Author Topic: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions  (Read 89037 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CurtisSeizert

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 150
  • Country: us
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #275 on: April 24, 2024, 04:28:54 pm »
Julian - it is my pleasure. This is a very interesting project that all of you are putting a lot of effort into and doing a great job of documenting.

On routing the vias, I just put them in the pad itself and connect to the ground planes. With 6 layer, as you probably know, JLC fills the vias for free, which opens up via in pad as an option, which is nice. All the shields I used were stock at Digikey. I fully acknowledge that finding a stock part with the right dimensions to fit everything you want is a PITA. Also, I would say pollute away with seemingly mundane details because sometimes mundane just means consequential but easily overlooked.

I did not look into getting custom cut and bent sheet metal for RF shields. I could be wrong, but I would think that the cost of that would be unappealing for small order quantities. How much did your custom part cost? Another manufacturer to check out would be fotofab. I think they custom cut and dimple sheet metal, but their stock shields are already quite expensive (around $70 from Digikey, I believe). If I need a custom shield my plan would generally be to secure it with SMD shield clips (Harwin, I think). I would 3-D print a form with two locating holes for dowel pins, drill corresponding holes in the sheet, cut it as needed, and bend it around the form. By the way, if you do find yourself needing to drill sheet metal, try using brad-point (woodworking) bits. The drill doesn't wander, the point doesn't deform the sheet, and the hole comes out very clean. You might not be able to pull this off with 0.8 mm sheet, however. I was considering it for 0.25 mm stock.

The inclusion of probe features on the pcb itself is an interesting idea. I usually don't have much free room under shielding cans where that would be the most useful, but another way of learning what you need to know would simply to make a test board with the relevant features and sniffer footprints.

The reason I used the JLC2116 1.2 mm stackup was that it offered a good compromise between reasonably low width for 50 ohm controlled impedance traces and low(ish) capacitance to ground for places where that would be bad. One thing to be cognizant of in 6 layer designs is that signals on the top layer and the second inner layer may share a return on the ground plane on the first inner layer because the distance between the middle two layers can be comparatively rather large. I think it is a good idea to try to route fast digital signals as controlled impedance in a noise-sensitive design. I have heard Eric Bogatin say you are likely to get EMI problems long before you get signal integrity problems, by which I assume he means digital signal integrity. I take this to mean you are going to get issues with low level analog signals before you start seeing bit errors. I kept my SPI bus lines quite short, with the MCU pretty close to the ADC, so the time delay may not have been sufficient to justify. Sometimes, however, I think it is prudent when design resources are limited to overdesign by default rather than get away with as much as possible for everything because it takes time to figure out how much "as much as possible" is.

I tend to agree that it is easier to try to avoid DC-DC converters, and I didn't mean to imply that they were the right choice for your design. It was necessary to include them within the specific parameters of my NVM because of the whole battery power thing and the importance of keeping power dissipation nearly constant through a discharge cycle to avoid drift in the magnitude of parasitic thermocouples. The results from EMI probes are nice at the level I use them, but the ultimate question is whether a change impacts the quality and repeatability of measurements. When I was probing around, I was trying to understand whether the higher-than-expected noise density with shorted inputs to the ADC driver was caused by EMI, so I made what changes I could to assign the peaks in noise spectrum under normal operating conditions. The challenges, at least with my equipment and setup, were limited dynamic range and the potential for obscuring peaks in the background noise. Also, any experiments are, to some degree, non-representative of actual operating conditions, because the board cannot be in an enclosure. I was able to rule out the SMPS as a root cause for the specific issue I was investigating, but I did not ever get to a complete understanding of the problem. Actually, one of the most valuable debugging features I put on the NVM board was the analog out SMB jack after the input stage.

I should buy a few LSK389s and see how they come out for noise using the same setup I used for the JFE2140. I was aware they were lower noise, but I am interested to see where the 1/f corner is. I haven't used them before because they are more expensive than the JFE2140 and the matching specs are not as good. I would generally be inclined to parallel JFET pairs before using an IF3602 because the matching, capacitance, and leakage are so bad for the latter. The reason I added those details about the JFE2140 was because of some noise measurements you had posted maybe six months ago. It is sometimes difficult as a casual observer to know which issues have been solved.

By the way, have you posted a full schematic of the board? I don't believe I have seen one, but this thread is 11 pages long, so I might have missed it.
 

