can IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. VI-32, NO. 1, FEDRUARY 1983 121 Intercept Point and Undesired Responses RICHARD C. SAGERS, Mewen, 1x Abseract—A method for using the concept of Intercept point to calculate the undesired-response rejection ratio of a single staze Is presented Single stages may be cascaded together to form a system nd the undesired-response rejection ratio of te system may be found ting a procedure similar to enscaded noise figure. When applied to receiver system desiga, this method allows easy calculation f such undesired receiver responses as intermodulation distortion and spuri- L INTRODUCTION HE TRANSFER functions of electronic devices commonly used in amplifying and mixing circuits are seldom if ever ideal-linear in the case of an amplifier, square law in the case of a mixer. The nonideal characteristics inher Geviees lead to undesired responses which are produced in addition to the desired response. Through a power secies expansion representing the transfer function of a nonideal device, these undesired responses may be analyzed and ejection ratio or the amount of rejection thet a stage has to these undesired responses may be found, When several stages are cascaded togetlier to form a system, the nonideal characteristics of each stage will contribute to the overall rejection ratio of the system. A system undesired response ejection ratio may therefore be defined to describe the overall system performance as it relates to undesired responses. The following sections outline a procedure for calculating the rejection ratio tage as well as the reje ratlo ofa system of cascaded stages tin these TL EQUATIONS USED IN INTERCEPT POINT CALCULATIONS Power Series Expansion The transfer function /lx) of a nonideal stage can be ex pressed asa power series expansion: x eo)” +a (2)! + an)? +as6e)? tag)! + From this expansion it can be seen that undesired higher order responses are produced in addition to the fundamental, response. These responses may be plotted as shown in Fig. 1 where the desired or fundamental response is shown with a slope of one, and an undesired higher order response is shown with a slope m. The procedure for calculating numerical values for m will be covered in Section ILL. Manuscript recited July 29,1982; revited Septmber 30, 1982. This work wat presented at the 390d IEEE Vehicular Technoloey Society (Conference, San Divo, CA, May 23-26, 1982, ‘The author is wath Motorola, Ine, $SS5 North Beach Steet, Fort Worth, 7X 76137. Teleplios (817) 252-5117. 018.9: 108) Fig. 1. Respontes fom nonides! sa Intercept Point The two responses shown in Fig. 1 intersect at a point led the intercept point (IP) of the stage. From Fi it can be seen that the inteecept point may be referenced to either the input or the output of the stage. If referenced to the input it is called the input intercept point IP; and if referenced to the output it is called the output intercept point IP,. Note that IP, and IP, correspond to specific power levels at the input and output of the stage and may be related to each other by the gain of the stage. Let G be the gain of the stage in dB. Then Pout =Pin +6 where Poot is the output power of stage in dB ‘Puy is the input power to stage in dB, For the IP coordinates shown in Fig. 1 1B, =1P; +6 y=, —G (B), w As previously stated, the intercept point is the intersection of the fundamental and the undesired response, The IP of /83/0200-0121 $01.00 © 1983 IEEEstics and 1 stage is determined by the device charac operating environment, and it remains constant as long as these two things remain the same, Therefore, the IP may be thought of z and may be used to calculate the undesired-response rejection ratio ofthe stage. To derive such an expression, consider Fig. 2 where a signal with input power P), is applied to a stage with fain G. From Fig, 2, a fixed parameter associated with the sta B= Po, +4 and URR = (m= I. Therefore URR/(m—)=< and IP, = P,, + URR/ (™—1) IP, =P, + 8(URR) B= 1m = 1), In the general case for arbitrary Py, this expression becomes Py =Py+8(URR) (4B) o B=1/(m—1) @ where mr isthe slo Py and URR with aspect Ia Fig, 3, fg = desited output response at frequency fy (fa 8 channel signal for an amplifier stage and intermediate- fq fq = undesired output response