The collection

Every essay

One idea per essay, ordered so that the earlier ones set up the later ones — but nothing here depends on being read in sequence. Page 1 of 6.

Circuits that do a job, and the range they do it over

Thirteen fields measure an element and the edge it has. This one composes several of them into a circuit with a purpose and asks the same question of the whole, where the answer is almost never the worst of the parts: an oscillator whose design condition is an exact equality no resistor can hold, a regulator that is a voltage source below three kilohertz and a capacitor above it, a threshold whose hysteresis is set by the noise underneath it, and a bridge that is linear near one point. It needed machinery the other twelve did not — a netlist with a nonlinearity in it, marched forward in time — because an oscillator's frequency comes from the linear part and its amplitude from the nonlinear part, and no analysis that drops either one returns both.

The closed-loop poles at a gain of 3.05. The locus of the two poles as the amplifier's gain runs from 2.7 to 3.3. It crosses the imaginary axis at a gain of 3.000000 — bisected on the netlist, not quoted — and at 3.05 the real part is 2.500e+2 radians a second, which is an envelope multiplying by 1.17015 every cycle. The crosses are the closed form ω₀(k−3)/2 and they sit on the measured circles.

The gain that is exactly one

An oscillator is designed by making the loop gain one at the frequency where the phase is zero. The gain at which this circuit's poles reach the imaginary axis is 3.000000000000, bisected on the netlist — an equality, not a range. A gain three per cent high multiplies the envelope by 1.0987 every cycle and reaches the rails in 61 milliseconds; three per cent low divides it by the same factor. A one per cent resistor cannot hold the condition, and neither can any other component.

7 figures
Started from a millivolt at a gain of 3.20. The output grows by 1.8804 a cycle — the factor the poles give — and then stops, at 858 mV of amplitude and 1.58 kHz. The lower panel is the envelope on a logarithmic axis, where the linear model's prediction is the straight line that keeps going. What ends it is the diode pair across the feedback resistor, and no direct-current analysis of this circuit returns that number.

The amplitude nothing linear predicts

A linear model's poles say the envelope grows by 1.88 a cycle and never say when it stops. Two diodes across the feedback resistor stop it, at 858 millivolts — a number no pole, no transfer function and no bias point contains. Getting it needs a netlist with a nonlinearity in it, marched forward in time, and that pairing is what the whole field is built on.

8 figures
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.

7 figures
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.

5 figures
1000 µF across a 100 Ω load, rectified from 17 V peak. The output sits at 15.69 V with 1.331 V of ripple, against the 1.569 V the expression I/2fC gives — 15.1% high, because the capacitor is being recharged for part of the cycle rather than discharging throughout it. The lower panel is why: the diode conducts for 28.8° of each half cycle and carries 2.10 A at the peak, which is 13.4 times the 157 mA the load draws.

The direct voltage that is a sawtooth

A rectifier and a reservoir capacitor make what everybody calls a direct voltage. Marched with the diodes in the netlist, a thousand microfarads across a hundred ohms gives 15.69 volts with 1.33 volts of ripple on it, against the 1.57 the textbook expression predicts. The expression is high by the fraction of the cycle the diode conducts for — measured at 0.94 to 0.96 of it across two sweeps — and it has no opinion at all about the quantity that actually sizes the transformer, which is a peak diode current 13.4 times the current the load draws.

7 figures
A five-volt regulator's output impedance, with 1.00 Ω of series resistance. 0.430 mΩ at direct current, 1.95 Ω at 10.0 kHz — a factor of 4.52e+3 — and it has already doubled by 4.81 Hz. The upper curve is the same circuit with its loop opened, and the ratio between them is the loop gain. A regulator is a voltage source below a frequency and the datasheet's milliohms are the value at the bottom of it.

A source below a frequency

A five-volt regulator's output impedance is 0.43 milliohms, which is the number a datasheet quotes. It has doubled by 4.8 hertz, is ten times worse by 27, and reaches 1.95 ohms at ten kilohertz — four and a half thousand times its own specification, and higher there than the same circuit with its feedback loop cut. Two routes to that curve, sharing only the netlist, agree to a part in ten to the thirteenth.

8 figures
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.

9 figures
Rejection is not a property of the loop. The same regulator with the same loop gain and the same 46.5° of phase margin, drawn twice. With the amplifier's output referred to ground the rail reaches the output at -67.3 dB at the bottom and 5.79 dB at 10.0 kHz — where it is amplified. Referred to the rail instead, every point is 60.00 dB lower, which is 20 log(gm·ro) for the pass device and not a design choice.

What gets through from the rail

A regulator's job is to hold its output still while its input moves, and the measurement says it does that well at ten hertz, badly at a kilohertz, and not at all at ten kilohertz — where this one puts out 1.9 times what arrives. Then the same netlist with one node moved, the same loop gain and the same 46.5 degrees of margin, rejects 60.009 decibels better at every frequency in six decades. The sixty decibels is the pass device's own intrinsic gain and it is not a design choice.

7 figures
A threshold crossed once, in 20k samples of noise. With no hysteresis the comparator changes its mind 22.7 times on average and as many as 29, on a signal that crosses the threshold once. The vertical bars are the range over twelve seeds. The expected number of extra transitions falls below a tenth at 3.57 standard deviations — so the hysteresis a threshold needs is set by the noise under it and not by the signal over it.

Two thresholds because there is a floor

A comparator with one threshold, watching a slow signal cross it once, changes its mind 22.7 times on average and as many as 29 — because there is noise under the signal and no threshold is ever crossed once. Hysteresis fixes it, and how much is needed is a multiple of the noise's own standard deviation rather than a voltage: 3.57 of them here. The multiple grows with how long the threshold is watched, and slowly — a hundredfold longer record needs three times the hysteresis, not a hundred times.

7 figures
A comparator's delay, at a divider ratio of 0.50. Each nanosecond of comparator delay adds 2.650 nanoseconds to the period — measured as a slope between two delays, both exact multiples of the marching step — against the 2.667 that 4/(1+β) gives and the 2 that counting the delay twice gives. A 50 ns comparator therefore holds the frequency to one per cent only below 75.0 kHz.

The period a delay lengthens

Feed a comparator's output back through a resistor to the capacitor on its own input and the two thresholds stop defending a decision and start setting a period. The closed form is two RC times the log of one plus beta over one minus beta, and a marched circuit recovers it as the step shortens. A comparator that responds fifty nanoseconds late does not add fifty nanoseconds to each half cycle: it adds 4/(1+beta) times the delay to the period, 2.65 here against the 2 that counting it twice gives, because during the delay the capacitor keeps going the way it was going.

9 figures
A 350 Ω bridge, with ideal leads. The straight line is the expression every textbook gives, Vδ/4; the curve is the solve. They part company at half the fractional change — 0.498% at 1.0% — so the tangent is worth one per cent only up to 2.020%. Driving the bridge from a current source instead halves the departure at every point and moves that edge to 4.040%.

The bridge that is linear near one point

The expression for a Wheatstone bridge's output is V delta over four, and the solve says it is V delta over two times two plus delta — low by half the fractional change, exactly, at every change tested. So the tangent is worth one per cent only up to a two per cent change and a tenth of a per cent only up to two tenths. Driving the bridge from a current source instead halves the departure at every point and doubles both edges, which is a change of one component and no change at all to the four resistors being measured.

7 figures
Twenty nanoseconds of skew is 0.28% of duty, not 0.40. computed by solving, not by drawing. The duty cycle of a relaxation oscillator whose comparator takes longer to go one way than the other, marched, against the expression that lengthens each half cycle by its own delay. The two part company immediately and by a constant factor of about 1.42: during a delay the capacitor keeps charging past the threshold it already crossed, so the next half cycle starts further out and takes longer, and the two halves partly cancel. At 200 ns of skew on a 2585 ns period the duty is 52.805 per cent where the expression says 54.004. The open circles are the same quantity in closed form — the overshoot is V(1 − (1 − β)e^(−d/τ)) and the next half starts from it — which the march reproduces to parts in ten thousand.

The delay that is two delays

Modelling one comparator delay applied to both transitions makes the two half cycles equal by construction, and the fix is a change of one line. Made, the duty cycle moves by 0.28 per cent for twenty nanoseconds of skew rather than the 0.40 the obvious expression gives, more hysteresis improves the duty cycle and worsens the volt-seconds at the same time, and ten nanoseconds of skew saturates a hundred-turn core in 231 cycles.

8 figures
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.

7 figures
A tenth of a per cent of lead is 999 µε of strain that is not there. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 350 Ω quarter bridge at zero load, against the resistance in each lead. With both leads in the changing arm the output is 4.99500 mV at 350 mΩ — an apparent fractional change of 0.1998%, which at a gauge factor of 2 is 999 microstrain. With one lead in that arm and one in the arm beside it the output is zero to the last bit, at every lead resistance drawn. The lower panel is what the second arrangement costs: the sensitivity falls as 1/(1 + Rlead/R), which is 0.100% at the same lead and is a calibration constant rather than a drift.

The leads that are in the bridge

A strain gauge on the end of two long wires cannot be told from a strain gauge under load: both leads in the changing arm is bit for bit the same netlist as a quarter bridge whose fractional change is larger by twice the lead over the gauge, which at 350 milliohms on a 350 ohm gauge is 999 microstrain that is not there. Moving one of those leads into the arm beside it leaves the output at exactly zero for every lead resistance drawn, and turns a twenty-kelvin drift of 76.8 microstrain into 0.077. That factor is two over the strain being read — 999 at a thousand microstrain and 9990 at two hundred — and it costs 0.100 per cent of sensitivity.

7 figures
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.

7 figures
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.

8 figures
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.

8 figures
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.

7 figures
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.

7 figures
Two leads nobody counts cost 1995 parts per million, and two more leads remove all of it. computed by solving, not by drawing. The error in the reported strain against the resistance in each of the two excitation leads, at 1000 µε on a quarter bridge of 350 Ω excited at 10 V. With four wires the instrument takes the excitation to be the supply's voltage, so every reading is scaled by R/(R + 2r): 1995 parts per million at 0.35 Ω, 54029 at 10. Two more leads brought back from the bridge's own terminals, carrying only the instrument's input current, leave 3.5e-4 parts per million. Exciting with a current instead of a voltage does the same thing with no extra leads at all, because the lead resistance is in series with a source that does not care.

The two leads nobody counts

The leads that are in the bridge moved a lead out of the changing arm and turned a 999-microstrain error into nothing. The two leads carrying the excitation are still there, and they scale every reading: 0.35 ohms each on a 350-ohm bridge is 1,995 parts per million, exactly −2r/(R + 2r), the same on a full bridge as on a quarter one, and drifting 0.153 microstrain over twenty kelvin — twice what the three-wire fix left behind. Two more wires brought back from the bridge's own terminals leave 0.00035 parts per million. So does exciting the bridge with a current, which needs no extra wires at all.

6 figures
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.

6 figures
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.

5 figures
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.

6 figures
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.

6 figures
A cable's carrier limit is its conductors' matching, not its capacitance. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 350 Ω quarter bridge at 1000 µε, excited at a carrier frequency, with 10 metres of cable at 100 pF a metre on each output terminal. Each terminal sees the two arms meeting there in parallel against that capacitance, so each lags by arctan(2πf·(r/2)·C) with a corner at 909 kHz — and with the two conductors matched the lag CANCELS in the difference: -0.117° where each terminal has -5.71°. A mismatch does not cancel, and it arrives multiplied by the ratio of the excitation to the signal, which at 1000 µε is 2000: at 1 per cent the phase is 40.3° at a hundred kilohertz. So the excitation a 10-metre cable allows for 200 parts per million falls from 205 kHz matched to 1.82 kHz at 1 per cent. And it depends on the strain being measured — 183 Hz at 100 µε, 547 Hz at 300 µε, 1.82 kHz at 1000 µε, 5.45 kHz at 3000 µε — because the amplification is the reciprocal of the signal.

The carrier a cable allows

A carrier-frequency amplifier removes an instrument's offset drift by exciting the bridge with alternating current, and the cable that was a resistance at direct current becomes a capacitance. Both output terminals see the same arms and the same capacitance, so the lag cancels in the difference: ten metres matched leaves 0.15 degrees at a hundred kilohertz where each terminal has 6.3. What does not cancel is the mismatch between the two conductors, arriving multiplied by the ratio of the excitation to the signal — two thousand at a thousand microstrain — so one per cent of it takes the allowed carrier from 205 kilohertz to 1.8.

5 figures
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.

5 figures
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.

6 figures
A tenth of a per cent of screen mismatch on the gauge's side cancels the pair's own phase: 18.2 kHz becomes 143 kHz. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 350 Ω quarter bridge at 1000 µε read through ten metres of screened pair: 100 pF a metre from each conductor to the screen, Cs, and 50 pF a metre between the two, Cp. The loss of the synchronously demodulated reading, 1 − cos φ, against the excitation frequency: for the capacitance between the conductors alone, for the screen capacitances alone with a mismatch of 0.1% on the gauge's side, for both together, and for a matched screen with nothing between. For a 200 ppm budget they allow 18.2 kHz, 18.3 kHz, 143 kHz and 205 kHz. The pair's capacitance lags the reading; extra screen capacitance on the gauge's own terminal leads it, by an amount divided by the signal, so at a mismatch of δ·Cp/Cs the two cancel to first order.

The capacitance that is already a difference

A screened pair has capacitance from each conductor to the screen, which cancels in a bridge's difference when the two match, and capacitance between the conductors, which is a difference from the start and cannot cancel. Ten metres of it between a 350 Ω quarter bridge and its carrier amplifier allows 18.2 kHz for a 200 ppm loss, against 205 kHz for the screen alone. The two phases are ωR·ΔC/δ and ωR·C, the same slope with one divided by the signal, so a screen mismatch of δ·Cp/Cs on the gauge's own terminal cancels the pair's lag exactly: 0.10% at 1000 µε takes the limit to 143 kHz. That is what a carrier amplifier's capacitance balance finds when it nulls the quadrature — and because the mismatch's phase changes sign with the strain and the pair's does not, the balance holds in tension above half the strain it was set at and never in compression.

6 figures
An unregulated supply's output against its load: 3.38 Ω of slope with perfect parts, 3.64 with 0.3 Ω in the winding, 3.32 with it in the capacitor. computed by solving, not by drawing, marched with the diodes in the netlist: a 17 V peak centre-tapped rectifier into 1000 µF, loaded from 200 Ω down to 25 Ω. The mean output with perfect parts falls from 15.99 V at 80 mA to 14.33 V at 573 mA, an average slope of 3.380 Ω against the textbook's 1/(4fC) = 5 Ω, drawn dashed without its diode drop. With 0.3 Ω in each half-winding the slope is 3.642 Ω; with the same 0.3 Ω in the capacitor it is 3.317 Ω. The slider is the resistance.

The resistance a supply's regulation counts

An unregulated supply's output falls as its load rises, and the slope is its output resistance: 4.17 Ω at 80 mA and 2.80 at 575 for a thousand microfarads, below the textbook's 1/(4fC) = 5 Ω and falling, because the diodes conduct for longer as the load grows. A winding resistance adds to that slope at about its own value, 0.94 to 1.18 of it; a capacitor's adds −0.14 to −0.25. The guess that each should count by the share of the cycle it carries current in — a sixth and five sixths — is wrong in both places, and the right weighting is the mean current each carries: all of the load's through the winding, none through the capacitor.

5 figures
Calibrated at the carrier, a matched cable allows 121 kHz where its phase allowed 16.5 kHz. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 350 Ω quarter bridge read through ten metres of screened pair, excited over leads of 0.35 Ω and 3 µH each with 500 pF between them. Solid: the worst error of a synchronous reading over strains from −2000 to +2000 µε after a calibration at +1000 µε at the operating carrier, with the reference taken from the source at the instrument; dashed, from the bridge's own terminals on sense wires; dotted, the phase measure 1 − cos φ the earlier readings of this cable used. For a 200 ppm budget: 16.5 kHz by phase, 119 kHz calibrated against the source and 121 kHz calibrated against the bridge.

What a calibration at the carrier removes

The phase a cable puts on a carrier-excited bridge is a loss of 1 − cos φ, and a loss that is the same at every strain is a gain error — which a shunt calibration at the operating carrier exists to remove. Calibrated there, a synchronous reading of a quarter bridge through ten metres of matched screened pair allows 121 kHz for 200 ppm over ±2000 µε, where the phase measure allowed 16.5; the capacitance between the conductors, which no matching could improve, stops mattering. Where the reference is taken — at the instrument or from sense wires at the bridge — moves that by 1.2 per cent. What calibration cannot touch is a screen mismatch: its leak is a fixed voltage, not a fixed gain, and a hundredth of a per cent of it takes 121 kHz back to 11.5.

