PLL confusion

[jim]

I'm trying to learn about PLL circuits and admittedly I'm a newbie and
therefore confused as usual. Why is the phase detector portion of a
phase lock loop (analog) called "phase detector" when what it really
detects is a difference in frequency. That is two waveforms with
different frequencies cannot have any fixed phase relationship. As I
understand it putting two identical frequencies that are some fixed
phase apart will not give any signal out of the phase detector, only
two different frequencies will give a dc current out. I've obviously
got something muddled up here ,what is it? thanks jim

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 21:12:26 GMT, jim <road12fg@netscape.net> wrote:

I'm trying to learn about PLL circuits and admittedly I'm a newbie and
therefore confused as usual. Why is the phase detector portion of a
phase lock loop (analog) called "phase detector" when what it really
detects is a difference in frequency. That is two waveforms with
different frequencies cannot have any fixed phase relationship.

If the frequencies are different, the phase is "rolling."

As I
understand it putting two identical frequencies that are some fixed
phase apart will not give any signal out of the phase detector, only
two different frequencies will give a dc current out.

No, it detects and indicates phase. The result is some DC level if the
frequencies are truly equal, or a "rolling dc" level (which is
typically a sine or triangle wave) if they are really different.


Classic (simple) phase detectors detect phase difference, not
frequency difference. So if the two input frequencies are, say, 10 Hz
apart, the pd output is a sine or triangle wave at 10 Hz. If the
signals are the same frequency but differ in phase (timing) the pd
will give a corresponding DC out.

Such a classic pd (a multiplier, diode mixer, xor gate, d-flipflop
etc) when fed into the oscillator control loop will result in lock
only if the phase change is relatively slow, which only happens if the
frequencies are close. If the frequencies are too far apart, the pd
output is a high-frequency waveform with no dc component that just
confuses the vco. So a simple pll has a limited "acquisition range",
even though it may track a wide range *once it gets into lock*.

There are complex phase detectors that are smart enough to realize
that they are way out of lock, in which case they force the pd output
in the right direction until they're close enough to work in true
phase-detect mode. That solves the acquisition problem.

If a loop had a true frequency detector, any tiny analog error would
result in the vco frequency being not exactly the input frequency. But
a loop with a phase detector has zero longterm frequency error; the
waveforms are locked.

John

 

[Peter Lawton]

I'm doubtful if 'phase' is the right word too. the phase difference of two
non - same frequencies increases over time and never repeats.

Peter
..
"jim" <road12fg@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:mj9ap05rvdkoia9733f9j9lqiogpa52021@4ax.com...

I'm trying to learn about PLL circuits and admittedly I'm a newbie and
therefore confused as usual. Why is the phase detector portion of a
phase lock loop (analog) called "phase detector" when what it really
detects is a difference in frequency. That is two waveforms with
different frequencies cannot have any fixed phase relationship. As I
understand it putting two identical frequencies that are some fixed
phase apart will not give any signal out of the phase detector, only
two different frequencies will give a dc current out. I've obviously
got something muddled up here ,what is it? thanks jim

 

[Active8]

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:54:34 GMT, Peter Lawton wrote:

I'm doubtful if 'phase' is the right word too. the phase difference of two
non - same frequencies increases over time and never repeats.

This is not true. A 5 and 10 Hz signal that start off in phase, will

be in phase after one cycle of the 5 Hz wave, for example.

--
Best Regards,
Mike

 

[Kevin Aylward]

Active8 wrote:

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:54:34 GMT, Peter Lawton wrote:

I'm doubtful if 'phase' is the right word too. the phase difference
of two non - same frequencies increases over time and never repeats.

This is not true.

For specific cases

A 5 and 10 Hz signal that start off in phase, will
be in phase after one cycle of the 5 Hz wave, for example.

In general cases the phase between two signals is not definable at all.

Kevin Aylward
salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

 

[Active8]

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:00:54 GMT, Kevin Aylward wrote:

Active8 wrote:
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:54:34 GMT, Peter Lawton wrote:

I'm doubtful if 'phase' is the right word too. the phase difference
of two non - same frequencies increases over time and never repeats.