at frequency f, P,_=level of fyat output of stage (in dB) URR= difference in power level between fy and fy st output of stage Cin dB). Py and URR measurements should be made in the absence of outpar selectivity. See Appendix Note that URR defines rejection ratio between the fun damental and undesied response at the output of the stage But for receiver work the rejection ratio is defined as the difference between input signals necessary to produce the same output level. Therefore, an expression is needed for ¢ UR. f the undesized response (Section TM) in be measui he ouput of the stage um analyzer, es shown in Fig. 3 (GF) signal for a mixer stage) the rejection ratio referenced to the input of the st Consider the coordinates shown in Fig 4 Put sensitivity level for a desiced response at the output (20 dB of noise quieting in an FM receiver, te). Fig. 3. Spectrum analyzer display of des 2 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. VT-32, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 1983 Pata) Fie, 2. Relationship between IP and outp responses ofa stage fy fo and uni atthe output ofa sage Fig. 4. Relationship between IP and output responses ofa statsi si SAGERS: INTERCEPT POINT AND UNDESIRED RESPONSES Then from the definition of slope, m= (mn —1)a/URr URe = — Iam. But d=2,—Po=I+G—Py Therefore URe = [= 1Dim] [IP +G—Po1. But Hence URr=[(m — 1)/m] [P, +G—P,~G] URr= a [IP] (4B) @ a= (m= 1m “ In @), UR: = undesiced response rejection ratio at input of stage (in ¢B) IP, = input intercept point of stage for undesired re sponse (in dBm) P,_ = input power level to stage (in dBm.) ‘A summary of the previous derivations is shown in Fig. S ‘These results form the basis for intercept point cal culations, IIL. DETERMINING THE SLOPE OF THE UNDESIRED RESPONSE Power Series and Subexpansion Consider @ stage having a transfer function given by the power series expansion [eeHag (x)? +0165)! +0300" Fae)? + aaGe)t ++ agCa + Let x be a sum of signals, A,B, C, ~~, appearing at the input A+B+C+ 123 TABLE DATA FOR So’ COMMON RECEIVER UNDESIRED RESPONSES, ase epnon She 1 ‘im Te ume me | eee [3 ps [» | mes Mine . Consider the case whore x = A + B; then the mth orde in (6) becomes an(A + By" = anol" +k, A"~ 1B + kA" 2B? Fob ge ABO Ry] a where (i= 0, 1,2,~ n) ate the expansion coeficints Let the expansion (7) of the nth order term in (6) be called a subexpansion, and consider the ith term of this subexpansion, Let the powers of A and B in this term be designated by P;, and Pry 30 that the ith term of (7) bezomes AgkACA BOD, PL +P © To determine the slope of the undesired response, the order nv of the term in the power series expansion from which it comes (6) must first be identified. Once term is known, a subexpansion of the term is performed as in (1). From this subexpansion, the term which produces the undesired response must be identified. The term in the sub- expansion which produces the undesired response will consist of a combination of the input signals, each raised to specific powers. Depending on the purpose of the stage, some of the input signals may be allowed to vary in input level while others may remain fixed. For example, a mixer may have two input als applied to it, one being the desired radio frequency (RF) signal and the other being the local oscillator (LO) signal. Typically the RF signal will vary in input level while the LO signal will be held at a fixed input level. It is neces tify those input signals which will vary and those which fixed. he order of this Calculating the Stope Once the rm in (7) which produces the undesired response thas been identified, the slope of the undesired response may be found by expressing this term in dB. An example is shown below for the ith term of the subexpansion (7). Let the ith term be the term which produces an undesired response undesired response = ayk,A° ia B(PiB), Cae124 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. VT.32, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 1983, In €B this nay be expressed as sundesized response (4B) ~ 20 10g [a,k,A Pts) 907] = 20 log [aki] + ;,20108 [4] + Pig20 log [8] = constant + Pi_(A in dB) +P iy(B in B) o ‘The slope m of the undesired response is found from (9) by summing the P's of the terms which are allowed to vary. For