Chp. 5: Quality Factor and LC Tank Behavior in Time Domain
To develop further intuition in Q-factor and extend its application to matching and bandwidth, it is prudent to study time domain behavior of LC tank. We show how an LC tank starts up, how the voltage developed across it heads to infinity, how a finite Q-factor limits its growth, and what happens if you excite the tank with non-resonant frequencies.
Attach a sinusoidal current source of 1mA with 1GHz frequency to an LC tank which is also set to resonate at 1GHz. Let’s see how things play out.
We are going to do same experiment as above but now with an LC tank with finite quality factor. Let’s attach a resistor of 1kΩ to an LC tank set to resonate at 1GHz, and excite this tank with 1mA current source with 1GHz frequency.
If you force an LC tank at a frequency which is not natural to it (and that is everything except resonant frequency), it wouldn’t be able to develop the max voltage it could or in other words current source would never be able to deliver the power it could in resonant case. Ind and cap will always take in some current from source, leaving a little less for resistor. Therefore, voltage developed will always be smaller than a resonant case. We compare two cases. Our LC tank was set to resonate at 1GHz, we excite it with double (2GHz) and half (0.5GHz) frequency and analyze why it could not develop much voltage.
Things play out as usual. Cap and resistor start by taking all the current from source. Ind picks up the pace, and slowly starts taking current. A point comes where not enough current is available from source to keep providing for all three (ind, cap, res). Someone has to give up. Ind cannot because it does not like sudden change in current. Cap gives up and its current starts reducing. All of this looks normal transient behavior as we saw in case of resonant frequency. The difference comes from zero crossings. See now cap voltage and source currents zero crossings are not aligned which they were in resonant case. So at V1 (in left image below) cap is in a position to discharge but source still wants to go positive. Its zero crossing comes later at V2. Now instead of reverse charging the cap and ind also helping the process (as happened at V6 for resonant frequency cases described above), source tries to charge cap positively again whereas ind is still trying to reverse charge. Overall, result is that total charge or voltage build-up across cap is lesser. This goes on in every cycle, and cap is never able to develop a higher voltage. Now question is how much lesser voltage is produced compared to resonant case? Ans: the farther the zero crossing of cap voltage from source current, the lesser the voltage developed. It does not matter if source zero crossing comes earlier or later, what matters is how far away is it.
Note left and right image below are response of same LC tank. Just that left shows initial transient behavior, and right shows when things have settled.
Nothing much to say here. It emphasizes the same thing that when zero crossings are not aligned, things will not go in your favor. For example, you can observe that resistor current and source current are not in phase, so the resistor would never be able to draw all of source current and develop the max voltage it could. And they are not in phase because the way cap voltage developed and when source zero crossing came in didn’t align (V1 and V2 in left image below).
The LC tank of 1GHz resonance frequency and quality factor of ~3 is excited with different frequencies and the voltage developed across tank is plotted in image below.
Interesting thing to note here that is that if you excite at x times higher or x times lower frequency than resonance frequency, the voltage developed is same. For example, at \(1.1f_o\) or \(\dfrac{f_o}{1.1}\), the voltage developed is about 854mV. Similarly, at \(1.33f_o\) or \(\dfrac{f_o}{1.33}\) voltage developed is again same (~477mV). This tells us that a resonator behaves in a geometric fashion that is if you were to look at voltage developed at \(f_o+x\) and \(f_o-x\) it will not be same; but if you were to look at \(xf_o\) and \(\dfrac{f_o}{x}\), it will be exactly the same. How can we explain this – let’s explore that in next chapter.
RFInsights
Published: 04 March 2023
Last Edit: 04 March 2023