cent. How the values fill that band is not printed, and it decides almost everything a design does with the part. Four populations that all honour ±1% — spread evenly, Gaussian with the band at three standard deviations, screened from a wider population, and sorted with the best parts removed — give a four-resistor divider spreads of 0.289, 0.168, 0.267 and 0.378 per cent, a factor of 2.26 under one label. Specify the divider at ±0.5 per cent and the yield is 91.4, 99.8, 93.7 and 85.3 per cent. The shape's signature fades as one over the number of parts, so it bites hardest in the circuits with fewest.

networks · Component tolerance
At 100 Hz the bowl's bottom is at 2.11 kΩ and 3.10 dB, against 6.67 kΩ and 1.14 dB in the white region. computed by solving, not by drawing: the spot noise figure against source resistance of an amplifier with 4 nV/√Hz and 0.6 pA/√Hz of white noise, whose voltage noise has a flicker corner at 10 Hz and whose current noise has one at 1 kHz. At 100 Hz the spot densities are 4.20 nV/√Hz and 1.99 pA/√Hz, so the optimum is 2.11 kΩ — found by search on the drawn curve at 2.11 kΩ — with a floor of 3.102 dB. Dashed: the white-region bowl, 6.67 kΩ and 1.138 dB. A source left at the white optimum reads 4.492 dB at this frequency. The slider is the frequency.

The source resistance the flicker moves

An amplifier's optimum source resistance is the ratio of its voltage noise to its current noise, and both densities rise below their flicker corners — which are rarely the same frequency. With the voltage noise's corner at 10 Hz and the current noise's at 1 kHz, a part whose optimum is 6.67 kΩ at high frequency wants 2.11 kΩ at 100 Hz and 699 Ω at 1 Hz, tending to the white value times the square root of the ratio of the corners. Over the audio band the drift costs 0.012 dB; over a band from 1 to 100 Hz, choosing the white optimum costs 3.77 dB, and the spot optimum at the band's centre recovers all but a tenth of a decibel.

noise · Device noise
The winding window solved electrostatically, in two portions. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same cross-section the loss solve reads, read with ∇·(ε∇φ) = 0 instead. Two things are the opposite way round from the magnetic problem and both are the whole difference. The iron is now a Dirichlet boundary rather than a Neumann one — an earthed core is an equipotential, so the field meets it at right angles instead of running along it — and a conductor carries a prescribed potential rather than a prescribed current. The thin curves are equipotentials, which are contours of φ, so equal spacing is equal potential step and crowded curves are a strong field. The copper is shaded by the potential each foil sits at, which rises along the winding rather than being one number. Winding to winding this window is 926.9 picofarads a metre, and 89 per cent of the energy is inside insulation that occupies a fraction of the window.

The other half of the same window

The two-dimensional solve that settled what a winding's alternating-current resistance really is computed one of the window's two parameters and never mentioned the other. Read with Laplace instead of the vector potential, the same cross-section returns 926.9 picofarads a metre — and 89 per cent of that energy sits inside films that occupy 14.1 per cent of the window. The instrument agrees with a layered slab to three parts in ten thousand billion and converges on a real winding at order 1.34, and the reason for the shortfall is not the arithmetic but the corner of a conductor.

magnetics · Winding capacitance
Two 230 V sources joined by 0.05 + j0.2 Ω: the most that can be received is 194 kW, at 76.0°; with 50% of the reactance cancelled it is 262 kW, at 63.4°. computed by solving, not by drawing, at 50 Hz: two 230 V sources, the sending one leading the receiving one by an angle δ, joined by a line of 0.05 Ω and j0.2 Ω with a series capacitor cancelling a fraction of the reactance; the real power absorbed at the receiving end against δ. Uncompensated (dashed) the maximum is 194.37 kW at 75.96°, the line's impedance angle. With 50% cancelled (solid) it is 261.55 kW at 63.43°. Both maxima match V² cos β (1 − cos β)/R, found by a search on the solve to a part in a million. Past its maximum the received power falls as the angle grows: a larger angle drives more current, and past the impedance angle the extra current's loss outgrows what it carries.

Sixty degrees, and the limit compensation stops raising

Series capacitors are put in transmission lines to raise how much power can pass between two sources before the angle between them runs out. The lossless textbook limit, V²/X(1 − k), rises without bound as the reactance is cancelled. With the line's resistance kept, the limit is V² cos β (1 − cos β)/R for an impedance angle β, and it peaks where β is exactly sixty degrees: 56.7 per cent cancellation and 264.5 kW on a 230 V tie of 0.05 + j0.2 Ω, against 194.4 uncompensated — then falls, to nothing at full cancellation. A line of R/X 0.1 can nearly triple its limit; one above 1/√3 cannot raise it at all. And at the best compensation the line delivers exactly half of what it is sent.

power · Series compensation
With Rₜₕ = 10 kΩ, a tenfold range of β moves the collector current by 17.3%. computed by solving, not by drawing. The collector current of a transistor biased from a 2 V Thévenin source through 1, 10 and 100 kΩ, with 4.7 kΩ in the collector, 1 kΩ in the emitter and a 12 V supply, against its current gain from 30 to 1000, each point a Newton solve of the netlist with both junctions in the device. Dotted: one resistor from the supply to the base, 876 kΩ, sized for the same current at β = 100; it is proportional to β until it saturates. With Rₜₕ = 10 kΩ the current moves by 17.3 per cent from β = 50 to 500.

The bias the gain does not set

A transistor's current gain varies tenfold across the parts one type number covers, and a bias network is judged by how little of that reaches the collector current. One resistor from the supply to the base passes all of it — 0.61 mA at β = 50, 1.16 at 100, and saturation from 200. The four-resistor network passes 98.5 per cent of a tenfold change with a 100 kΩ divider, 17.3 with 10 kΩ and 3.4 with 1 kΩ, and never less than the 1.78 per cent the ratio β/(β + 1) keeps however stiff the divider. Each tenfold cut in that spread costs a tenfold rise in the divider's standing current, so the design is a point on a hyperbola rather than a rule.

semiconductors · Operating point
The trade, in the plane where both halves of it live. computed by solving, not by drawing. Leakage inductance across, interwinding capacitance up, both solved on the same cross-section with the same cells. The faint diagonals are lines of constant leakage-times-capacitance, so a design action that runs along one of them has bought nothing and only moved where the energy is kept. Interleaving runs at slope -0.78, which is nearly along them: six sections cut the leakage 21.3 fold and multiply the capacitance 11.0 fold, and the product moves by 1.94. What it does change is the winding's characteristic impedance, 95 ohms down to 6.2 — a factor of 15. Thickening the interlayer instead runs at -4.8, steeply across the diagonals, and moves the product 5.2 fold over the same sweep. It is the cheaper action by that measure and it is not free either: the millimetre it spends is a millimetre of window that is not copper.

Interleaving is a choice, not an improvement

Splitting a transformer's windings into six sections divides its leakage inductance by 21.4 and multiplies its winding-to-winding capacitance by 11.0. The product of the two — which is what sets the frequency the part stops being a transformer at — moves by 1.94, and the resonance it decides goes from 1.804 to 2.515 megahertz for all that work. What interleaving really changes is the winding's characteristic impedance, 95.2 ohms down to 6.2, and nobody quotes it.

magnetics · Winding capacitance
The best foil thickness for 4 layers, for three currents with the same fundamental. computed by solving, not by drawing. The loss of a portion of 4 layers against foil thickness, with the loss weighted by the current in each harmonic rather than computed for one frequency. A sinusoid wants 0.6631 skin depths and lands at 1.3368 times the direct-current resistance — four thirds, the single-frequency constant, reproduced. A triangular ripple wants 0.6432, which is the same answer to within 3.0 per cent, so a winding carrying one needs none of this. A square current of the same fundamental wants 0.3838 — thinner by a factor of 1.728 — and lands at 1.8313, which is not four thirds and is not any constant the geometry knows. Building to the sinusoid's answer costs 16.8 per cent more loss.

The optimum a spectrum moves

The best foil thickness for a winding is derived for one sinusoid and quoted as a property of the geometry: a minimum at four thirds of the direct-current resistance, whatever the layer count. Weight the loss by the current in each harmonic instead and a square current of the same fundamental wants foil 1.728 times thinner and lands at 1.83, and a narrow pulse wants it 3.68 times thinner. Four thirds is a property of the current. The constant that replaces it for an ideal square edge is exactly two, and a real winding sits between them at a place its edge rate decides.

magnetics · Winding
With a leak of a hundred periods the flux settles to a spread of 1.22% of the swing at β = 0.5 — 0.759 of what independent duty errors would give. Seeded: three runs of sixty thousand periods of the event map, 5 mV of threshold noise, β = 0.5, driving a magnetising branch whose flux leaks with τ = L/R. The stationary spread of the period-end flux in volt-nanoseconds against τ in periods, quoted here as a percentage of one half cycle's swing V·T/2 = 5493 V·ns: 1 → 0.146% (closed form 0.145%), 3 → 0.233% (closed form 0.232%), 10 → 0.401% (closed form 0.397%), 30 → 0.685% (closed form 0.673%), 100 → 1.25% (closed form 1.22%), 300 → 2.16% (closed form 2.10%). The closed form linearises one period, keeping the leak inside each half and the covariance −AB between consecutive periods' imbalances; dropping that covariance gives the upper curve, 1.61% at a hundred periods. For a slow leak the spread is V·σ·|B − A|·√(τ/T), the drawn asymptote.

