This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

LMK05318BEVM: High spurious output when changing XO frequency

Part Number: LMK05318BEVM
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: LMK05318B, LMK5B12204

I setup the LMK05318B evaluation board to generate a 140MHz signal using APLL2 on OUT0 and a 100MHz signal using APPL1 on OUT7 with a 10MHz clock on the primary reference input.  The performance of the evaluation board is acceptable to me with no measurable spurs and a phase noise at a 10kHz offset of -137dBc on the 100MHz output using APLL1.  I now would like to verify performance with a more readily available XO than the one on the evaluation board. 

I replaced the 48.0048MHz XO that is on the evaluation board with the 24.576MHz Kyocera KC2520Z24.5760C15XXK and stepped through the TICS Pro Wizard using the new XO frequency of 24576000Hz.  I used the suggested frequency plan and used the Matlab script to set the DPLL in the same way as for my original design with the 48.0048MHz XO.   However, I now measure very high phase noise and lots of spurs on both outputs.  The worst case spurs are at +/-1590Hz from the carriers at a level of -60dBc.  The Status page of the TICS Pro application indicates that all PLLs are locked and the outputs are at the correct frequencies of 100 and 140MHz.  I've tried going through the Wizard several times with slightly different output configurations and I still get this poor performance.   I would like to know if there are any considerations in changing the XO frequency without degrading performance that I may have missed.  

  • Hello Ed,

    If possible, could you please provide me with images of your phase noise plots for the 100 MHz and 140 MHz outputs when using the 24.576 MHz crystal?

    Regards,

    Kia Rahbar

  • Hi Kia,

    Sorry but it is too late for that since I’m removed this XO and tried a couple more XOs. What I have found is that the 24.576MHz Kyocera KC2520Z24.5760C15XXK and 32.768 Kyocera KC2520Z32.7680C1KX00 both create high phase noise and lots of spurs but the 24.576MHz Wurth 831056295 works just fine. It seems like the Kyocera KC2520Z series parts are not compatible with the LMK05318B. However I can’t see anything on the datasheets that would indicate that they are not compatible. Can you please look at the datasheets and let me know what I’m missing? Thanks!

  • Hello Ed,

    I don't believe that there is any issue with your LMK05318B setup/configuration. It appears that the reduction is performance is due to the performance of the XOs. The Wurth 831056295 has great performance measurements (shown below), therefore resulting in better phase noise measurements at the output of the LMK05318B.

    I was unable to find the noise parameters for the  Kyocera KC2520Z series parts, but I would assume the performance would be worse.

    One recommendation I would provide is to directly connect each of your XOs to a phase noise analyzer and check their performances. An XO's performance has a significant effect on the output performance of the LMK05318B.

    Regards,

    Kia Rahbar

  • I agree that it must have to do with the noise performance of the XO.  However this conflicts with the statement in section 9.3.1 of the LMK05318B and LMK5B12204 datasheets that states "An XO/TCXO/OCXO source with low-frequency or a high-phase jitter/noise will have no impact on the output jitter performance".  It was this statement that led me to believe that I did not need to consider the noise performance of the XO.  I recommend that you update the datasheet so that other users of these parts know that the noise performance of the XO does have an impact on output jitter performance.