• RF switches

    From John Larkin@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 25 16:03:28 2022
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich S@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Fri Feb 25 17:44:35 2022
    On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 12:03:45 AM UTC, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.


    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Well the HMC347B seems to be "in production" https://www.analog.com/en/products/hmc347b.html#product-overview

    and in stock https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/analog-devices-inc./HMC347B/9484664?utm_source=505&utm_medium=supplier&utm_campaign=buynow
    https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Analog-Devices/HMC347B?qs=sGAEpiMZZMv0NwlthflBi%252BwqWTQIZySMXYxFWpKgzJk%3D

    cheers, RS

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Clifford Heath@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Sat Feb 26 13:08:15 2022
    On 26/2/22 11:03 am, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    We've used Skyworks SKY13453 (2-way) and SKY13317 (3-way) but they're
    only 6GHz. Check their other parts?

    And Qorvo of course: <https://www.qorvo.com/products/switches/discrete-switches> <https://store.qorvo.com/products/switches/rf-switch?att_4714=1&att_4719=6%2c7>

    Clifford Heath

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to richsulinengineer@gmail.com on Fri Feb 25 18:02:56 2022
    On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 17:44:35 -0800 (PST), Rich S
    <richsulinengineer@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 12:03:45 AM UTC, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.


    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Well the HMC347B seems to be "in production" >https://www.analog.com/en/products/hmc347b.html#product-overview

    and in stock >https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/analog-devices-inc./HMC347B/9484664?utm_source=505&utm_medium=supplier&utm_campaign=buynow
    https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Analog-Devices/HMC347B?qs=sGAEpiMZZMv0NwlthflBi%252BwqWTQIZySMXYxFWpKgzJk%3D

    cheers, RS

    347B is a bare die. Mouser seems to have some of the only surviving
    packaged part, HMC347ALP. We could scoop up a lifetime supply, for $70
    each.

    Thanks.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Walliker@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Sat Feb 26 03:22:53 2022
    On Saturday, 26 February 2022 at 00:03:45 UTC, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    The data sheet does say:
    "All of the RF ports (RFC, RF1, and RF2) are dc-coupled to 0 V,
    and no dc blocking is required at the RF ports when the RF line
    potential is equal to 0 V."
    There is a similar device, the ADRF5025 that goes down to 9kHz, but that has much slower switching.
    There must be resistive filtering on the gate drive and a resistive path from the
    FET sources to ground to bias the FETs. The time constant must be such that there is not enough time for the gate charge to leak away during each half-cycle of
    the switched signal. If so, the tradeoff between minimum operating frequency and switching time would make complete sense, as would the power derating
    at low frequencies.
    The data sheet also mentions that there are no low-frequency spurious signals, so
    they are not using a charge pump for FET bias.

    John

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to jrwalliker@gmail.com on Sat Feb 26 07:07:58 2022
    On Sat, 26 Feb 2022 03:22:53 -0800 (PST), John Walliker
    <jrwalliker@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Saturday, 26 February 2022 at 00:03:45 UTC, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    The data sheet does say:
    "All of the RF ports (RFC, RF1, and RF2) are dc-coupled to 0 V,
    and no dc blocking is required at the RF ports when the RF line
    potential is equal to 0 V."
    There is a similar device, the ADRF5025 that goes down to 9kHz, but that has >much slower switching.
    There must be resistive filtering on the gate drive and a resistive path from the
    FET sources to ground to bias the FETs. The time constant must be such that >there is not enough time for the gate charge to leak away during each half-cycle of
    the switched signal. If so, the tradeoff between minimum operating frequency >and switching time would make complete sense, as would the power derating
    at low frequencies.

    Maybe. I suspect the gate drivers are slow to save power.

    The data sheet also mentions that there are no low-frequency spurious signals, so
    they are not using a charge pump for FET bias.

    John

    The RF people seem to pick some arbitrary low frequency limit on
    parts, possibly based on the blocking caps on their eval board.

    Some people apparently work with spectrum analyzers that commonly have
    a 9 KHz low end, so spec their parts to 9 KHz.

    I did once use a Hittite 8-to-1 RF mux that was spec'd "DC-to-12 GHz."
    It didn't work right below about 50 MHz. I eventually got the chip
    designer on the phone but he wouldn't explain it because it was
    proprietary.

    The RF world is weird.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to no.spam@please.net on Sat Feb 26 08:16:48 2022
    On Sat, 26 Feb 2022 13:08:15 +1100, Clifford Heath
    <no.spam@please.net> wrote:

    On 26/2/22 11:03 am, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    We've used Skyworks SKY13453 (2-way) and SKY13317 (3-way) but they're
    only 6GHz. Check their other parts?

    And Qorvo of course: ><https://www.qorvo.com/products/switches/discrete-switches> ><https://store.qorvo.com/products/switches/rf-switch?att_4714=1&att_4719=6%2c7>

    Clifford Heath

    Wow, a lot of near-misses.

    I'm amplifying an arbitrary waveform as the seed of a largish laser.
    And I want to inject a 100 ps fiducial pulse. We can make a nice
    programmable 100 ps gaussian pulse, but can't passively mix it with
    the arb without wrecking both. So I was thinking that a switch could
    select the impulse and then immediately switch over to the arb. But
    the customer wants at most 5 ns between the fid and the arb.

    Maybe we'll tell them they have to wait longer. The 5 ns requirement
    might not be absolute.

    I could delay the fiducial some, to start it after we've told the
    pokey analog switch to go. Maybe.





    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joe Gwinn@21:1/5 to All on Sat Feb 26 13:20:54 2022
    On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 18:02:56 -0800, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com
    wrote:

    On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 17:44:35 -0800 (PST), Rich S ><richsulinengineer@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 12:03:45 AM UTC, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.


    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Well the HMC347B seems to be "in production" >>https://www.analog.com/en/products/hmc347b.html#product-overview

    and in stock >>https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/analog-devices-inc./HMC347B/9484664?utm_source=505&utm_medium=supplier&utm_campaign=buynow
    https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Analog-Devices/HMC347B?qs=sGAEpiMZZMv0NwlthflBi%252BwqWTQIZySMXYxFWpKgzJk%3D

    cheers, RS

    347B is a bare die. Mouser seems to have some of the only surviving
    packaged part, HMC347ALP. We could scoop up a lifetime supply, for $70
    each.