The spread a winding resistance holds

A relaxation oscillator's threshold noise walks an ideal core's flux without limit. Put the winding's resistance back and the walk stops at a spread: 1.22% of a half cycle's swing when L/R is a hundred periods, growing as the square root of L/R, while a comparator skew's offset grows as L/R itself. The anticorrelation between consecutive duty errors is worth 24% of that spread at β = 0.5 and 62% at β = 0.2 — but only in a core slow enough to remember several periods. And the resistance that bounds the walk is a boundary in its own right: with a millihenry and a fifth of the swing to spare, an ohm tolerates 12.9 mV of noise, and a hundred picoseconds of skew needs at least 0.14 Ω.

applied · Hysteresis
With a 2 ps reference and a 0.1 ps-a-period oscillator the best loop has a time constant of 20.0 periods, where the clock's error is 0.453 ps — 90.9 dB on a 10 MHz tone. computed by solving, not by drawing, with seeded locked clocks as dots. A free-running oscillator whose period has a spread of 0.1 ps, locked by a first-order loop to a reference whose timing error, as the phase detector sees it each period, is 2 ps rms and white. The loop passes the reference's error below its corner and the oscillator's walk above it, so the stationary error is σₒ²/(1 − a²) + σᵣ²(1 − a)/(1 + a) with a = exp(−1/τ). The oscillator's part rises as √(τ/2)·σₒ and the reference's falls as σᵣ/√(2τ); they are equal, and their sum least, at τ = 20.00 periods, the ratio σᵣ/σₒ, where the clock's error is 0.4528 ps — √(σᵣ·σₒ). Seeded clocks of 65,536 periods: τ = 2, 1.000 ps; τ = 5, 0.656 ps; τ = 20, 0.452 ps; τ = 80, 0.649 ps; τ = 300, 1.187 ps; τ = 1000, 2.105 ps.

The loop a reference allows

A sampling clock is a free-running oscillator held by a loop to a reference, and the reference has an error of its own. With 0.1 ps of period spread in the oscillator and 2 ps of white error in the reference, a first-order loop of 20 periods leaves the clock 0.453 ps from ideal — 90.9 dB on a 10 MHz tone — and that is the best any first-order loop can do: the oscillator's share rises as the square root of the loop's time constant, the reference's falls as one over it, and they are equal at σᵣ/σₒ. The clock's error there is the geometric mean of the two, so a reference a hundred times worse costs ten. On a spectrum the rule reads as one instruction: put the loop's corner where the free oscillator's skirt meets the reference's floor. And it holds only for long captures. Below about seven loop time constants the free oscillator beats every loop.

digital · Aperture jitter
With the capacitor tracking the inductor, one per cent of drift moves the Q = 5 response by at most 1.00%, at the peak — against −2.73% beside it with the capacitor held. computed by solving, not by drawing, from two netlists. The Q = 5 series RLC low-pass with its inductor raised by 1% and its capacitor changed by (1.01)^(−t) − 1, so that at t = 1 their product is unchanged; here t = 1. The fractional change in the response against frequency (solid), against the inductor alone with the capacitor held (dashed). The upper pole moves 9.90 × 10⁻⁴ ω₀ towards the axis and 0.99 × 10⁻⁴ ω₀ up it, and ω₀ by 0.00%. The largest change is 1.00% at 1.000 ω₀; with the capacitor held it is −2.73% at 1.115 ω₀. The slider is the tracking.

Two parts that drift together

A one per cent change in the inductor of a Q = 5 resonant low-pass moves its pole pair mostly downwards, and the response by 2.73% beside the peak. Let the capacitor fall by the same fraction as the inductor rises and their product is fixed, so ω₀ is: the pair can only go round its circle, sideways near the top, and the response changes by 1.00% at the peak and nowhere else — the change a resistor makes. The difference grows with Q: at Q = 20 one per cent of drift moves the band edge 10.2% with the capacitor held, 20.7% with it drifting the same way, and 1.00% with it tracking. Over −40 to 85 °C an inductor of +150 ppm/K moves a Q = 20 band edge 9.1% with a zero-coefficient capacitor and 0.57% with a −150 ppm/K one. Correlation between two parts' errors is itself a tolerance.

frequency · Frequency response
With the weft counted as well as the warp, the skew a pair can reach is least at 45.0° to the warp — 128 fs — and turning further off the warp makes it worse again. computed by solving, not by drawing, to first order in the permittivity's swing, the summed bound held against an integration over 64 registrations of the pair to the cloth at six angles. A 0.25 mm pair over a cloth whose warp has a 0.5 mm pitch and whose weft has a 0.5 mm pitch, each swinging the permittivity by ±0.2 about 4.4. The warp's contribution falls as the route turns off it, as the earlier figures found; the weft's rises, because the pair's projection across the weft grows as d·sin θ while its yarns are crossed less often. The worst skew is least at 45.00°, 128.3 fs. At 10°, where the warp alone allows 291.4 fs over every registration — twice the earlier figure's 146 fs, which was for a route starting over bundle and gap — the weft adds 13.8 fs. Integrated: 5° 587.6 fs, 15° 215.1 fs, 30° 139.3 fs, 40° 126.3 fs, 60° 139.2 fs, 80° 304.9 fs. The slider is the weft's pitch.

The angle two weaves allow

Turning a differential pair a few degrees off a board's glass weave stops its skew growing with length — but a cloth has two weaves, and turning off the warp turns onto the weft. Counting both, the worst skew over every registration of the artwork to the cloth is a sum of two bounds, one falling as the route leaves the warp and one rising as it meets the weft, and it is least at an angle the cloth decides: 45° and 128 fs for two identical half-millimetre weaves and a quarter-millimetre pair, against 305 at 10°; 52° for a finer weft; 67° for a flatter one. Doing the count properly also finds the earlier bound a factor of two low, and finds the obvious answer a trap: on a square weave's exact diagonal the two weaves' product stops averaging and the skew grows again, 2.2 fs a millimetre, while a degree either side it stays at 128.

lines · Differential line
With 0.05 Ω of machine reactance at each end the sixty-degree peak needs 107% of the line cancelled — out of reach — so the limit rises all the way to full cancellation, 261.6 kW against 145.3. computed by solving, not by drawing, at 50 Hz, searched over the angle between the two EMFs on the solve (dots) and from V²·cos β·(1 − cos β)/R with the totals in it (line): the 230 V tie of 0.05 + j0.2 Ω with each source a machine whose EMF is held behind 0.05 Ω of its own reactance, against the fraction of the LINE's reactance cancelled. The capacitor cannot reach the machines' reactance, so the total impedance angle reaches sixty degrees only at k* = (X + 2Xₘ − √3·R)/X = 106.7%, beyond full cancellation; the limit rises from 145.34 to 261.55 kW and never turns. Dashed: the bare tie, peaking at 56.7%. The slider is the machines' reactance.

The reactance the capacitor cannot reach

A series capacitor raises a tie's transfer limit until the loop's impedance angle is sixty degrees, and on a bare 0.05 + j0.2 Ω line that is 56.7% cancellation. Put a machine at each end, its EMF held behind a reactance of its own, and the capacitor still cancels only the line: the sixty degrees now needs the line's reactance plus twice a machine's, less √3 times the resistance, as a fraction of the line's reactance, which passes 100% as soon as each machine's reactance exceeds √3/2 of the line's resistance — 0.043 Ω here. Beyond that the limit rises at every step to full cancellation, and the lossless estimate of the gain, wildly high on a bare line, becomes nearly right: 1.43 against 1.50 at 0.2 Ω. The higher limit is reached with the receiving terminal lower — 180 V falling to 148 at 0.1 Ω — and the capacitor's own resistance is negligible for any power capacitor: a Q of 222 keeps the peak within 1%.

power · Series compensation
Sampled at 100 kHz, the loop repays its whole debt below 50.0 kHz: 6.60 kHz·Np each side, with a peak of 8.72 dB — the continuous loop had repaid 89% by then. computed by solving, not by drawing, from the loop's exact zero-order-hold equivalent. The three-pole amplifier of the area essay (second pole 4 kHz), closed through a sampler and hold at 100 kHz. The device sensitivity, in decibels, against linear frequency from zero to half the sample rate, where the discrete response ends. Margin 24.7° at a crossover of 5.71 kHz, against 34.9° for the continuous loop; peak +8.72 dB at 6.45 kHz. The area below zero is 6.598 kHz·Np and the area above, all of it inside the band, 6.598; net 1.84 × 10⁻² Hz·Np. The continuous loop, by 50.0 kHz, had repaid 88.6% of its own.

The band a sampled loop repays in

Close the three-pole amplifier's loop through a sampler and hold at 100 kHz and Bode's sensitivity integral still balances — but only over the band below 50 kHz, because that is all the band a sampled loop has. The whole debt, 6.60 kHz·Np, is repaid there; the continuous loop had repaid 88.6% of its own by the same frequency and spends decades above on the rest. Below a tenth of the sample rate the sampled loop is the continuous loop with half a sample of delay, 24.7° of margin against 24.6°. And the finite band turns the equality into a floor: hold the sensitivity 20 dB down over a third of the band and no loop can peak below 10 dB. This loop's floor is low and its margin sets its peak; the sample rate at which the peak is 3 dB above the continuous loop's is 18 times the crossover.

feedback · Desensitivity
With the receiving end at 0.9 of the sending voltage the limit peaks at 62.6% cancellation, where the impedance angle is 56.3° — and the peak is still Vₛ²/4R = 264.5 kW. computed by solving, not by drawing, at 50 Hz, searched over the angle between the sources on the solve (dots) and from (Vᵣ·cos β/R)·(Vₛ − Vᵣ·cos β) (line): the 0.05 + j0.2 Ω tie with the sending source at 230 V and the receiving one at 207 V, against the fraction of the reactance cancelled; dashed, equal ends. The limit is a parabola in cos β with its top at cos β = Vₛ/(2Vᵣ) = 0.5556, an impedance angle of 56.25°, reached at k = 62.58%; its height there is Vₛ²/4R = 264.50 kW, the same as for equal ends. Uncompensated, this tie carries 180.53 kW at most. The slider is the receiving voltage as a fraction of the sending.

The peak a sagging receiver keeps

The sixty degrees at which series compensation stops raising a tie's transfer limit is a statement about two ends at equal voltage. With the receiving end lower, the limit is a parabola in the cosine of the impedance angle whose top is at cos β = Vₛ/2Vᵣ: 56.3° and 62.6% cancellation for a receiver at 0.9 of the sender, 33.6° and 83.4% at 0.6, full cancellation at one half. But the height of that top is Vₛ²/4R whatever the receiving voltage — 264.5 kW for the 0.05 + j0.2 Ω tie from a receiver at 1.1 of the sender down to one at 0.5 — and at it the receiving end takes exactly half of what is sent, to four decimal places, for every receiving voltage tried. The best compensated tie is the sending source driving a matched load, and the receiving source's voltage only decides how much capacitor that takes.

power · Series compensation
A 50 Ω source over 20.0 Hz–20.0 kHz: the best turns ratio is 10.7, giving 1.30 dB; the white optimum's 11.5 gives 1.31, and no transformer at all 13.2. computed by solving, not by drawing, the band integrals checked by quadrature. The drifting part of the essay before — 4 nV/√Hz and 0.6 pA/√Hz white, flicker corners at 10 Hz and 1 kHz — fed from a 50 Ω source through an ideal step-up transformer of ratio n, so it sees n²·50 Ω. The noise figure over 20.0 Hz to 20.0 kHz against n: least at n = √(√(E/I)/Rₛ) = 10.73, where the amplifier sees 5.76 kΩ, at 1.298 dB. The ratio that matches the white optimum, 11.55, gives 1.310 dB; the source connected directly, 13.23 dB. The slider is the band.