Offline Echo88Topic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 847
  • Country: de
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #276 on: August 19, 2024, 09:55:06 pm »
Quick question as im replicating the current source of the 3458A and i assumed this would be the most fitting thread:
Whats the reason for the seemingly duplicate 3k/10k divider (RP300A/B/C,R310) and U306 analog switch switch?
I know that the divider produces the necessary 13Vref, but i cant make out the reason for the analog switch in this case.
A picture of the detail in the CLIP is attached, page 51.
 

Offline Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14708
  • Country: de
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #277 on: August 20, 2024, 09:05:44 am »
The 2 dividers have different resistor values. It is 3 K and .3 K. This gives 2 ref. voltages for the current source and thus additional combinations and tests. It makes sense to use different voltages at the current source: The highest test current of some 10 mA would give quite some self heating at the resistor with a 3 V voltage for the resistor. At the other end the highest resistor could this way also be used for another extra small test current, for very large resistors. It would not be super accurate, but still better than measuring with the 10 M divider in parallel to the DUT.
I don't know how the 2 voltage settings are used in the 3458, but they could also help with an extra self test step and maybe ACAL.


In my ohms current source I use even 3 (could argue 4) voltages of 5 V, 1.5 V, 0.5 V and as an essentially "off" case some 15 mV, that is still OK for a timy current in the 10 nA range. More voltages are an easy way to get more test current settings and maybe get away with fewer (e.g. 4) resistors.
 

Offline Mickle T.

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 482
  • Country: ru
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #278 on: August 22, 2024, 07:52:32 am »
The value of resistor R311 in the ground wire current compensation circuit makes it clear that RP300A/RP300C and RP300B/R310 are two identical dividers.
 

Offline Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14708
  • Country: de
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #279 on: August 22, 2024, 09:04:39 am »
The ground current does not depend on R309A/B, but only R309C and R310.

It could still make sense to have 2 same ratio dividers for better TC matching: The 1 mA and 10 mA range use a seprate resistor in the current source and would like a matched resistor pair for the voltage. So they would use R300A/C as a TC matched pair. The smaller ranges use resistors from the R300 array and thus would like a mix if of low TC (R310) and a resistor from R300B to get TC compensation for the array.

It is still a somewhat odd solution, as the small currents would work better with a slightly higher voltage and the higher currents with a slightly lower voltage. So they could have also choose 2 different voltages (e.g. 2 V and 4 V).
 

Offline julian1

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 765
  • Country: au
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #280 on: August 25, 2024, 10:10:53 am »
the cost of that would be unappealing for small order quantities. How much did your custom part cost?

A while between posts - I wanted to try to progress on a few points before updating the thread.
Here's a couple of pics of the shield made by Pcbway, which should give some sense of the construction/tolerance.
The cost was about half the price of the expedited shipping cost, so reasonable for one-off prototypes, although maybe not for professional quantities.
Perhaps the fixed cost for tooling setup could be offset/negotiated down with increasing quantity.
The issue is that it's still not quite right in terms of either design or material/thickness - and I still need to ask if they could manage 0.3mm tin-plate steel as a special request.
When placed flat on a glass table-top, there is very rocking movement/play, so it's quite impressive given how thick/strong the sheet is, for the relative size of the piece.

Quote
By the way, have you posted a full schematic of the board? I don't believe I have seen one, but this thread is 11 pages long, so I might have missed it.

Most of the design - especially the important points has been posted as kicad or ltspice files, or else noted in discussion.
I will post an overview schematic for further review/comment/interest when I can test stuff that has changed, but which hasn't received any testing yet - at least for basic function.
 

Offline julian1

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 765
  • Country: au
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #281 on: August 25, 2024, 10:29:22 am »
From my side, I had a try at a smps.

- The main idea is for the power-board to mate with the analog-board similar to an arduino or raspberry pi hat.
The clearance between the two pcbs should allow sheet-metal shielding, with small holes/slots for the inter-board connectors.

- outputs are +-18V,5V.  and a optional +-18V to power turn-over/INL self tests.

- The driver is a full-bridge running at 15kHz.
Gate resistors can be used to slew the drive, and this kind of works - a 1k gate resistor gives a rise/fall-time around 500ns/1us. 
Although 10k destroys the sot-23 fets due to small size/SOA.

- Control is by mcu which feels a bit wrong - although slower-frequencies can be achieved (better for ripple post-regulation) versus some PMIC.
And it's fast to experiment with different parameters.

