Intermodulation » History » Version 21

HAENNIG, Gerald, 12/14/2015 11:06 PM

1 10 GOMEZ, Ramon
{{toc}}
2 10 GOMEZ, Ramon
3 10 GOMEZ, Ramon
h1. 3.3 Intermodulation (IMD)
4 2 HAENNIG, Gerald
5 17 HAENNIG, Gerald
3rd order Intermodulation measures the major contributions to the non-linear distortions on the signal.
6 2 HAENNIG, Gerald
7 2 HAENNIG, Gerald
8 11 GOMEZ, Ramon
h2. 3.3.1 Creation of two tones for Intermodulation test
9 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
10 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
To measure the intermodulation in our system is necessary to generate two sinus at the input of the optical system and to evaluate them at the output. As the signal generator couldn't provide two sinus at the same time it has been decided to use the USRP with a Labview program to do so.  
11 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
12 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
An already programmed Labview example in which one tone was generated was modified in order to do so:
13 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
14 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
p=. !{width:700px}Main_Front_Panel.png!
15 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
Figure 1. Front Panel used to generate two sinus
16 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
17 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
Then, the part of the Labview block in which the tone was generated was duplicated, adding a new output and having the result observed below: 
18 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
19 7 HAENNIG, Gerald
p=. !{width:400px}Generate_Waveform.png!
20 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
Figure 2. Block modified to generate two sinus
21 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
22 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
After the Labview modifications it could be observed at the output of the USRP the two tones:
23 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
24 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
p=. !{width:500px}two_sinus.jpg!
25 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
Figure 3. Two sinus output from the USRP
26 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
27 11 GOMEZ, Ramon
h2. 3.3.2 Measurement results
28 5 HAENNIG, Gerald
29 12 GOMEZ, Ramon
In Figure 4, 5 and 6 we can observe the different intermodulation results for 0.7, 1 and 2 GHz:
30 12 GOMEZ, Ramon
31 14 HAENNIG, Gerald
p=. !{width:700px}IMD_700MHz.png!
32 9 HAENNIG, Gerald
Figure 4. 3rd order Intermodulation vs Input Power @ 700 MHz
33 3 HAENNIG, Gerald
34 14 HAENNIG, Gerald
p=. !{width:700px}IMD_1000MHz.png!
35 15 HAENNIG, Gerald
Figure 4. 3rd order Intermodulation vs Input Power @ 1000 MHz
36 1 GOMEZ, Ramon
37 14 HAENNIG, Gerald
p=. !{width:700px}IMD_2000MHz.png!
38 12 GOMEZ, Ramon
Figure 6. 3rd order Intermodulation vs Input Power @ 2000 MHz
39 12 GOMEZ, Ramon
40 17 HAENNIG, Gerald
On these curves, it is possible to observe :
41 18 HAENNIG, Gerald
* 1:1 slope for the signal (f1 or f2) : IMD is more important as the output signal increases;
42 17 HAENNIG, Gerald
* 3:1 slope for 3rd intermodulation product (2*f1-f2 or 2*f2-f1);
43 20 HAENNIG, Gerald
* Carrier to Intermodulation degrades as the input signal increases ;
44 19 HAENNIG, Gerald
* IP3 point, intersection between linear & intermodulation lines : 3rd Order Output (OIP3) or Input (IIP3) Intercept Points are the metric to characterize such a non-linearity.
45 16 HAENNIG, Gerald
46 16 HAENNIG, Gerald
p=. !{width:700px}SFDR.png!
47 16 HAENNIG, Gerald
Figure 6. Spurious Free Dynamic Range (SFDR) @ 2000 MHz
48 21 HAENNIG, Gerald
49 21 HAENNIG, Gerald
SFDR is the input power range where the output signal is above the noise level and 3rd order intermodulation products remains below the noise floor level. 
50 21 HAENNIG, Gerald
51 21 HAENNIG, Gerald
This metric summarizes noise and linearity performances in 1 figure : the higher its value, the better is the component.