One turns ratio for a band

A 50 Ω source and an amplifier whose optimum is 6.67 kΩ want a step-up transformer, and the ratio that matches the white optimum, 11.5, is the one a design note computes. Over the audio band it is nearly right: 1.31 dB against 1.30 at the band's own best ratio, 10.7. Over 1 Hz to 100 Hz it is badly wrong — 9.2 dB where a ratio of 4.8 gives 5.4 — because the band's noise lives in its bottom decade, where the flicker has moved the optimum down. One ratio for a two-decade band costs at most 0.24 dB against a ratio that could follow the optimum. The transformer's winding resistance multiplies the whole noise factor by one plus the winding's resistance over the source's, not just its own share: a tenth of the source costs 0.41 dB where its own noise alone would cost 0.31. And 115 amplifiers in parallel are an ideal 10.7:1 transformer, noise for noise.

noise · Device noise
An L-section whose coil has a Q of 50 and whose capacitor has a Q of 1000. computed by solving, not by drawing at 89 ratios, the loss read as one minus power into the load over power into the section. It follows Qₛ(1/Qcoil + 1/Qcap) (dashed) to 3% wherever it is under 2%: at a ratio of 20 it is 8.39% against 9.15%. Two parts of Q 95.2 each — the harmonic mean of 50 and 1000 — lose 8.40% there (faint), and within 0.4% of the unequal pair at every ratio: the section hardly cares which part is lossy, only what the two reciprocals sum to.

The part that decides the match

An L-section's loss is not twice its Q over the components' Q unless the two components are equally good. Given a coil of Q 50 and a capacitor of Q 1000, a 50 Ω to 1 kΩ match loses 8.39%, which is what two parts of Q 95.2 — the harmonic mean — would lose: the reciprocals of the two Qs add, each weighted by the loaded Q, and 95% of the heat is in the coil. Both parts carry the same circulating energy, so they share the loss in the inverse ratio of their Qs, which makes the coil the one to spend on: Q 50 to 100 halves the loss, and past the capacitor's own Q a better coil buys almost nothing. The high-pass section, with each part in the other arm, loses the same to 0.01%; per hundred watts delivered the coil runs at 4.36 W; and the ratio above which splitting the match pays, 9 to 10, does not move with the parts at all.

frequency · Series-parallel
A gain of −1 on a part stable only at gains of ten, with 1.25 kΩ across its inputs. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 100 MHz amplifier whose second pole is at 20 MHz, wired as an inverter with two 10 kΩ resistors. Its signal gain is one at a kilohertz on every curve. Its noise gain is two with nothing across the inputs (dashed): 35.0° of margin and 4.4 dB of peaking. A resistor from the summing junction to ground raises the noise gain without touching the signal: at a noise gain of 10 the margin is 65.6°, the peak is 0.00 dB and the −3 dB point is 14.1 MHz.

The gain added to buy a margin

An amplifier sold as stable only at gains of ten — 100 MHz of gain–bandwidth, its second pole at 20 MHz — has 35.0° of margin and 4.4 dB of peaking as a gain of −1, because that gain closes its loop against two. A 1.25 kΩ resistor from the summing junction to ground raises the noise gain to ten without touching the signal gain, which stays one to a part in ten thousand, and the margin becomes 65.6°: still 14.1 MHz of bandwidth, 2.19 times what a unity-stable part from the same die gives at its natural gain. The price is everything the amplifier contributes, multiplied by ten instead of two — 64.0 nV/√Hz at the output against 20.5 — and a capacitor in series with the resistor buys back the low-frequency half of it and none of the wideband total.

feedback · Noise gain
A pi network matching 50 Ω to 1 kΩ at a loaded Q of 8, coil Q 100, capacitor Q 1000. computed by solving, not by drawing at 10 design Qs from √19 = 4.36 — the least a pi network can have, at which it is the L-section and loses 4.58% — upwards. At a Q of 8 it loses 9.47% (solid) and its band for |Γ| under 0.1 is 2.3% of the frequency (dashed, scaled to the left end), against 4.7% for the L-section. At 30 it loses 28.73% for a band of 0.6%. The chosen Q is paid for in both currencies at once.

The Q a pi network makes a designer choose

An L-section has no choice of Q; a pi network adds a third part and can be built at any loaded Q above √(ratio − 1). Matching 50 Ω to 1 kΩ with coils of Q 100 and capacitors of Q 1000, it is the L-section at its least Q of 4.36 — 4.58% lost, a band of 4.7% — and at a Q of 8 it loses 9.47% for a band of 2.3%; at 30, 28.7% for 0.6%. What the extra loss buys is rejection: the second harmonic 16.0 dB down at the least Q, 29.8 at Q 10, 39.1 at 30. A tee network, with two coils where the pi has one, loses within 0.8% of the pi at every Q, because the loss follows the energy the Q makes the network circulate rather than the number of coils that carry it. And the freedom runs one way only: no pi or tee is less selective than the L-section; a lower Q needs more sections.

frequency · Series-parallel
A capacitor of 67% of the load's reactive power, moved along a feeder whose load is spread evenly over 10 km. computed by solving, not by drawing at each of 30 positions: one phase of an 11 kV feeder of 0.3 + j0.35 Ω/km, carrying 2 MW at 0.8 lagging spread over 30 equal loads. Uncorrected it loses 16.8 kW a phase; with every load corrected to unity at its own terminals, 11.1 kW — so 5.66 kW is the reactive current's share. This capacitor does best at 67% of the way out, where the loss is 11.8 kW and 87.6% of the reactive share is gone. At the substation end it removes nothing; at the far end it overshoots.

The capacitor two-thirds of the way out

A feeder's reactive current costs loss in every section it passes through, and on a feeder whose load is spread along its length that current is largest at the substation and falls to nothing at the far end. Correcting it at the substation removes no loss at all. One phase of an 11 kV feeder carrying 2 MW at 0.8 lagging over ten kilometres loses 16.8 kW, of which 5.66 kW is the reactive current's; the best single capacitor is about two-thirds of the load's reactive power placed about two-thirds of the way out, and it removes 87.6% of that share — against the eight-ninths the textbook rule gives for an idealised line. Two capacitors at 2/5 and 4/5 remove 95.6%. The same capacitor left in at light load costs more than it saves below half load, and the rule for a continuous load is a statement about many taps.

power · Reactive power
The Chebyshev 5's sections, each node's peak before and after equal-maxima scaling. computed by solving, not by drawing. Unscaled (lighter), section by section the largest signal anywhere inside reaches 4.537×, 3.109×, 1.000× the input, so the ceiling is 4.537× at F0b. With a gain of 0.220 at the input, 1.000 and 1.602 between sections and 2.833 at the output, every section peaks at 1× (darker) and the response is unchanged. The floor rises from 249.7 to 883.8 nV, so the range gains 2.16 dB of the 13.14 dB the internal peak was costing.

The ceiling a gain gives back

A fifth-order Chebyshev loses 13.14 dB of its range because its first section's capacitor node carries 4.537 times the input. The textbook repair is to scale: divide the signal in front of the loud section, restore it later, so that every node peaks at the same level. Done exactly, with silent gains of 0.220, 1.000, 1.602 and 2.833 and the response unchanged to the last digit, it lowers the ceiling to the input and raises the floor from 249.7 to 883.8 nV — and gives back 2.16 dB of the 13.14. Every section between the division and the restoration has its noise multiplied by what the signal was divided by. On the even-order Chebyshevs scaling loses half a decibel; on the seventh-order it recovers 3.77 of 22.45. Reordering the sections and scaling them together gives 4.75 dB. The rest of the ceiling belongs to the high-Q section and no gain moves it.

noise · Dynamic range
Fifth-order filters between Bessel (m = 0) and Butterworth (m = 1), all at one corner: the step at m = 0.5. computed by solving, not by drawing: each pole set interpolated between the Bessel and Butterworth poles of the same rank, renormalised to a 1 kHz half-power point, built as a network and its step taken from the residues. m 0: 0.77% overshoot, 0.68 periods to 1%, 14.1 dB at 2 kHz; m 0.25: 2.19% overshoot, 0.94 periods to 1%, 16.6 dB at 2 kHz; m 0.5: 4.53% overshoot, 1.27 periods to 1%, 20.7 dB at 2 kHz; m 0.75: 7.99% overshoot, 1.58 periods to 1%, 25.7 dB at 2 kHz; m 1: 12.78% overshoot, 2.21 periods to 1%, 30.1 dB at 2 kHz. Every quantity moves monotonically from one end to the other: the families are the two ends of one line, not two choices.

The line from Bessel to Butterworth

Bessel, Butterworth and Chebyshev are taught as three choices, and measured at one order and one corner they are points on one line. Interpolate each Bessel pole towards its Butterworth partner and every quantity moves smoothly: a fifth-order filter's step overshoots 0.77% and settles to 1% in 0.68 periods of the corner as a Bessel, 4.53% and 1.27 periods halfway, 12.78% and 2.21 periods as a Butterworth, while its attenuation at twice the corner climbs from 14.1 to 30.1 dB. The Chebyshevs carry the same line on to 47.0 dB at 4.97 periods, and every step along it buys attenuation with settling time — a frontier, with no member beaten on both. Overshoot is not the price: past 0.05 dB of ripple a Chebyshev overshoots less while ringing longer. And a specification of 25 dB at twice the corner within 1.6 periods is met first at order five, by a member nobody names.

filters · Filter families
The gain a Wien oscillator needs, when one of its four parts is off its value. computed by solving, not by drawing: for each part moved alone from −5% to +5%, the gain at which the poles reach the axis, bisected on the netlist, against 1 + Rs/Rp + Cp/Cs (to ten digits at every point). A series resistor or shunt capacitor 1% high raises the gain needed to 3.0100; a shunt resistor or series capacitor 1% high lowers it to 2.9901. Every part moves the frequency the same way, by half its error: 1% high on any one of them, 1.58 kHz against 1.59 kHz. The gain needed moves by the error itself, a third of it relative to three.

