Noise conversion of Schottky diodes in mm-wave detectors under different nonlinear regimes: modeling and simulation versus measurement

Abstract

Noise conversion of Schottky diodes in mm-wave detectors under different nonlinear regimes: modeling and simulation versus measurement je ' ssica gutie ' rrez, kaoutar zeljami, enrique villa, beatriz aja, maria luisa de la fuente, sergio sancho and juan pablo pascual This paper presents and discusses several methods for predicting the low-frequency (LF) noise at the output of a mm-wave detector. These methods are based on the extraction of LF noise source parameters from the single diode under a specific set of bias conditions and the transfer or conversion of these noise sources, under different operating conditions including cyclostationary regime, to the quasi-dc output of a mm-wave detector constructed with the same model of diode. The noise analysis is based on a conversion-matrix type formulation, which relates the carrier noisy sidebands of the input signal with the detector output spectrum through a pair of transfer functions obtained in commercial software. Measurements of detectors in individual and differential setups will be presented and compared with predictions. I . I N T R O D U C T I O NThe low-frequency (LF) noise at the output of a detector may contribute to increasing system instability, becoming a source of error, for example in the operation of radiometers. Particularly, to establish appropriate switching frequencies in switched radiometer systems, it is especially relevant to know the knee frequency of devices [1]. The presence of a switching frequency in these systems transforms the noise analysis into a cyclostationary problem. Moreover, the system's knee frequency may vary depending on the operation mode of the devices. Rigorous mathematical treatment of several types of deterministic and random signals flowing through a nonlinearity is a classic topic [2], which should be reconsidered as simulation tools evolve and the requirements of systems become stricter. On the other hand, in general, apart from phase noise (PHN) in oscillators, simulation tool studies have paid limited attention to LF noise. Therefore, it is considered of great interest to have an accurate characterization of devices' LF noise together with reliable simulation tools for predicting its conversion to the system output, depending on the device operation regimes.The relevance of the device operation regime is shown in [3], which provides empirical evidence of the shot noise deviation with respect to the conventional model in a large-signal pumped Schottky diode, proposing an alternative model based, not on the mean current of the device, but on the smallsignal resistance, supported by a classic reference [4] and in agreement with the distinction between shot noise with constant and with time-varying rate presented in [5]. In [6], the simulation of cyclostationary noise is treated from a physically-based point of view. In [7], the use of time-domain and transient-envelope tools is proposed for the simulation of switching radiometer systems handling noisy broadband signals. Nevertheless, the frequency domain is usuall...

Accurately Modeling of Zero Biased Schottky-Diodes at Millimeter-Wave Frequencies

“…Thus, this ensures a stable response in a dynamic mode of operation. In this sense, a set-up was developed to measure and model low-frequency noise sources present in the ZBD, following [9]. The set-up diagram is shown in Figure 13, and the corresponding photo is shown in Figure 14.…”

“…Antimony (Sb) heterostructure backward diodes offer better noise performance with easier matching to 50 Ohm [5] compared to GaAs Schottky diodes, but may not always be easily accessible or available as discrete components [6]. Series 9161 diodes (Keysight HSCH and MACOM-Metelics MZBD) models are frequently used for hybrid detectors below the W-band [7][8][9], though also in the W-band [10][11][12][13]. Zero-bias Schottky diodes from ACST (Advanced Compound Semiconductor Technologies GmbH) (https://acst.de/) operating as power sensors have been reported in [14].…”

“…freq (2.000GHz to 50.00GHz) SP1.SP.S(1,1) SP1.SP.S(7,7) freq (75.00GHz to 110.0GHz) S11_cor freq (2.000GHz to 110.0GHz) SP3.SP.S(1,1) .SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) SP2.SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) SP2.SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) SP2.SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) S11, Modelo freq (2.000GHz-110.0 GHz) S11, Medidas freq (2.000GHz-50.00 GHz) S11, Medidas freq (75.00GHz-110.0 GHz) .00GHz to 110.0GHz) SP2.SP.S(2,1) SP2.SP.S(10,9) SP1.SP.S(2,1) SP1.SP.S(8,7) SP3.SP.S(2,1) SP2.SP.S(2,1) SP2.SP.S(10,9) SP1.SP.S(2,1) SP1.SP.S(8,7) SP3.SP.S(2,1) freq (2.000GHz to 50.00GHz) SP1.SP.S(1,1) SP1.SP.S(7,7) freq (75.00GHz to 110.0GHz) S11_cor freq (2.000GHz to 110.0GHz) SP3.SP.S(1,1) .S(5,5) new_total SP.S(1,1) SP2.SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) SP.S(5,5) new_total SP.S(1,1) SP2.SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) S11, Modelo freq (2.000GHz-110.0 GHz) S11, Medidas freq (2.000GHz-50.00 GHz) S11, Medidas freq (75.00GHz-110.0 GHz) .S(2,1) SP2.SP.S(10,9) SP1.SP.S(2,1) SP1.SP.S(8,7) SP3.SP.S(2,1) SP2.SP.S(2,1) SP2.SP.S(10,9) SP1.SP.S(2,1) SP1.SP.S(8,7) SP3.SP.S(2,1) S 11 (dB) Modeling Freq (2GHz-110GHz) S 11 (dB) Measurement Freq (75GHz-110GHz) S 11 (dB) Measurement Freq (2GHz-50GHz) -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 -0.6 0.6 freq (75.00GHz to 110.0GHz) SP2.SP.S(1,2) SP2.SP.S(10,9) freq (2.000GHz to 50.00GHz) SP1.SP.S(1,2) SP1.SP.S(7,8) freq (2.000GHz to 110.0GHz) SP3.SP.S(1,2) .SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) SP2.SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) SP2.SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) SP2.SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) S12, Modelo freq (2.000GHz-110.0 GHz) S12, Medidas freq (2.000GHz-50.00 GHz) S12, Medidas freq (75.00GHz-110.0 GHz) .00GHz to 110.0GHz) SP2.SP.S(2,1) SP2.SP.S(10,9) SP1.SP.S(2,1) SP1.SP.S(8,7) SP3.SP.S(2,1) SP2.SP.S(2,1) SP2.SP.S(10,9) SP1.SP.S(2,1) SP1.SP.S(8,7) SP3.SP.S(2,1) freq (2.000GHz to 50.00GHz) SP1.SP.S(1,1) SP1.SP.S(7,7) freq (75.00GHz to 110.0GHz) S11_cor freq (2.000GHz to 110.0GHz) SP3.SP.S(1,1) .SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) SP2.SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) SP2.SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) SP2.SP.S(5,5) S11_new_total SP1.SP.S(1,1) S11, Modelo freq (2.000GHz-110.0 GHz) S11, Medidas freq (2.000GHz-50.00 GHz) S11, Medidas freq (75.00GHz-110.0 GHz) .S(2,1) SP2.SP.S(10,9) SP1.SP.S(2,1) SP1.SP.S(8,7) SP3.SP.S(2,1) SP2.SP.S(2,1) SP2.SP.S(10,9) SP1.SP.S(2,1) SP1.SP.S(8,7) SP3.SP.S(2,1) S 12 (dB) Modeling Freq (2GHz-110GHz) S 12 (dB) Measurement Freq (75GHz-110GHz) S 12 (dB) Measurement Freq (2GHz-50GHz) Cont. Electronics 2019, 8, 696 6 of 13 Electronics 2019, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of Modelled and measured [S]-parameters of the unbiased diode (0 V) after the de-embedding in the wire bonding configuration.…”