- the input voltage is 10V at the moment.
Using 5V would reduce the exposed voltage on the primary even more.
And 5V is convenient for being able to be shared with digital.
Unfortunately the fet-drivers I chose have a 10V UVLO, so these parts/footprints would need to change for 5V operation.

- The toroid is comically oversized to create strong physical separation between prim/secondary - about 2.5pF coupling cap.

- Using coax to wind the primary works fine.
I tried winding the secondaries with shielded ethernet cable, but there is too much bulk for the turn count.
Another way to do this may be by using two transformers -
ie. a low-voltage high-isolation type with shielded coax on both prim and secondary, eg. 5V to 5V.
followed by a step-up transformer where the exposed magnet-wire doesn't matter and with enough turns for the +-18V secondaries.

- The output filtering is 2x LC filters 10uH/220uF (with smaller MLCCs bottom side).

- The linear regulators are 317/337. There is an extra cap across the larger resistor in the adjustment divider to stiffen the feedback node.
This follows the DS schematic for ripple current measurement.
More modern regulators such as ltc3080 exist - but ripple suppression is the main point, and looks better for the classic npn/non-LDO regulators.
lt3080 .  ripple rejection is 55dB at 10kHz.
lm317.    DS. Fig 12. On Semi.  looks to be about 75dB at  10kHz.

- For the scope traces - the yellow trace is the secondary winding before the rectifier. 10V / division.
the purple is the regulated +18V output, AC coupled, 20mV/ division to observe switching noise.

- there is some switching pulse which I don't like.
It's hard to know how much is real, and how much is an artifact of probing/ or probe coupling.
I tried swapping the inductors for high-current ferrite beads/ and also low valued resistors but it doesn't change much.
Perhaps RF inductors with less inter-winding capacitance would be better.

- I have a $100 handheld-scope ordered - to test CM current following Marco Reps' Extreme Isolation video
It would be good to do this test before making other changes (using coax etc).
Reps did a ton of work, testing and posting results for different DMMs/supplies, so it is a good opportunity for a comparison.
 
The following users thanked this post: Kleinstein

Offline Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14708
  • Country: de
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #282 on: August 25, 2024, 10:59:42 am »
There is quite some background on the regulated 18 V. However this does not look like comming from the transformer / switching part. At least it looks nearly constant over time, more like much higher frequency (e.g. FM radio, or a µC clock) or something oscillating mauch faster than 15 kHz.

For the toroid, keep in mind that there is also coupling via the core. The soft, high µ ferrites tend to be somewhat conductive. So it my be worth having a little more separation from the winding to the core, at least at one side.
One has to find a balance between capacitove coupling and magnetic stray field.
 

Offline julian1

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 765
  • Country: au
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #283 on: September 20, 2024, 05:50:10 am »
The handheld-scope arrived and works pretty well.

I did some quick tests of mains transformers/CM currents to use as a baseline reference, and for comparison.
A good goal is to be able to replicate Marco Reps setup and follow the experiments in the Extreme Isolation video.

The voltages are measured with a handheld scope - 1Meg. x1 input impedance. 
So 1V measured corresponds to 1uA of current.

    Bel IF-10-10 (10VA, 2x 5V secondary).
        unpowered   0.585 Vpp.   0.212V RMS
        one coil    3.6 Vpp,     1.3V RMS
        two coils   5.3 Vpp,     1.9V RMS

    small 6V / 2.3VA pcb mount transformer.
        unpowered   0.5Vpp    0.225V   RMS 
        powered     3.5Vpp     1.3V   RMS 

    34401a transformer
        analog board CT winding 7.5Vpp      2.7V RMS

    if-10-10 step-down, followed by custom 50-60Hz AC step-up transformer.
        0.4Vpp      0.2V    RMS 


The 34401a transformer story is as expected.
I suspect the shield shown in the schematic is there just to isolate the analog side from the noisy switching digital board/display.

The two transformer approach shows the design advantage of starting at a lower voltage, and this applies whether using a smps, or mains-frequency transformers.
This is employed by K617, and probably the M182.

The two transformer test was a bit hasty, since I didn't wind enough turns for +-18V .
But on the other hand the bobbins are 3d printed, and can be assembled/disassembled, with adhesive copper tape used to guard.
Also the core size is too over-sized (43VA), while a smaller core would be better.

For a two-transformer approach an AC wall-wart supply is also an option, which improves safety.
 
The following users thanked this post: Mickle T.

