Christine Vollinger, Erk Jensen
Material characterization for the 18 MHz to 40 MHz
sweep-tuneable RF system
Measurement support by Fritz Caspers
2
RF tuning cavity with magnetic bias
Example for perpendicular bias (from Friedrichs, 1991)
Example for parallel bias (from Gardner, 1991)
3
From Talk of Erk in PS2 Review:Parallel plus perpendicular biasing possible?
• Smythe suggested in 1983 to use– transverse bias to get into saturation (lower losses)– add’l. parallel bias for tuning (less bias).
• Could this work? (I’d like to try!)
4
Leads to two primary goals:1. Characterization of ferrite samples with different saturation and
line widths under different bias conditions in the required f-range. (This required a dedicated test set-up, since supplier data does not exist – PART 1).
2. Verification of Smythe’s claims (PART 2).3. First requirement for an f-range of 18-40 MHz is a -range of
approx. 5 (since f 1 / Sqrt[] ).4. Ratio of maximum to minimum f is given by Sqrt[max/ min]; max
is the value at minimum bias field.
5
Measurement Set-up• Problematic: samples are available in sizes 1” x 1” (or smaller);• Small sample size led to strip-line set-up on ferrite; • 1-port frequency swept measurement with NWA chosen to obtain s11. From s11, the DUT impedance is determined and the µ can be calculated;• Measurement taken with magnetic bias field applied perpendicular to signal propagation;• Carries the assumption that the magnetic RF-field left/right of the strip-line can be neglected (there the bias field would be parallel).
Hbias
Coaxial connection
Ferrite
Strip-line
6
μ’ for Material #1 (Y36)
μ’-ratio:
μ’(20 MHz,300 G)/μ’(40 MHz, 1005 G)=4.0
μ’-ratio:
μ’(20 MHz,145 G)/μ’(40 MHz, 1005 G)=11.1
7
μ’’ for Material #1 (Y36)
μ’’-values:
μ’’(20 MHz,145 G)= 6.3μ’’(20 MHz,300 G)= 0.2μ’’(40 MHz,1005 G)= 0.074
8
μ’ for Material #2 (G300)
μ’-ratio:
μ’(20 MHz,145 G)/μ’(40 MHz, 1005 G)=9.0
μ’-ratio:
μ’(20 MHz,300 G)/μ’(40 MHz, 1005 G)=2.8
9
μ’’ for Material #2 (G300)
μ’’-values:
μ’’(20 MHz,145 G)= 10.1μ’’(20 MHz,300 G)= 0.12μ’’(40 MHz,1005 G)= 0.076
10
μ’ for Material #3 (G810)
μ’-ratio:
μ’(20 MHz,558 G)/μ’(40 MHz, 1008 G)= 5.8
μ’-ratio:
μ’(20 MHz,153 G)/μ’(40 MHz, 1008 G)= 8.5
11
μ’’ for Material #3 (G810)
μ’’-values:
μ’’(20 MHz,153 G)= 11.9μ’’(20 MHz,558 G)= 1.2μ’’(40 MHz,1008 G)= 0.03
12
μ’ for Material #4 (RG3)
μ’-ratio:
μ’(20 MHz,145 G)/μ’(40 MHz, 1004 G)= 12.5
μ’-ratio:
μ’(20 MHz,349 G)/μ’(40 MHz, 1004 G)= 3.14
13
μ’’ for Material #4 (RG3)
μ’’-values:
μ’’(20 MHz,145 G)= 17.01μ’’(20 MHz,349 G)= 0.1μ’’(40 MHz,1004 G)= 0.05
14
Summary (1/3)
• Four ferrite samples have been ordered from industry and measured in an external magnetic bias field. This allowed the determination of their available -range and the corresponding values of ’ as a function of frequency and Bias-field.• Requirement for an f-range of 2.2 from 18-40 MHz is a ’-ratio of approx. 5.
Y36 G300 G810 RG3
’-ratio, [145 – 1005 Gauss]
11.1(’’,145 G= 6.3)
(’’,1005 G = 0.074)
9.0(’’,145 G= 10.1)
(’’,1005 G = 0.076)
8.5(’’,153 G = 11.9)(’’,1005 G= 0.03)
12.5(’’,145 G = 17.01)(’’,1005 G= 0.05)
’-ratio, [300 – 1005 Gauss]
4.0(’’,300 G= 0.2)
(’’,1005 G = 0.074)
2.8(’’,300 G= 0.12)
(’’,1005 G = 0.076)
-- --
’-ratio, [558 – 1008 Gauss]
-- -- 5.8(’’,558 G = 1.2)
(’’,1005 G= 0.03)
--
’-ratio, [349– 1004 Gauss]
-- -- -- 3.14(’’,349 G = 0.1)
(’’,1004 G = 0.05)
15
Summary (2/3)
• Measurement set-up is found that appears robust and stable (1-port-measurement with NWA).• More ferrite samples from different suppliers are already ordered for measurement. • Next step will be to investigate potential non-linearity of the materials, if exposed to moderate power (IP3 measurement).
16
Leads to two primary goals:1. Characterization of ferrite samples with different saturation and
line widths under different bias conditions in the required f-range. (This required a dedicated test set-up, since supplier data does not exist – PART 1).
2. Verification of Smythe’s claims (PART 2).
17
Verification of Smythe’s Claims (PART 2)• Smythe suggested in 1983 to use
– transverse bias to get close to saturation (reduces losses)– additional parallel bias for tuning (less bias required for same μ-range).
Happlied
Measurement Set-upHapplied
Htune
Hbias
19
μ’ for Material #2 (G300) in 2-Directional Magnetic Bias
Change of 55 G (parallel) with 200 G perpendicular -> μ’-ratio > 6
μ’-ratio with Hperp=200G:
μ’(20 MHz,HparBias=18 G)/μ’(40 MHz, HparBias=200 G)= 6.4
20
μ’’ for Material #2 (G300) in 2-Directional Magnetic Bias
μ’’-values with Hperp=200G :
μ’’(20 MHz, Hpar=18 G) = 1.23μ’’(20 MHz, Hpar=73 G)= 0.106μ’’(40 MHz, Hpar=200 G)= 0.105
21
Contour-plots “Smythe” and G300 Material
RF field direction
Hpa
r/4
Ms
Hperp/4Ms
Plot of Smythe Measured Data
22
Summary (3/3)• The idea of Smythe to use a 2-directional magnetic bias field appeared in 1983, but (to my knowledge) has never been used or further investigated.• Smythe had no measurement data to support his claims.
• From the measurement done on the G300 sample, it appears as if the method is promising and could work; we will continue further tests with other samples and higher parallel bias fields.
G300 with perpendicular bias
G300 with 2-directional bias
’-ratio, [300 – 1005 Gauss]
4.0(’’,300 G= 0.2)
(’’,1005 G = 0.074)
--
’-ratio, [ 200 Gauss perpendicular] &[18 – 200 Gauss parallel]
-- 6.4(’’,18 G= 1.23)
(’’,200 G = 0.105)
23
I would like to thank Fritz Caspers for his strong and unfailing support with all kind of measurement problems!