Difference between revisions of "Integrators"

From Microlab Classes
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 118: Line 118:
 
H\left(s\right) = \frac{a}{\left(1 + s\frac{a}{\omega_0}\right) \cdot \left(1+\frac{s}{p_2}\right)\cdot \left(1+\frac{s}{p_3}\right) \cdots}  
 
H\left(s\right) = \frac{a}{\left(1 + s\frac{a}{\omega_0}\right) \cdot \left(1+\frac{s}{p_2}\right)\cdot \left(1+\frac{s}{p_3}\right) \cdots}  
 
</math>|{{EquationRef|16}}}}
 
</math>|{{EquationRef|16}}}}
 +
 +
If we assume that <math>\omega_0 \ll p_2, p_3, \ldots</math> and <math>a \gg 1</math>, we can then rewrite the transfer function as:
 +
 +
{{NumBlk|::|<math>
 +
\begin{align}
 +
\left. H\left(j\omega\right) \right|_{\omega=\omega_0} & = \frac{1}{\left(\frac{1}{a} + \frac{j\omega_0}{\omega_0}\right) \cdot \left(1 + \frac{j\omega_0}{p_2}\right) \cdot \left(1 + \frac{j\omega_0}{p_3}\right) + \cdots} \\
 +
& = \frac{1}{\left(\frac{1}{a} - \frac{\omega_0}{p_2} + j + \frac{j\omega_0}{a\cdot p_2}\right) \cdot \left(1 + \frac{j\omega_0}{p_3}\right) + \cdots} \approx \frac{1}{\left(\frac{1}{a} - \frac{\omega_0}{p_2} + j \right) \cdot \left(1 + \frac{j\omega_0}{p_3}\right) + \cdots}\\
 +
& \approx \frac{1}{\left(\frac{1}{a} - \frac{\omega_0}{p_2} + j + \frac{j\omega_0}{a\cdot p_3} - \frac{j\omega_0^2}{p_2\cdot p_3} - \frac{\omega_0}{p_3}\right)\cdots} \approx \frac{1}{\left(\frac{1}{a} - \frac{\omega_0}{p_2} - \frac{\omega_0}{p_3} + j\right)\cdots} \\
 +
& \approx \frac{1}{\left(\frac{1}{a} - \frac{\omega_0}{p_2} - \frac{\omega_0}{p_3} - \ldots \right) + j} \\
 +
& \approx \frac{1}{\left(\frac{1}{a} -\sum\limits_{i=2}^N \frac{\omega_0}{p_i} \right) + j}
 +
\end{align}
 +
</math>|{{EquationRef|17}}}}
 +
 +
For <math>N</math> non-dominant poles. The integrator quality factor is then equal to:
 +
 +
{{NumBlk|::|<math>
 +
Q \approx \frac{1}{\frac{1}{a} -\sum\limits_{i=2}^N \frac{\omega_0}{p_i}}
 +
</math>|{{EquationRef|18}}}}
 +
 +
As expected, the effect of finite gain can be cancelled out by the effect of the non-dominant poles.
  
 
=== Capacitor Non-Idealities ===
 
=== Capacitor Non-Idealities ===
 +
For lossy capacitors, modeled in Fig. 11 as an ideal capacitor in series with a resistor, <math>R_c</math>, the integrator transfer function becomes:
 +
 +
{{NumBlk|::|<math>
 +
\begin{align}
 +
H\left(s\right) = \frac{v_o}{v_i} & = -\left(R_c + \frac{1}{sC} \right)\cdot \frac{1}{R} = -\frac{1}{sRC}\cdot \left(1 + sR_c C\right) \\
 +
& = -\frac{\omega_0}{s}\cdot \left(1 + sR_c C\right) = -\frac{\omega_0}{j\omega}\cdot \left(1 + j\omega R_c C\right) \\
 +
& = -\frac{\omega_0}{j\omega}\cdot \frac{1 + \omega^2 R_c^2 C^2 }{1 - j\omega R_c C}
 +
\end{align}
 +
</math>|{{EquationRef|19}}}}
 +
 +
The magnitude and phase response is shown in Figs. 12 and 13. Notice the phase lead introduced by the zero due to <math>R_c</math>. At <math>\omega=\omega_0</math>:
 +
 +
{{NumBlk|::|<math>
 +
\begin{align}
 +
H\left(j\omega_0\right)  & = -\frac{1}{j}\cdot \frac{1 + \omega_0^2 R_c^2 C^2 }{1 - j\omega_0 R_c C} = \frac{-\left( 1 + \omega_0^2 R_c^2 C^2 \right)}{j + \omega_0 R_c C} \\
 +
& = \frac{-1}{j\frac{1}{1 + \omega_0^2 R_c^2 C^2} + \frac{\omega_0 R_c C}{1 + \omega_0^2 R_c^2 C^2}}
 +
\end{align}
 +
</math>|{{EquationRef|20}}}}
 +
 +
The integrator quality factor can then be written as:
 +
 +
{{NumBlk|::|<math>
 +
Q = \frac{1}{\omega_0 R_c C} = \frac{RC}{R_c C} = \frac{R}{R_c}
 +
</math>|{{EquationRef|21}}}}
 +
 +
Thus, a non-zero <math>R_c</math> degrades the integrator quality factor, but in typical implementations, the amplifier non-idealities will dominate.
 +
 +
== Summary ==
 +
The quality factor of the integrator is reduced by:
 +
* The finite gain of the amplifier,
 +
* The presence of amplifier non-dominant poles, and
 +
* The loss of passive reactive components, e.g. capacitors.
 +
 +
Note that both the finite amplifier gain and the lossy capacitor introduces a phase lead, and the presence of non-dominant poles results in a phase lag.