Offline julian1

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 765
  • Country: au
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #284 on: September 20, 2024, 05:57:47 am »
There is quite some background on the regulated 18 V. However this does not look like comming from the transformer / switching part. At least it looks nearly constant over time, more like much higher frequency (e.g. FM radio, or a µC clock) or something oscillating mauch faster than 15 kHz.

I believe it's an FM tower/mast. It has caused quite some headaches with circuits in the past. If I have the chance I should try using the scope in another location.
 

Offline Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14708
  • Country: de
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #285 on: September 20, 2024, 07:51:06 am »
For the mains frequency part in the CM current one could use a compensation with added capacitors. It also makes a difference which side of the primary is connected to the hot / cold side of mains.
 

Offline julian1

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 765
  • Country: au
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #286 on: September 21, 2024, 01:12:45 am »
I tried putting a Schaffner 1A IEC inlet filter before the Bel transformer.
This has two 2.2nF Y-class caps from L and N to PE.
There is no effect/reduction on 50Hz coupling.
This is expected, since the inductance/cap values are sized for smps frequency line filtering.

Reps shows that a 2.2uF from primary to PE can be effective (at 7.20min).
Why this works is a bit mysterious.
Also, a cap this size would appear to pass a lot of AC current to PE, that could trip RCD devices.
I don't have any large HV film caps, and there are likely compliance issues for caps without a Y-class safety rating (Y-class are typically manufactured to smaller values).
So I am not sure how useful it is to experiment in this direction.
 

Offline julian1

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 765
  • Country: au
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #287 on: September 21, 2024, 04:34:45 am »
To compare, the DC/DC smps measures 70mVpp and 44mV RMS .
The readings are similar, whether the board is power or un-powered, with only the earth connection made back to the linear supply.
So presumably, whatever CM currents get across the transformer isolation, are of the same order, or lower than the stray capacitive currents that flow around the surface of the desk.
Unless I goofed up somehow.

setup configuration -
The output is tapped from +18V smps regulated output.
The earth used, is the earth terminal of the linear power supply.

It would be an interesting test, to use the Bel transformer+regulation instead of the linear supply to try powering the DC/DC board.

 

Offline Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14708
  • Country: de
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #288 on: September 21, 2024, 07:03:30 am »
A large capacitor between mains and PE is a no go for safty reasons. There is also little chance that this would help - if att all more in the higher frequency range depending on the local situation.

For the very low residual hum levels there is also just coupling from the environment (e.g. capacitance to wiring, lights, other electric applianes). For the very sensitive tests one would need a kind of grounded (a grounded ESD matt could be enough) environment.

A transformer with low hum in combination with the DIY low noise SMPS can be a good combination. The transformer can at least reduce the CM current from the lower frequencies. Still the coupling capacitance of the 50 Hz and SMPS transformer are likely roughly comparable - so maybe a factor of 2 to be gained for the SMPS frequencies, but possibly addition 50 Hz hum voltage from the transformer. So maybe half of the CM current from the transformer plus half the CM current from the DCDC (when used with a grounded DC input).
« Last Edit: September 21, 2024, 07:06:04 am by Kleinstein »
 

Offline dietert1

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2350
  • Country: br
    • CADT Homepage
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #289 on: September 21, 2024, 11:23:55 am »
Recently i got small common mode chokes, digikey part 817-2299-ND. I measured them as 145 mH. They add about 5 Ohm of resistance. If you combine the choke with a pair of 4.7 nF y caps, that's already a reasonable filter against mains transients. If PE is noisy, one can omit the Y caps.
Small 2-chamber transformers like Block FL 6/xx have a coupling capacitance of about 40 pF and the resonant frequency of 145 mH and 40 pF is 66 KHz. If there is a clean PE, the Y caps can reduce this another factor 10x. Lower frequency noise that passes the filter can be shorted by Gnd wiring.
The common mode choke doesn't block very high frequency RF, so one can add some ferrite, e.g. on the transformer secondary side.

Regards, Dieter
« Last Edit: September 21, 2024, 01:51:39 pm by dietert1 »
 

Offline Echo88Topic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 847
  • Country: de
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #290 on: September 21, 2024, 04:13:34 pm »
Maybe the current cancellation trick which is used in the HPAK34420A is of use for the 50Hz/slow transients CM here?
https://xdevs.com/doc/HP_Agilent_Keysight/34420A/HP34420A_SM_David.pdf Page 168 top right
 
The following users thanked this post: julian1

Offline Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14708
  • Country: de
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #291 on: September 21, 2024, 05:19:21 pm »
A compensation scheme could be a good idea, especially with a more normal mains transformer and split windings to have both polarities available. It could likely be simpler, with a trimmer instead of the DAC.
 

