Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-nf276 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-14T10:19:03.266Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A 1.5–40 GHz frequency modulated continuous wave radar receiver front-end

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2021

Mantas Sakalas*
Affiliation:
Baltic Institute of Advanced Technology, Pilies g. 16-8, Vilnius, Lithuania
Niko Joram
Affiliation:
Technische Universität Dresden, Chair for Circuit Design and Network Theory, Helmholtzstr. 18, Dresden, Germany
Frank Ellinger
Affiliation:
Technische Universität Dresden, Chair for Circuit Design and Network Theory, Helmholtzstr. 18, Dresden, Germany
*
Author for correspondence: Mantas Sakalas, E-mail: mantas.sakalas@bpti.eu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study presents an ultra-wideband receiver front-end, designed for a reconfigurable frequency modulated continuous wave radar in a 130 nm SiGe BiCMOS technology. A variety of innovative circuit components and design techniques were employed to achieve the ultra-wide bandwidth, low noise figure (NF), good linearity, and circuit ruggedness to high input power levels. The designed front-end is capable of achieving 1.5–40 GHz bandwidth, 30 dB conversion gain, a double sideband NF of 6–10.7 dB, input return loss better than 7.5 dB and an input referred 1 dB compression point of −23 dBm. The front-end withstands continuous wave power levels of at least 25 and 20 dBm at low band and high band inputs respectively. At 3 V supply voltage, the DC power consumption amounts to 302 mW when the low band is active and 352 mW for the high band case, whereas the total IC size is $3.08\, {\rm nm{^2}}$.

Information

Type
Research Paper
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Top level view of the RX front-end unit.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Design topology of the active power limiter. $Z_{1, 2}$ is the resulting characteristic wave impedance, $l_{1, 2}$ is the length of the corresponding TL [7].

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Impact by the parasitic capacitance, modeled in the $50\, {\Omega }$ domain. Solid blue: active power limiter, black triangles: equivalent performance diode limiter 1.5–18 GHz [7].

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Top level view of the chosen four-stage distributed differential LNA topology. $Z_{1, 2}$ is the resulting characteristic wave impedance, $l_{1, 2}$ is the length of the corresponding TL and $R_{B,\; C}$ denote the base, or collector loadline resistor [7].

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Differential cascode stage with controlled feedback and inductive peaking [7].

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Schematic diagram of the designed mixer circuit [7].

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Combined HB LNA and mixer. $CG$ (triangles) and $NF_{DSB}$ (crosses), $S_{DD11}$ (squares). Measured (solid) versus simulated (dashed). IF freq. = 100 MHz, LO = 0 dBm, RF = −30, dBm, high gain setting [8].

Figure 7

Fig. 8. Combined LB active limiter, LNA, and mixer. $CG$ (triangles) and $NF_{DSB}$ (crosses), $S_{DD11}$ (squares). Measured (solid) versus simulated (dashed). IF freq. = 100 MHz, LO = 0 dBm, RF = $-30\, {\rm dBm}$, high gain setting.

Figure 8

Fig. 9. Combined active limiter, LNA, and mixer. Measured $P_{OUT}$ versus $P_{IN}$: high gain setting (black) and low gain setting (blue). RF freq. = 10 GHz, IF freq. = 100 MHz, LO power = 0 dBm [7].

Figure 9

Fig. 10. Chosen ultra-wideband, balanced frequency multiplier topology [9].

Figure 10

Fig. 11. Schematic diagram of the second version RF switch and active balun IC.

Figure 11

Fig. 12. Simulated ($\phi$) imbalance (left Y -axis, solid) and $\vert A\vert$ imbalance (right Y -axis, triangles), LB (blue) and HB (black) respectively.

Figure 12

Fig. 13. Simplified schematic of the LDO circuit.

Figure 13

Fig. 14. Simulated time domain performance of the LDO circuit. Output voltage (solid) versus input voltage (dashed, blue).

Figure 14

Fig. 15. Simplified schematic view of the designed IF switch circuit. The LB part is circled left and the HB circled right.

Figure 15

Fig. 16. Simplified schematic view of the designed IF amplifier circuit.

Figure 16

Fig. 17. Microscopic view of the designed RX IC with denotation of separate components.

Figure 17

Fig. 18. 3D view of the RF board and the RX IC.

Figure 18

Fig. 19. Top view of the designed RF front-end.

Figure 19

Fig. 20. HB, measured $CG$: IC input (dashed, blue), RF board input (triangles), and $NF_{DSB}$ IC input (circles, blue), RF board input (solid). IF freq. = 100 MHz, LO power = $-10\, {\rm dBm}$, feedback off. Measured $S_{DD{\rm 11}}$, RF board input (circles).

Figure 20

Fig. 21. LB, measured $CG$: IC input (dashed, blue), RF board input (triangles), and $NF_{DSB}$: IC input (circles, blue), RF board input (solid). IF freq. = 100 MHz, LO power = $-10\, {\rm dBm}$, feedback off. Measured $S_{DD{\rm 11}}$, RF board input (circles).

Figure 21

Fig. 22. LB, measured $P_{OUT}$ versus $P_{IN}$: high gain mode (solid), linear mode (dashed, blue). RF freq. = 8 GHz, IF freq. = 100 MHz, LO power = $-10\, {\rm dBm}$.

Figure 22

Fig. 23. HB, measured $P_{OUT}$ versus PIN: high gain mode (solid), linear mode (dashed, blue). RF freq. = 25 GHz, IF freq. = 100 MHz, LO power = $-10\, {\rm dBm}$.

Figure 23

Fig. 24. Measured CG versus supplied LO input power level. LB (dashed, blue) RF freq. = 8 GHz, IF freq. = 100 MHz, HB (triangles) RF freq. = 25 GHz, IF freq. = 100 MHz.

Figure 24

Fig. 25. LB, measured $CG$ versus IF frequency. RF freq. = 8.05 GHz 8.12 GHz, LO freq. = 8 GHz, LO power = $-$10 dBm.

Figure 25

Table 1. SotA comparable RX front-ends.