The gain a tolerance demands

A Wien oscillator needs a gain of exactly three only when its four network parts are exactly equal. In general it needs 1 + Rs/Rp + Cp/Cs — bisected on the netlist to ten digits — so a series resistor 1% high asks for 3.0100 and a shunt resistor 1% high for 2.9901. Four thousand seeded oscillators from 1% parts set to the textbook's comfortable 3.02 leave a quarter of them silent; 99.9% start only at 3.072, and at that setting the median unit distorts 2.6% — the limiter has to absorb a margin the tolerance forced. The frequency spreads by one part's own spread, 0.58% for 1% parts, as large as the limiter's own 0.771% shift. Parts from one array, tracking to 0.05%, need only 3.0035, because the gain depends on ratios and the frequency on products.

applied · Oscillator
A 1 ns edge from a 10 Ω driver, a trunk, and a fork into two branches each ending in 2 pF. computed by solving, not by drawing: the network of trunk and two branches marched by its characteristics, the branch length bisected for 1% overshoot at either end. Forked at the driver, each branch may be 2.33 mm, against 1.05 mm for one track carrying both inputs at its end (dashed). Every millimetre of trunk costs more than a millimetre of branch: 0.0 mm of trunk, 2.33 mm branches; 0.2 mm of trunk, 1.89 mm branches; 0.4 mm of trunk, 1.43 mm branches; 0.6 mm of trunk, 1.01 mm branches; 0.8 mm of trunk, 0.57 mm branches; 1.0 mm of trunk, 0.11 mm branches.

The track that forks

Two 2 pF inputs on one track from a 10 Ω driver with 1 ns edges may sit only 1.05 mm away inside 1% overshoot if both hang from its end. Fork the track at the driver and each branch may run 2.33 mm — more than twice as far — because two fifty-ohm branches in parallel are a 25 Ω line, half as mismatched to the driver. Every millimetre of trunk before the fork costs more than a millimetre of branch: with a millimetre of shared trunk the branches may run only 0.11 mm. Equal branches are the only good ones: a 2.2 mm branch overshoots 0.91% beside an equal partner and 1.7% beside a short one. And a star reaches further the more inputs it serves — 2.33 mm for two, 11.85 for four, where four branches in parallel make 12.5 Ω — while a daisy chain of the same inputs reaches 2.54.

limits · Lumped element
A reference flattened at 300 K, from −40 to 125 °C, with its core current as T to the 1. computed by solving, not by drawing every 1.25 K. The reference has zero slope at 300 K by construction and its output there is 1.17170 V. It is never flat anywhere else: it falls 1.391 mV by −40 °C and 2.526 mV by 125 °C, a bow of 2.526 mV that no choice of the weight can remove, and the residue matches −(xti − α)·Vₜ·[x ln x − (x − 1)] with x = T/300 K (dashed) to within the diode law's "+1".

The bow a trim leaves

A band-gap reference trimmed to zero slope at 300 K is flat at exactly one temperature. Everywhere else it falls: 1.39 mV by −40 °C and 2.53 mV by 125 °C for a core biased proportional to absolute temperature, 3.79 mV for one run at a constant current, and nothing at all for one whose current rises as the cube of temperature. The residue is (xti − α) thermal voltages times x ln x − (x − 1), with x the temperature over the trim temperature, and six references of different bias, exponent and current fall on that one curve. The least box, 1.9 mV, comes from making the slope zero at 39 °C rather than at room temperature; quoted per kelvin it is 9.8 ppm/K over the automotive range and 4.2 over the commercial one. A third junction supplies the bow's own shape, and subtracting it leaves 18 µV — at an output that is then the band gap itself.

semiconductors · Temperature
One channel of a summing amplifier whose junction is shared by 8 inputs. computed by solving, not by drawing. Every input has its own 10 kΩ resistor into one junction and a gain of −1 at a kilohertz; the 10 MHz part closes its loop against a noise gain of 9. Input 1's −3 dB point is 1.17 MHz with 8 inputs, against 6.43 MHz with one: 1: 6.43 MHz, 2: 3.95 MHz, 4: 2.21 MHz, 8: 1.17 MHz, 16: 603 kHz. No other input has to be driven for this to happen; it is enough that its resistor is there.

The input that costs every other input

A summing amplifier gives each of its inputs a gain of −1 and closes its loop against one more than the number of inputs, so every input added divides every channel's bandwidth and multiplies the amplifier's own noise — 6.43 MHz with one input, 1.17 MHz with eight, 603 kHz with sixteen, on a 10 MHz part. Above 5.4 inputs the amplifier's 5 nV/√Hz, multiplied by n + 1, outgrows the resistors' Johnson noise, which rises only as its square root. A muted channel whose source is grounded still costs: a sixteen-input mixer is 11.5 dB louder with two channels in use than one whose unused resistors are disconnected. A channel of gain 0.1 beside one of gain 10 is 13.7 dB noisier than alone. A tree of smaller summers doubles the bandwidth and does not make the sum any quieter.

feedback · Noise gain
The quantisation error's power as a function of where the input sits, for four dithers. computed by solving, not by drawing; the error's mean square given the input, integrated over each dither's density through the converter's own quantiser, and checked against seeded draws to 6 × 10⁻³. Undithered it is the square of a sawtooth, x² up to half a step and (1 − x)² beyond. One uniform step makes it x(1 − x): zero at a code, a quarter of a step² between codes — the error's power is carried by the signal. Two steps (triangular) hold it at ¼ everywhere, and one step subtracted after the converter at 1/12 everywhere. Averaged over the input the prices are 3.01, 4.77 and 0.00 dB against the undithered 1/12.

One step of dither per moment

A whole step of uniform dither makes a quantiser's error average to zero wherever the input sits, and leaves its power at x(1 − x) steps²: zero at a code and a quarter between codes, so the noise rises and falls with the signal. Two steps — a triangular dither — hold the power at a quarter everywhere and leave the third moment swinging by 0.096 steps³; three steps fix that too. Each added step fixes one more moment of the error and costs a twelfth of a step² of power: 3.01 dB for one, 4.77 for two. Subtracted after the converter, one step fixes the error's whole distribution for 0.00 dB.

digital · Quantisation
Where a chain of 4 stages stops obeying its model, against where one stage does. computed by solving, not by drawing. amplifier, 1%: one stage 14.2 kHz, 4 stages 7.06 kHz, a ratio of 0.498; Kirchhoff, 1°: one stage 3.97 MHz, 4 stages 993 kHz, a ratio of 0.250; small-signal, 1%: one stage 7.30 mV, 4 stages 7.26 µV, a ratio of 0.000995. The amplifier's edge moves as N to the −½ because its error grows as the square of frequency; the board's as N to the −1 because a phase grows in proportion; and the small-signal edge collapses, because the last stage sees the gain of all the others.

The edge of a chain

A system built from stages that are each inside their own edge is not inside its own: the stages share one error budget. Four ×10 stages from a 1 MHz amplifier are 1% from ideal at 7.06 kHz, not at the single stage's 14.2 kHz — the edge moves as N to the −0.502. A signal path through four ten-centimetre boards is a degree long at 993 kHz, a quarter of one board's edge, as N to the −1. The chain's exponent is minus the edge's own exponent in its tolerance, measured on the line y = −x. And the small-signal edge of a chain with gain belongs to its last stage: four junction stages of ten are 1% off at 7.26 µV, a thousandth of one stage's 7.30 mV.

limits · Model edges
The supply's mean output against its load, with no leakage inductance, 0.3 mH and 1 mH in the winding. computed by solving, not by drawing, marched with the diodes in the netlist: 17 V peak into 1000 µF, 50 mΩ of winding throughout. Without inductance the output falls 1.69 V from 200 Ω to 25 Ω, an average slope of 3.43 Ω. With 0.3 mH it falls 0.62 V, 1.14 Ω, from a higher start; with 1 mH, 0.42 V, 0.77 Ω. An element that carries the load's current and drops no mean voltage makes the regulation better, not worse.

The inductance that flattens the supply

An unregulated supply's output resistance counts each resistance by the mean current it carries, and an inductance in the winding carries the whole mean current and drops no mean voltage — so by that rule it should count for nothing. Marched, it counts for less than nothing: 0.3 mH of leakage takes the output resistance at 100 Ω from 3.88 Ω to 0.67, and the mean output falls 0.62 V from 200 Ω to 25 Ω instead of 1.69. The effect has an interior optimum — 0.03 mH makes it slightly worse, 0.3 mH best, 3 mH back to 2.86 Ω — because the inductance first rings the reservoir up and then turns the rectifier toward choke input.

applied · Unregulated supply
An integrator of 100 kΩ and 1 µF with its input grounded: what its own input currents do to it. computed by solving, not by drawing, marched for ten seconds from rest. With 50 nA flowing out of each input and the + input grounded, the output ramps at 50.0 mV/s — the bias current over the capacitance, to six figures — and reaches 0.500 V. With 100 kΩ in the + input to balance the resistances, only the 5 nA of offset current is left and the ramp is 5.00 mV/s. Neither stops: an integrator has no gain to quote, because its gain is time.

The current a capacitor adds up

An amplifier's input current in a resistor is an offset; in a capacitor it is a rate, and time is the gain. An integrator of 100 kΩ and 1 µF with its input grounded ramps at 50.0 mV/s from 50 nA, and balancing the inputs leaves the 5.00 mV/s of the offset current, still unbounded. A leak resistor bounds it at the current times the leak and costs the lowest frequency the circuit integrates. A hold capacitor's droop times its acquisition time is fixed, so 50 nA through a 100 Ω switch needs 655 nF and 0.77 ms for half a 16-bit step. A charge amplifier's offset times its low corner is Ib/2πCf, whatever its bleed.

instruments · Input bias current
What balancing the source resistances is worth, against how correlated the two input currents are, for a bias-cancelled input. computed by solving, not by drawing; 400 seeded parts at each correlation, each solved unbalanced and balanced at a 1 MΩ source, input currents of zero mean and 1 nA spread. The ratio of rms errors (dots) follows 1/√(2(1 − ρ)) (line): 0.72 for independent currents — balancing makes it 38% worse — one at ρ = ½, and 6.5 at 0.99. The cure removes what the two currents share, and is a cure only if they share more than half.

The cure that needs one current

Balancing the resistances an amplifier's inputs look into removes whatever its two input currents have in common and leaves their difference. On a plain bipolar input the two are one current at two pins, correlated at 0.991, and the cure is worth ten. On an input whose bias current has been cancelled they are two residues of either sign, correlated at 0.10, and over 400 seeded parts the cure makes the error 38 per cent worse. It is worth 1/√(2(1 − ρ)) for a zero-mean current, nothing at ρ = ½, and in general exactly the input current over the offset current.

instruments · Input bias current
The gain a Wien oscillator needs above three, against its amplifier's gain–bandwidth product. computed by solving, not by drawing: the closed-loop gain at which the oscillating pair reaches the axis, bisected on the netlist with a one-pole amplifier of 100 dB direct-current gain, for equal 10 kΩ and 10 nF parts. At 10 times the frequency, 3.15339; at 30 times the frequency, 3.02349; at 100 times the frequency, 3.00257; at 1000 times the frequency, 3.00012. Every point agrees with 3(1 + δ) + 3ε²/(1 + δ + 3ε), where ε = kf₀/GBW and δ = k/a0, to two parts in ten million. The bandwidth's share falls as the square of the ratio; below it sits a floor of 9.00e-5 from the finite direct-current gain, and the two are equal near a ratio of √(3a0) = 548.

The gain an amplifier asks for, squared

A Wien oscillator built round a real amplifier needs more than a gain of three, and the excess is easy to overrate: the amplifier's lag moves the frequency in proportion to the lag and the required gain only in proportion to its square. At a gain–bandwidth product a hundred times the oscillation frequency the frequency is 4.22 per cent low and the gain needed is 3.00257 — fifty-one times smaller in proportion. The square is also what makes the bias spread: an amplifier 30 per cent slow asks for 1.94 times the typical excess. Against 1 per cent parts the amplifier matches the network's share at a ratio of 16; against a network matched to 0.05 per cent, not until 86.

applied · Oscillator
One, two, three and four means of twenty milliseconds in cascade: the response, and the band each holds forty decibels down. computed by solving, not by drawing: |sin(πfT)/(πfT)|ⁿ with T = 20 ms, held against running means on samples at three frequencies. Each mean nulls 50 Hz, so n of them null it to order n, and their first sidelobe sits at −13.26 dB a mean. Forty decibels down, one mean holds 49.50–50.51 Hz, two 45.40–55.69, three 40.71–69.49 — its sidelobe at −39.78 dB just above the line — and four everything above 36.90 Hz: the null has become a stopband.

The mean that makes a stopband

A cascade of n means of one mains period holds, at a depth D, exactly the band a single mean holds at D/n — to a part in a million, because the cascade's response is the single mean's raised to the nth power. That one identity answers whether the third mean pays. Forty decibels down, two means hold 45.4 to 55.7 Hz, three 40.7 to 69.5, and four hold everything above 36.9 Hz: once D/n is shallower than one mean's first sidelobe, 13.26 dB, the null stops being a null and becomes a stopband. The price is a mains period of settling per mean and a noise bandwidth that exceeds a single mean of the same length by √(3n/π) — a factor that never stops growing.

noise · Noise bandwidth
The droop of the ceramic regulator against the rise time of a 100 mA load, with the capacitor at full value, half and a fifth. computed by solving, not by drawing, marched from the operating point: 10 µF, 5 mΩ of series resistance, 630 pF across the upper divider resistor, the 100 mA arriving as a straight ramp. A step droops 103 mV at 100%, 137 mV at 50%, 203 mV at 20% of the capacitance. A ramp of a millisecond droops 2.98 mV, 2.56 mV, 2.56 mV, and the slowest ramps approach the loop's inductance, 25.2 µH, times the ramp's rate (dashed) — a quantity with no capacitance in it — times 1.18, 1.03, 1.03, the share the loop's ringing adds. The full-value and fifth-value curves cross at 23 µs; slower than that, the larger capacitor droops more.

The load that rises slower than the loop

Every droop a regulator is sized against is a load step with an infinitely fast edge, and a ceramic regulator droops 103 millivolts on its full 10 µF and 203 on a fifth of it. Give the same 100 mA a rise time and the ordering does not survive: past 23 microseconds the full capacitor droops more than the fifth, and a slow ramp's droop is the loop's own 25.2 µH times the load's rate of change — a number with no capacitance in it, raised 18 per cent on the full capacitor by the impedance peak its slower loop leaves. For a 10 mV budget the load must take 298 µs to arrive on the full capacitor and 253 on the fifth.

applied · Regulator
A chain of identical one-pole stages: the time its step takes to settle within 1%, against the number of stages. computed by solving, not by drawing: the chain's step response is the Erlang distribution's, and its 1% settling bisected on it, held against a fourth-order march of the chain at one, four and sixteen stages. One stage settles in 4.61τ, the familiar ln 100; four in 10.0τ, sixteen in 26.7τ, a thousand and twenty-four in 1099.9τ. The frequency edge's rule, √N stretched by the bandwidth that holds 1% (faint), says sixteen stages need 4.02 times one stage's time; they need 5.81. For a long chain the settling time approaches the delay, N time constants (dashed): 1.074 of it at 1024 stages. For one stage (τ = 1.59 µs at 100 kHz) the 1% time is 7.33 µs.

The delay a chain adds

A chain of one-pole stages leaves its flat band as the square root of the number of stages, and it leaves its settling time faster: four stages take 10.0 time constants to settle within 1 per cent against one stage's 4.61, sixteen take 26.7 — 5.81 times one stage, where the frequency rule allows 4.02. The difference is a delay. The chain's step is the sum of N exponential lags, so it is an edge of mean N time constants and spread √N; the magnitude response sees only the spread. At a thousand stages the 1 per cent time is 1.074 of the delay. A chain budgeted to stay flat to 1 per cent settles to 1 per cent 45 per cent late.

limits · Model edges
The group delay of fifth-order filters along the line from Bessel to Butterworth, and of a 0.1 dB Chebyshev, all with one half-power point. computed by solving, not by drawing: the delay as a sum over each pole set's poles, held to the slope of each realised network's own phase at four frequencies. At zero frequency the delay is 0.386, 0.413, 0.449, 0.488, 0.515, 0.633 periods of the corner; across the passband it varies by 0.40%, 5.7%, 16.4%, 34.1%, 59.6%, 122.7% of that. The Bessel is flat to the corner and beyond; every step toward Butterworth bends the delay up into a peak near the corner, and the Chebyshev's peak is the largest.

The attenuation a flat delay cannot buy

Along the fifth-order line from Bessel to Butterworth the group delay's spread across the passband grows at every step, from 0.40 per cent to 59.6, and on through the Chebyshevs to 191 — monotone, like overshoot and settling, and lost fastest in the first eighth of the way. The third axis turns the frontier into something sharper than a trade. More order flattens a Bessel's delay four to seven times an order and buys it no attenuation at all: 14.17 dB at twice the corner at order six is the most any Bessel reaches, and from there the attenuation falls toward the 12.04 dB of the Gaussian every delay-flat filter tends to. A flat delay and a steep skirt cannot both come from poles.

filters · Filter families
A 3.3 V edge from a 10 Ω driver down a 50 Ω line of 1 ns, received through 50 Ω in series with four capacitors, beside a plain 50 Ω and an open end. computed by solving, not by drawing: the line marched by its characteristics. The open end rings up to 5.50 V; the plain resistor holds 2.750 V, the launched level, and never reaches the swing. With the capacitor the far end arrives at the same 2.75 V and then climbs as the capacitor charges and stops terminating: with a time constant of half a round trip (20.0 pF) it overshoots to 4.48 V; with one, 3.83 V; with three (120 pF) it rises without overshoot to 3.30 V by 24 ns; with ten, 3.13 V by 24 ns, still on its way.

The termination that runs out

A 50 Ω resistor at the end of a line terminates every edge and draws current for as long as the line is held high: 75.6 mW on an alternating pattern from a 3.3 V, 10 Ω driver. Put a capacitor in series with it and the standing current is gone, and so, eventually, is the termination: the far end reflects nothing as an edge arrives and the whole of it once the capacitor has charged, by one less the exponential of −t/2Z₀C exactly. Under two round trips of time constant the receiver overshoots — 54.8 per cent at a quarter of one — and above it the receiver waits on the capacitor to reach the swing. On a pseudo-random pattern the levels are tightest at three round trips, and on a fast pattern the capacitor holds the line's mean and the resistor still burns half of what a plain one does.

lines · Termination
Three trackers finding a panel's maximum power from open circuit, against the number of readings each takes. computed by solving, not by drawing: the single-diode panel of 81.0 W at 17.244 V, every tracker starting at 0.995 of the 19.85 V open-circuit voltage. Perturb-and-observe with 0.2 V steps walks down and then oscillates about the maximum, within two parts in a thousand of it from reading 39. Newton on I + V·dI/dV, two readings a step for the current and its slope, is within a part in a million from reading 10. The fractional open-circuit rule needs one reading and lands exactly, because its fraction, 0.8686, was taken at this light.

How many readings a maximum takes

A panel's maximum power sits where I + V·dI/dV is zero, and a tracker finds it by reading the panel. From open circuit, perturb-and-observe in 0.2 V steps takes 39 readings to come within two parts in a thousand and then oscillates about the maximum forever, giving up 7|P''|δ²/24 of it; Newton's method on the condition itself takes 10 readings to come within a part in a million, the digits doubling at each step. Newton converges only from a window: above 15.82 V on a panel whose maximum is at 17.24, because below it the condition is nearly the short-circuit current and nearly flat, and one step leaves the characteristic. And the one-reading rule — a fixed fraction of the open-circuit voltage — loses nothing at the light it was set at and 17 per cent at a fiftieth of it.

networks · Source model
The harmonics of one phase of three balanced rectifier loads conducting 60°, each sorted into the sequence its three phasors form. computed by solving, not by drawing: each harmonic of the three phases decomposed into zero, positive and negative sequence. Every one is a single sequence to the arithmetic's floor: h1 positive, h3 zero, h5 negative, h7 positive, h9 zero, h11 negative, h13 positive, h15 zero. A balanced set shifts harmonic h by h × 120° between phases, so the third and its multiples are not shifted at all — zero sequence — the seventh is shifted as the fundamental is, and the fifth the other way round. Relative to the fundamental, the zero-sequence harmonics together are 72.5%, the negative 24.1% and the positive 16.7%.

