AoE 3 P. 485 (footnote 22) references a paper by Broderson, Chenette & Jaeger, entitled "A Superior Low Noise Amplifier", 1970 ISSC, P. 164. Before I feed yet another $31 into the voracious maw of the IEEE, does anybody have a copy handy?
No, but by now it should be common knowledge if it's any good.
Places to go:
formatting link
nist.gov, search for Fred Walls, Ferre-Pikal, timefreq group, 1134.pdf "origin of 1/f PM and AM noise in Bipolar Junction Transistor Amplifiers"; there is more.
"GOOD LOW-NOISE PERFORMANCE at low frequencies is difficult to achieve in an amplifier without resorting to careful selection of the input transistors. Such selection is, at best, an expensive process for discrete-component circuits and a nearly unobtainable luxury for monolithic integrated circuits. The circuit of Figure 1 has superior low-noise performance at low frequencies. It consists of a Darlington pair of transistors and a dc current source connected to the emitter of the input transistor. This current source allows the independent adjustment of the small-signal transconductance of the input transistor. When the transconductances of the two transistors are equal, the excess output noise is nulled. In a typical realization described below, the noise performance is an order of magnitude better than that of either transistor alone."
They then show how to make a differential pair of the same circuit.
I'm interested in reducing the 1/f noise of pHEMTs, which besides low V_A is their only vice. An order of magnitude improvement in the 1/f noise would reduce their noise corner from 10 MHz to 100 kHz, a fairly startling improvement.
Of course the mechanism is different, so the BJT trick may well not work.
Received a copy from the estimable John M in Scotland. Interesting bit of work, but only a couple of pages long--about $15 per page from the ever-generous IEEE. Thanks, John!
The abstracts are written to make it unclear whether the paper might be useful. You have to buy the whole thing to find out. It's better to assume that it's not useful, which is the general case.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing laser drivers and controllers
Same here, but my spending an afternoon driving to the city and back would cost the customer a lot of 31 buckses. There's an outfit called DeepDyve that lets you take a squint at the paper for 6 bucks or so before buying it, iirc, which is better but still annoying.
I can go to the nearby UC Med Center library. For a min of $20, I can buy a printer card, which lets me print things for $1 a page. They have all the major journals online. I can look at them on a PC, and print just the pages I want.
I do that on an occasional binge basis, maybe once a year, when I need to learn something new. Last one was Fourier Transform Mass Spectroscopy. I might research sub-Abbe-resolution fluorescent microscopy soon.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing laser drivers and controllers
This is also how the IEEE Digital Library program works, except it's more like $40/month. It's violently annoying to pay that for research that was largely taxpayer-funded in the first place, but it's also a hard habit to break.
I think the IEEE probably doesn't own the copyright on the US Govt research. When I worked for a company and submitted a conference paper to ISSCC they made me sign something to assign the copyright to them, like this form:
formatting link
You will notice the section for US and UK government employees to sign - where they concede that where the funding body won't give the IEEE all of their rights, the IEEE is still happy to publish the paper anyway. Admittedly the IEEE can still coerce authors into handing over right to a lot of papers that are only indirectly government-funded.
If you could compile a database of all of those papers that the IEEE does not own the rights to, and put those papers online, I doubt the IEEE could do a thing about it, and may get in trouble if it tries.
Anyway I don't intend to sign any more if the IEEE's copyright assignment forms, if they ever do want to print something of mine in future.
I would like for a referendum of IEEE members to be held, about whether papers over 5 years old should be automatically open-access to members, and whether the papers should also be open-access to the public. I think most members would want at least older papers to be open-access, and most corporate subscribers to IEEE journals would keep paying for immediate access. I would like such a referendum to be held, not because I think the IEEE would obey the outcome, but because their reaction would demonstrate whose interest the IEEE management works for.
In physics, we have the Arxiv preprint site, where you can have a look at a lot of papers in publication. It's run sort of like the Royal Society--you have to have a member submit the paper for you, which keeps down the spammers and cranks.
It also goes a long way towards solving the fast vs slow journal problem in hot fields. (I don't read that many recent physics papers.)
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.