    Probably why I mostly see PIN diodes used for such things.

    Joe Gwinn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to All on Sat Feb 26 11:13:35 2022
    On Sat, 26 Feb 2022 13:20:54 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
    wrote:

    On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 18:02:56 -0800, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com
    wrote:

    On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 17:44:35 -0800 (PST), Rich S >><richsulinengineer@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 12:03:45 AM UTC, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10 >>>> GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.


    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Well the HMC347B seems to be "in production" >>>https://www.analog.com/en/products/hmc347b.html#product-overview

    and in stock >>>https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/analog-devices-inc./HMC347B/9484664?utm_source=505&utm_medium=supplier&utm_campaign=buynow
    https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Analog-Devices/HMC347B?qs=sGAEpiMZZMv0NwlthflBi%252BwqWTQIZySMXYxFWpKgzJk%3D

    cheers, RS

    347B is a bare die. Mouser seems to have some of the only surviving >>packaged part, HMC347ALP. We could scoop up a lifetime supply, for $70 >>each.

    Probably why I mostly see PIN diodes used for such things.

    Joe Gwinn

    PINs are cheap and can switch lots of power. They are terrible for
    time domain signals. At really high frequencies, their off capacitance
    can be a problem. 0.2 pF is about 50 ohms at 14 GHz.



    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Walliker@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sat Feb 26 14:07:08 2022
    On Saturday, 26 February 2022 at 15:08:14 UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sat, 26 Feb 2022 03:22:53 -0800 (PST), John Walliker
    <jrwal...@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Saturday, 26 February 2022 at 00:03:45 UTC, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    The data sheet does say:
    "All of the RF ports (RFC, RF1, and RF2) are dc-coupled to 0 V,
    and no dc blocking is required at the RF ports when the RF line
    potential is equal to 0 V."
    There is a similar device, the ADRF5025 that goes down to 9kHz, but that has >much slower switching.
    There must be resistive filtering on the gate drive and a resistive path from the
    FET sources to ground to bias the FETs. The time constant must be such that >there is not enough time for the gate charge to leak away during each half-cycle of
    the switched signal. If so, the tradeoff between minimum operating frequency >and switching time would make complete sense, as would the power derating >at low frequencies.
    Maybe. I suspect the gate drivers are slow to save power.
    The data sheet also mentions that there are no low-frequency spurious signals, so
    they are not using a charge pump for FET bias.

    John
    The RF people seem to pick some arbitrary low frequency limit on
    parts, possibly based on the blocking caps on their eval board.

    Some people apparently work with spectrum analyzers that commonly have
    a 9 KHz low end, so spec their parts to 9 KHz.

    There are two almost identical parts (ADRF5024 and ADRF5025) with different tradeoffs between switching speed and low-frequency cutoff. That isn't going to be explained by limitations of the test gear or blocking caps on the eval board - especially when the eval board doesn't even have any dc blocking caps on it!
    The data sheet is quite specific that there is a dc path to ground on all the rf pins.
    It is a real tradeoff and there is nothing arbitrary about it.

    John

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Jones@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Feb 27 21:09:48 2022
    On 27/02/2022 03:16, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sat, 26 Feb 2022 13:08:15 +1100, Clifford Heath
    <no.spam@please.net> wrote:

    On 26/2/22 11:03 am, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    We've used Skyworks SKY13453 (2-way) and SKY13317 (3-way) but they're
    only 6GHz. Check their other parts?

    And Qorvo of course:
    <https://www.qorvo.com/products/switches/discrete-switches>
    <https://store.qorvo.com/products/switches/rf-switch?att_4714=1&att_4719=6%2c7>

    Clifford Heath

    Wow, a lot of near-misses.

    I'm amplifying an arbitrary waveform as the seed of a largish laser.
    And I want to inject a 100 ps fiducial pulse. We can make a nice
    programmable 100 ps gaussian pulse, but can't passively mix it with
    the arb without wrecking both.

    Why? Does each one produce interfering crud when it should produce
    nothing, or are you just not able to tolerate the amplitude loss of a
    passive resistive combiner?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com on Sun Feb 27 07:35:05 2022
    On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 21:09:48 +1100, Chris Jones
    <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 27/02/2022 03:16, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sat, 26 Feb 2022 13:08:15 +1100, Clifford Heath
    <no.spam@please.net> wrote:

    On 26/2/22 11:03 am, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10 >>>> GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    We've used Skyworks SKY13453 (2-way) and SKY13317 (3-way) but they're
    only 6GHz. Check their other parts?

    And Qorvo of course:
    <https://www.qorvo.com/products/switches/discrete-switches>
    <https://store.qorvo.com/products/switches/rf-switch?att_4714=1&att_4719=6%2c7>

    Clifford Heath

    Wow, a lot of near-misses.

    I'm amplifying an arbitrary waveform as the seed of a largish laser.
    And I want to inject a 100 ps fiducial pulse. We can make a nice
    programmable 100 ps gaussian pulse, but can't passively mix it with
    the arb without wrecking both.

    Why? Does each one produce interfering crud when it should produce
    nothing, or are you just not able to tolerate the amplitude loss of a
    passive resistive combiner?

    Amplitide. Neither the arb nor the fiducual generator can make over
    about 0.75 volts peak, and the distributed amp needs all of that to
    drive the modulator. DA's invert, so adding another $300 chip in the
    signal chain creates new tangles.

    The many available RF switches are various flavors of weird and all
    are poorly spec'd. I've never seen any mention of the capacitance of
    the mux control pins, for instance. Or of switching glitches. OIr,
    heaven forbid, any actual waveforms. The really fast ones need a pair
    of maybe-big poorly-specified negative switch control voltages.

    Analog Devices acquired Hittite, which had the fastest RF switches.
    "Support" is mostly now forums. Some issues that I care about are
    asked about on the forum; some haven't been answered in four years.

    TI had the same problem when they acquired Burr-Brown. Nobody knew
    much about the parts.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gerhard Hoffmann@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 27 18:15:57 2022
    Am 27.02.22 um 16:35 schrieb jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com:

    Analog Devices acquired Hittite, which had the fastest RF switches.
    "Support" is mostly now forums. Some issues that I care about are
    asked about on the forum; some haven't been answered in four years.

    TI had the same problem when they acquired Burr-Brown. Nobody knew
    much about the parts.

    But this is not only for aquired products. My questions about
    the bleeding controls in the ADF5356 synthesizer are unanswered,
    too, after 2 years. Some 500 reads.

    About as helpful as the Altium forum.

    Gerhard

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 27 09:51:52 2022
    On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 18:15:57 +0100, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de>
    wrote:

    Am 27.02.22 um 16:35 schrieb jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com:

    Analog Devices acquired Hittite, which had the fastest RF switches.
    "Support" is mostly now forums. Some issues that I care about are
    asked about on the forum; some haven't been answered in four years.

    TI had the same problem when they acquired Burr-Brown. Nobody knew
    much about the parts.

    But this is not only for aquired products. My questions about
    the bleeding controls in the ADF5356 synthesizer are unanswered,
    too, after 2 years. Some 500 reads.

    We had a lot of hassle using the LMX2571 synth, that TI made necessary
    by being coy. Makes no sense.


    About as helpful as the Altium forum.

    Gerhard

    It must be difficult to find and keep good application and support
    engineers. They have a life that is, basically, continuous job
    interviews. It's a great job for a recent grad.

    I guess that the chip designers, if they are even still around, need
    to be defended against customer questions, or they wouldn't get work
    done.

    We have to test a lot of parts ourselves to understand them.

    We need a web site where we share insights, measurements, code, bugs.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Hobbs@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Feb 27 19:02:25 2022
    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sat, 26 Feb 2022 03:22:53 -0800 (PST), John Walliker <jrwalliker@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Saturday, 26 February 2022 at 00:03:45 UTC, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    The data sheet does say:
    "All of the RF ports (RFC, RF1, and RF2) are dc-coupled to 0 V,
    and no dc blocking is required at the RF ports when the RF line
    potential is equal to 0 V."
    There is a similar device, the ADRF5025 that goes down to 9kHz, but that has >> much slower switching.
    There must be resistive filtering on the gate drive and a resistive path from the
    FET sources to ground to bias the FETs. The time constant must be such that >> there is not enough time for the gate charge to leak away during each half-cycle of
    the switched signal. If so, the tradeoff between minimum operating frequency
    and switching time would make complete sense, as would the power derating
    at low frequencies.

    Maybe. I suspect the gate drivers are slow to save power.

    The data sheet also mentions that there are no low-frequency spurious signals, so
    they are not using a charge pump for FET bias.

    John

    The RF people seem to pick some arbitrary low frequency limit on
    parts, possibly based on the blocking caps on their eval board.

    And the 1/f corner of the parts.


    Some people apparently work with spectrum analyzers that commonly have
    a 9 KHz low end, so spec their parts to 9 KHz.

    HP 8566B, for instance. That isn't a coupling cap, it's just the wings
    of the huge peak at DC. The HP 8568B has a coupling cap, which makes it
    harder to blow up the first mixer.

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs


    --
    Dr Philip C D Hobbs
    Principal Consultant
    ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
    Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
    Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

    http://electrooptical.net
    http://hobbs-eo.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Jones@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Mon Feb 28 11:20:28 2022
    On 28/02/2022 02:35, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 21:09:48 +1100, Chris Jones
    <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 27/02/2022 03:16, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sat, 26 Feb 2022 13:08:15 +1100, Clifford Heath
    <no.spam@please.net> wrote:

    On 26/2/22 11:03 am, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10 >>>>> GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    We've used Skyworks SKY13453 (2-way) and SKY13317 (3-way) but they're
    only 6GHz. Check their other parts?

    And Qorvo of course:
    <https://www.qorvo.com/products/switches/discrete-switches>
    <https://store.qorvo.com/products/switches/rf-switch?att_4714=1&att_4719=6%2c7>

    Clifford Heath

    Wow, a lot of near-misses.

    I'm amplifying an arbitrary waveform as the seed of a largish laser.
    And I want to inject a 100 ps fiducial pulse. We can make a nice
    programmable 100 ps gaussian pulse, but can't passively mix it with
    the arb without wrecking both.

    Why? Does each one produce interfering crud when it should produce
    nothing, or are you just not able to tolerate the amplitude loss of a
    passive resistive combiner?

    Amplitide. Neither the arb nor the fiducual generator can make over
    about 0.75 volts peak, and the distributed amp needs all of that to
    drive the modulator.

    Could you increase the output of the fiducial generator somehow? Then a combiner with unequal resistors could have low loss for the arb.

    If you don't care too much about the shape of the fiducial, there are
    probably also some less-broadband-on-one-port combiners that could help
    with lower loss for the arb.

    If you can't increase the output voltage of the fiducial generator, it
    may be sufficient to provide multiple outputs with the same voltage, or
    a single, lower-impedance output driving a combiner designed for
    different impedances.

    Could you yank the arb output high just during the fiducial pulse, with
    the emitter of a fast NPN? The impedance would not stay constant, but
    that mightn't matter.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gerhard Hoffmann@21:1/5 to All on Mon Feb 28 02:49:53 2022
    Am 26.02.22 um 16:07 schrieb jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com:

    The RF people seem to pick some arbitrary low frequency limit on
    parts, possibly based on the blocking caps on their eval board.

    Some people apparently work with spectrum analyzers that commonly have
    a 9 KHz low end, so spec their parts to 9 KHz.

    The 9 KHz come from some EMC norms. If a lab wants to certify
    compliance to these norms, they must measure to 9 KHz.
    Everything better might cost one more synthesizer loop aka money
    or lose dynamic range because of 1/f, filter bandwidth or
    over all synthesizer quality.


    I did once use a Hittite 8-to-1 RF mux that was spec'd "DC-to-12 GHz."
    It didn't work right below about 50 MHz. I eventually got the chip
    designer on the phone but he wouldn't explain it because it was
    proprietary.

    The 8720A network analyzer goes from 20 GHz down to 50 MHz.
    They won't specify anything they cannot measure.
    And 50 MHz is just nervous DC.