Offline julian1

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 765
  • Country: au
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #292 on: September 21, 2024, 09:36:54 pm »
Recently i got small common mode chokes, digikey part 817-2299-ND. I measured them as 145 mH. They add about 5 Ohm of resistance. If you combine the choke with a pair of 4.7 nF y caps, that's already a reasonable filter against mains transients. If PE is noisy, one can omit the Y caps.

I am using a Schaffner IEC block which I think is reasonably comparable.  They are an integrated solution that reduces wiring exposure risk. And there are pcb mount options too. But it's only for HF transients as you note.
 

Offline julian1

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 765
  • Country: au
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #293 on: September 21, 2024, 09:38:22 pm »
What is the situation with grounded chassis enclosures and test-equipment?
Is there a common preference, or need, that I may have been overlooked?

An external double-insulated/wall-wart adapter as first-stage step-down is nice because it side-steps the safety aspects of dealing with HV.
Although pcb-mount components (IEC/inlet/ CM filter/transformer/fuse ) are available and can eliminate a lot of exposure risk versus hand-wiring.

But traditionally - there is an operator expectation that DMM/test-equipment use a grounded enclosure/chassis.
And this relies on the power-cable to carry the earth connection to the device.

Of course, different configurations can be covered with a few optional pcb components, as well as the option for DC battery power, but it adds complexity.
 

Offline julian1

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 765
  • Country: au
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #294 on: September 21, 2024, 10:13:59 pm »
Maybe the current cancellation trick which is used in the HPAK34420A is of use for the 50Hz/slow transients CM here?
https://xdevs.com/doc/HP_Agilent_Keysight/34420A/HP34420A_SM_David.pdf Page 168 top right

Thanks @Echo88
 
So, for the 34420, it looks like the dac is reproducing a 50/60Hz sin wave - to zero the offset, on the capacitively coupled grounds.
HP engineers are remarkable.

Edit. actually to zero to an average value, to cancel the frequency coupled current.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2024, 11:59:22 pm by julian1 »
 

Offline Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14708
  • Country: de
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #295 on: September 22, 2024, 05:05:20 am »
The DAC in the 34420 circuit is not producing the sine wave. It acts as a digital pot to adjust the amplitude. The actual waveform should be still from mains. This kind of allows to trim the symmetry in the capacitive coupling and thus the injected 50/60 Hz current. The advantage of a digital trim is that it can be done with a closed case and no extra hum via the trim tool. Still the adjustment should only be needed once.
 
The following users thanked this post: julian1

Offline dietert1

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2350
  • Country: br
    • CADT Homepage
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #296 on: September 24, 2024, 07:22:08 am »
For safety reasons it may be required to connect a metal chassis to PE. But there are low power devices with so called safety transformers that are allowed with two-prong mains cables. That can be an advantage when PE is noisy. Another alternative is a small 3-phase common mode filter so one can filter the PE as well.
I think in order to get the best out of a high end DVM one needs to find a good solution for each setup. It's easy to get ppm deviations from unlucky guard wiring or so. Professional analog audio equipment often had a ground lift switch to break ground loops.
For low frequency currents one needs to look at the numbers. When you are trying to achieve 100 nV accurate measurements, a typical wiring scheme with ground cable resistance between 0.1 and 1 Ohm will be sensitive at 100 nA to 1 uA current. It's realistic to compensate the injected 50 Hz current down to about 20 nArms.

Regards, Dieter
« Last Edit: September 24, 2024, 09:21:40 am by dietert1 »
 
The following users thanked this post: julian1

Offline Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14708
  • Country: de
Re: Analog frontends for DMMs approaching 8.5 digits - Discussions
« Reply #297 on: September 24, 2024, 07:41:07 am »

Residual mains hum would also be not that bad, as the DMM is usually quite good in averaging out the hum. The more nasty parts are more higher frequency components and EMI effects that give an error via some rectification. The issue can be that RF wise there can still be a difference between the power neutral and PE. So even with a 50Hz transformer it could make some sense to have a CM choke (for L and N only, not PE).

For thermal reasons a metal case is convenient and connecting it to PE should not be an issue, as the environment would have a similar potential anyway.
One may still want some distance to keep the capacitance to the guard small.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf