Field

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

The load that neither limit owns

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

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

The error a bigger resistor cannot help

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

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

The tee that charges for its own compensation

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

A summing junction with 8 inputs on it, and the ceiling that fell. computed by solving, not by drawing by driving a current into the node and reading the voltage, with the input source zeroed, at each of 6 channel counts. With one input the node's ceiling is 909.5 Ω — the input and feedback resistors in parallel — and with 32 it is 31.15 Ω, a factor of 29.19 stiffer for 32 times the inputs — less than the count, because the feedback resistor is in the parallel combination too. Only the ceiling moves: the direct-current value and the whole rise are the same to 5.4 per cent at every count, because the open-loop impedance and the loop gain both scale as 1/N and cancel. So what the channel count does is bring the ceiling down to meet the rise earlier, and the per-pair leakage saturates rather than reaching unity — -0.8 dB at one input against -30.1 dB at 32. The total into every other channel together does not saturate: it is (N − 1)·Z/Rin, and with Z ≈ Rin/N that tends to unity — 0.966 at 32 inputs, 0.476 at two. A summing junction above its loop hands over essentially all of one input's signal to the others collectively, and the count decides only how it is divided.

The node that does not care how many

Put thirty-two inputs on a summing junction instead of one and its ceiling falls from 909 ohms to 31.2 — the input resistors in parallel with the feedback resistor, twenty-nine times stiffer. Every other part of the curve is unchanged to five per cent, because the open-loop impedance and the loop gain both scale as one over the count and cancel. So the stiffer node buys nothing: the per-channel leakage saturates instead of reaching unity, and the leakage into every other channel together tends to exactly one, whatever the count.

A summing junction with a second pole above it: 3.1 dB of peak, and inductive. computed by solving, not by drawing on a two-pole amplifier — a gain block, two sections and a buffer, so the feedback network loads the output exactly as it does with one pole. The faint curve is the one-pole case, which rises to 909.1 Ω and stops. With a second pole at 100 kHz the junction reaches 1304 Ω at 112 kHz — 3.13 dB above the two resistors in parallel — because the division is by |1 + T| and near crossover that is smaller than one. A third of a decade below the peak the node's impedance leads its current by 84.4°, which is an inductance: the node is no longer a resistance that a capacitance loads, it is a reactance that a capacitance resonates with. The slider puts capacitance on the node and moves the peak.

The node that is an inductance

A summing junction with a one-pole amplifier round it rises to the two feedback resistors in parallel and stops there, and that ceiling is the whole of what a virtual earth can be. Give the amplifier a second pole and the node overshoots it — 1074 ohms against 909 with the second pole at 300 kilohertz, 1868 with it at thirty — and below the peak the impedance leads its current by more than twenty degrees, which is an inductance. So a stray capacitance on the node is no longer a load on a resistance; it is a resonance, and the peak grows with it rather than being damped by it.

An integrator's summing junction is flat at 15.7 Ω, and worst at direct current. computed by solving, not by drawing. A current is driven into the node and the voltage read. The dashed curve is the same amplifier with a 10 kΩ resistor as its feedback element: a tenth of an ohm at direct current, rising a decade per decade, 909.5 Ω at the top. With a 10 nF capacitor instead, the loop gain has no frequency in it — the amplifier's gain falls as 1/f while the feedback factor rises as f — so it is flat at 62.83 and the node is flat with it, at Rin/(1 + 2π·GBW·C·Rin) = 15.666 Ω, measured 15.668 Ω and holding to 0.50 per cent from 100 Hz to 5.31 kHz — between the amplifier's own pole and the capacitor's corner, which is where a loop gain with no frequency in it lives. Both ends are the other way round from the resistive case: at direct current the capacitor is an open circuit, there is no loop at all, and the node is 843.0 Ω — a factor of 8388 worse than the resistor's 100 mΩ. Above the amplifier's crossover the capacitor is a short and the node is 47.6 Ω against 909.5. The two cross at 1.56 kHz, which is the frequency above which an integrator is the better virtual earth of the two.

The shelf a capacitor makes

An inverting amplifier's summing node rises a decade per decade to the two resistors in parallel. Replace the feedback resistor with a capacitor and it does neither: an integrator's loop gain has no frequency in it, so the node is flat at Rin/(1 + 2π·GBW·C·Rin) — 15.67 ohms over four decades, to half a per cent. Both ends invert. At direct current the capacitor is an open circuit, there is no loop at all, and the node is 843 ohms against the resistor's tenth of one; above the amplifier's crossover the capacitor is a short and the node is nineteen times better.

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

The compensation that costs nothing

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

1 nF at the node lifts the inverting stage's virtual earth 1.28-fold at its resonance, the integrator's 1.09-fold. computed by solving, not by drawing. The impedance looking into the summing junction of an inverting stage (1 kΩ in, 10 kΩ feedback) and an integrator (1 kΩ in, 10 nF feedback) on the same 1 MHz amplifier, bare (dashed) and with 1 nF of sensor capacitance from the node to ground (solid). The inverting stage's node rises as an inductance, and a capacitance across an inductance is a resonance: its node reaches 909 Ω at 126 kHz, 1.28 times the bare node there. The integrator's node is a resistance, the shelf of 15.9 Ω, and a capacitance across a resistance is a corner: the loaded node is at most 1.086 times the bare one, and only where the amplifier's own output resistance is part of the loop.

The sensor an integrator does not see

A sensor's capacitance at an inverting stage's summing junction sits across a node that rises like an inductance, and makes a resonance: 10 nF lifts the node 2.50-fold at 39.8 kHz, the lift is the resonance's Q, and the loop's margin falls from 90° to 24.8°, and to 8.0° at 100 nF. The same capacitance at an integrator's node sits across a resistance — the shelf, 1/(2π·GBW·Cf) — and the shelf does not move, because the capacitance enters the open node and the loop gain together and cancels. With an ideal output the integrator's margin is 90.91° at every sensor from 1 pF to 100 nF. What it does see is its amplifier's output resistance: 50 Ω driving the feedback and sensor capacitors in series is a pole, worst when the two are equal, 58.3° at 10 nF, and it recovers on both sides.

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

The resistor that holds the bottom of the shelf

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

$The gain's sensitivity to the device and to the divider add to one at every frequency, and at crossover each is exactly one half (34.9° of margin). computed by solving, not by drawing, three times at each of 241 frequencies: nominal, with the amplifier's gain raised by one part in 10⁵, and with the feedback fraction raised by one part in 10⁵. The fraction of the device's change reaching the closed-loop magnitude is 9.97 × 10⁻⁴ at 10.0 Hz and 1.60 at its peak near 7.94 kHz; the fraction of the divider's change is 0.99899 at 10.0 Hz and falls to −0.60 at 7.94 kHz. They add to one within 1.16 × 10⁻⁵ everywhere, and at the loop's crossover, 5.73 kHz, they are 0.5000 and 0.5000: the real parts of 1/(1 + T) and T/(1 + T), which are one half at |T| = 1 for any phase. The cut loop, a second route, agrees to 9.55 × 10⁻⁶.$

Half to the amplifier, half to the resistors

A feedback amplifier is supposed to hand its accuracy to the resistors, and at low frequency it does — 99.9 per cent of a change in the divider reaches the gain and 0.1 per cent of a change in the device. The two fractions are measured here by nudging each and solving again, and they add to one at every frequency, to five parts in a hundred thousand. At the loop's crossover each is exactly one half, whatever the margin: the gain's magnitude answers the amplifier and the resistors equally. As complex numbers both are 1/(2 sin(φ/2)) there, above one for any margin under sixty degrees, and around the crossover lies a band where the gain is more sensitive to both than it would be with no feedback at all.

On a linear frequency axis the loop's desensitisation is an area, and the area it gives back above crossover is the same: 6.74 and 6.74 kilohertz-nepers at 34.9° of margin. computed by solving, not by drawing. The logarithm of the device sensitivity |1/(1 + T)|, from the cut loop at 3601 frequencies between 0.01 Hz and 10 GHz, drawn in decibels against linear frequency to 60 kHz. It is −60.0 dB at low frequency, crosses zero at 4.47 kHz (the crossover is 5.73 kHz), peaks at +5.70 dB at 6.87 kHz, and returns towards zero as the loop gain goes. The area below zero is 6.74 kHz·Np (58.6 dB·kHz); the area above, integrated to 10 GHz, is 6.74, of which 6.11 lies inside the drawing. The net is −1.48 × 10⁻⁸ Hz·Np. Bode's sensitivity integral says it must be zero for a loop that falls two poles or more and is stable when cut.

The area that feedback only moves

A feedback amplifier divides its device's variation by the loop gain, sixty decibels of it at low frequency, and pays for it with a sensitivity peak near crossover. The payment is exact. Integrated over linear frequency, the logarithm of the sensitivity has as much area above zero as below — 6.74 kilohertz-nepers each side at 34.9° of margin, net zero to eight parts in a billion — at every margin and every gain, because the loop falls by more than one pole. Margin decides only the shape of the repayment: a 14-decibel spike at 11.7°, a one-decibel hump spread past half a megahertz at 80.4°. Only a loop that falls as a single pole keeps any of it, (π/2) times its crossover, and no amplifier is one.

A tee of factor 10 turns 1 µV/K of offset drift into 65.1 pA of error at −40 °C, 10 times the single resistor's. computed by solving, not by drawing. The direct-current error of a 10 MΩ photodiode amplifier calibrated at 25 °C, as the input current that would give the same output, against temperature: the part from the amplifier's offset drift of 1 µV/K (solid) and the part from its input bias current, 1 pA at 25 °C and doubling every 10 K (dashed), for a tee of factor 10 (heavy) and a single resistor (light). The offset reaches the output multiplied by the direct-current noise gain — one for the single resistor, since the source is a capacitor, and 10 for the tee — while the bias current sees the same transimpedance through both. The bias term overtakes the offset term at 85 °C with the tee and 40 °C with one resistor; below that the tee's error is the offset's, 10 times as large.

The drift a tee multiplies

A feedback tee reaches a large transimpedance with small resistors, and on a photodiode its price has been counted in noise: at direct current its noise gain is its own factor, where a single resistor's is one. The same noise gain multiplies the amplifier's offset. Calibrated at 25 °C and read at −40, a 10 MΩ amplifier with 1 µV/K of offset drift is 6.56 pA wrong through one resistor and 65.1 pA through a tee of factor ten — ten times, exactly, while the input bias current's error is identical through both. So the tee's drift penalty is hidden wherever the bias current dominates, which for a field-effect input doubling every 10 K is the hot end, and fully exposed at the cold end. The worst error over −40 to 85 °C comes within a factor of two of the single resistor's only above 10 MΩ for a tee of ten, and above 100 MΩ for a tee of a hundred.

A 10 µs delay in the loop: the peak rises to 13.53 dB and the sensitivity above crossover becomes a comb, and the two areas are still equal — 7.14 kHz·Np each side. computed by solving, not by drawing, from the loop's closed form, held against the netlist's cut loop to a part in a billion. The three-pole amplifier of the area essay (second pole 4 kHz) with a pure delay of 10 µs in its loop. Its margin falls from 34.9° to 14.3° at an unchanged crossover of 5.73 kHz, and the peak of |1/(1 + T)| rises from +5.70 to +13.53 dB. Above crossover the delay keeps turning the loop's phase, so the sensitivity rises and falls about zero with a period of 100 kHz. The area below zero is 7.144 kHz·Np, the area above 7.144, net 9.00 × 10⁻⁵ Hz·Np — integrated to 50 MHz on a grid that takes sixty steps a tooth.

The phase a delay never stops adding

Put a pure delay in a feedback loop and Bode's sensitivity integral does not notice: with 10 µs in the three-pole amplifier's loop the logarithm of the sensitivity still has equal areas above and below zero, 7.14 kHz·Np each side. What changes is where they are. The delay keeps turning the loop's phase above crossover, so the sensitivity becomes a comb with a tooth every 100 kHz; the desensitisation shrinks from 6.74 to 6.48 kHz·Np, the main peak rises from 5.70 dB to 13.53 and overpays it by 7%, and the comb hands the excess back below zero. The margin reads the peak from below by about 1.4 dB at every delay. Past 16.9 µs the loop is unstable and the integral stops balancing — by exactly the growth rate of the pole pair that has crossed.

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

The band a sampled loop repays in

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

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

The gain added to buy a margin

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

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

The input that costs every other input

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

Three loops with exactly 45° of phase margin, and their step responses. computed by solving, not by drawing; three lags spaced by a ratio r, the amplifier's gain bisected in each for a 45.000° margin, the step from the closed loop's residues. Lags a hundredfold apart need a loop gain of 141 and overshoot 23.6%. Spaced by three they need 4.7 and overshoot 34.5%; coincident, 2.83 and 41.0%. The same margin, and overshoots 1.73 times apart.

One margin, and the gain under it

A phase margin of 45° is quoted as an overshoot of 23 per cent, and on a loop with plenty of gain below its crossover it is: three lags a hundredfold apart, closed at 45°, overshoot 23.6%. Bring the same three lags together and the loop reaches 45° at a loop gain of 2.83 instead of 141, and overshoots 41.0% — the same margin, 1.73 times the ringing. The closed-loop peak follows the overshoot where the margin does not: predicted from the peak the worst error over 27 loops is 3.1 points, from the margin 22.2. The gain margin moves with it, from 37.2 dB to 9.0.

A gain of ten round an amplifier with a second pole: its half-power bandwidth and its noise bandwidth, each over what the gain–bandwidth product predicts. computed by solving, not by drawing: the stage as a netlist round a two-pole amplifier of 1 MHz, the second pole placed at r times GBW/G. The half-power bandwidth agrees with the second-order closed form √r·g(√r/2) to two parts in a thousand at every placement: 1.000 at r = 0.5, 1.272 at r = 1, 1.414 at r = 2, 1.231 at r = 5, 1.110 at r = 10, 1.010 at r = 100 times GBW/G. It is 1.414 times the product's prediction at r = 2 and within ten per cent only beyond r = 10. The noise bandwidth is (π/2)·GBW/G to half a per cent at every r: the second pole moves the one and leaves the other where it was.

The bandwidth the product still gets right

Gain times bandwidth is a constant for an amplifier with one pole, and real amplifiers have a second. Put it at r times the closed-loop bandwidth the product predicts and the half-power bandwidth becomes √r·g(√r/2) times GBW/G — 41.4 per cent wide at r = 2, within ten per cent only beyond r = 10 — so a follower round a 1 MHz part with its second pole at 2.5 MHz runs 40 per cent wider than the rule says. The noise bandwidth does not move at all. A second-order loop's noise bandwidth is set by one coefficient the second pole cannot touch, and it stays (π/2)·GBW/G at every r and every gain, to half a per cent on the netlist. A third pole is what breaks it.

One loop, cut at its output wire with 160 nF on it: the voltage injection crosses unity twice, the current injection reads 57 dB too much at low frequency, and together they are the loop gain. computed by solving, not by drawing. A three-pole amplifier closed for a gain of a hundred, with 100 Ω of output resistance and 160 nF of load. The loop gain read at the controlled source's own input, which draws no current (solid); read by a voltage injected in series with the output wire (dashed); and by a current injected into the same wire (dotted). The true loop crosses unity at 5.31 kHz with 8.9° of margin. The voltage reading first crosses at 5.04 kHz with 15.1°, and rises through it again at 10.6 kHz, because above 9.95 kHz the load is a lower impedance than the source. The current reading crosses at 5.82 kHz with 19.8°. Combined through 1/(1 + T) = 1/(1 + Tv) + 1/(1 + Ti) (dots), the two give the controlled source's reading to 3e-9 at every frequency.

Two wrong readings and one loop gain

A loop gain measured on a bench is measured at a wire, and a wire has an impedance on each side. Cut an amplifier's output with 100 Ω behind it and 160 nF ahead, inject a voltage in series, and the reading is the loop gain plus (1 + T)·Zs/Zl — 15.1° of margin where the loop has 8.9°, and a second unity crossing at 10.6 kHz that the loop does not have. Inject a current into the same wire and the error is (1 + T)·Zl/Zs: 19.8°, and 57 dB too much loop gain at low frequency. The two errors are reciprocal, so the readings combine exactly: 1/(1 + T) = 1/(1 + Tv) + 1/(1 + Ti) returns the loop gain at the controlled source's own input to a few parts in a billion, at every frequency and every load.

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

The gain that stops making a stage faster

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

Two loops with exactly 45° of margin and the same crossover: with 100% of the extra lag a delay, the step overshoots 28.7%, against 23.3% for two poles. computed by solving, not by drawing: the closed-loop step of a loop K·exp(−sD)/(s(1 + s/p)) with its crossover at one, its phase margin exactly 45°, and 100% of the 45° beyond the integrator supplied by the delay (solid), against the same margin from a lag alone (dashed). Delay 0.785, lag's pole absent. Overshoot 28.7% against 23.3%; settled within 2% at 7.03 against 7.06; gain margin 6.0 dB against no limit. Marched with a history buffer, and at δ = 1 checked against the exact series of the method of steps.

The margin a delay spends

A phase margin can be made of a lag or of a delay, and the number is the same either way. Forty-five degrees from a lag overshoots 23.3 per cent, and forty-five degrees from a delay overshoots 28.7; at sixty degrees the sign reverses, 8.77 against 5.57, and the two cross near 54 degrees. The overshoot is the smaller difference. A two-pole loop's gain margin has no limit at all, and five per cent of its extra lag as delay brings that to 25.5 dB; with all of it delay the gain margin is 90°/(90° − margin), which is 6.0 dB at 45°, and nothing else is in the expression. Across twenty-one such loops the margin alone misses the overshoot by 13.1 points. The closed-loop peak, which already reads the whole band, misses by 1.2.

All essays