The sequence a harmonic belongs to

Symmetrical components are defined on phasors, so they describe one frequency, and a rectifier load's current has many. Taken harmonic by harmonic, three balanced loads give a single sequence at every harmonic, to the arithmetic's floor: the third and its multiples zero sequence, the seventh, thirteenth and nineteenth positive, the fifth, eleventh and seventeenth negative — because harmonic h is shifted h × 120° between phases. The sequence decides where each harmonic can go. Connected line to line, the loads put no triplen in a line at all: 3.32 A of them circulates round the delta and never leaves it. Fed through a delta–wye transformer beside a second group, the fifth and seventh cancel in the supply and the eleventh and thirteenth remain, because the transformer turns the two sequences opposite ways.

power · Three-phase
A half-micron field-effect device's current against its gate voltage at 250, 300, 350 and 400 K, and the gate voltage at which they agree. computed by solving, not by drawing: mobility falling as T^−1.5, threshold falling 2 mV a kelvin, velocity saturation at 2 V. Below the crossing a warmer device draws more, because its threshold has fallen; above it less, because its mobility has. The curves agree at 1.7000 V, 1.0000 V of overdrive — the closed form's 2κT·vc/(1.5·vc − κT) — where 300 K draws 0.667 mA and 250 and 400 K draw 0.669 and 0.673 mA.

The overdrive at which temperature cancels

A field-effect device's current has two temperature coefficients pulling opposite ways: its threshold falls about two millivolts a kelvin, which raises the current, and its mobility falls as the temperature to the −1.5, which lowers it. They cancel at one overdrive, (4/3)κT = 0.800 V for a long channel, and the device's curves at every temperature cross there. Velocity saturation moves the crossing up — to 1.000 V at half a micron and 2.400 V at 0.15 µm — and, if the saturation velocity does not itself change with temperature, removes it altogether below a hundred nanometres. Below the zero a warmer device takes more current, the bipolar runaway in a device said to be free of it: 26 per cent more for 10 K at 0.1 V of overdrive.

semiconductors · Square law
A milliohm read four-terminal with a drifting thermoelectric EMF: the error against the test current, read three ways, and the shunt's own heating. computed by solving, not by drawing: an EMF of 0.5 µV settled plus 1 µV relaxing with a minute's time constant, read thirty seconds after a disturbance with readings a second apart; the shunt 20 ppm/K and 20 K/W. At 10 mA one polarity is out by 11.1%, a reversal by 501 ppm, the three-reading delta by 4.14 ppm. Every EMF error falls as 1/I; the heating, 0.400 ppm at an ampere, rises as I². The best current is 11 A for one polarity (149 ppm in all), 1.8 A reversed (4.08 ppm) and 0.37 A with the delta (0.167 ppm).

The voltage four wires carry in

Four wires remove a resistance measurement's leads by keeping the sense loop free of current, and that loop is exactly where a thermoelectric voltage lives. Ten milliamps through a milliohm is ten microvolts, so every microvolt where a copper lead meets a brass terminal moves a single-polarity reading by a tenth. Reversing the current removes any EMF that holds still and leaves the change over one interval; the + − + delta leaves the second difference; four readings leave the third — 501 ppm, 4.14 and less at 10 mA while a disturbed junction settles. Against the shunt's own heating each scheme has a best current, and the least error rises only as the cube root of the shunt's temperature coefficient: the reading method moves the error by orders of magnitude, the alloy by a cube root.

instruments · Four-terminal
The Q of a 10 mH coil with 1.2 Ω of winding and 8 pF across it, with cores whose own Q is 1000, 300, 100 and 50. computed by solving, not by drawing: the core's loss a resistance ωL·Qc across the inductance, constant loss tangent, the coil solved at each frequency. Without a core loss the Q peaks at 11340 at 325 kHz, the self-resonance over √3. With the cores: 825.6 at 136 kHz for Qc = 1000, 274.9 at 94.0 kHz for Qc = 300, 95.9 at 66.2 kHz for Qc = 100, 48.7 at 52.8 kHz for Qc = 50. The peak falls to just under the core's own Q for a poor core and further under it for a good one, and moves down from the self-resonance over √3.

The Q a core allows

A coil's Q, limited by its winding and its own capacitance, peaks at the self-resonance over √3. Put a core with a loss of its own across the inductance and the peak falls and moves: with a core whose own Q is 100, the 10 mH coil that peaked at 11,340 near 325 kHz peaks at 95.9 near 66 kHz. The peak sits where x³ = a/2 — x the frequency over the self-resonance, a the core's Q over the winding's — and reaches the core's Q less three times the two-thirds power of a/2 of it. At that peak the core carries 97 per cent of the loss, so a better winding hardly moves it. A core whose loss is a fixed resistance instead puts the peak at the geometric mean of two corners, as high as half the square root of the core's resistance over the winding's; a loss tangent that rises with frequency drags the peak down to the material's corner.

magnetics · Real inductor
Averaging an input that drifts 1 µV a cycle through a 1 pF switched-capacitor averager: too short a memory keeps the noise, too long a lag, and the best is 16.5 cycles at 27.2 µV. computed by solving, not by drawing, and seeded. A switched-capacitor exponential averager — 1 pF sampling capacitor, an equal damping capacitor for unity gain, memory set by the feedback capacitor — fed a ramp of 1 µV a cycle. The rms error against the input (solid) is the lag (dashed), (a/(1 − a))·r, and the switch noise (dotted), 2kT(Cs + Cd)/(Cf²(1 − a²)), together; seeded marches of sixty thousand cycles (dots) agree to 5%. The best memory is 16.55 cycles against (kT/(Cs·r²))^(1/3) = 15.88, with 27.2 µV of error: 15.5 µV of lag and 22.3 µV of noise.

The leak worth building in

An integrator that never forgets cannot follow an input that moves. Give a switched-capacitor integrator a deliberate leak — a damping capacitor that samples the output each cycle and takes its charge away — and it becomes an exponential average with a memory of Cf/Cd cycles. Fed an input drifting 1 µV a cycle, through a 1 pF sampling capacitor, too short a memory passes the switch noise and too long a memory lags the drift; the best, on the exact closed form and on seeded marches of sixty thousand cycles, is 16.5 cycles, for 27.2 µV of error against 89.5 µV in a single sample. The best memory follows a cube-root law, the cube root of kT/(Cs·r²), ten times the drift for a memory 4.64 times shorter, and at it the noise variance is twice the squared lag. And the leak is not free: the damping capacitor is switched too, and at unity gain it samples half of the averager's noise.

noise · kT/C noise
A zero at 1ωₙ moves the fastest-settling damping from 0.782 to 0.873 and the fastest settling from 3.62 to 2.38/ωₙ. computed by solving, not by drawing. The 2% settling time of a second-order step against its damping ratio, with no zero (grey), a zero at 2ωₙ (dashed) and at 1ωₙ (solid), each located by residues on the recovered polynomial and refined by bisection; the step by residues equals the plain step plus (1/b) times its derivative to 2e-16. zero none: fastest at ζ = 0.7825, 3.623/ωₙ; zero 2ωₙ: fastest at ζ = 0.7975, 3.028/ωₙ; zero 1ωₙ: fastest at ζ = 0.8725, 2.376/ωₙ. The zero adds the step's own derivative, which adds overshoot, so more damping is needed to keep the last excursion inside the band — and it speeds the rise, so the best settling is faster than with no zero at all. The cliffs in the curve are still there, moved.

The damping a zero asks for

The fastest-settling damping of 0.78 belongs to a step with no zero in it. Put a zero at the natural frequency and the step becomes the plain one plus its own derivative: the best damping moves to 0.873 and the best settling falls from 3.62/ωₙ to 2.38/ωₙ. A zero five times further out moves nothing, and a zero at three times moves the optimum by only 0.005, yet keeping 0.78 there costs 52 per cent, because the optimum sits on a cliff. A zero in the right half-plane moves the best damping by 0.015 and costs 20 per cent in settling that no damping can buy back.

transients · Damping
A 63.7 Ω resistor in series with a gyrator's capacitor moves its series resistance's sign change from 63 Hz to 754 Hz, and 70.0 Ω removes it below the amplifiers' edge. computed by solving, not by drawing. The one-henry synthetic inductor of four 10 kΩ resistors, a 10 nF capacitor and two 1 MHz amplifiers with a gain of 10⁵, its series resistance against frequency with a resistor r₄ in series with the capacitor of 0 (grey), 0.9, 1 and 1.1 times 4/(ωₜ·C) = 63.66 Ω. Without it the resistance is −0.153 Ω at 100 Hz and −25.2 Ω at 1 kHz, negative from 63.0 Hz. r₄ adds ω²·L·C·r₄, the same frequency law, so at exactly 4/(ωₜ·C) the resistance is 0.099 Ω at 100 Hz and −0.075 Ω at 1 kHz and changes sign only at 754 Hz; at 1.1 times it stays positive throughout: 2.44 Ω at 1 kHz.

The resistor that pays the amplifiers back

A synthetic inductor's negative resistance grows as the square of frequency, and so does the real part a resistor in series with the gyrator's capacitor adds: Zᵢₙ = sL/(1 + sCr₄) ≈ sL + ω²LCr₄. Fitted on solves across six designs, the resistor that cancels the amplifiers' term is 4/(ωₜ·C) to 1.8% — 63.7 Ω for 10 nF and 1 MHz amplifiers, whatever the resistance level or the open-loop gain. Put in, it moves the sign change from 63 Hz to 754 Hz; a tenth more removes it below the amplifiers' edge and gives a quality factor of 2,579 at 1 kHz where the bare inductor had −250. The catch is that the cancellation is as good as the gain–bandwidth is known: amplifiers 10% slower than the resistor was chosen for leave −2.9 Ω at 1 kHz. Chosen a tenth over the slowest amplifier a ±30% spread allows, the inductor's Q at 1 kHz runs from 312 to 1,847 and is never negative.

filters · Gyrator
At 1.00 A forward the silicon-carbide Schottky hands the switch more charge than the silicon PN diode above 245 V. computed by solving, not by drawing. The charge each diode returns through the switch when it is forced to block, against the reverse voltage, at 1.00 A forward and 100 A/µs. The silicon-carbide Schottky's is its depletion capacitance charged to the rail, closed form checked against Simpson's rule: 11.8 nC at 100 V, 25.0 nC at 400 V, 30.9 nC at 600 V, the same at any current. The ultrafast silicon diode's is its stored minority charge, 18.1 nC at this current from the recovery's closed form, plus 1.59 nC of its own capacitance at 400 V. The two are equal at 245.3 V.