    Many s-parameter files end at either 3 or 6 GHz because
    the 8753 A/B/SE/WHATEVER ends at 3 or 6 GHz without/with
    the option -6.

    The RF world is weird.

    No, just costly.

    And PINs will switch even slower.
    They start to distort below a few MHz.

    Maybe you can build something discrete with CEL 20 GHz GaAsFets.

    < https://www.digikey.de/de/products/detail/cel/CE3520K3-C1/6165462 >

    Cheers, Gerhard

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com on Sun Feb 27 17:31:00 2022
    On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 11:20:28 +1100, Chris Jones
    <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 28/02/2022 02:35, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 21:09:48 +1100, Chris Jones
    <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 27/02/2022 03:16, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sat, 26 Feb 2022 13:08:15 +1100, Clifford Heath
    <no.spam@please.net> wrote:

    On 26/2/22 11:03 am, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10 >>>>>> GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100 >>>>>> MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    We've used Skyworks SKY13453 (2-way) and SKY13317 (3-way) but they're >>>>> only 6GHz. Check their other parts?

    And Qorvo of course:
    <https://www.qorvo.com/products/switches/discrete-switches>
    <https://store.qorvo.com/products/switches/rf-switch?att_4714=1&att_4719=6%2c7>

    Clifford Heath

    Wow, a lot of near-misses.

    I'm amplifying an arbitrary waveform as the seed of a largish laser.
    And I want to inject a 100 ps fiducial pulse. We can make a nice
    programmable 100 ps gaussian pulse, but can't passively mix it with
    the arb without wrecking both.

    Why? Does each one produce interfering crud when it should produce
    nothing, or are you just not able to tolerate the amplitude loss of a
    passive resistive combiner?

    Amplitide. Neither the arb nor the fiducual generator can make over
    about 0.75 volts peak, and the distributed amp needs all of that to
    drive the modulator.

    Could you increase the output of the fiducial generator somehow? Then a >combiner with unequal resistors could have low loss for the arb.

    We're using a Micrel laser driver chip, Sy88022. It makes 25 ps edges
    and has beautiful linear amplitude control, but is intended to drive a
    low impedance laser and won't swing even one volt.

    Inspired by Leo Bodnar's pulse generator, which uses a similar Maxim
    chip.


    If you don't care too much about the shape of the fiducial, there are >probably also some less-broadband-on-one-port combiners that could help
    with lower loss for the arb.

    The shape really matters. It will be used to test the response of
    laser bits downstream. The customer wants a 100 ps gaussian.


    If you can't increase the output voltage of the fiducial generator, it
    may be sufficient to provide multiple outputs with the same voltage, or
    a single, lower-impedance output driving a combiner designed for
    different impedances.

    Could you yank the arb output high just during the fiducial pulse, with
    the emitter of a fast NPN? The impedance would not stay constant, but
    that mightn't matter.



    It's hard enough to make a 100 ps programmable gaussian pulse. The
    analog switch looks like the thing we need.

    There are some amazing RF switches around. ADRF5025 is rated for 9 KHz
    to 44 GHz. It switches slow so we'd have to deal with that.

    The fast switches all look like nightmares. Some need 7 volt (or 40
    volt!) gate drives into unspecified capacitances.





    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 27 18:12:32 2022
    On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 02:49:53 +0100, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de>
    wrote:

    Am 26.02.22 um 16:07 schrieb jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com:

    The RF people seem to pick some arbitrary low frequency limit on
    parts, possibly based on the blocking caps on their eval board.

    Some people apparently work with spectrum analyzers that commonly have
    a 9 KHz low end, so spec their parts to 9 KHz.

    The 9 KHz come from some EMC norms. If a lab wants to certify
    compliance to these norms, they must measure to 9 KHz.
    Everything better might cost one more synthesizer loop aka money
    or lose dynamic range because of 1/f, filter bandwidth or
    over all synthesizer quality.


    I did once use a Hittite 8-to-1 RF mux that was spec'd "DC-to-12 GHz."
    It didn't work right below about 50 MHz. I eventually got the chip
    designer on the phone but he wouldn't explain it because it was
    proprietary.

    The 8720A network analyzer goes from 20 GHz down to 50 MHz.
    They won't specify anything they cannot measure.
    And 50 MHz is just nervous DC.

    The Hittite mux thing was real. It is supposed to terminate the
    unselected inputs with 50 ohms, but there is apparently a cap in
    series with each terminator resistor. So much for "DC."




    Many s-parameter files end at either 3 or 6 GHz because
    the 8753 A/B/SE/WHATEVER ends at 3 or 6 GHz without/with
    the option -6.

    The RF world is weird.

    No, just costly.

    And PINs will switch even slower.
    They start to distort below a few MHz.

    Maybe you can build something discrete with CEL 20 GHz GaAsFets.

    < https://www.digikey.de/de/products/detail/cel/CE3520K3-C1/6165462 >

    We use a lot of MiniCircuits enhancement phemts, the SAV series. I
    considered making my own RF switch from a couple of them, but it would
    be risky. Gate drive would be interesting.

    We did make a nice switchable attenuator with a SAV541.




    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Jones@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Mon Feb 28 16:55:18 2022
    On 28/02/2022 12:31, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 11:20:28 +1100, Chris Jones
    <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 28/02/2022 02:35, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 21:09:48 +1100, Chris Jones
    <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 27/02/2022 03:16, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sat, 26 Feb 2022 13:08:15 +1100, Clifford Heath
    <no.spam@please.net> wrote:

    On 26/2/22 11:03 am, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10 >>>>>>> GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100 >>>>>>> MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone >>>>>>> obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    We've used Skyworks SKY13453 (2-way) and SKY13317 (3-way) but they're >>>>>> only 6GHz. Check their other parts?

    And Qorvo of course:
    <https://www.qorvo.com/products/switches/discrete-switches>
    <https://store.qorvo.com/products/switches/rf-switch?att_4714=1&att_4719=6%2c7>

    Clifford Heath

    Wow, a lot of near-misses.

