MINIATURE INAGE REJECT MIXERS AND THER USE IN LOW-NOISE FRONT-ENDS IN CONJUNCTION WITH Gade FET AMPLIFIERS Ferenc A. Marka Watkine-Johneon Company ‘593 Hillview Avene Stanford Industrial Park Palo Alto, California 04504 ABSTRACT. 1s shown thet the Image Reject Mixer (Bf) reslstvely terminates the image sldeband by downconverting it ton oul ‘put port tht is physically distinet from the { port. ‘The Image Reject 2Uixer is algo shovn to be & dual channel dovmoonverter that dowmoonverts the upper sideband and lover sideband to two distinct I ports and, consequently this IRM ie the ides! mixer tobe used after an RF amplifier recovery type low noise IRM. WHAT IS THE IMAGE SIGNAL? ‘The image signal is an input sigual tothe receiver whose frequency is different from the locel oscillator fre- quency by the amount of the intermediate frequency, butt Spears on the opposite cide ofthe local oscillator from the desired signal (see Figure 1) SM Magna A WENT Figure 1, Image frequency an easily be confused with « true input. For example: Af fy 18 desired input signal froquency, then fy 1s the image frequency. It fy. #8 a desired irput, then fpy is ite tmage, Likewise, if fey to ge 18.4 desired input signal band, then an image nots band extends from figs 1 fies DEPINITION OF UPPER AND LOWER SIDERANDS ‘he sidebands shall be defined in the frequency domesn, ‘which will be taken feom ~» to ==. Those frequencies {reater than that ofthe local ogeillator are termed upper Sidebands and those frequencies lover than that of the Toes oscillator are termed lover sideband, IMAGE VERSUS PSEUDO-IMAGE Although the, (2f,,~ fq) intermodulation product fre~ ‘queney is Identical to the frequency of the tmage a major Aistinction existe which has not been properly observed by many authors. The image is «potential, or, in fact sm input Signtl, whereas the (2, ~ fg) intermodulation product i= ‘ot and cannot be an input slgnal to the mixer that generated As will be shown lator, the image reject mixer (IRN) resistuively terminates both sidsbards by downconverting ‘each to a distinct output port which is resistively termi- bated, The (2, ~ fy) intermod con either he realstively terminated [see Figure 2a)) , or by 1 proper cholee of er- cuitry, can be resctively terminated (open or sort cir cuited)intermelly to the mixer [see Figure 2()|. The 6m215-1/78/0000-0159500.75 (©) 1978 1208 159 Its also shown that the image eldebend does not have to be reactively terminated in @ (et, -typintermodulation product is thus referred to a8 ho to ne aye BN aes Baa fe analvats of sideband channelizers, RF is usually fed through the Iybeid to preserve bsndwidth, The 2, - fy product may be resistively (a) or reactively (b terminated, HOW THE SIDEBAND CHANNELIZER WORKS In te simplest form, the sideband ebannelizer is built with two single-ended (one dlode) mixers using 4 resistive pover divider (see elreult (a) In Figure 2). Each diode {psiser) ean be modeled aa 8 current generator that obeys: Text, end = GL Vert. where Glu) isthe diode conductance waveform and YioRt) 18 the emall signal voltage waveform thet appease Aeross the diode. It should be voted that the LO power level ‘is much grester than the signal power level. Thus this Is » ‘small eignal analysis,Lotus expand the fenotion Burt wRl In the form: CWLDs Vents and te -S qe on = lins Bw, mo Gn = 3 n~ My) = 38 ‘Then, the conductance waveform Is omy nl, ‘the voltage waveform is: and the diode current wavelorm is sors oS tn emrmns) Im the frequency domain, we oan write: Foftsie) = + mw oftisfe) “32 at mig) 3 Fog & pjtum frequencies) = (ot, + mtg) Sure Hort on = earn (Soeemen| Berte7/2, ond tan [ohm Now, concentrate on the difference frequenctes: sate {obourmens | Tent eR ome |, itextmogtene/2+7/2 $ _iousthmogtone/2) OL ext vm ( as - eeartmene/9) 1f the analysis As Limited to positive IF frequencies (dp), thee equations can be solved for upper and lower side- ‘band downconversion. For lower sideband downconverston, ned and m=-1 1oLh og) = © ~ Cancellation ene IgloLte ond = 21 va RET?) naettion or upper sideband downconversion, m=-1 and m=: (ens ond) = aga v1 AORELM — gsatson Lyles eR = 0 Cancellation Relating these results to Pigure 2, It can be seen thet input 4requenetes above and below the LO frequency are effoctively pirated into two IF channels, Expanding te analyse to the case of«double-alenced miner reveals hy the paetde-Lnage rust be tortnated By & host circlt atthe RF pote ofthe miser, Assume tat the Aouble-balancod mixer in Figur 9 forts fall of the ings ‘eject obamelser(erot (in Figure 2). Th currents