EN300220 and phase noise

[Robert Lacoste]

Hi all,

Any EN 300-220 European standard guru out there ?

I have some difficulties to deduce the maximum phase noise profile of a
transmitter from this standard in the case of a very narrow bandwidth
transmitter (say 10KHz bandwidth, operating in a non-standard VHF frequency
band) :

- Standard gives a limitation of the transmitted power in the adjacent
channels (10µW integrated over each adjacent channel). Fine
- Standard gives a limitation for the spurious emissions (-36/-54dBm under
1GHz with 100KHz spectrum analyzer bandwidth depending on the frequency).
Fine.

But what is the maximum noise or side modulation levels say 2, 3 or 10
channels away from the carrier ? My first assumption was that the "spurious"
specification was applicable, but with a 100KHz resolution bandwidth I would
be measuring the carrier power if I do the measurement even 5 channels away
from the carrier...

Any help welcome...

Friendly yours,
Robert

 

[upda]

I would say that you should keep your phase-noise below the leve
where your radiated power is less than -36 dBm when integrated fro
two channels away and out. On both sides

 

[Robert Lacoste]

I would say that you should keep your phase-noise below the level
where your radiated power is less than -36 dBm when integrated from
two channels away and out. On both sides.

Thanks Daniel, that's effectively a potential interpretation. However I must
admit, well, that the result in terms of phase noise is quite hard to comply
with at least with low cost transmitters... and I was hoping to get another
answer ;+)

 

[Joerg]

Hello Robert,

Thanks Daniel, that's effectively a potential interpretation. However I must
admit, well, that the result in terms of phase noise is quite hard to comply
with at least with low cost transmitters... and I was hoping to get another
answer ;+)

I don't know your transmitter but if noise from the PLL is a concern
experiment with the loop bandwidth. If it needs to remain agile you
might consider two loops, one to do the fast pull-in and the slower one
to keep the lock.

 

[Robert Lacoste]

I don't know your transmitter but if noise from the PLL is a concern
experiment with the loop bandwidth. If it needs to remain agile you might
consider two loops, one to do the fast pull-in and the slower one to keep
the lock.

Thanks Joerg. Have you the same understanding of the standard than Daniel
for such a narrow band transmitter I mean :

P(Fc-CBW/2 to Fc+CBW/2) < whatever si the nominal autorized in-channel power
P(Fc+CBW/2 to Fc+3CBW/2) < -20dBm (adjacent channel)
P(Fc+3CBW/2 to Fc+3CBW/2+100KHz) < -36dBm (application of the "spurious"
spec starting just after the adjacent channel)

(with CBW=channel bandwidth and F0 the center frenquency)

 

[Joerg]

Hello Robert,

Thanks Joerg. Have you the same understanding of the standard than Daniel
for such a narrow band transmitter I mean :

P(Fc-CBW/2 to Fc+CBW/2) < whatever si the nominal autorized in-channel power
P(Fc+CBW/2 to Fc+3CBW/2) < -20dBm (adjacent channel)
P(Fc+3CBW/2 to Fc+3CBW/2+100KHz) < -36dBm (application of the "spurious"
spec starting just after the adjacent channel)

(with CBW=channel bandwidth and F0 the center frenquency)

I am not familiar with that part but AFAIR we had to design to 4nW
spurious and 250nW adjacent. However, that was under 1GHz. This would be
more than what you have listed.

Wish I had it in French or at least in English but if you can plow your
way through some German this might help:

http://www.circuitdesign.de/products/tech_info/guide5.asp

Best would be a brief chat with your EMC lab about what limits they test
for (or have to test for).

 

[upda]

So Robert, what type of oscillator do you have? PLL? Is it som
all-in-one radio IC? Just an external coil

 

[Robert Lacoste]

So Robert, what type of oscillator do you have? PLL? Is it some
all-in-one radio IC? Just an external coil?

PLL/VCO/modulator chip with external coil, but trying to use in for a non
standard application. I know how to optimize its phase noise (or at least
how to balance it with loop filter, etc), but my question is really to
understand what's the standard is specifying. I'm in touch with a notified
body to try to have a definitive answer...

Thanks for your help,
R.

 

[Joerg]

Hello Robert,

PLL/VCO/modulator chip with external coil, but trying to use in for a non
standard application. I know how to optimize its phase noise (or at least
how to balance it with loop filter, etc), but my question is really to
understand what's the standard is specifying. I'm in touch with a notified
body to try to have a definitive answer...

Way to go. A standard is one thing. But at the end of the day the guys
in the certified lab decide how they'll measure compliance. Been there a
lot, and there is absolutely no argueing with them if you think that one
test or the other is a bit too strict versus the standard.

Seems you have the loop filter licked. If it's FM then the other thing
to look out for is the modulator input. You might have to muffle the
higher spectra a bit, especially if it is a data stream.

I am pretty sure this won't happen with your experience but in case
others are following the thread: When called out to find a "cure" for a
failed compliance test the number one problem I found with transmitters
was their power supply. Mostly there were remnant switcher spikes, RAM
banking transients, video sync and all kind of other stuff riding along.
This resulted in almost perfect AM modulation right onto the carrier.
You could see a picket fence on the analyzer. It doesn't take a lot to
blow through -20dbm or -30dBm.

 

[Robert Lacoste]

Way to go. A standard is one thing. But at the end of the day the guys in
the certified lab decide how they'll measure compliance. Been there a lot,
and there is absolutely no argueing with them if you think that one test
or the other is a bit too strict versus the standard.

Yes Joerg, you're fully right. In fact I got today a prelmiminary answer
from a notified body, and there seems to be some room for interpretation
effectively...

Thanks all,
Robert

 

[Joerg]

Hello Robert,

Yes Joerg, you're fully right. In fact I got today a prelmiminary answer
from a notified body, and there seems to be some room for interpretation
effectively...

If this is for a mass product there would be another advantage. Let's
say someone questions the compliance. They may not relent at all if you
counter with lots of technical details and analyzer plots. But if you
place a paper in front of them with a stamp and some signatures, stating
that this was tested to the EN 300 200 standard by XYZ S.A., they'll
probably salute and rest their case.

 

[vasile]

PLL/VCO/modulator chip with external coil, but trying to use in for a non
standard application. I know how to optimize its phase noise (or at least
how to balance it with loop filter, etc),

So, how much is your LO phase noise measured at 10Khz, 100Khz and 1Mhz
from the carrier, which is the LO frequency and what is the carrier
frequency and SNR you've got after the PLL ?
You say non-standard. There are many non standard applications these
days.
The specification should tell you clear which shoud be the adjacent
channel rejection.
You can't guess. However -20dB suppresion looks very little for me.

greetings,
Vasile Surducan

 

[Joerg]

Hello Vasile,

You can't guess. However -20dB suppresion looks very little for me.

It's -20dBm, not -20dB below carrier. Depending on the power level it
may not be quite trivial to achieve but feasible.