This is not true.

For specific cases

A 5 and 10 Hz signal that start off in phase, will
be in phase after one cycle of the 5 Hz wave, for example.

In general cases the phase between two signals is not definable at all.

I think we're talking about the kind of periodic sigs where it is.

--
Best Regards,
Mike

 

[Peter Lawton]

"Active8" <reply2group@ndbbm.net> wrote in message
news:jfoso7x7flvq$.dlg@news.individual.net...

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:54:34 GMT, Peter Lawton wrote:

I'm doubtful if 'phase' is the right word too. the phase difference of
two
non - same frequencies increases over time and never repeats.

This is not true. A 5 and 10 Hz signal that start off in phase, will
be in phase after one cycle of the 5 Hz wave, for example.

Mm...... depends what you mean by 'in phase'.
Can you give me a definition to mull over?

Peter

--
Best Regards,
Mike

 

[jim]

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:32:11 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 21:12:26 GMT, jim <road12fg@netscape.net> wrote:

I'm trying to learn about PLL circuits and admittedly I'm a newbie and
therefore confused as usual. Why is the phase detector portion of a
phase lock loop (analog) called "phase detector" when what it really
detects is a difference in frequency. That is two waveforms with
different frequencies cannot have any fixed phase relationship.

If the frequencies are different, the phase is "rolling."

As I
understand it putting two identical frequencies that are some fixed
phase apart will not give any signal out of the phase detector, only
two different frequencies will give a dc current out.

No, it detects and indicates phase. The result is some DC level if the
frequencies are truly equal, or a "rolling dc" level (which is
typically a sine or triangle wave) if they are really different.

I'm pretty visually oriented so my questions come from that angle,

so I'm picturing the output of a pll of two signals that are
identical in frequency which will be a flat dc level. Does the whole
loop then try to bring the dc level to zero or is matching frequencies
enough?

Classic (simple) phase detectors detect phase difference, not
frequency difference. So if the two input frequencies are, say, 10 Hz
apart, the pd output is a sine or triangle wave at 10 Hz. If the
signals are the same frequency but differ in phase (timing) the pd
will give a corresponding DC out.

Such a classic pd (a multiplier, diode mixer, xor gate, d-flipflop
etc) when fed into the oscillator control loop will result in lock
only if the phase change is relatively slow, which only happens if the
frequencies are close. If the frequencies are too far apart, the pd
output is a high-frequency waveform with no dc component that just
confuses the vco. So a simple pll has a limited "acquisition range",
even though it may track a wide range *once it gets into lock*.

There are complex phase detectors that are smart enough to realize
that they are way out of lock, in which case they force the pd output
in the right direction until they're close enough to work in true
phase-detect mode. That solves the acquisition problem.

I can picture the visual way to obtain phase difference of two
different frequencies of equal amplitude by just drawing a horizontal
line through the two waves at any amplitude and this will give the
rolling phase difference. But what will be the effect on the phase
detector output if one of the waves is say twice the amplitude.? If
there is a difference how does the phase detector deal with this?

If a loop had a true frequency detector, any tiny analog error would
result in the vco frequency being not exactly the input frequency. But
a loop with a phase detector has zero longterm frequency error; the
waveforms are locked.

John
Thanks for all the replies btw, I've just got to get my hands on a

phase detector and see for myself. jim

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:40:16 GMT, jim <road12fg@netscape.net> wrote:

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:32:11 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 21:12:26 GMT, jim <road12fg@netscape.net> wrote:

I'm trying to learn about PLL circuits and admittedly I'm a newbie and
therefore confused as usual. Why is the phase detector portion of a
phase lock loop (analog) called "phase detector" when what it really
detects is a difference in frequency. That is two waveforms with
different frequencies cannot have any fixed phase relationship.

If the frequencies are different, the phase is "rolling."