    I'm amplifying an arbitrary waveform as the seed of a largish laser. >>>>> And I want to inject a 100 ps fiducial pulse. We can make a nice
    programmable 100 ps gaussian pulse, but can't passively mix it with
    the arb without wrecking both.

    Why? Does each one produce interfering crud when it should produce
    nothing, or are you just not able to tolerate the amplitude loss of a
    passive resistive combiner?

    Amplitide. Neither the arb nor the fiducual generator can make over
    about 0.75 volts peak, and the distributed amp needs all of that to
    drive the modulator.

    Could you increase the output of the fiducial generator somehow? Then a
    combiner with unequal resistors could have low loss for the arb.

    We're using a Micrel laser driver chip, Sy88022. It makes 25 ps edges
    and has beautiful linear amplitude control, but is intended to drive a
    low impedance laser and won't swing even one volt.

    Inspired by Leo Bodnar's pulse generator, which uses a similar Maxim
    chip.


    If you don't care too much about the shape of the fiducial, there are
    probably also some less-broadband-on-one-port combiners that could help
    with lower loss for the arb.

    The shape really matters. It will be used to test the response of
    laser bits downstream. The customer wants a 100 ps gaussian.

    If the fiducial generator will drive a low impedance, and if the width
    of the pulse is only 100ps, I'm sure there is some tricky transmission
    line transformer way to impose it in series with your arb output and
    maintain decent pulse shape. It would take some experimentation though.

    Whatever switch you choose, I wonder what amount of glitch gets injected
    into the signal output when it switches (charge injection or whatever
    you want to call it).

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Miles, KE5FX@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Sun Feb 27 21:46:24 2022
    On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 4:03:45 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    PE42525, maybe. 9 kHz-60 GHz, SPDT, 8-12 ns switching time to
    10%/90%, 48-60 ns settling time to 0.05 dB.

    I'd be surprised if you find anything faster than that. PSemi makes
    fantastic stuff (at least, when you can buy it.)

    -- john, KE5FX

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to jmiles@gmail.com on Mon Feb 28 02:33:40 2022
    On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 21:46:24 -0800 (PST), "John Miles, KE5FX" <jmiles@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 4:03:45 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    PE42525, maybe. 9 kHz-60 GHz, SPDT, 8-12 ns switching time to
    10%/90%, 48-60 ns settling time to 0.05 dB.

    I'd be surprised if you find anything faster than that. PSemi makes >fantastic stuff (at least, when you can buy it.)

    -- john, KE5FX

    Interesting, but bare die. It reminds me of some of the Hittite parts:
    no power pins. And no capacitance spec on the control pins.





    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com on Mon Feb 28 02:23:27 2022
    On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 16:55:18 +1100, Chris Jones
    <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 28/02/2022 12:31, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 11:20:28 +1100, Chris Jones
    <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 28/02/2022 02:35, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 21:09:48 +1100, Chris Jones
    <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 27/02/2022 03:16, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sat, 26 Feb 2022 13:08:15 +1100, Clifford Heath
    <no.spam@please.net> wrote:

    On 26/2/22 11:03 am, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10 >>>>>>>> GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100 >>>>>>>> MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone >>>>>>>> obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    We've used Skyworks SKY13453 (2-way) and SKY13317 (3-way) but they're >>>>>>> only 6GHz. Check their other parts?

    And Qorvo of course:
    <https://www.qorvo.com/products/switches/discrete-switches>
    <https://store.qorvo.com/products/switches/rf-switch?att_4714=1&att_4719=6%2c7>

    Clifford Heath

    Wow, a lot of near-misses.

    I'm amplifying an arbitrary waveform as the seed of a largish laser. >>>>>> And I want to inject a 100 ps fiducial pulse. We can make a nice
    programmable 100 ps gaussian pulse, but can't passively mix it with >>>>>> the arb without wrecking both.

    Why? Does each one produce interfering crud when it should produce
    nothing, or are you just not able to tolerate the amplitude loss of a >>>>> passive resistive combiner?

    Amplitide. Neither the arb nor the fiducual generator can make over
    about 0.75 volts peak, and the distributed amp needs all of that to
    drive the modulator.

    Could you increase the output of the fiducial generator somehow? Then a
    combiner with unequal resistors could have low loss for the arb.

    We're using a Micrel laser driver chip, Sy88022. It makes 25 ps edges
    and has beautiful linear amplitude control, but is intended to drive a
    low impedance laser and won't swing even one volt.

    Inspired by Leo Bodnar's pulse generator, which uses a similar Maxim
    chip.


    If you don't care too much about the shape of the fiducial, there are
    probably also some less-broadband-on-one-port combiners that could help
    with lower loss for the arb.

    The shape really matters. It will be used to test the response of
    laser bits downstream. The customer wants a 100 ps gaussian.

    If the fiducial generator will drive a low impedance, and if the width
    of the pulse is only 100ps, I'm sure there is some tricky transmission
    line transformer way to impose it in series with your arb output and
    maintain decent pulse shape. It would take some experimentation though.

    Whatever switch you choose, I wonder what amount of glitch gets injected
    into the signal output when it switches (charge injection or whatever
    you want to call it).



    One would think that would be specified on the data sheet of an analog
    switch. It isn't.

    I guess that RF people don't have oscilloscopes.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mixed nuts@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Mon Feb 28 16:39:34 2022
    On 2/25/2022 19:03, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    Start here:

    Warren, W. S. (1987).
    Effects of Pulse Shaping in Laser Spectroscopy
    Laser Applications to Chemical Dynamics.
    doi:10.1117/12.966903

    WSW is still active - Duke U.


    --
    Grizzly H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Simon S Aysdie@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Tue Mar 1 20:10:05 2022
    On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 4:03:45 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    https://www.psemi.com/pdf/datasheets/pe42525ds.pdf

    and other switches.

    I'd check Macom too. We've been designing some of our own lately.

    Just a note: there is a difference between amplitude settling and switching speed. I think you do care about switching speed.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Skittles@21:1/5 to melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie on Tue Mar 8 07:49:41 2022
    On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 16:39:34 -0500, mixed nuts
    <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> wrote:

    On 2/25/2022 19:03, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    Start here:

    Warren, W. S. (1987).
    Effects of Pulse Shaping in Laser Spectroscopy
    Laser Applications to Chemical Dynamics.
    doi:10.1117/12.966903

    WSW is still active - Duke U.