Revision as of 11:44, 2 April 2021

The Ideal Integrator

The ideal integrator, shown in Fig. 1, with symbol shown in Fig. 2, makes use of an ideal operational amplifier with , , and . The current through the resistor, , can be expressed as:

 

 

 

 

(1)

Thus, we can write the integrator output voltage, , as:

 

 

 

 

(2)

In the Laplace domain:

 

 

 

 

(3)

Or equivalently:

 

 

 

 

(4)

The magnitude and phase response of an ideal integrator is shown in Figs. 3 and 4. A key feature to note in ideal integrators is the fact that:

  • The unity gain frequency is equal to , and
  • The phase at the unity gain frequency is exactly .

Rewriting the transfer function as:

 

 

 

 

(5)

We can then define the quality factor of an ideal integrator:

 

 

 

 

(6)

Since . Fig. 5 shows a multiple-input integrator, with output voltage:

 

 

 

 

(7)

Integrator Noise

Fig. 6 shows an integrator where the output is fed back to one of its inputs, giving us:

 

 

 

 

(8)

Ignoring the noise from the amplifier, the output noise of the integrator in Fig. 6 can be expressed as:

 

 

 

 

(9)

The total integrated noise is then:

 

 

 

 

(10)

Integrator Non-Idealities

In practice, integrators are limited by the characteristics of non-ideal amplifiers: (1) finite gain at DC, and (2) non-dominant amplifier poles. Let us look at the effects of these non-idealities one at a time.

Finite Gain

The transfer function of an integrator using an amplifier with finite gain, , can be written as:

 

 

 

 

(11)

The magnitude and phase response of this non-ideal integrator is shown in Figs. 7 and 8. Note that the integrator quality factor now becomes finite:

 

 

 

 

(12)

The phase at is then:

 

 

 

 

(13)

Thus, if is finite, will approach, but will never be equal to , resulting in a phase lead. For example, if , we get , and will result in .

Non-Dominant Poles

The transfer function of an integrator using an amplifier with infinite gain but with non-dominant poles can be expressed as:

 

 

 

 

(14)

The magnitude and phase response of this non-ideal integrator is shown in Figs. 9 and 10. The phase at the unity gain frequency is then equal to:

 

 

 

 

(15)

Note that the non-dominant poles contribute to the integrator phase lag.

In a real integrator, the effects (phase lead) of the amplifier finite gain can cancel out the effects (phase lag) of the non-dominant poles! Given the transfer function of the integrator with an amplifier that has both finite gain and non-dominant poles:

 

 

 

 

(16)

If we assume that and , we can then rewrite the transfer function as:

 

 

 

 

(17)

For non-dominant poles. The integrator quality factor is then equal to:

 

 

 

 

(18)

As expected, the effect of finite gain can be cancelled out by the effect of the non-dominant poles.

Capacitor Non-Idealities

For lossy capacitors, modeled in Fig. 11 as an ideal capacitor in series with a resistor, , the integrator transfer function becomes:

 

 

 

 

(19)

The magnitude and phase response is shown in Figs. 12 and 13. Notice the phase lead introduced by the zero due to . At :

 

 

 

 

(20)

The integrator quality factor can then be written as:

 

 

 

 

(21)

Thus, a non-zero degrades the integrator quality factor, but in typical implementations, the amplifier non-idealities will dominate.

Summary

The quality factor of the integrator is reduced by:

  • The finite gain of the amplifier,
  • The presence of amplifier non-dominant poles, and
  • The loss of passive reactive components, e.g. capacitors.

Note that both the finite amplifier gain and the lossy capacitor introduces a phase lead, and the presence of non-dominant poles results in a phase lag.