Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Abstract—Gain and timing mismatches among sub-converters limit the (nM + 0)Ts + r0 Ts
I. I NTRODUCTION gM −1
ADCM −1
A time-interleaved ADC (TIADC) provides an effective way to
achieve high sampling rates [1]. Each channel ADC in an M - TIADC with fs = 1/Ts
fs
channel TIADC operates with a sampling rate of M , while the
overall sampling rate is fs , i.e., M -times higher. Unfortunately, due Fig. 1. Identification and compensation of gain and timing mismatches with
to different channel characteristics, the interleaving of multiple ADCs a bandlimited oversampled input signal for an M -channel TIADC.
leads to mismatches, where in particular gain and timing mismatches
affect the performance [2].
Several mismatch identification and compensation methods have gain gm for m = 0, 1, . . . , M − 1. By assuming a bandlimited input
been introduced, e.g., [3]–[7]. However, due to their computational signal X (jΩ), i.e., X(jΩ) = 0 for |Ω| ≥ Ωb and Ωb Ts ≤ π, the
complexity their practical applicability is limited. In [8], [9] the output of the M -channel TIADC with gain and timing mismatches
authors have investigated adaptive blind calibration of gain and timing can be represented in discrete time as [12]
mismatches that have maintainable complexity but are limited to two
channels. In [10] the blind calibration technique from [9] has been “ ” M −1
X “ 2π
” “ 2π
”
extended to four-channel TIADCs but it only considers the calibration Y ejω = αk ej (ω−k M ) X ej (ω−k M ) (1)
of timing mismatches. k=0
In this paper we extend our previous work [5], [11] and present
with
a structure that allows to adaptively compensate gain and timing
mismatches in an M -channel TIADC using similar assumptions as “ ” M −1
1 X jω 2π
αk ejω = gm erm Hd (e ) e−jk M m (2)
in [5], [10]. Hence, we assume a slightly oversampled input signal M m=0
that exhibits sufficient energy during the adaptation process. Under
these assumptions we can use the LMS algorithm to estimate the gain and
and timing mismatches of the TIADC and compensate the error signal
due to the mismatches. Because of the relation to [5] the achievable Hd (ejω ) = jω for − π < ω ≤ π (3)
performance of this method and the method in [5] is comparable, but
the implementation complexity in this work has been considerably is the frequency response of an ideal discrete-time differentiator [13].
reduced. For an ideal TIADC without gain and timing mismatches gm = 1
For the sake of clarity, we refer to an even number of channels M and rm = 0. Since in a typical TIADC the relative time offsets rm
for all derivations in this paper. The derivations for an odd number are small compared to the sampling period Ts we can apply Taylor’s
jω
of channels can be done accordingly. series approximation to the term erm Hd (e ) and can neglect the
higher order terms, which results in [12]
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
jω
“ ”
Figure 1 shows a model of a TIADC with gain and timing erm Hd (e ) ≈ 1 + rm Hd ejω . (4)
mismatches. Each channel is characterized by the relative time
offset rm Ts , where Ts is the overall sampling period, and the After substituting (4) in (2) we obtain
C. Vogel was supported by the Austrian Science Fund FWF’s Erwin “ ” “ ”
Schroedinger Fellowship J2709-N20. αk ejω = Gk + Rk Hd ejω (5)
50
xg [n] TABLE I
S IMULATED GAIN AND TIMING MISMATCH VALUES
1
G0 cg
xr [n] d[n] ε[n] ADC gk rk
1
G0 cr
LMS ADC0 1.01 −0.007Ts
ADC1 0.98 0.002Ts
ADC2 0.99 −0.003Ts
ADC3 1.02 0.008Ts
ĉr [n] e[n]
51
0
0.005
−10
−20 0
Energy Density Spectrum [dBc]
−30
−50
−0.01
−60
−70
−0.015
−80
LMS Adaptation
−90 Ideal Values
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 −0.02
Normalized frequency Ω/Ω 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
s Number of Samples 4
x 10
Fig. 4. Energy density spectrum of the uncompensated output y[n] after Fig. 7. The convergence behavior of the timing mismatch coefficients ĉr [n]
convergence of the LMS algorithm (last 2048 samples). The SNR is 35.1 dB. compared to their expected values G1 cr = [−0.001, 0.0016, −0.005].
0
0
R EFERENCES
−10
[1] W. C. Black Jr. and D. A. Hodges, “Time-interleaved converter arrays,”
−20 IEEE Journal of Solid State Circuits, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1024–1029,
Energy Density Spectrum [dBc]
December 1980.
−30 [2] C. Vogel, “The impact of combined channel mismatch effects in time-
interleaved ADCs,” IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measure-
−40 ment, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 415–427, February 2005.
[3] J. Elbornsson, F. Gustafsson, and J. E. Eklund, “Blind adaptive equal-
−50
ization of mismatch errors in a time-interleaved A/D converter system,”
−60
IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers, vol. 51,
no. 1, pp. 151–158, January 2004.
−70 [4] J. Elbornsson, F. Gustafsson, and J.-E. Eklund, “Blind equalization of
time errors in a time-interleaved ADC system,” IEEE Transactions on
−80 Signal Processing, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 1413–1424, April 2005.
[5] C. Vogel, “A frequency domain method for blind identification of timing
−90 mismatches in time-interleaved ADCs,” in Proceedings of the 24th IEEE
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Normalized frequency Ω/Ωs Norchip Conference, November 2006, pp. 45–48.
[6] V. Divi and G. Wornell, “Scalable blind calibration of timing skew
Fig. 5. Energy density spectrum of the compensated output yc [n] after in high-resolution time-interleaved ADCs,” in Proceedings of IEEE
convergence of the LMS algorithm (last 2048 samples). The SNR is 66 dB, International Symposium on Circuits and Systems, ISCAS, May 2006,
which is an improvement of 30.9dB compared to the uncompensated output. pp. 3390–3393.
[7] M. Seo, M. J. W. Rodwell, and U. Madhow, “Generalized blind
mismatch correction for a two-channel time-interleaved ADC: Analytic
approach,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Circuits
0.02 and Systems, ISCAS, May 2007, pp. 109–112.
[8] S. Jamal, D. Fu, M. Singh, P. Hurst, and S. Lewis, “Calibration of
0.015 sample-time error in a two-channel time-interleaved analog-to-digital
converter,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Regular
0.01 Papers, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 130–139, January 2004.
Estimated Gain Error
52