faving thigh the branches of the tng-tpe mixer are described by = Werbery =>) mat {oeeurerao| fe = tyoumann Esra [emernenren| fy IloLer ents) fata [ohenementern) Figure 3. A ring-type double-balanced mixer Is used to caloulate current characteristics, 160‘Thus, in terms of branch currents, the currents Howing ‘through the LO, RF and IF ports of the mixer can be described as: 2 Fay-iy-tyn ig 1 Payrig-ty-to 2 Far-trts-t0 » Sing eeeny none sep om Stott man St oct stogers mi=d) ahd all even integers co At the 1 port then, the important cancellations are: fa fof fue fe fy - fa oe ee Fat Sab Spee nee® At the R port, the important cancellations are: R fof fey [Note that the (2f,~ fy) pseudo-tmage is not cancelled at the mae Se ees SmSLtmoRD At tho Iport, the important cancellations sre fre th 2, - fe Note that the (+ fp) is not cancelled at the T port. 1m summary: '2) The (L,~ fa) is open circuited at the diode June~ tions by the L and R baluns. b) The (2f,.~ fy) Hs open elreuted st the Land t ports (©) The 61, fp) 4s vesistively terminated at the 1 port, 4) The” (2h ~ fq) 4s resiatively terminated at the R port. To build a low-nolse sidebend channelizer with double- balanced mixers, in addition to cancellations a) and b), the (241, fh) peodo-tmage must be short-ciruted at the cor 161 responding mixer R ports and the sum (fy, fr) wall have tobe open-ctreulted atthe Tports. The short eixeuited scudo-image is realized when t= 0 or m\/4, where 1 san odd integer. The open-circuited rum ot tae I ports can be realized with properly phased low~puse filters, LOW NOISE AMPLIFIER FOLLOWED BY AN IRM ‘Whenever the Image Sidebind Noise is not Altered at the cutput of the amplifier and prevented from becoming an ‘npn tothe mixer along with the Signe] Seebend Noize, en Image Reject Mixer muist be used to preserve a 9 dB better recolver noise figure for equal upper and lover (Image and Signal) Sidebond Noise contbation of the smplilar (eee Figure 4). Figure 4(2) shows that if both the ISB and the USB are inputs to he amplifier, a Non-Lmage Reject Mixer will down- convert these along wilh the amplifier noise contribution of Doth the upper and lover sidebands, and since all these noise enargice are non-coreelated they add at the I post of the “Figure 4(b) shows that when an Image Reject Mxer {= used to downconvert the eutput of the amplifier the mixer ‘ll ofoctively segregate the lower and upper sideband down converted signels and deliver them to the tnd to he Ip ports, respectivel In Figure 4(o) a single sideband input nto che amplifier 4s Maally dovmconverted along with both nolse sldebands of the amplifier to single [port igure 4(@) te particalarly important case when only f single sideband input is injected into the amplifier, as in Figure 4(e), but an Image Reject Mixer is used to dows ‘convert and channelize the upper and lower sidebands to tho two distinct I ports. The noise figure ofthis receiver is, 8.48 lower than the receiver of Figure de). Tais is due to ‘the fet thatthe upper aldebind nalze energy of the amplifier 4s downconverted 9 the Ty port and not the Ty port. See feeno &® one i RN pes Bax. Se ene aietn hoxtmveeroter 3 6. mg t rate aaaeae 1 Figure 4. Noise power diotriubion of amplifier-mixer fowmconverter front ends Image rejection versus Image notse contribution is shown in Figure 5, This is correct only when the amplificx {al Is the same in both upper and lower sidebande, Figure 5, Noise contribution versus image rejection REFERENCES ‘Richard T. Davis, "Front End Designs ~ Arsaulting The ld Noise Barriers," atleroWaves, Vol. 10, No.4, Pp. 92-36, (Apeil 1972), Dr. E. James Crescens!, Jr., Richard W. Oglesbea, Roger A. Chapell, "Integrating Components For New’ Front End Designs,’ MieroWaves, Vol. 19, No.8, pp. 85-47, (August 1974), 162 Robert B. Wilds, "Microwave Two-Phase Converters For Imegaloss Receivers," icrowave Journal, Vol. y No.9) pp. 84-87, (September 1961), Dr. E. dames Cresson, Jr. and Fereno A, Matli, "Fused Siltea: A Betier Substrate For Mixers ?," Mlorolaves, Vol.25, No. 1, pp. 3£-82% (January 1976), D. L. Cheadle, "Selecting Mixer For Best Intermed Performance Parts [and Il," MicroWeves, Vol. 12, Nos 1and 12, pp. 48-62 and pp. 58-62, (November 1078 end December 1973), Lawrence B, Dickens and Douglas W. Maki, "An Integrated Cireuft Balanced Mixer image and Sum Enhanced, "IEEE Transtetions, Microwave Theory and ‘Teoiniquet, pp. 276-281, (alorch 1975), Jamor B, Cochrane and Ferenc A, Marki, "Thin-Film Mbxers Team Up To Block Out Image Notte," Micro Waves, Vol.26, No.3, pp. 34-40 & p. 64, (March 1977),