    It amazes me that so many people spec RF switches without asking the
    power of the signal to be switched. Pretty fundamental.

    What is the typical coherence length for light in chemical solutions?


    Skittles

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to gwhite@ti.com on Tue Mar 8 07:59:10 2022
    On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 20:10:05 -0800 (PST), Simon S Aysdie
    <gwhite@ti.com> wrote:

    On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 4:03:45 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    https://www.psemi.com/pdf/datasheets/pe42525ds.pdf

    and other switches.

    I'd check Macom too. We've been designing some of our own lately.

    Just a note: there is a difference between amplitude settling and switching speed. I think you do care about switching speed.


    I'm working with short, shaped pulses, so I want the switch to have
    good pulse fidelity within some fast time of switching.

    ADRF5024 looks good. Its gross switching happens in under 10 ns and is
    pretty clean. In fine RF tradition, it's underspecified and specs are
    basically dishonest.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Skittles@21:1/5 to All on Tue Mar 8 09:04:16 2022
    On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 07:59:10 -0800, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com
    wrote:

    On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 20:10:05 -0800 (PST), Simon S Aysdie
    <gwhite@ti.com> wrote:

    On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 4:03:45 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    https://www.psemi.com/pdf/datasheets/pe42525ds.pdf

    and other switches.

    I'd check Macom too. We've been designing some of our own lately.

    Just a note: there is a difference between amplitude settling and switching speed. I think you do care about switching speed.


    I'm working with short, shaped pulses, so I want the switch to have
    good pulse fidelity within some fast time of switching.

    ADRF5024 looks good. Its gross switching happens in under 10 ns and is
    pretty clean. In fine RF tradition, it's underspecified and specs are >basically dishonest.


    You may want to look the the switch through a TDR (Time domain
    reflectomter). That will give you the best measurement for switch's
    ability to maintain pulse fidelity.

    Skittles

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to All on Tue Mar 8 08:58:31 2022
    On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 09:04:16 -0700, Skittles<Skittles@nowhere8.org>
    wrote:

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 07:59:10 -0800, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com
    wrote:

    On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 20:10:05 -0800 (PST), Simon S Aysdie
    <gwhite@ti.com> wrote:

    On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 4:03:45 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10 >>>> GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    https://www.psemi.com/pdf/datasheets/pe42525ds.pdf

    and other switches.

    I'd check Macom too. We've been designing some of our own lately.

    Just a note: there is a difference between amplitude settling and switching speed. I think you do care about switching speed.


    I'm working with short, shaped pulses, so I want the switch to have
    good pulse fidelity within some fast time of switching.

    ADRF5024 looks good. Its gross switching happens in under 10 ns and is >>pretty clean. In fine RF tradition, it's underspecified and specs are >>basically dishonest.


    You may want to look the the switch through a TDR (Time domain
    reflectomter). That will give you the best measurement for switch's
    ability to maintain pulse fidelity.

    Skittles

    We've been testing a number of RF switches with pulse generators and
    TDR. It has been interesting.

    Several of the eval boards have the no-solder screw-on microwave
    connectors. The eval boards are free or less if you account for those.





    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mixed nuts@21:1/5 to Skittles on Tue Mar 8 12:03:30 2022
    On 3/8/2022 09:49, Skittles wrote:
    On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 16:39:34 -0500, mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> wrote:

    On 2/25/2022 19:03, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10
    GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    Start here:

    Warren, W. S. (1987).
    Effects of Pulse Shaping in Laser Spectroscopy
    Laser Applications to Chemical Dynamics.
    doi:10.1117/12.966903

    WSW is still active - Duke U.


    It amazes me that so many people spec RF switches without asking the
    power of the signal to be switched. Pretty fundamental.

    What is the typical coherence length for light in chemical solutions?

    10^10 light years for dilute homogeneous solutions, <1 um for dense anisotropic dispersive solutions.


    --
    Grizzly H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Miles, KE5FX@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Tue Mar 8 12:33:24 2022
    On Monday, February 28, 2022 at 2:33:54 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    Interesting, but bare die. It reminds me of some of the Hittite parts:
    no power pins. And no capacitance spec on the control pins.

    I see they now have a packaged version:

    https://www.psemi.com/products/rf-switches/broadband-rf-switches/pe42546

    Only rated for 45 GHz, though, so there's that. No actual data yet other than the
    "product brief." Their parts generally do what they say, though.

    -- john, KE5FX

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Skittles@21:1/5 to All on Tue Mar 8 21:09:03 2022
    On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 08:58:31 -0800, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com
    wrote:

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 09:04:16 -0700, Skittles<Skittles@nowhere8.org>
    wrote:

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 07:59:10 -0800, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com >>wrote:

    On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 20:10:05 -0800 (PST), Simon S Aysdie
    <gwhite@ti.com> wrote:

    On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 4:03:45 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
    Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10 >>>>> GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100
    MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    https://www.psemi.com/pdf/datasheets/pe42525ds.pdf

    and other switches.

    I'd check Macom too. We've been designing some of our own lately.

    Just a note: there is a difference between amplitude settling and switching speed. I think you do care about switching speed.


    I'm working with short, shaped pulses, so I want the switch to have
    good pulse fidelity within some fast time of switching.

    ADRF5024 looks good. Its gross switching happens in under 10 ns and is >>>pretty clean. In fine RF tradition, it's underspecified and specs are >>>basically dishonest.


    You may want to look the the switch through a TDR (Time domain >>reflectomter). That will give you the best measurement for switch's
    ability to maintain pulse fidelity.

    Skittles

    We've been testing a number of RF switches with pulse generators and
    TDR. It has been interesting.

    Several of the eval boards have the no-solder screw-on microwave
    connectors. The eval boards are free or less if you account for those.


    What kind of transmission line are you running into the switches?
    Sometimes that can really affect your measurements.