The recovery a Schottky does have

A Schottky diode stores no minority charge and is quoted as having no reverse recovery. It has a depletion capacitance instead, and to block it must be charged to the rail through the switch: a 650 V silicon-carbide part holds 25.0 nC at 400 V whatever current it was carrying. An ultrafast silicon diode with a 20 ns lifetime returns 19.7 nC at 1 A, so below 1.42 A forward the diode said to have no recovery hands the switch more charge, and at 125 °C the boundary falls to 632 mA. In energy the capacitive charge costs 64.9 per cent of V·Q rather than all of it, and the boundary is 799 mA.

transients · Reverse recovery
A 100 µs pulse through the transformer whose band runs 400 Hz to 81.3 kHz: it rises in 4.03 µs, droops 21.6% along its top, and swings 21.6% below zero after it. computed by solving, not by drawing, twice. A 1 V, 100 µs pulse into the 1:1 transformer of the band essays — 10 mH windings, coupling 0.99, 50 Ω each side — from residues (solid) and from a trapezoidal march of the netlist (dots, within 0.34% of the plateau). The upper edge, 81.3 kHz, is a rise of 4.03 µs from 10 to 90%; the lower edge, 400 Hz, is a droop with time constant 1/(2πfₗ) = 398 µs, and the top ends at 0.7842 of the 0.4901 V plateau against exp(−T/τₗ) = 0.7778. When the pulse ends the output falls by the full plateau and goes negative by what the top lost, then recovers with the same time constant.

The band counted in rise times

A transformer's band is two frequencies and its pulse response is two times, and they are the same two facts. Through the 1:1, k = 0.99 transformer whose band runs 400 Hz to 81.3 kHz, a 100 µs pulse rises in 4.03 µs — 0.35 over the upper band edge — and droops 21.6% along its top with a time constant of one over 2π times the lower edge, 398 µs; solved by residues and by a march of the netlist, they agree to a third of a per cent. Coupling buys rise time and nothing else: from 30.8 µs at k = 0.9 to 422 ns at 0.999, while the droop's time constant moves from 414 to 396 µs. The longest pulse that droops no more than 10%, over the rise, is 0.048 times the ratio of the upper band edge to the lower — the band ratio counted in rise times, 10.4 at k = 0.99 and 98.8 at 0.999. And the droop is not lost: a transformer has no gain at direct current, so the output swings below zero afterwards by exactly what the top lost, and the two areas match to 0.08%.

magnetics · Transformer
A 4:1 load on a cable of 3 dB matched loss costs the cable 1.53 dB more: the standing wave makes the line lossier, by up to the mismatch loss. computed by solving, not by drawing. The extra loss — power into the line over power reaching the load, beyond the matched line's — against the matched loss, for loads giving a standing-wave ratio of 1, 1.5, 2 and 4: 10·log((a² − |Γ|²)/(a(1 − |Γ|²))) − 10·log a (lines), with a 200 Ω load on a 50 Ω line solved exactly as a line whose loss is all series resistance (dots). At a ratio of 4 the extra is 0.109 dB on a 0.1 dB line, 0.82 on a 1 dB line, 1.53 on 3 dB and 1.94 on 20 dB — rising towards the mismatch loss 10·log(1/(1 − |Γ|²)) = 1.94 dB, which it reaches when the reflected wave is burnt before it can return.

The heat a standing wave leaves

A cable improves a mismatch's apparent return loss by twice its own loss because the reflection is burnt on the way back, and the burning is not free: it is extra loss in the cable. For one unit delivered to a load reflecting |Γ| through a line of matched loss a, the line must be fed (a² − |Γ|²)/(a(1 − |Γ|²)). A 4:1 load on a 3 dB cable costs 1.53 dB more than a matched one; on a 20 dB cable, 1.94 dB, which is exactly the mismatch loss, because by then every reflected watt is heat. Short lines multiply their dissipation by (1 + |Γ|²)/(1 − |Γ|²), long ones by 1/(1 − |Γ|²). Solved exactly on a line whose loss is in its conductor, the heat stands where the current does: the hottest point runs at the standing-wave ratio times a matched line's, 4.04 against 4.00, so a power rating limited by temperature falls by the ratio, not by the average.

lines · Line loss
Asked for 105% of the nose power, a tap changer that blocks on a wrong-signed step stops at 9.759 V and holds it; one that does not keeps raising, and the voltage keeps falling. Marched. The 10 V source behind 1 Ω of the regulator essays, its load drawing 105% of the line's 25 W nose power at the 10 V setpoint, regulated by a tap changer that raises the ratio by 1.25% every 5 s while the load is more than 20 mV low. With no blocking rule (dashed) it climbs past the nose ratio √(Rₗ/R) = 1.9518 and keeps going, to n = 3.250 and 8.61 V by 900 s, still falling; the integrating regulator of the earlier essay (dotted) collapses the same way, faster. With the rule (solid) the tap at n = 1.9625 is the first to lower the voltage, the regulator stops at 385 s, and the load holds 9.759 V — within a tap of the most this line can give it, 9.759 V. The setpoint is out of reach either way; the rule converts a collapse into a stall.

The rule that reads the sign of the gain

A regulator that raises a ratio whenever its load is low collapses the voltage once the load asks for more than the line's nose power, because past the nose raising the ratio lowers the voltage. The standard protection is a rule: after each tap, compare the voltage with the one before, and if it fell, stop. On a 10 V line asked for 105% of its 25 W, a 1.25% tap changer with the rule stops at n = 1.9625, the first tap past the nose, and holds 9.759 V — the most the line can give — where without it the ratio climbs to 3.25 and the voltage is 8.61 V and still falling. The rule is exact without noise and fragile with it, because it reads a difference that vanishes at the nose: with 3 mV of measurement noise it wrongly stops a raise that could have reached the setpoint 0.3% of the time at 98% of the nose and 15% at 99.5%. Trusting it to 1% costs margin — 97.9% of the nose at 3 mV, 79.9% at 10 mV — or coarser taps.

power · Voltage regulation
A Wien oscillator with a lamp for its lower gain arm, τ = 100 ms: the envelope rings 63.6 times in ten time constants at 63.6 Hz and settles at 1.000 V. computed by solving, not by drawing: three state equations marched through every cycle of the 1.59 kHz carrier. The peak at the network's node, over its settled value (solid), from a millivolt with a cold filament, against time in units of the filament's time constant τ = 100 ms. Cold, the 50 Ω filament asks for a gain of 11 and the output sits on the 12 V rail until the filament has warmed. It leaves the rail after 1.99 ms, falls through the operating point, overshoots and rings at 63.6 Hz with a damping ratio of 0.0225. The dashed bound is the linear loop's decay, exp(−(1 + m)t/2τ) with m = 0.8, and it contains neither the carrier's frequency nor the amplitude. The settled amplitude, 1.000 V at the node and 3.00 V at the output, is the one at which the filament is at 250 Ω.

The lamp that has to be slow

A small lamp in a Wien oscillator's gain network adjusts the gain to whatever each unit needs, so the margin a limiter spends is no longer spent, and the price is an amplitude loop of its own. The envelope is an integrator and the filament is a lag, which makes a second-order loop that rings at the square root of 2ω₀m/τ and decays at (1 + m)/2τ. The filament's ripple at twice the carrier is the only distortion, 0.201/ω₀τ. So the slowness that lowers the distortion lengthens the settling in exact proportion: distortion times settling is 0.163 cycles at any time constant, and 0.01 per cent takes a second at 1.59 kHz and 82 seconds at 20 Hz.

applied · Oscillator
A stage with its second pole at 3 times the bandwidth the product predicts settles within 0.1% in 5.06τ, against 6.91τ for the one-pole stage the product describes. computed by solving, not by drawing: the step of a stage whose amplifier has a second pole at r = 3 times GBW/G (solid), against the one-pole stage of the same product (dashed). Time is in units of τ = G/(2π·GBW). Settled within 0.1% at 5.055τ, against ln(1000) = 6.908τ, with the netlist of a gain-of-ten stage agreeing at 5.057τ. The stage with the second pole is usually faster, whatever it does on the way.

The gain that stops making a stage faster

The gain–bandwidth product says a stage of gain G settles in time proportional to G, and a stage with a second pole does something else. Below r = 4 the closed loop's poles are a complex pair whose real part is half the sum of the open loop's, π times the second pole's frequency, with neither the gain nor the product in it: a 1 MHz amplifier with a 0.5 MHz second pole takes 4.10 µs to settle within 0.1 per cent at unity gain, 4.04 at two and 4.22 at five, where the product says 1.10 to 5.50. Above the knee at G = 4·GBW/f₂ the product returns. In between lies the fastest stage, r = 3.32 for a 0.1 per cent band, which settles in 3.44 time constants against the one-pole stage's 6.91: half the time, and not at the r that gives the widest band.

feedback · Gain-bandwidth
Eight stages of damping 0.8 against eight one-pole stages of the same bandwidth: settled within 1% at 18.75τ against 16.00τ, with 2.02% of overshoot. computed by solving, not by drawing: the step of eight identical second-order stages of damping ζ = 0.8, each with its half-power bandwidth at ω = 1, marched (solid), against eight one-pole stages with the same bandwidth from the closed Erlang step (dashed). Within 1% at 18.75τ against 16.00τ, the overshoot being 2.02% and each stage's delay 1.393 against one. At ζ = 1 the march agrees with the Erlang step of order sixteen.