5 figures
A 1% mismatch in the cable reads as 3.0% of full-scale displacement, at every frequency. computed by solving, not by drawing. A capacitive displacement sensor — two 10 pF plates driven at ±5 V in antiphase facing a common electrode — read by a charge amplifier through two metres of three-conductor cable with 30 pF a metre between each excitation conductor and the sense conductor. With the two cross-capacitances mismatched by 1 per cent and the sensor centred, the reading's in-phase part (solid) is 3.00 per cent of full scale at every carrier from 100 Hz to 1 MHz: the cable is a sensor capacitance, and its mismatch a displacement. The quadrature part (dashed), which the cable's resistance makes, rises with frequency and a synchronous detector rejects it. With each conductor in its own screen the cross-capacitance is gone and so is the error.

The sensor that is the capacitance

Read a capacitive displacement sensor through the same kind of cable that limited a strain-gauge bridge's carrier, and the roles exchange. On the bridge, a 1% mismatch in the cable's capacitance was a quadrature leak that grew as the square of the carrier and could be escaped by a lower one. On a sensor of two 10 pF plates it is 3.0% of full-scale displacement, in phase, at every carrier from 100 Hz to 1 MHz — because a capacitance between an excitation conductor and the sense conductor is in parallel with the measurand and is a sensor capacitance. No detector phase separates it and no carrier escapes it; only geometry does. Screen each conductor separately and there is nothing left to mismatch.

5 figures
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.

6 figures
With a 300 ps skew and 5 mV of noise a core with 100 ns of headroom saturates after 502 periods on average — the 500 the skew alone gives — and one drive in a hundred by 184. Seeded: 2,000 drives of an ideal core by the event map at β = 0.5, 5 mV of threshold noise and a comparator skew of 300 ps, each run until the summed high-minus-low time leaves ±100 ns. A histogram of the counts on logarithmic bins, against the closed-form first-passage distribution, between two barriers, of a walk with drift 0.200 ns a period and spread 1.89 ns per root period. Mean 501.9 against 499.9; quantiles 1% 184, 10% 275, 50% 463; the empirical and closed-form cumulative distributions differ by at most 0.014.

The count a core survives

A relaxation oscillator with a 300 ps comparator skew and 5 mV of threshold noise saturates an ideal core with 100 ns of volt-second headroom after 502 periods on average — the 500 the skew alone gives — and one drive in a hundred by 184. The mean does not see the noise at all until the noise is large enough to saturate the core the other way first; the early tail sees nothing else. Every skew and noise level falls on one curve in one ratio, the skew's count over the count at which its ramp overtakes the walk. Read as a burst, a thousand periods with one failure in a thousand allows 150 ps of skew with no noise, 93.5 ps at a millivolt, and none at all above 2.41 mV.

6 figures
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.

6 figures
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.

5 figures
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.

5 figures
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.

5 figures
Forty thousand periods at β = 0.5: each period's error against the same period's duty error, correlated by 0.008. Seeded: forty thousand periods of the event map, β = 0.5, 5 mV of threshold noise; one in twenty is drawn, each scaled by its own standard deviation (3.4 ns for the period, 2.49 ns for the high-minus-low time). A period is three draws with coefficients A, A + B, B and its duty error the same three with A, B − A, −B, so their covariance is σ²[A² + (A + B)(B − A) − B²], which is zero at every β. Measured, the correlation is 0.0080, inside the ±0.0100 that forty thousand samples resolve. With normal draws, uncorrelated is independent: the cloud is round.

Every draw shared, and nothing in common

A relaxation oscillator's period error and its volt-second error are made of the same threshold draws, and they are exactly uncorrelated. A period weighs its three draws A, A + B and B; the high half less the low weighs the same three A, B − A and −B; the products sum to A² + B² − A² − B², which is zero at every hysteresis. Over forty thousand periods the measured correlation is 0.008 against a resolution of 0.010. What the two do share is one draw with the period on either side, ±0.157 at β = 0.5, and over any whole burst those two lags cancel term for term. Four thousand bursts judged against twenty-five pairs of limits fail both ways exactly as often as the product of the two rates says: the margins specified separately double-count nothing.

5 figures
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.

5 figures
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.

6 figures

Where a signal becomes a number

A converter is an element in the netlist like any other: it has an anti-alias filter made of the same components as every filter here, a reference a resistor's Johnson noise sits on, and an aperture. What it also has is three boundaries of kinds the rest of the site does not carry — one with no gradient at all, one that stops being a floor and becomes distortion, and one whose variable is a duration.

A 9.0 kHz input sampled at 10 kHz arrives as 1.0 kHz. computed by solving, not by drawing. The dots are the samples. The input at 9.00 kHz is above half the 10 kHz rate, and every dot also lies on the 1.00 kHz curve drawn beside it — the two sample sequences differ by 9.3e-15, which is the arithmetic and not a small effect. Nothing is attenuated and nothing is distorted: the samples are the samples of a different signal, at full amplitude, and there is no measurement of them that could say which one was there.

The frequency a sample rate invents

Every other boundary in this field is a model getting gradually worse. This one has no gradient at all: below half the sample rate a set of samples has one sinusoid through it, above half the sample rate it has another, and the two sets of numbers are identical to three parts in ten thousand billion. Nothing is attenuated, nothing is distorted, and there is no measurement of the samples that could say which signal was there.

6 figures
What the reconstruction returns, either side of 5.0 kHz. computed by solving, not by drawing. The Whittaker–Shannon sum is evaluated on the samples and compared with two things: the signal that was sampled, and the frequency the samples report. Below 5.00 kHz these are the same curve and the error is 4.88e-3 — the truncation of the sum at sixty-four samples either side, and nothing else. Above it they part: at 9.00 kHz the reconstruction is 1.59e-3 from the alias and 2.000 from the input. The small number is the interesting one. A reconstruction cannot be improved into the right answer, because it is already an exact answer to a different question.

An exact answer to a different question

The reconstruction that turns samples back into a signal is normally introduced as the thing that recovers what was there. Measured on both sides of half the sample rate it does something more interesting than failing: above the boundary it returns the alias to 1.6 parts in a thousand, which is the same accuracy it returns the input with below the boundary, and it is wrong about the input by twice the amplitude. Its error is not a degradation. It is exactness about something else.

6 figures
The sample rate each anti-alias filter demands for 80 dB. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 20 kHz passband, and each filter must be 80 dB down by the frequency that folds back into it. The required rate follows, and it is a property of the filter rather than of the converter: Bessel 3.53× Nyquist, Butterworth 2.08×, Chebyshev 1.53×. The elliptic design at a selectivity of 0.8 is refused: its equiripple stopband has a floor at -74.1 dB, which is above the requirement at every frequency, so no sample rate satisfies it. At a selectivity of 0.5 the same order needs 1.34×. The floor is the selectivity's, not the order's.

What the filter in front costs

The filter that keeps a converter honest is normally chosen for its skirt. Measured against one requirement — eighty decibels down by the frequency that folds back into a 20 kHz band — the choice is not a decibel or two of skirt but a factor in the clock: Bessel demands 3.53 times Nyquist, Butterworth 2.08, Chebyshev 1.53. And one design is refused outright, because an elliptic stopband is a floor rather than a slope and no sample rate reaches past a floor.

6 figures
Where a converter stops measuring the signal and starts measuring the resistor. computed by solving, not by drawing. The quantisation floor is q/√12 and halves with every bit; the Johnson floor of a 1 kΩ source in 100 kHz is 1.266 µV and does not move. They cross at 18.80 bits. Below that the converter is the limit; above it the resistor is, and a further bit buys a more precise measurement of thermal noise. A resolution quoted without a source impedance and a bandwidth is not a resolution — which is the same sentence the instruments field makes about a probe.

The floor a converter sets

A converter's resolution is quoted as a number of bits, which is a property of the converter. What it can actually resolve is a property of the circuit in front of it, and the two cross: measured against the Johnson noise of a 1 kΩ source in 100 kHz of bandwidth, the quantiser is the limit up to 18.80 bits and the resistor is the limit above it. Past that crossing every further bit buys a more precise measurement of thermal noise.

6 figures
6.02 bits + 1.76 dB, measured — and the overload that is blamed on it. computed by solving, not by drawing. A coherent sinusoid is quantised and the ratio is read off the error sequence, never from the formula. One step inside full scale the two agree to 0.15 dB at every bit count from 8 to 16. Driven to exactly full scale the same converter measures 0.83 dB worse at 8 bits when driven to exactly full scale, and the reason is in the count beside it: 327 of 8192 samples hit the top code. A mid-tread converter's largest code is one step below full scale, so a sinusoid that reaches full scale is already overloading — half a step of overload, at the peak, where the error correlates with the signal. The loss halves with every bit for the same reason the clipped count does — 0.83, 0.47, 0.21, 0.06, -0.13 dB — and by sixteen bits it is inside the measurement's own scatter. The formula was never the approximation.

Six decibels a bit, and the half step blamed on it

Every converter data sheet quotes 6.02N + 1.76 dB and every bench measurement comes up short of it, which is usually explained by calling the formula an approximation. Measured one step inside full scale it agrees to 0.15 dB at every bit count from eight to sixteen. Driven to exactly full scale the same converter loses 0.83 dB at eight bits — because 327 of 8192 samples hit the top code, and a mid-tread converter's largest code is one step below full scale.

6 figures
The amplitude at which a converter's floor becomes distortion. computed by solving, not by drawing. The quantisation error is transformed and the power in harmonics of the input is measured directly, at the bins those harmonics occupy. Undithered, the share rises from 0.29% at 230 levels to 76.5% at 1.3: the error has stopped being spread and has become a deterministic staircase locked to the signal. The sweep is drawn against the levels the input uses rather than against volts because it is then the same sweep for every converter — a twelve-bit part and a sixteen-bit part agree here to 0.0e+0, so what decides the character of the error is how many levels the signal crosses and not how many the converter owns. With 1 least significant bit of dither the share stays under 0.34% at every amplitude, for 3.03 dB of signal to noise. Adding noise to a converter's input improves what comes out of it, which is true and sounds like it should not be — and the amount is one whole step, not "some": a quarter of a step leaves 52.7% and a half leaves 25.6%, because a dither smaller than a step cannot make the quantiser cross one.

When a floor stops being a floor

Quantisation error is treated as noise and behaves like noise while the input crosses many levels. As the amplitude falls it stops: measured at the bins its harmonics occupy, the share of the error's power sitting in harmonics of the input rises from 0.29% at 230 levels to 76% at 1.3. The floor has not moved. It has become a distortion product locked to the signal, and the fix is to add noise on purpose — one whole least significant bit, and no more.

6 figures
One bit, oversampled — and where the quantisation noise went. computed by solving, not by drawing. A first-order modulator is marched forward one sample at a time with a one-bit quantiser inside the loop, and the noise inside the band is read out of the transform of the error. It falls by 8.99 dB for every doubling of the oversampling ratio — measured 9.33, 10.12, 6.96, 9.54 — against 3.01 dB for plain oversampling, which is drawn beside it from the same starting point. The loop does not make less noise; it moves the noise out of the band, and at a ratio of 128 one bit is worth 9.18.

One bit, and where the noise went

Sampling faster spreads a fixed quantity of quantisation noise over a wider band, so the part inside the band of interest falls by 3.01 dB for every doubling — half a bit. Putting the quantiser inside a loop with an integrator does something different in kind: measured on a modulator marched forward one sample at a time, with its test tone inside the band the ratio is quoted over, the in-band noise falls by 8.99 dB per doubling. At an oversampling ratio of 128, one bit is worth 9.18 — and the octaves scatter by a decibel each, which is the loop telling the truth about what its error is made of.

6 figures
The droop a zero-order hold imposes at 48 kHz. computed by solving, not by drawing. Holding each sample for a clock period convolves the output with a rectangle, so the spectrum is multiplied by a sinc: -0.143 dB down at a tenth of the sample rate, -0.912 at a quarter and -3.922 at half — which is exactly 20 log(2/π) and contains no design decision at all. The dots are the amplitude of the fundamental read out of the transform of the staircase itself, agreeing with the closed form to 0.008%. There is also half a sample of delay, 10.417 µs here, which is the reason a held reconstruction is not a droopy copy of the signal but a droopy copy that has moved.

The staircase on the way out

A converter does not emit impulses. It holds each sample for a whole clock period, which is a convolution with a rectangle and therefore a multiplication by a sinc — 0.14 dB down at a tenth of the sample rate, 0.91 at a quarter, and 3.92 at half, which is exactly 20 log(2/π). Nobody chose that droop and it is nearly eight times the half-decibel ripple of a Chebyshev passband. Measured on the transform of the staircase itself, it agrees with the closed form to 0.008%.

6 figures
A 4 kHz Butterworth, mapped to 48 kHz two ways. computed by solving, not by drawing. The upper panel is the digital response on the unit circle; the lower one is where each analogue frequency lands. The bilinear transform compresses the axis as it approaches half the sample rate — -3.11% at a tenth of the rate and -15.2% at a quarter — so a design mapped straight through is -3.432 dB at its own corner instead of -3.010. Pre-warping puts that one frequency back exactly and no other: above it the pre-warped curve is the further of the two from the analogue prototype. It is a choice of where to be right, not a correction.

The corner that moved

The bilinear transform has to fit an infinite frequency axis onto a circle, so something must be compressed, and what is compressed is everything near half the sample rate. A 4 kHz Butterworth mapped to a 48 kHz clock is 3.432 dB down at its own corner instead of 3.010, and at a quarter of the sample rate the axis is 15.2% out. Pre-warping puts one frequency back exactly and no other — it is a choice of where to be right, not a correction.

6 figures
A 8th-order Butterworth at 12 bits, as a cascade and as one polynomial. computed by solving, not by drawing. The open circles are the poles as designed, on the z-plane with the unit circle drawn. Filled marks are where they go once the coefficients are stored in 12 bits. A cascade of biquads keeps two coefficients per pole pair, so a rounding error moves that pair and nothing else: 8.43e-3, largest radius 0.97478. A direct form keeps one denominator whose coefficients are symmetric functions of every pole, so one rounding error moves all of them: 6.21e-1, largest radius 1.54393 — outside the unit circle, which is not an inaccurate filter but an unstable one. The two are the same filter until they are written down.

The same filter, rounded twice

The filters field measured two realisations of one analogue response and found the passband error growing as the 0.99 power of a component tolerance in a cascade and the 2.00 power in a ladder. The digital version of that argument comes out harder. At eighth order and sixteen bits, a cascade of biquads moves its poles by 6.6 × 10⁻⁴ and stays at a radius of 0.9748; the same filter written as one polynomial moves its poles to a radius of 1.4536, which is not an inaccurate filter but an unstable one.

6 figures
What 10 ps of aperture jitter is worth, in bits. computed by solving, not by drawing. Samples are taken at instants displaced by a seeded Gaussian of 10 ps and the error is measured against the same sinusoid sampled exactly. The line is −20 log(2π f × jitter), which the measurement matches to 0.12 dB across three decades. The penalty is exactly twenty decibels a decade of input frequency, because the error is the signal's slope times the timing error and nothing else — so a converter holds 16 bits only up to 199 kHz and 12 bits up to 3.18 MHz. An aperture figure quoted without an input frequency states no resolution at all.

A picosecond, read as bits

Every other boundary in this collection has a frequency, an amplitude or a size on its axis. This one has a duration. A converter that samples at t + δ instead of t gets a value wrong by the slope times δ, so the damage is proportional to input frequency and to nothing else about the part: ten picoseconds holds sixteen bits up to 199 kHz and twelve bits up to 3.18 MHz, falling at exactly twenty decibels a decade. An aperture figure quoted without an input frequency states no resolution at all.

6 figures
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.

9 figures
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.

7 figures
Same 2 ps of jitter: a floor at -121 dB, or a line at -91. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 3.337 MHz sinusoid sampled at 10 MHz with two clocks of identical root-mean-square jitter. One clock's timing error is independent gaussians and the other's is a sinusoid at 130 kHz. The total error power is the same — -87.43 and -87.55 decibels below the signal, against the closed form's -87.55 — and the pictures are not. The random clock spreads it over 2048 bins, -120.5 dB each; the modulated one puts it into two lines at 3.337 ± 0.130 MHz, -91.5 dB down. A specification in picoseconds does not choose between them.

A floor, or a line

Two clocks with identical two-picosecond jitter sample the same sinusoid, and the total error power is the same to a tenth of a decibel — the closed form an earlier essay computed, right for both. One of them puts that error across two thousand bins at −120 dB each; the other puts it into two lines at −91.5. The gap is the processing gain, it grows with the record length because a density falls and a line does not, and nothing in a specification quoted in picoseconds root-mean-square distinguishes the two cases.

8 figures
Fed nothing, an eighth-order cascade sits 88 least significant bits from zero. computed by solving, not by drawing. Where each section of a 12-bit rounded cascade settles with zero input and a seeded state. Nothing decays to zero: a constant state survives whenever rounding returns it to itself, which needs only |y·(1 + a₁ + a₂)| ≤ q/2, and that denominator is small precisely because the corner is far below the sample rate. Each section's own band is 30, 31, 32, 33 least significant bits and the settled offsets are -27, -50, -70, -88 — accumulating, because a section's dead-band output is the next section's input and the next section passes direct current. In volts the offset halves with every bit added; in least significant bits it does not move at all.

Zero in, and not zero out

Rounding a filter's coefficients and marching it in double precision leaves out the other half: the products are rounded too. Put that in and a twelve-bit eighth-order cascade fed nothing at all settles two per cent of full scale away from zero and stays there — and the offset does not shrink with the word length, it grows as the square of how far the corner sits below the sample rate, reaching eighteen per cent at a hundred and twenty-eight times.

8 figures
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.

8 figures
The direct form works at 28 bits and fails again at 29. computed by solving, not by drawing. The largest pole radius of an order-8 Butterworth at a 1 kHz corner and a 48 kHz clock, at every coefficient word length from 6 to 40 bits, for both realisations. Above the unit circle the filter is not inaccurate but unstable. The direct form is outside at 23 of the 35 word lengths drawn; the cascade at none of them, its worst radius being 1.000000. The failures are not an interval: 28 bits works and 29 bits does not, so the smallest word length that works is 1 below the largest that does not and a search for the crossing has no crossing to find. The direct form's curve is clipped at 1.24: a radius of 4.5 and a radius of 1.01 are the same verdict.

The word length that is not a threshold

The essay below this one measured an eighth-order direct form at five word lengths, found its poles outside the unit circle at every one, and left behind a phrase — the coefficient resolution required. Sixty word lengths later there is no such resolution. That filter is stable at 28 bits, unstable at 29 and stable again at 30, and the smallest word length a search would return is not one anybody can use. What survives is a law with a slope: 4.53 bits of coefficient for every pole added, rising to 47 bits at twelfth order, and none at all for a cascade.

7 figures
Against its own shaping the error is 17.4× tonal, not 51×. computed by solving, not by drawing. The share of an order-1 loop's in-band error sitting in its five largest lines, from 0.02 to 0.9 of full scale, with both nulls drawn. The lower level is 1.953 per cent — five lines of a FLAT error over 256 — and it is what this measurement has always been quoted against. The upper level is 5.74 per cent, which is what five lines of the loop's OWN shaping hold with no tone anywhere in them. Measured against the first the error is 51 times tonal at 0.02 of full scale and 26 at 0.9; against the second, 17.4 and 8.9. The direction survives the correction and the size does not.

A floor, or five tones

The field's sharpest statement about a one-bit loop is that three quarters of its in-band error sits in five lines, against the 1.953 per cent a white error would put in any five — a factor of thirty-eight. The comparison is to a white error, and a shaping loop exists to make its error anything but white. Measured against the loop's own transfer function, which the loop reproduces line by line to a part in five hundred when it is dithered, the same error is 17.4 times tonal at a fiftieth of full scale and 8.9 times at nine tenths. And 99.5 per cent of it at the quiet end is two harmonics of the input.

8 figures
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.

8 figures
The images a zero-order hold leaves, at 0.222 of the sample rate. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 10.67 kHz tone held at 48 kHz, with every line read out of a transform of the staircase itself. The sampled spectrum repeats at every multiple of the clock and the hold multiplies all of it by one sinc, so each image survives scaled by the sinc at its own frequency: the fundamental at -0.72 dB, the largest image (1fs−f, 37.3 kHz) at -11.60 dB, which is 10.88 dB of rejection. The sinc's nulls are exactly at the multiples of the clock and the two first-order images straddle the first of them without touching it — so the hold's rejection is 25.6 dB for a tone at 0.05 fs and 1.74 dB for one at 0.45, falling to nothing at half the clock. Measured and closed form agree to 0.026%.

The nulls are where nothing is

A zero-order hold multiplies the whole repeated spectrum by one sinc, so it attenuates every image at the image's own frequency and its nulls land exactly on the multiples of the clock. Nothing is ever at a null: the two first-order images straddle it, and the closer the signal comes to half the clock the closer they come to each other. The hold gives 25.6 dB of image rejection to a tone at a twentieth of the clock, 1.74 dB at 0.45 of it, and nothing at all at half — which is the frequency the band most needs it at.

5 figures
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.

5 figures
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.

5 figures
An all-pole filter's stopband floor: -120 dB, from 10 fF nobody drew. computed by solving, not by drawing. A butterworth 8 realised at a 20 kHz passband, drawn twice: from its poles, which fall at 48 decibels an octave for ever, and from the same netlist with 10 femtofarads of stray capacitance from its input to its last shunt node — a fraction of a picofarad between two tracks. The second stops falling at -120.0 dB at 136 kHz, because the stray bypasses every pole in front of it and what is left is its ratio to the shunt capacitance it divides against. The poles alone predict -293 dB a decade further out, which is 173 decibels lower. So an all-pole design has a stopband floor exactly as an elliptic one does — -140 dB at 1 fF, -130 dB at 3 fF, -120 dB at 10 fF, -110 dB at 30 fF, -100 dB at 100 fF, which is 20.0 decibels per decade of stray — and above that frequency a faster sample rate buys nothing at all, which is the refusal recorded for the elliptic row and not for this one.

The floor every filter has

The elliptic design was refused because its equiripple stopband is a floor and no sample rate reaches past a floor, while an all-pole design falls at six decibels an octave per pole for ever — so a faster clock is always an answer for one and never for the other. On paper. Ten femtofarads of stray capacitance from a filter's input to its output, which is a fraction of a picofarad between two tracks, puts the eighth-order Butterworth's stopband at −120 decibels from 136 kilohertz onwards where its poles predict −293. Every all-pole design has a floor, and it is a layout rather than a design.

5 figures
The order is worth 0.68 bits and a factor of 29 in clock. computed by solving, not by drawing. A butterworth design at a 20 kHz passband, at each order from two to ten and at three impedance levels, with the sample rate it demands for eighty decibels and the resolution its own resistors' noise allows. The clock demand falls steeply — 50.50×, 11.27×, 5.50×, 3.65× and on down to 1.76×, a factor of 28.8 — and the bar widths carry it. The noise rises: 2.00 µV at order two against 3.22 µV at ten, which is 0.68 of a bit. So the order is cheap in the currency everybody worries about and expensive in nothing. What is expensive is the impedance level: every resistance goes as one over the capacitance and a noise voltage as the square root of a resistance, so a decade of capacitance is 1.66 bits — the same at every order, to 0.000 of a bit — and the three curves are ten, one and a tenth of a nanofarad a section. The ceiling on resolution is set by a choice nobody prices, and the order, which everybody argues about, moves it by two thirds of a bit.

Two thirds of a bit for a factor of twenty-eight

An anti-alias filter costed in clock rate gets steeply cheaper with order — fifty times Nyquist at the second and 1.76 at the tenth — and the obvious objection is noise, since the filter is in the signal path and every section adds resistors. Measured, the objection barely holds: from order two to order ten the clock demand falls by a factor of 28.7 and the resolution the filter's own noise allows falls by 0.69 of a bit. What does cost resolution is the impedance level, at five thirds of a bit per decade of capacitance, and nobody argues about that at all.

5 figures
Sampling 100–120 MHz: 6 allowed windows and 5 forbidden gaps. A band 20 MHz wide centred at 110 MHz, and the sample rates at which it and all its images land without overlapping. Twice the top of the band is 240 MHz and every rate above that works, which is the familiar answer. Below it there are 5 more windows, the slowest at 40.00 MHz — 1.00 times twice the band's WIDTH, which is the quantity that bounds a sample rate when the signal is not at baseband. Between the windows are 5 forbidden gaps, shaded: at 219.1 MHz the band's images overlap it, while 200.00 MHz works and 240.0 works. So a clock raised out of a working window has been made worse by being made faster, and "a faster clock is always an available answer" is a statement about baseband and not about sampling.

The clock that is too fast

Every sample rate in the requirement is a lower bound: the filter must be down by the frequency that folds back, and a faster clock is always at least as good. That holds for a signal at baseband. A band from 100 to 120 megahertz can be sampled at 240 and above, or at 120 to 200, or 80 to 100, or 60 to 66.7, or 48 to 50, or 40 — six disjoint windows with five forbidden gaps between them, so 110 megahertz fails while 100 works and 120 works. The bound is twice the band's width, 40 megahertz, and it is six times below twice its top.

5 figures
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.

6 figures
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.

5 figures
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.

5 figures
A band from zero to its top frequency takes 4.77 dB less from 10 ps of jitter than a tone at the top: it is the rms frequency that counts, not the highest. computed by solving, not by drawing. Forty-eight equal tones at random phases filling a band from 0 to 1 of its top frequency, sampled 16,384 times at instants displaced by a seeded 10 ps Gaussian, at seven top frequencies from 100 kHz to 100 MHz. The measured signal-to-error ratio (dots) is 88.64 dB at 1 MHz, against −20 log(2π × rms frequency × jitter) = 88.76 dB from the band's power-weighted rms frequency, 580 kHz — and against 84.04 dB for a tone at 1 MHz itself. The gap is 4.77 dB at every frequency, 10 log(3/(1 + r + r²)) for a flat band from r to 1 of the top: 4.77 dB (a factor of √3 in frequency) for a band from zero, nothing for a narrow one. At 1 MHz the band holds 14.43 bits where the tone holds 13.67.

The frequency a band moves at

The jitter rule is written for a sinusoid: ten picoseconds holds a tone at 1 MHz to 84.04 dB. A signal that fills the band up to 1 MHz holds 88.64 dB against the same clock, because each sample's error is its own slope times its own timing error, and a band's slope is set by its rms frequency — the top frequency over √3 for a flat band, 4.77 dB better. Pink content up to 1 MHz is 11 dB better than the rule and content falling as 1/f² is 29 dB better. So the same ten picoseconds hold sixteen bits to 199 kHz for a tone, 344 kHz for a flat band and 734 kHz for a pink one: an aperture figure needs a signal as well as a frequency.

5 figures
The same 0.1 ps of period jitter: 107.0 dB at any record length if each edge is independent, 80.3 dB over 4096 samples if the edges walk. computed by solving, not by drawing, averaged over 8 seeded clocks at each of 5 record lengths. A 10.01 MHz tone sampled at 160 MHz by a clock whose every period has a spread of 0.1 ps, in two ways: each edge independently displaced (white), and each edge displaced from where the last one landed (a free-running oscillator's walk). The sampled tone is fitted by least squares for amplitude, delay and a small frequency offset, and what is left is the error. White jitter gives 107.2, 107.0, 107.0, 107.1, 107.0 dB — the closed form 107.0 dB, at every length. The walk gives 92.6, 86.4, 80.3, 74.5, 68.2 dB for 256, 1024, 4096, 16384, 65536 samples, falling 10.1 dB a decade, as the period spread times √(n/15): a jitter with no value until the length of the look is named.

A jitter that grows with the look

Two clocks with the same 0.1 ps spread in every period sample the same 10 MHz tone. If each edge is displaced independently, the error is 107.0 dB down at any record length. If each edge is displaced from where the last one landed — a free-running oscillator — the edges walk, and the error after fitting the best delay and frequency is 92.6 dB down over 256 samples, 80.3 over 4,096 and 68.2 over 65,536: ten decibels a decade of record, as the period spread times √(n/15). The one oscillator honestly has jitter figures from 0.10 to 4.7 ps depending on the length named. A locking loop is what gives the jitter a value: with a time constant of a hundred periods it stops growing at 87.0 dB.

5 figures
At 60 dB of rejection an eighth-order filter keeps 3 of the brick wall's 6 windows; a fourth-order one keeps 2. computed by solving, not by drawing. The sample rates at which a band from 100 to 120 MHz can be sampled without anything the filter in front passes at more than −60 dB folding onto the band, for a band with hard edges and for Butterworth bandpass filters of order 12, 8, 6 and 4 on the band's own edges; each row is labelled with the span, in megahertz, where the filter is still above −60 dB. A real filter moves each window's edges inward by half its transition band. The window from 120 to 200 MHz narrows to 124.4–193.2, 127.9–188.4, 132.8–182.4, 149.7–166.9 MHz as the order falls, and the lower windows close altogether. Every window is checked by folding every frequency the filter passes.

The windows a real filter leaves

A band from 100 to 120 MHz can be sampled at any clock in six disjoint windows — for a band with hard edges. Put a real bandpass filter in front and ask that whatever folds onto the band be 60 dB down, and every window's edges move inward by half the filter's transition band: an eighth-order Butterworth keeps three of the six, a fourth-order one two, and the window from 120 to 200 MHz shrinks from ±25 per cent of clock tolerance to ±19.1 per cent at order eight and ±5.4 per cent at order four. The windows depend on the rejection only through the rejection per order: 40 dB at order four, 60 at order six and 80 at order eight all leave the same ±15.7 per cent. So a filter's order is bought in clock tolerance, at one order per ten decibels.

5 figures
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.

6 figures
With a 100 kHz flicker corner the 0.1 ps oscillator's ratio stops falling ten decibels a decade of capture and starts falling twenty, past 2,277 samples — 1.42 periods of the corner. computed by solving, not by drawing, from the exact expected residual of a summed process, with seeded clocks as dots (24 at each length to 16,384). A free-running oscillator with a 0.1 ps period spread and a flicker of its frequency whose timing spectrum meets the walk's at 100 kHz, sampling a 10.01 MHz tone at 160 MHz. Signal-to-timing-error after removing each capture's best delay and frequency: the walk alone falls ten decibels a decade, 85.7 dB at 1024, 67.6 dB at 65536; with the flicker, 84.1 and 52.9 dB. The flicker's share equals the walk's at 2,277 samples, 14.2 µs, which is 1.42 periods of the corner frequency; beyond it the ratio falls 19.5 dB a decade. Removing a quadratic as well buys 3.80 dB at 65,536 samples and changes no slope.

A frequency that wanders

Below its flicker corner an oscillator's phase noise falls thirty decibels a decade instead of twenty, because the oscillator's frequency itself wanders. A clock with 0.1 ps of period spread and a 100 kHz corner samples a 10 MHz tone at 84.1 dB over 1,024 samples and 52.9 over 65,536 — 14.7 dB worse than the walk alone — because past 2,277 samples its error grows as the capture rather than its square root. That crossing is 1.42 periods of the corner frequency for every corner. Fitting a parabola as well as a line buys 3.88 dB at every length and changes no slope; each further term buys a fixed fraction. And a first-order locking loop cannot stop it: the locked clock's variance grows with the logarithm of the record, 1.92 dB lost between 4,096 and 262,144 samples, until a loop with an integrator holds it at 87.5.

6 figures
A sinusoid sampled 8 times a cycle, at the phase that puts its peak between two samples. computed by solving, not by drawing: the samples of a unit sinusoid at 8 a cycle, synchronous, at the sampling phase that hides its peak worst. 8 samples a cycle is 4 times the Nyquist rate and holds the waveform completely; the largest sample is still 0.9239, 7.61% below the peak, which is 1 − cos(π/8). Read straight off the samples the peak needs 22.2 samples a cycle for 1% and 70.2 for 0.1%.

The rate each reading needs

Twice the frequency is the rate at which a set of samples holds a sinusoid completely, and it is not the rate at which any particular property can be read off them. Eight samples a cycle — four times the Nyquist rate — hold the waveform, and their largest is still 7.61% below the peak; the largest sample needs 22.2 a cycle for 1% and 70.2 for 0.1%, because its error falls only as the square of the rate. A parabola through the three largest gets 1% at 8. A zero crossing found by a straight line between two samples is a hundredth of a cycle right at 5 a cycle, its error falling as the cube, because a sine is straight at its zero. The rms of whole cycles is exact from three a cycle — and at exactly two it reads anything from zero to √2. A slow rate with a long record of a steady signal does what a fast rate does, once the samples have slipped a whole interval past it: 42 cycles at 4.0236 a cycle.

5 figures
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.

5 figures
A second-order loop at a ratio of 64, with a quantiser of one to five bits: the ratio in the band against the input amplitude. computed by solving, not by drawing: the loop whose noise transfer is exactly (1 − z⁻¹)², marched with a sine inside the band, the error measured through a squared Hann window. At half scale, 1 bit 69.4 dB, 2 bits 82.5 dB, 3 bits 90.3 dB, 4 bits 96.8 dB, 5 bits 102.0 dB. The first extra bit adds 13.1 dB because a one-bit quantiser's error is larger than a step's uniform error; after that each adds six or seven. The amplitude each does best at moves up with the bits — 0.6 for 1, 0.6 for 2, 0.8 for 3, 0.85 for 4, 0.95 for 5 — because a fine quantiser is never driven past its last level by the shaped error.

The levels the loop cannot shape

Give a second-order noise-shaping loop a quantiser of several bits instead of one and every bit beyond the second buys six or seven decibels, the best input amplitude climbs from 0.6 of full scale to 0.95, and loops of third and fourth order that will not run on one bit run on three or four. What it charges is outside the loop's reach. The levels the quantiser feeds back enter where the input does, so their errors are passed rather than shaped: a three-bit loop loses its lead over a one-bit one when each level is out by 0.027 per cent, its error stops falling with oversampling, and the error arrives as harmonics. One bit is immune because two levels always lie on a line.

5 figures
A second-order four-bit loop whose integrators are built round amplifiers of finite gain: the ratio in the band against oversampling. computed by solving, not by drawing: each integrator's pole at 1 − 1/A, half-scale input, half a step of shaped dither, three seeds averaged, squared Hann window. With perfect integrators the ratio rises 15.1 dB an octave, to 138.9 dB at 512. With A = 1000: 138.5 dB at 512, 0.4 below; with A = 100: 122.3 dB at 512, 16.6 below; with A = 30: 102.9 dB at 512, 35.9 below; with A = 10: 85.0 dB at 512, 53.9 below. Each curve leaves the ideal one near a ratio of about πA; for A = 10 the last octave gains 2.7 dB against the ideal's 15.1 — toward the three an octave a floor that is not shaped improves at.

The integrator that leaks the zero away

A noise-shaping loop puts its error's zero at zero frequency because its integrators never forget. An integrator built round an amplifier of gain A forgets a part in A every sample, and the zero moves off zero frequency to a floor. The cost is a function of one number, the oversampling ratio over π times the gain: for two leaky integrators it is 10 log(1 + (10/3)x² + 5x⁴), which the marched loops follow to within two decibels from gains of 10 to 300, and keeping it under a decibel needs a gain of 1.2 times the oversampling ratio. A first-order loop pays a second way: inputs within exactly 1/(2A − 1) of zero leave its output where it was.

5 figures
Fed nothing, a 12-bit eighth-order cascade sits 88 least significant bits from zero; with its rounding error fed back, never more than 1. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same cascade with its corner at 1 kHz and its clock 48 times higher, each section's state seeded at eight least significant bits and every product rounded to 12 bits, marched with no input. Plainly rounded, the sections settle at 27, 50, 70, 88 least significant bits — a constant state survives whenever rounding returns it to itself, and each section's offset is the next one's input. With each section's last two rounding errors added back with weights −2 and +1, the error reaches the output through (1 − z⁻¹)²/A(z), a constant state y needs (1 + a₁ + a₂)·y = 0, and the only one is zero: the largest excursion over the last two thousand samples is 1, 1, 1, 1 least significant bit, single isolated steps rather than a settled offset.

The rounding a section keeps

A fixed-point biquad that remembers its last two rounding errors and adds them back with weights −2 and +1 before it rounds again sends its error to the output through (1 − z⁻¹)²/A(z) instead of 1/A(z). For a low-pass clocked far above its corner that double zero lands exactly on the recursion's largest gain. Fed nothing, an eighth-order 12-bit cascade at 48 times its corner sat 88 least significant bits from zero; with the error kept, a constant state needs (1 + a₁ + a₂)·y = 0, its only solution is zero, and the output never strays more than one bit at any clock rate from 8× to 128×. The round-off floor at 128× falls 89 times, 6.5 bits, for two additions and a shift per section — and the white-noise model, which the plain cascade broke by a factor of ten at eight bits, holds to 2.3% from six bits to twenty.

5 figures
Three waveforms at 16 samples a period, sampled at the worst instant: the largest sample of a sine is 1.92% short, of a triangle 12.5%, of a clipped sine 0. computed by solving, not by drawing: three waveforms with the same period and the same peak, sampled 16 times a period at the phase that puts the peak midway between two samples (dots). The sine leaves its peak as the square of the time, the triangle in proportion to it, and the sine clipped at nine-tenths of its height does not leave it at all for as long as it stays flat. The largest sample therefore falls short by 1.92% for the sine, 12.5% for the triangle, 0 for the clipped sine, at one rate, for three waveforms with the same period.

The peak that is a corner

The largest of a set of samples falls short of a sine wave's peak as the square of the sample interval, and that law belongs to the sine. Measured over every sampling phase, a triangle's corner falls short as the first power, 12.5 per cent at sixteen samples a period against the sine's 1.92, a peak whose curvature vanishes as the fourth power, and a sine clipped at nine-tenths of its height reads exactly above seven samples a period. The order in which a waveform leaves its peak is the whole of the law, and it also fixes how much better the average reading is than the worst. A real corner is round at some scale, so the law bends where the samples resolve its top harmonic, and a parabola through three samples helps a round peak, barely touches a corner and makes a flat one worse.

5 figures
A Gaussian edge read at 3 samples per rise, at the worst sampling phase: straight chords between the samples say the rise is 8.78% from its true value. computed by solving, not by drawing: a Gaussian edge (solid), its samples at 3 per 10–90% rise at the sampling phase that reads worst (dots), and the straight lines an instrument's linear interpolation draws through them (dashed). The chord crosses 10 and 90 per cent earlier and later than the edge does, because a Gaussian edge curves in opposite senses at the two thresholds. The reading is 1.0878 rises against 1.

The samples a rise time needs

A rise time is read from two thresholds, and an instrument that draws straight chords between its samples is wrong at each by an amount that goes as the square of the interval. For a Gaussian edge at the worst sampling phase that is 5.02 per cent at four samples per rise and 0.818 at ten; the rule of thumb of three to five is a five per cent rule, and one per cent takes nine. The reading is not monotonic in the rate: above 20.9 per rise a first-order edge reads exactly at whole numbers and 0.046 per cent at 24.5, because its two errors subtract at one phase, and a Gaussian edge reads worse there because its two add. Reconstructing before reading needs 1.87 per rise for one per cent, and at four times the edge's 3 dB bandwidth the reading is still 11.7 per cent out.

5 figures

Feedback, and the margin

The site's strongest construction, and the subject supplies it free: a phase margin computed from the loop gain in the frequency domain, an overshoot measured from the step response in the time domain, one circuit, and a required agreement between two numbers that share no arithmetic.

Loop gain of a three-pole amplifier closed for a gain of 100. Unity loop gain at 5.73 kHz, where 34.9° of phase remains before −180°. The phase reaches −180° at 89.6 kHz, where the loop gain is 46.1 dB below unity.

What is left at crossover

A feedback loop is stable or not according to one number read at one frequency — how much phase remains before −180° at the point where the loop gain passes unity. The loop gain here is obtained the way it is obtained on a bench: cut the loop, drive one side of the cut, and measure what comes back to the other.

6 figures
One loop, two measurements of the same margin. The loop gain crosses unity at 5.73 kHz with 34.9° of phase left. The closed-loop step overshoots by 35.2%, which the second-order relation says corresponds to 34.8°. They differ by 0.1°, and the difference is the third pole.

Two measurements of one margin

A phase margin is computed from the loop gain in the frequency domain, without ever looking at a step. An overshoot is measured from the closed-loop step response in the time domain, without ever looking at a Bode plot. Inverting the standard relation on the second returns 34.9° against the first's 34.9°, and the residue is the third pole.

6 figures
A gain of 100 asked of an amplifier with 1.00 MHz of gain–bandwidth. The ideal amplifier — a nullor, so the two golden rules exactly — holds 100 at every frequency. The real one is 0.10% low at direct current, 1% low by 1.35 kHz, and 3 dB down at 10.0 kHz. Above 10.0 kHz there is no loop gain left and the ideal answer is not an approximation to anything.

The ideal amplifier, and where it stops being one

An ideal operational amplifier's closed-loop gain is set by two resistors and nothing else — a horizontal line at every frequency. The real one is already a tenth of a per cent low at direct current, one per cent low by 1.35 kHz, and above 10 kHz has no loop gain left, at which point the ideal answer is not an approximation to anything.