    For instance if you are running coplanar or microstrip and you have
    some components from the line to ground, they should be split equally
    to both sides of the line. Say your circuit had 100 ohm to ground, it
    should be 2 each 200 ohm to ground on both edges of the line so the
    currents split evenly. Make sure the ground current follows the same
    path as the signal, each being in different planes.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to All on Tue Mar 8 21:49:56 2022
    On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 21:09:03 -0700, Skittles<Skittles@nowhere8.org>
    wrote:

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 08:58:31 -0800, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com
    wrote:

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 09:04:16 -0700, Skittles<Skittles@nowhere8.org>
    wrote:

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 07:59:10 -0800, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com >>>wrote:

    On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 20:10:05 -0800 (PST), Simon S Aysdie
    <gwhite@ti.com> wrote:

    On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 4:03:45 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote: >>>>>> Question for the RF guys here.

    We want a wideband RF switch IC that switches fast. Bandwidth lf to 10 >>>>>> GHz or better, switching in well under 10 ns.

    ADRF5024 is 100 MHz to 44 GHz, but switches in about 17 ns. The 100 >>>>>> MHz lower signal bw makes no sense.

    HMC347 looked pretty good, DC-14 GHz and 10 ns typ, but it's gone
    obsolete.

    Who else makes parts like this?

    https://www.psemi.com/pdf/datasheets/pe42525ds.pdf

    and other switches.

    I'd check Macom too. We've been designing some of our own lately.

    Just a note: there is a difference between amplitude settling and switching speed. I think you do care about switching speed.


    I'm working with short, shaped pulses, so I want the switch to have >>>>good pulse fidelity within some fast time of switching.

    ADRF5024 looks good. Its gross switching happens in under 10 ns and is >>>>pretty clean. In fine RF tradition, it's underspecified and specs are >>>>basically dishonest.


    You may want to look the the switch through a TDR (Time domain >>>reflectomter). That will give you the best measurement for switch's >>>ability to maintain pulse fidelity.

    Skittles

    We've been testing a number of RF switches with pulse generators and
    TDR. It has been interesting.

    Several of the eval boards have the no-solder screw-on microwave >>connectors. The eval boards are free or less if you account for those.


    What kind of transmission line are you running into the switches?
    Sometimes that can really affect your measurements.

    The eval boards usually have CPW

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/rbo4mzo640z43t6/ADRF5024-EVALZTOP-web.png?raw=1

    which they can do if all you need is one tiny part on a relatively
    giant board.

    Our boards are most always microstrip, because we need to pack a lot
    of parts onto a small board.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/bb16beiwymbu28a/T502A.jpg?raw=1


    For instance if you are running coplanar or microstrip and you have
    some components from the line to ground, they should be split equally
    to both sides of the line. Say your circuit had 100 ohm to ground, it
    should be 2 each 200 ohm to ground on both edges of the line so the
    currents split evenly. Make sure the ground current follows the same
    path as the signal, each being in different planes.

    In real life, we need to jam parts very close together, and that
    dominates layout.

    Things that go to ground usually do that to a big layer 1 ground pour.
    Vias down to layer 2 have too much personality.

    We don't think much about "return currents." Actually, not at all.






    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Tue Mar 8 22:43:29 2022
    On Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 4:50:13 PM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 21:09:03 -0700, Skittles<Skit...@nowhere8.org> wrote: >On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 08:58:31 -0800, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 09:04:16 -0700, Skittles<Skit...@nowhere8.org> wrote: >>>On Tue, 08 Mar 2022 07:59:10 -0800, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 20:10:05 -0800 (PST), Simon S Aysdie <gwh...@ti.com> wrote:
    On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 4:03:45 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

    <snip>
    What kind of transmission line are you running into the switches? >Sometimes that can really affect your measurements.
    The eval boards usually have CPW

    It's hard to build anything but a co-planar waveguide on a printed circuit board.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/rbo4mzo640z43t6/ADRF5024-EVALZTOP-web.png?raw=1

    which they can do if all you need is one tiny part on a relatively
    giant board.

    Our boards are most always microstrip, because we need to pack a lot
    of parts onto a small board.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/bb16beiwymbu28a/T502A.jpg?raw=1

    I have tried to get John Larkin to think about (buried) strip-lines, which you can bury inside multi-layer boards. Unlike structures on the surface, they can be non-dispersive. There's no way to suggest this in away that sounds flattering, so John isn't
    interested.

    For instance if you are running coplanar or microstrip and you have
    some components from the line to ground, they should be split equally
    to both sides of the line. Say your circuit had 100 ohm to ground, it >should be 2 each 200 ohm to ground on both edges of the line so the >currents split evenly. Make sure the ground current follows the same
    path as the signal, each being in different planes.
    In real life, we need to jam parts very close together, and that
    dominates layout.

    Things that go to ground usually do that to a big layer 1 ground pour.
    Vias down to layer 2 have too much personality.

    We don't think much about "return currents." Actually, not at all.

    John Larkin doesn't like doing any thinking very much, and does much less of it than he should.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Wed Mar 9 10:16:16 2022
    Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:6e6c0cc9-daf7-416d-b7c8-e3b5565174cbn@googlegroups.com:

    I have tried to get John Larkin to think about (buried)
    strip-lines, which you can bury inside multi-layer boards. Unlike
    structures on the surface, they can be non-dispersive. There's no
    way to suggest this in away that sounds flattering, so John isn't
    interested.

    I have done some stripline designs. Before I would move forward with
    your idea, which sounds good to me, btw, I would run it past my boss of
    over 30 years, and he is one of the top RF engineers on the planet
    (was).

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc on Wed Mar 9 07:10:12 2022
    On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 10:16:16 -0000 (UTC), DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

    Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in >news:6e6c0cc9-daf7-416d-b7c8-e3b5565174cbn@googlegroups.com:

    I have tried to get John Larkin to think about (buried)
    strip-lines, which you can bury inside multi-layer boards. Unlike
    structures on the surface, they can be non-dispersive. There's no
    way to suggest this in away that sounds flattering, so John isn't
    interested.

    I have done some stripline designs. Before I would move forward with
    your idea, which sounds good to me, btw, I would run it past my boss of
    over 30 years, and he is one of the top RF engineers on the planet
    (was).

    Parts mount on the surface. Stripline traces are inherently several
    layers down. The connection to a stripline trace involves at least two
    vias. Vias are deadly for really fast signals.