The stage that overshoots a little

A stage with a little overshoot settles sooner than a one-pole stage of the same bandwidth, 3.53 time constants against 4.61 within one per cent, and a chain of them should do better still, since a stage at the right damping adds almost no spread. It does not. The saving is 17 per cent at two stages, 11 at four and 2 at eight, and at sixteen the chain is 5 per cent slower than the one-pole chain, because a stage's extra delay adds as the number of stages and the spread it removes adds only as the root. The best damping stays near 0.83 at every length, just short of letting the overshoot out of the band. In frequency the same stages are five times flatter at their best, at a different damping, and so the two edges of a chain ask for two different stages.

limits · Model edges
Scaling a Chebyshev 5 with real 4 nV/√Hz amplifiers everywhere: 118.18 dB at equal maxima and 118.32 dB with no gain stages at all, so the gains cost 0.14 dB, where silent ones promised 2.16 dB. computed by solving, not by drawing: the dynamic range on ±15 V of a fifth-order Chebyshev with gains d^α in front of each section and after the last, against α. Every amplifier has a voltage noise of 4 nV/√Hz, the sections' own and the stages', and each stage carries a kilohm in its divider or lower feedback arm (solid). With every amplifier and gain silent (dashed), equal maxima recovers 2.16 dB over no scaling, 142.44 dB to 144.60 dB. With real ones: 118.32 dB with no stages, and with stages 115.75 dB at α = 0.2, 116.27 dB at α = 0.4, 116.86 dB at α = 0.6, 117.50 dB at α = 0.8, 118.18 dB at α = 1. Merely having the stages is a step down at the smallest α, since each is a real amplifier in the path, and the curve climbs from there to equal maxima. The response is unchanged to a part in a billion at every α.

The floor the gains bring

Equal-maxima scaling recovers 2.16 decibels of a fifth-order Chebyshev's range when its gains make no noise and its amplifiers make none either. Give every amplifier in the circuit a voltage noise of 4 nV/√Hz, the sections' own and the stages', and the unscaled filter reads 118.32 dB over a 1 MHz band and the scaled one 118.18: the last gain has nothing after it to filter its noise, so it multiplies 4 µV of wide-band noise by 2.83, and the lower ceiling is spent paying for it. At 1 nV/√Hz scaling costs 6.61 dB, and at 16 nV/√Hz it gains 0.99, so a noisier amplifier makes it look better. A narrower measuring band does not rescue it. On a Chebyshev 7, with a node 13.26 times the input, the same arrangement gains 6.15 dB.

noise · Dynamic range
A reference 0° behind the excitation at 20 kHz, after a calibration at +1000 µε: matched, the worst error is 5.79 ppm; with a tenth of a per cent of screen mismatch, 0.607%. computed by solving, not by drawing: the error of a synchronous reading of a 350 Ω quarter bridge through ten metres of screened pair, against the strain read, with the reference 0° from the excitation at the bridge and a shunt calibration at +1000 µε through the same reference, for a matched screen (solid) and for 0.01 and 0.1 per cent of mismatch. The calibration takes out cos(φ − θ), because it multiplies the signal at every strain. It cannot take out a voltage that does not scale with the strain, and the mismatch's leak is such a voltage: a hyperbola through zero at the calibration strain. Worst over ±2000 µε: 0%: 5.79 ppm, 0.01%: 606 ppm, 0.1%: 0.607%.

The reference that should be late

A carrier amplifier's reference is taken from the excitation because that is what the output is meant to be in phase with, and nothing says that is where it belongs. A screen mismatch's leak arrives late by the common-mode node's lag and the difference's together, 525 ns on ten metres of pair and a 350 Ω bridge, so a reference on the excitation reads sin 3.7° of it at 20 kHz: 0.607 per cent of error at a tenth of a per cent of mismatch, and 72.6 parts per million with the reference 3.7° late. The null is a delay rather than a phase and does not move with the mismatch, and a delayed reference allows about five times the carrier on any mismatched screen. How exactly it must be held narrows as mismatch times carrier.

applied · Bridge
The same 15 pF spread along 2 kΩ of line, on a 1 ns edge: with 1 of its branches copied the output is flat to 1.07%, against 11.2% with one trimmer alone. computed by solving, not by drawing: the response to a 1 ns edge of a ten-to-one divider whose lower arm is 100 pF direct and 15 pF along a 2 kΩ resistive line, with one trimmer (dashed) and with the first 1 branch of the line's exact partial-fraction expansion copied into the upper arm (solid). The expansion's time constants are 12.2 ns, 1.35 ns, 486 ps and so on, as 1/(2k − 1)². Inverted numerically by Talbot's method, and the line itself checked against a netlist of sections.

The branches a square root needs

A resistive cable's late charge is a continuum and not one branch, and the partial fractions of its tanh are an exact description of it: 81.1 per cent of the capacitance behind a time constant of 12.2 ns, 9.01 per cent behind a ninth of that, 3.24 behind a twenty-fifth, all through the same kilohm. So a divider's upper arm can copy it one piece at a time. On a 1 ns edge one trimmer alone is 11.2 per cent out, one copied branch 1.07, two 0.252 and four 0.0353. The first branch does most of the work and the uncopied capacitance falls only as one over the count; what saves the rest is that a branch faster than the edge is averaged away. Faster edges ask for more branches, and the tolerance on the first ends the series before the arithmetic does.

instruments · Compensation
Paralleling a 4 nV/√Hz amplifier on a 50 Ω source, summed through 100 Ω from each: the best is 1.19 dB at 140 parts, against 1.14 dB at 134 parts with a perfect summing node. computed by solving, not by drawing: the noise figure from a 50 Ω source against the number of amplifiers in parallel, each 4 nV/√Hz and 0.6 pA/√Hz, with a perfect summing node (dashed) and with their outputs averaged through 100 Ω each into one node (solid), which adds a thermal 4kTR/N at the node. The summing resistors' noise falls as 1/N exactly as the amplifiers' voltage noise does, so their ratio is the same at every N, and a summing resistor comparable with the resistance an amplifier's voltage noise is worth is a constant factor on that term.

The resistors that sum a hundred amplifiers

A hundred amplifiers in parallel across a 50 Ω source are an ideal transformer of ratio ten, and the summing network between them and the output is where the comparison was left. Its resistors turn out to be the least of it. N resistors averaging N outputs make the noise of R/N, falling exactly as the amplifiers' voltage noise does, so the resistor equal to a 4 nV/√Hz amplifier is about a kilohm at every N, and at 133 parts 200 Ω costs only a tenth of a decibel. The stage that was forgotten is whatever reads the sum. Averaging leaves it alone, so a following amplifier as good as one of the parts costs 12.14 dB, and each part needs a gain of 26 to bring that under a tenth. Parallel amplifiers then match a transformer with one ohm of winding.

noise · Device noise
A follower section of Q = 5 on an amplifier 100 times the corner: +4.79% as designed from the formula; designed for that amplifier, exact at it, and +1.64% and −0.966% on parts 30% slow and fast. computed by solving, not by drawing: the realised Q of a unity-gain Sallen–Key section against the actual amplifier's gain–bandwidth, relative to the typical value it was chosen for, from the poles of the netlist. Designed from the textbook formula (solid): +6.51% at 0.7, +4.79% at 1, +3.78% at 1.3. Predistorted, with its capacitance ratio and resistors found by iteration on the netlist so that the typical part is exact (dashed): +1.64% at 0.7, exact at 1, −0.966% at 1.3. Predistortion moves the line down without changing its slope much: it removes the error the amplifier has in common and leaves what differs between amplifiers.

The Q designed for the amplifier

A follower section's Q comes out 4.79 per cent high at Q = 5 with an amplifier a hundred times the corner, and nothing stops a designer asking for 4.771 so that the real circuit lands on 5.000. That removes the error the amplifier has in common and leaves what differs between amplifiers: parts 30 per cent slow and fast read +1.64 and −0.97 per cent. So the exchange rate is the spread itself, and it is large. One per cent of Q across ±30 per cent asks for 725 times the corner from the formula and 196 designed for the part. The design runs out at a definite ratio, 7.2 times at Q = 5, below which no value of its parts reaches the Q wanted. On a whole Chebyshev 5 the passband error falls from 1.43 dB to nothing on a typical part and 0.55 on a slow one.

filters · Q enhancement
An exponential stage at 20% output, with a loop gain of 1: second 2.5% from 4.97%, third 0.0415% from 0.165%, and fifth 0.68 ppm from 0.814 ppm. computed by solving, not by drawing: the harmonics of an exponential stage with emitter resistance, gm·Re = T, solved point by point on the implicit curve and transformed, at a fixed output fundamental of a fifth of the quiescent current, for T = 1 (dots a) against no feedback (dots b). 2: 2.5%, against 4.97%; 3: 0.0415%, against 0.165%; 4: 5.36 ppm, against 40.9 ppm; 5: 0.68 ppm, against 0.814 ppm; 6: 0.0202 ppm, against 0.0135 ppm; 7: 0.000245 ppm, against 0.000192 ppm; 8: 0.0000478 ppm, against 0.00000239 ppm; 9: 0.00000178 ppm, against 2.62e-8 ppm. The series gives the second and third at small drive: the implicit function's Taylor coefficients are 1/(1 + T), 1/2(1 + T)³ and (1 − 2T)/6(1 + T)⁵, and they agree. The third therefore has a null at T = ½, and past that it has the opposite sign, and feedback that reduces the low orders puts some of them back into the high ones.

The fifth a resistor adds

Local feedback's reputation is that it reduces distortion, and on the second order it does: 4.97 per cent falls to 2.5 at a loop gain of one and 0.46 at ten, with the output held fixed. The third has a null at a loop gain of exactly a half and comes back with its sign changed. And from the fifth upward, a harmonic rises above its open-loop value before it falls: the fifth 1.42 times, the sixth 5.23, the seventh 24.6, the ninth 960, peaking at a loop gain between six and twenty. The second order, carried back through the resistor, mixes with the signal and makes them. A total-harmonic reading shows only improvement throughout, because the second dominates it. A differential pair has no second order to carry back, and its fifth never passes its open-loop value.

semiconductors · Distortion

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Model rangeLoop gainComponent toleranceMeasurement conditionPhase marginGain–bandwidth productJohnson noiseSettling timeEquivalent series resistanceLoadingParasiticsClosed form

All concepts