6 figures
A loop whose phase comes back, at a gain of 1.0e+7. computed by solving, not by drawing. Three identical poles take the phase to −270°, two lead sections bring it back to −158°, and their own poles take it down again — so ∠L = −180° at 189 Hz, 3.46 kHz and 23.5 kHz. The gain moves the magnitude curve and not those three frequencies, so it decides only which side of each the unity-gain point falls. At 1.00e+7 the crossover is 10.6 kHz, in the recovered band, and the loop is stable.

Stable, and unstable with less gain

A three-pole loop with two lead sections is stable for gains between 1.81 × 10⁶ and 3.36 × 10⁷ and unstable on both sides of that window. Turning its gain *down* is what breaks it. Neither margin can see this, because a phase margin describes the loop at one frequency and a gain margin at one other, and this loop's phase crosses −180° at three: 189 Hz, 3.46 kHz and 23.5 kHz.

7 figures
How much of the amplifier reaches the answer, at 35° of phase margin. computed by solving, not by drawing by multiplying the forward path's gain by 1 + 10⁻⁵ and solving again. At low frequency 0.0999% of a fractional change in the device reaches the closed-loop gain, which is one over the loop gain of 995.04. It changes sign at 258 Hz — above there a better amplifier gives a smaller gain — and reaches 1.61 at 8.08 kHz, which is worse than having no feedback, and settles at exactly 1 above crossover (5.73 kHz), where there is no loop gain left to spend. The second route, the real part of 1/(1 + T) from the cut loop, agrees to 9.6e-6.

How much of the amplifier gets through

The reason to build an amplifier from a bad amplifier and two resistors is that a change in the device barely reaches the answer — a tenth of a per cent of it at low frequency, measured by making the device better and solving again. Near crossover the same fraction rises above one, so feedback makes the gain more device-dependent than no feedback at all, and below fifty degrees of margin it changes sign on the way.

8 figures
What the summing junction of an inverting amplifier actually is, at 1.00 MHz of gain–bandwidth. computed by solving, not by drawing by driving a current into the node and reading the voltage. It is 100 mΩ at direct current, rises 1.000 decades per decade of frequency, and settles at 909.5 Ω — which is the 1 kΩ and 10 kΩ in parallel, with the amplifier contributing nothing. It passes one per cent of the input resistor at 995 Hz, a factor of 1,005 below the gain–bandwidth. The second route — the open-loop impedance over one plus the return ratio from the cut loop — agrees to 0.045%.

The node that is at ground for a while

An inverting amplifier's summing junction is held at ground by the loop, so it is at ground exactly as well as the loop is strong. Driven with a current and measured, it is a tenth of an ohm at direct current, ten ohms at a kilohertz, and 909 ohms above a megahertz — which is the two feedback resistors in parallel, with the amplifier contributing nothing.

8 figures
An inverting unity gain, and the 100 pF that only the loop can see. computed by solving, not by drawing. Two ten-kilohm resistors around a 10 MHz amplifier make a gain of 1.00, and a loop that closes against 2.01 — one plus the ratio, not the ratio. Adding 100 pF at the summing junction leaves the closed-loop gain at a kilohertz unchanged — 0.99998051 against 0.99997988, three parts in a million at the far end of the slider — and takes the phase margin from 90.0° to 14.4°, because the noise gain now rises a decade per decade and the loop closes at forty decibels per decade instead of twenty. Forty-five degrees is reached at 9.00 pF, bisected on the netlist. The capacitance is not part of the signal path and does not appear in any expression for the gain.

The gain the loop closes against

An inverting amplifier with two equal resistors has a gain of one and a loop that closes against two, so it has half the bandwidth of a follower built from the same part — 4.99 megahertz against ten. Nine picofarads at the summing junction, less than a scope probe, takes the phase margin from ninety degrees to forty-five, and a hundred picofarads puts twelve decibels of peaking on a response whose designed gain is nought decibels and whose measured gain at a kilohertz has not moved by three parts in a million.

5 figures
An inverting unity gain driving 2.2 nF, and the pole that is inside the loop. computed by solving, not by drawing. Two ten-kilohm resistors around a 10 MHz amplifier make a gain of 1.00, and a loop that closes against 2.01 — one plus the ratio, not the ratio. Hanging 2.2 nF on the output leaves the closed-loop gain at a kilohertz unchanged — 0.99998002 against 0.99997988 — and takes the phase margin from 90.0° to 30.1°. The mechanism is at the other end of the amplifier from the summing-junction case and the arithmetic is the same: the load works against the amplifier's own fifty ohms of output resistance, which puts a second pole in the forward path — inside the loop, where the feedback has to live with it — while the gain the loop closes against does not move at all. Forty-five degrees is reached at 905 pF, bisected on the netlist. The capacitance is not part of the signal path and does not appear in any expression for the gain.

The load that gets inside the loop

Hanging a capacitor on an amplifier's output changes nothing a reader can find in any expression for its gain, and takes the phase margin of a unity-gain inverter from ninety degrees to thirty. The mechanism is fifty ohms of output resistance that no data sheet page puts next to the stability page: the load works against it, the pole that results is in the forward path, and forty-five degrees arrives at 905 picofarads — which is a metre of coaxial cable.

8 figures
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.

8 figures
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.

8 figures
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.

8 figures
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.

8 figures
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.

8 figures
The step at which the output impedance stops being a number. computed by solving, not by drawing. The excursion divided by the step, against the step. The flat line is the linear model, and it is flat to 0.0 parts per million across four decades — which is what an impedance is. The rising curve is the same netlist with the differential pair's tanh in the transconductor, and it leaves at 10.6 mA: the input error there is 3.63 thermal voltages, so the boundary is an amplitude in the pair's own units rather than a current with the amplifier's name on it. At 300 mA the ratio is 54.5 Ω against the linear 23.6 — 131 per cent, and it is no longer a property of the circuit at all. The slew rate that decides it is 3.25 V/µs, which is twice the thermal voltage times the gain-bandwidth in radians, and contains no design choice.

The step too large to have an impedance

The rung below drove the load node with a current step and reported an impedance: a voltage divided by a current, which is a number only if the ratio does not depend on the current. Give the amplifier the differential pair's own tanh in place of a linear transconductor and it is a number up to 10.6 milliamps and not above — where the input error is 3.63 thermal voltages, and where the slew rate that decides it is twice the thermal voltage times the gain-bandwidth in radians, containing no design choice at all.

8 figures
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.

9 figures
One channel's load step reaches another through the supply, and the compensation decides by 4497×. computed by solving, not by drawing. Two identical amplifiers on one rail — sharing no signal node — with an ampere of load step pulled from the first and the second's output read. With the wiring left out the coupling is exactly zero, which is what the seven rungs below this one computed. With 30 nanohenries and fifty milliohms of rail and 10 microfarads of decoupling it is not: 3.84 microvolts per ampere at 271 kHz if the compensation capacitor returns to ground, and 17.29 millivolts per ampere at 2.33 MHz if it returns to the rail. That is a factor of 4497 decided by a modelling choice, which is why both are drawn. The channel that caused the step is unaffected: its own loop corrects the disturbance along with everything else, and the crosstalk is entirely a problem for the channel that did not.

The rail the load moves

Seven rungs of this ladder end by saying the same thing: the supply is an ideal voltage source, so a load step is drawn from a node that cannot be disturbed. Giving the rail an impedance turns out to change the disturbing channel's own output impedance by three parts in ten million — its loop corrects the supply along with everything else — and to open a path to a second amplifier that shares nothing with it but a wire. How large that path is is a modelling choice: 3.84 microvolts per ampere with the compensation capacitor returned to ground, 17.3 millivolts with it returned to the rail, a factor of four and a half thousand.

8 figures
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.

8 figures
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.

8 figures
Loop gain of a two-pole amplifier closed for a gain of 100. Unity loop gain at 5.73 kHz, where 35.0° of phase remains before −180°. The phase never reaches −180° at any frequency, so there is no gain margin to quote: 2 poles contribute at most 180° and the last of it arrives only at infinity.

The loop that never crosses

Every loop this field draws carries two margins, and one of them is not always a number. Take the third pole out of the standard loop and its crossover moves by 2.45 parts per million and its phase margin by 0.164 degrees — the third pole's own arctangent there, to five decimal places — while its gain margin goes from 46.06 decibels to no number at all. The phase reaches −180° only where the magnitude has already reached −62 decibels, and the two instruments that are supposed to notice report 3.19 × 10⁻⁶ either way.

7 figures