    Sloman pontificates and insults and hasn't designed actual electronics
    in decades, and what he did decades ago sounds mostly like failures.

    We do a lot of multilayer test boards and real production boards.
    Experiment is a good check on guesswork theories.

    And we're not designing RF, we're doing picosecond time domain stuff.
    Working around 10 GHz is different from DC-to-10GHz. We measure signal
    fidelity in PPM, not dB.

    This drives the "slicer" section of a 2-stage e/o modulator:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/34j6pjg31qie2le/T503_FA3.jpg?raw=1

    We've improved the monitor pickoff on the current rev. This fast stuff
    depends a lot on instinct and experiment, mostly because we don't have
    good, or usually any, time-domain part models. It's amazing how much
    we don't know about the parts we use.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John S@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Wed Mar 9 13:12:32 2022
    On 3/9/2022 9:10 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 10:16:16 -0000 (UTC), DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

    Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
    news:6e6c0cc9-daf7-416d-b7c8-e3b5565174cbn@googlegroups.com:

    I have tried to get John Larkin to think about (buried)
    strip-lines, which you can bury inside multi-layer boards. Unlike
    structures on the surface, they can be non-dispersive. There's no
    way to suggest this in away that sounds flattering, so John isn't
    interested.

    I have done some stripline designs. Before I would move forward with
    your idea, which sounds good to me, btw, I would run it past my boss of
    over 30 years, and he is one of the top RF engineers on the planet
    (was).

    Parts mount on the surface. Stripline traces are inherently several
    layers down. The connection to a stripline trace involves at least two
    vias. Vias are deadly for really fast signals.


    In what way are they deadly, John? Would the result of being deadly show
    up in a frequency domain test?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to John S on Wed Mar 9 16:52:42 2022
    On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 13:12:32 -0600, John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org> wrote:

    On 3/9/2022 9:10 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 10:16:16 -0000 (UTC),
    DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

    Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
    news:6e6c0cc9-daf7-416d-b7c8-e3b5565174cbn@googlegroups.com:

    I have tried to get John Larkin to think about (buried)
    strip-lines, which you can bury inside multi-layer boards. Unlike
    structures on the surface, they can be non-dispersive. There's no
    way to suggest this in away that sounds flattering, so John isn't
    interested.

    I have done some stripline designs. Before I would move forward with
    your idea, which sounds good to me, btw, I would run it past my boss of
    over 30 years, and he is one of the top RF engineers on the planet
    (was).

    Parts mount on the surface. Stripline traces are inherently several
    layers down. The connection to a stripline trace involves at least two
    vias. Vias are deadly for really fast signals.


    In what way are they deadly, John? Would the result of being deadly show
    up in a frequency domain test?

    Time and (wideband) frequency domain tests are nearly interchangeable.
    In a fast time domain test, a via typically looks like a capacitor.
    Vias can be carefully tuned to match a trace impedance, but a thru via overshoots the transition to a microstrip and makes a nasty little
    stub with a pad on both ends. Blind vias are better but run up board
    cost.

    We usually keep our fast connections microstrip on layer 1, with
    ground plane as layer 2, and run power planes and slow stuff on layers
    below.

    Ground vias are inductive, so we have big ground pours on layer 1 with
    a lot of vias down to the layer 2 ground plane.

    Layout becomes a puzzle like doing single-sided boards in ancient
    times.

    "RF" is usually narrowband, so parasitics can be tuned out.

    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Wed Mar 9 18:27:02 2022
    On Thursday, March 10, 2022 at 2:10:27 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 10:16:16 -0000 (UTC), DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote in news:6e6c0cc9-daf7-416d...@googlegroups.com:

    I have tried to get John Larkin to think about (buried)
    strip-lines, which you can bury inside multi-layer boards. Unlike
    structures on the surface, they can be non-dispersive. There's no
    way to suggest this in away that sounds flattering, so John isn't
    interested.

    I have done some stripline designs. Before I would move forward with
    your idea, which sounds good to me, btw, I would run it past my boss of >over 30 years, and he is one of the top RF engineers on the planet
    (was).

    Parts mount on the surface. Stripline traces are inherently several
    layers down. The connection to a stripline trace involves at least two
    vias. Vias are deadly for really fast signals.

    If "designed" - which is to say fudged - buy John Larkin. It's extra inductance which can be neurtalised.

    Sloman pontificates and insults and hasn't designed actual electronics in decades, and what he did decades ago sounds mostly like failures.

    Cambridge Instruments fast stuff was mostly 1988 to 1991, and was a technical success and a commercial failure.
    I did at bit more at Nijmegen University around 1997. I cleaned up an old nanosecond pulse generator by replacing some of the TTL with ECLinPS, and got rid of a nasty sub-nanosecond jitter, which prompted the user to get us to design an ECLinPS-based
    replacement. We spent about a year doing the detailed design of the hardware and the software to run it, but the user ran out of funding at the point when we were starting on the layout. Not a successful development, but not a technical failure either.

    We do a lot of multilayer test boards and real production boards.
    Experiment is a good check on guesswork theories.

    The theories aren't guesswork, but experiment is a lot cheaper than simulations that are detailed enough to be all that reliable.

    And we're not designing RF, we're doing picosecond time domain stuff.

    And so was I.

    Working around 10 GHz is different from DC-to-10GHz. We measure signal fidelity in PPM, not dB.

    This drives the "slicer" section of a 2-stage e/o modulator:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/34j6pjg31qie2le/T503_FA3.jpg?raw=1

    We were producing 500psec wide pulses from about 1985. Your scope image is of a 4nsec wide pulse.

    We've improved the monitor pickoff on the current rev. This fast stuff depends a lot on instinct and experiment, mostly because we don't have
    good, or usually any, time-domain part models. It's amazing how much
    we don't know about the parts we use.

    And don't seem to be able to find out. Models are what you put together to fit experimental data. Manufacturers often do it for you.

    LTSpice frequently gives access to some manufacturers part models, but when I've used the BFR92 I've had to import the NXP Gummel Poon model myself.

    https://www.nxp.com/downloads/en/spice-model/spice_BFR92A.prm

    It has shown up in ,asc files I've posted here.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)