As I
understand it putting two identical frequencies that are some fixed
phase apart will not give any signal out of the phase detector, only
two different frequencies will give a dc current out.

No, it detects and indicates phase. The result is some DC level if the
frequencies are truly equal, or a "rolling dc" level (which is
typically a sine or triangle wave) if they are really different.

I'm pretty visually oriented so my questions come from that angle,
so I'm picturing the output of a pll of two signals that are
identical in frequency which will be a flat dc level. Does the whole
loop then try to bring the dc level to zero or is matching frequencies
enough?

If there's just some DC gain from the pd output to the vco input
(maybe just g=1, even), the loop will usually settle with some
non-zero pd output, namely the voltage necessary to pull the vco to
the target frequency. Since it almost always takes some non-zero dc
voltage to pull the vco to the target, there must be a steady-state
phase error, so the waveforms are locked in frequency but have some
fixed phase offset, whatever it takes to tune the vco. This is a
first-order pll.

But if you add an integrator in the path from the phase detector
output to the vco input, the loop will settle at zero frequency error
and zero phase error (ignoring any residual offset errors in the pd or
the integrator.) The integrator will slowly creep the vco input over
time such as to servo the pd output to zero. This is a second-order
pll.

The vco-phase detector combination is itself mathematically an
integrator - just imagine applying a small DC voltage at the vco
input... the pd output will then be a ramp (although the ramp
eventually folds over, but that's another story... no integrator can
ramp forever!) So the type-1 servo loop is an integrator with negative
feedback, which is usually very stable. The type 2 loop has *two*
integrators in a feedback loop, which tends to be unstable,
oscillating or ringing badly (two integrators tend to chase each
others' tails, so to speak) so some additional compensation is needed
to keep the lock stable.

Beyond this, a good book on pll's would be helpful. Unfortunately,
many are mainly mathematical in approach, which is fine for coming to
workable solutions but somewhat lacking if you want an instinctive
visual feel for what's happening.

My favorite pll uses a d-type flipflop as the phase detector in a
type-1 loop. It's inherently stable, but has zero phase error, because
the phase detector gain is infinite. Mathematically, it's sort of a
mess.

Classic (simple) phase detectors detect phase difference, not
frequency difference. So if the two input frequencies are, say, 10 Hz
apart, the pd output is a sine or triangle wave at 10 Hz. If the
signals are the same frequency but differ in phase (timing) the pd
will give a corresponding DC out.

Such a classic pd (a multiplier, diode mixer, xor gate, d-flipflop
etc) when fed into the oscillator control loop will result in lock
only if the phase change is relatively slow, which only happens if the
frequencies are close. If the frequencies are too far apart, the pd
output is a high-frequency waveform with no dc component that just
confuses the vco. So a simple pll has a limited "acquisition range",
even though it may track a wide range *once it gets into lock*.

There are complex phase detectors that are smart enough to realize
that they are way out of lock, in which case they force the pd output
in the right direction until they're close enough to work in true
phase-detect mode. That solves the acquisition problem.

I can picture the visual way to obtain phase difference of two
different frequencies of equal amplitude by just drawing a horizontal
line through the two waves at any amplitude and this will give the
rolling phase difference. But what will be the effect on the phase
detector output if one of the waves is say twice the amplitude.? If
there is a difference how does the phase detector deal with this?

Some phase detectors (like a linear multiplier) give an output that
depends on one or both input amplitudes, so loop behavior varies with
input signal level (vco level is usually pretty much constant.) Most
pd's don't care about input amplitude for reasonable input levels, but
just compare phases; that simplifies loop analysis. An XOR gate is a
nice phase detector that pretty much ignores input level. Just imagine
turning either sine input into a square wave of, say, +-1 volt fixed
signal level, using a comparator or some such, and then comparing
phases.

John

 

[peterken]

"jim" <road12fg@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:qk8fp0pgc4b5dsob7u66sv6hja6g6q7e2m@4ax.com...

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:32:11 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 21:12:26 GMT, jim <road12fg@netscape.net> wrote:

I'm trying to learn about PLL circuits and admittedly I'm a newbie and
therefore confused as usual. Why is the phase detector portion of a
phase lock loop (analog) called "phase detector" when what it really
detects is a difference in frequency. That is two waveforms with
different frequencies cannot have any fixed phase relationship.

If the frequencies are different, the phase is "rolling."

As I
understand it putting two identical frequencies that are some fixed
phase apart will not give any signal out of the phase detector, only
two different frequencies will give a dc current out.

No, it detects and indicates phase. The result is some DC level if the
frequencies are truly equal, or a "rolling dc" level (which is
typically a sine or triangle wave) if they are really different.

I'm pretty visually oriented so my questions come from that angle,
so I'm picturing the output of a pll of two signals that are
identical in frequency which will be a flat dc level. Does the whole
loop then try to bring the dc level to zero or is matching frequencies
enough?

the feedback signal to the vco will be of such a kind so the vco adjusts its
frequency (phase) to the given input
for one vco it will be a digital signal, for the other it will be a dc
signal of a specific magnitude

Classic (simple) phase detectors detect phase difference, not
frequency difference. So if the two input frequencies are, say, 10 Hz
apart, the pd output is a sine or triangle wave at 10 Hz. If the
signals are the same frequency but differ in phase (timing) the pd
will give a corresponding DC out.

Such a classic pd (a multiplier, diode mixer, xor gate, d-flipflop
etc) when fed into the oscillator control loop will result in lock
only if the phase change is relatively slow, which only happens if the
frequencies are close. If the frequencies are too far apart, the pd
output is a high-frequency waveform with no dc component that just
confuses the vco. So a simple pll has a limited "acquisition range",
even though it may track a wide range *once it gets into lock*.

There are complex phase detectors that are smart enough to realize
that they are way out of lock, in which case they force the pd output
in the right direction until they're close enough to work in true
phase-detect mode. That solves the acquisition problem.

I can picture the visual way to obtain phase difference of two
different frequencies of equal amplitude by just drawing a horizontal
line through the two waves at any amplitude and this will give the
rolling phase difference. But what will be the effect on the phase
detector output if one of the waves is say twice the amplitude.? If
there is a difference how does the phase detector deal with this?

amplitudes are irrelevant - if above a given minimum of course, only a
specific zero-crossing will be taken into acount
usually this crossing is detected by (internal) comparators, or (if digital)
square signals need to be fed

If a loop had a true frequency detector, any tiny analog error would
result in the vco frequency being not exactly the input frequency. But
a loop with a phase detector has zero longterm frequency error; the
waveforms are locked.

John
Thanks for all the replies btw, I've just got to get my hands on a
phase detector and see for myself. jim

 

[peterken]

"Active8" <reply2group@ndbbm.net> wrote in message
news:jfoso7x7flvq$.dlg@news.individual.net...
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:54:34 GMT, Peter Lawton wrote:

I'm doubtful if 'phase' is the right word too. the phase difference of
two
non - same frequencies increases over time and never repeats.


This is not true. A 5 and 10 Hz signal that start off in phase, will
be in phase after one cycle of the 5 Hz wave, for example.

wrong
It is indeed true the amplitude will be zero for both after one cycle of the
5Hz signal, and the zero crossing will have the same direction
BUT
For a 5 and 10Hz signal that start off in phase the 5Hz signal will be
lagging a full 360deg (or 2*pi rad) after one cycle with respect to the 10Hz
signal.
It's PHASE to be considered, remember...

 

[Active8]

On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 10:35:41 GMT, Kevin Aylward wrote:

Active8 wrote:
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:00:54 GMT, Kevin Aylward wrote:

Active8 wrote:
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:54:34 GMT, Peter Lawton wrote:

I'm doubtful if 'phase' is the right word too. the phase difference
of two non - same frequencies increases over time and never
repeats.

This is not true.

For specific cases

A 5 and 10 Hz signal that start off in phase, will
be in phase after one cycle of the 5 Hz wave, for example.

In general cases the phase between two signals is not definable at
all.

I think we're talking about the kind of periodic sigs where it is.

But not in general

If f1 is not rational to f2, phase can't be defined, even if periodic.

You mean a division resulting in a remainder of zero, that simple,

eh? Sounds right to me.

--
Best Regards,
Mike

 

[Active8]

On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 22:03:52 GMT, peterken wrote:

"Active8" <reply2group@ndbbm.net> wrote in message
news:jfoso7x7flvq$.dlg@news.individual.net...
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:54:34 GMT, Peter Lawton wrote:

I'm doubtful if 'phase' is the right word too. the phase difference of
two
non - same frequencies increases over time and never repeats.


This is not true. A 5 and 10 Hz signal that start off in phase, will
be in phase after one cycle of the 5 Hz wave, for example.

wrong
It is indeed true the amplitude will be zero for both after one cycle of the
5Hz signal, and the zero crossing will have the same direction
BUT
For a 5 and 10Hz signal that start off in phase the 5Hz signal will be
lagging a full 360deg (or 2*pi rad) after one cycle with respect to the 10Hz
signal.
It's PHASE to be considered, remember...

You both got me. The zero crosses don't indicate phase, they just
coincide at integral multiples of full cycle phase differences.
--
Best Regards,
Mike

 

[petrus bitbyter]

"jim" <road12fg@netscape.net> schreef in bericht
news:mj9ap05rvdkoia9733f9j9lqiogpa52021@4ax.com...

I'm trying to learn about PLL circuits and admittedly I'm a newbie and
therefore confused as usual. Why is the phase detector portion of a
phase lock loop (analog) called "phase detector" when what it really
detects is a difference in frequency. That is two waveforms with
different frequencies cannot have any fixed phase relationship. As I
understand it putting two identical frequencies that are some fixed
phase apart will not give any signal out of the phase detector, only
two different frequencies will give a dc current out. I've obviously
got something muddled up here ,what is it? thanks jim\

Phase and frequency are tightly related. Nevertheless, the output of a phase
detector is related to the phasedifference of both inputsignals regardless
what frequencies are used. When both frequencies are not equal (and not
otherwise related) the output of the phase detector will vary over time. As
you already know, these variations are used to control a VCO which makes one
input move to the point that the VCO is locked on the other signal.

petrus bitbyter


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.786 / Virus Database: 532 - Release Date: 30-10-2004

 

[jim]

Got it now very grateful,thanks..to all jim

:

"jim" <road12fg@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:b9ukp0tgbrpsv5obkolr5m97qa9thu7s41@4ax.com...

"jim" <road12fg@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:nfhkp0tapvonon5q3dlsfvk4rpsfhu73ut@4ax.com...
So is this correct....... That one can measure phase difference of two
different frequencies and amplitudes by picking any arbitrary
amplitude on the scope and just running a horizontal line through the
two waves and noting the intersection points? the complete phase curve
can then be obtained by raising or lowering the reference point ? But
what if one wave has twice the amplitude of the other? the horizontal
line will only intersect it and not the other. Does this imply that
only waves with equal amplitude can be measured for phase difference?
jim


One can take ANY reference point on two signals (eg 20deg after a
positive
zero crossing of a single cycle or something like that), but easiest is
to
take zero crossing of course.
When taking a reference for phase it's good practice to take something
both
signals DO have, in this case zero crossing.
This way one can compare phases between any form of repetitive signals of
whatever amplitude since it's phase we are interested in...
As fo the "horizontal line" : adjust your scope (or other visualisation
means) so the displayed amplitude of both is equal, since that's not what
we
are interested in measuring

Ok, I'm just about there,so you're saying that amplitude variation has
no effect on the phase relationships?

that's the idea yes, amplitude is on the vertical axis and phase is on the
horizontal axis
we're only comparing the horizontal axis, and (almost) ignoring the vertical
unless to "select" a reference point

the phase of a single signal has to do with the 360deg (2*pi rad) between
two instances of a repetitive cycle
whatever the amplitude, the 360deg is a given constant for every cycle of
this signal
whatever the time is to go through the full 360deg doesn't matter too, so
ignore the aspect "time" too (disconnect "time" from "phase" for a moment in
your mind)

now, given the initial 5Hz and 10Hz of this thread, starting from a specific
coinciding point of two signals (assume zero crossing) one can start
counting the completed cycles as 360deg for every signal
the 5Hz sig will have done 360deg after 1 cycle, whilst the 10Hz will be at
720deg (= two cycles) at the finishing point of this first 5Hz cycle
thus the phase difference of both signals will always increment, no matter
how long you look at them (*unless* you take a new reference point and start
counting from scratch but that's a new measurment)
an integral part of a pll is a phase comparator (usually phase detector
combined with an integrator) giving the "measure" for the phase difference
to be able to adjust a vco which is another part of a pll

 

[Kevin Aylward]

Active8 wrote:

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:00:54 GMT, Kevin Aylward wrote:

Active8 wrote:
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:54:34 GMT, Peter Lawton wrote:

I'm doubtful if 'phase' is the right word too. the phase difference
of two non - same frequencies increases over time and never
repeats.

This is not true.

For specific cases

A 5 and 10 Hz signal that start off in phase, will
be in phase after one cycle of the 5 Hz wave, for example.

In general cases the phase between two signals is not definable at
all.

I think we're talking about the kind of periodic sigs where it is.

But not in general

If f1 is not rational to f2, phase can't be defined, even if periodic.

Kevin Aylward
salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

 

[peterken]

"jim" <road12fg@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:b9ukp0tgbrpsv5obkolr5m97qa9thu7s41@4ax.com...

"jim" <road12fg@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:nfhkp0tapvonon5q3dlsfvk4rpsfhu73ut@4ax.com...
So is this correct....... That one can measure phase difference of two
different frequencies and amplitudes by picking any arbitrary
amplitude on the scope and just running a horizontal line through the
two waves and noting the intersection points? the complete phase curve
can then be obtained by raising or lowering the reference point ? But
what if one wave has twice the amplitude of the other? the horizontal
line will only intersect it and not the other. Does this imply that
only waves with equal amplitude can be measured for phase difference?
jim


One can take ANY reference point on two signals (eg 20deg after a
positive
zero crossing of a single cycle or something like that), but easiest is
to
take zero crossing of course.
When taking a reference for phase it's good practice to take something
both
signals DO have, in this case zero crossing.
This way one can compare phases between any form of repetitive signals of
whatever amplitude since it's phase we are interested in...
As fo the "horizontal line" : adjust your scope (or other visualisation
means) so the displayed amplitude of both is equal, since that's not what
we
are interested in measuring

Ok, I'm just about there,so you're saying that amplitude variation has
no effect on the phase relationships?

that's the idea yes, amplitude is on the vertical axis and phase is on the
horizontal axis
we're only comparing the horizontal axis, and (almost) ignoring the vertical
unless to "select" a reference point

the phase of a single signal has to do with the 360deg (2*pi rad) between
two instances of a repetitive cycle
whatever the amplitude, the 360deg is a given constant for every cycle of
this signal
whatever the time is to go through the full 360deg doesn't matter too, so
ignore the aspect "time" too (disconnect "time" from "phase" for a moment in
your mind)

now, given the initial 5Hz and 10Hz of this thread, starting from a specific
coinciding point of two signals (assume zero crossing) one can start
counting the completed cycles as 360deg for every signal
the 5Hz sig will have done 360deg after 1 cycle, whilst the 10Hz will be at
720deg (= two cycles) at the finishing point of this first 5Hz cycle
thus the phase difference of both signals will always increment, no matter
how long you look at them (*unless* you take a new reference point and start
counting from scratch but that's a new measurment)
an integral part of a pll is a phase comparator (usually phase detector
combined with an integrator) giving the "measure" for the phase difference
to be able to adjust a vco which is another part of a pll

 

[peterken]

"jim" <road12fg@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:mj9ap05rvdkoia9733f9j9lqiogpa52021@4ax.com...

I'm trying to learn about PLL circuits and admittedly I'm a newbie and
therefore confused as usual. Why is the phase detector portion of a
phase lock loop (analog) called "phase detector" when what it really
detects is a difference in frequency. That is two waveforms with
different frequencies cannot have any fixed phase relationship. As I
understand it putting two identical frequencies that are some fixed
phase apart will not give any signal out of the phase detector, only
two different frequencies will give a dc current out. I've obviously
got something muddled up here ,what is it? thanks jim

Simply stated:
A pll generates a frequency related to a measured input-frequency
The relation might be 1-to-1,
OR,
if in the feedback circuit a divider is built in the relation will be N-to-1
(a typical pll-based frequency-multiplier)

Even if the measured frequency and the generated frequency are say 0.000001%
un-equal, you WILL get a phase-difference over time between pll-generator
and input
The phase detector will detect this difference, and charge/discgharge a
filter circuit to set the vco of the pll tot the correct "phase"
Result : Since phase and frequency are so tightly related, the pll will
adjust not only phase, but also frequency

 

[Jamie]

the idea is to compare the 2 signals which will produce a
reference that will force a VCO (voltage control osc) to bias
it self, there by adjusting one of the 2 signals to properly
get in phase (in timing) with the master reference.
the master ref is generally fixed, you use dividers of the
VCO to scale it, so that the results will match the master ref.
the end results is, the VCO increasing in Freq.
the phase detector will produce the signal due to the 2
signals not being phased.
using something like an XOR gate circuit, there by pumping in
the two references, one from the Master ref and the other from the
output of the divider, will produce an sharp response of an out of
phase signal there by creating biasing to push the VCO OSC up in freq
until the two match and near match.
normally the VCO is aligned in free run to pull it self below the
minimum requirement. that is, with the bias voltage below what the
Phase Detector will produce.
a cheap PLL will use a simple charge pump decoupling circuit to hold
the VCO. good ones use DAC with a small charge pump for a narrow window.
etc..



jim wrote:

I'm trying to learn about PLL circuits and admittedly I'm a newbie and
therefore confused as usual. Why is the phase detector portion of a
phase lock loop (analog) called "phase detector" when what it really
detects is a difference in frequency. That is two waveforms with
different frequencies cannot have any fixed phase relationship. As I
understand it putting two identical frequencies that are some fixed
phase apart will not give any signal out of the phase detector, only
two different frequencies will give a dc current out. I've obviously
got something muddled up here ,what is it? thanks jim

 

[jim]

So is this correct....... That one can measure phase difference of two
different frequencies and amplitudes by picking any arbitrary
amplitude on the scope and just running a horizontal line through the
two waves and noting the intersection points? the complete phase curve
can then be obtained by raising or lowering the reference point ? But
what if one wave has twice the amplitude of the other? the horizontal
line will only intersect it and not the other. Does this imply that
only waves with equal amplitude can be measured for phase difference?
jim

On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 22:03:52 GMT, "peterken" <peter273@hotmail.com>
wrote:

"Active8" <reply2group@ndbbm.net> wrote in message
news:jfoso7x7flvq$.dlg@news.individual.net...
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:54:34 GMT, Peter Lawton wrote:

I'm doubtful if 'phase' is the right word too. the phase difference of
two
non - same frequencies increases over time and never repeats.


This is not true. A 5 and 10 Hz signal that start off in phase, will
be in phase after one cycle of the 5 Hz wave, for example.

wrong
It is indeed true the amplitude will be zero for both after one cycle of the
5Hz signal, and the zero crossing will have the same direction
BUT
For a 5 and 10Hz signal that start off in phase the 5Hz signal will be
lagging a full 360deg (or 2*pi rad) after one cycle with respect to the 10Hz
signal.
It's PHASE to be considered, remember...