sxample, if signal A can very and imereases by 1 4B, the un desired response would increase by Pr, dB for a slope of Pr, IC sgrals A and B can vary and if both increase by 1 dB, the undesired response will Increase by Pi + Pig dB for a slope of ig + Examples The calculation of the slopes for some common receiver related undesired responses i showa inte following examples, Example I: Third-Order Intermodulation Response a) Third-Onder Intermodulation in an Amplifier: Power pansion (6) g(x)? + ay Gx)! Han(ey? + ase) + Two input signals at frequencies Af and 2Af from the on- channel input frequency are involved in producing a thi order intesmodulation (IM) response in an amplifier 1], [2]. Let dhese two signals be designated by A and &, where Anstas Bastar and x=A+B. ‘The power series expansion bezonnes S2) = a0 +BY +0\(4 +5)! a4 +P tag +BY + (9) ‘The IM response is produced by the thintonder term in (10). Evaluating the subexpansion of this term gives as[A? +3472 +248" +B] " Thinl-order IM contributions will slo be genorted from higher crder odd terms, but these contibution ae usually smal i compat on to that of the thideorder term and wil therefore be naplcted in this dieusion aA? + Jas47R + 30yAB? +058 ap ‘The underlined term in the subexpansion, (11), preduces the IM response, To determine the slope m of this response, express this term in dB. IM response (4B) = 20 log [343478] = 20 Log [343] + 20 log [47] +20 oe (8) = constant + 2[4(@B)] + 1(B (4B) Since signals A and B are both allowed to vary, a 1-4B increcse sn A and B results in 2 3-4B increase in undesired IM response. Hence for th cd-order IM in an amplifier stage, m=3 Knowing che slope is useful when evalussing IP, (see Section I), because for every 1-4B change in the two input sia the IM sesponse seen on the spectrum analyzer should change by 3 dB. If it does not, something other then a third-order IM response is being observed. Note thet TP, is obs the on-channel frequency of the amplifige stage b) Dhird-Onder intermodulation in a Mixer: seris expansion (6): Power Mix) = aga)? +.0,(2)' + 0362)? + ag(e)? + age)" + ‘Two input signals at frequencies Af and 24/ from the on channel input frequency as well as the LO signal are involved {in producing & third-order IM response in # mixer [2], [3] ‘The two input signals can vary in amplitude, whereas the LO signal is usually held at a fixed amplitude. Let these signals be designated by A,B, and C, where Aayfe ar B=f+2ay C= LO signal and x=ATB4C ‘The power series expansion becomes x)= a9(A + B+ CP + +as4 +BH Cy 4 a2) The IM response is produced by: the fourth-order term in (12) (and also by higher order even terms which are neglected aee se SAGERS: INTERCEPT POINT AND UNDESIRED RESPONSES here)? Evaluating the subexpansion of this term gives 4 + ag +ayC* + 4ayAB? + 40,40? + 40gBC? + dag?B + 4agA3C + 448°C + 6agA7B™ + 604°C? + 6a587C? + 124, iC + 12agABPC+ 120gABC (3) The underlined term in (13) produces the IM response. To determine the slope m of this response, express this term in aB: IM response (dB) = 20 log [12a44*BC] 20 og [1244] + 20 og [47] +20 og [2] + 20og(C1 constant + 2[4 (@B)] + 1(B (aB)] + 1[¢ (@B)1. Since only signals A and B are allowed to vary, a 1-0B increase in A and B results in a 3 bined according to? way Ula) + GY Gey where q=(m—D2 and ‘ms the slope of the undesired response, Note that IP; and @ are expressed in numeric values rather than in dB. Intercept points of stages which do not contribute to the undesied response are considered to be infinite, Equs tion (18) allows the calculation of an overall system IP;, which may then be used along with the system input sexsiti lty level, 2, to find the system rejection ratio of the un- Uesiced response according to (4) UR = a(R) —2) J LL System input sensitivity level (20 dB quieting, ete.) (Bm) ‘System input intercept point (@Bm) ____ system response rejection ratio (4B), ‘An example follows, Example 4: Find the system IM intercept point and eale late the system IM rejection ratio (IMP), given the followingee is SAGERS: INTERCHHT POINT AND UNDESIRED RESPONSES Solution: Converting gains and intercept points to numeric values tives 3 104B 403 6B 17 abr and (18) becomes Piggy = Preys 1/;, +G,/IP;, +G,G3/IPi, (numeric) = 10.015 + 10/0,00501 + (10)(2.51)/0.0501 2.56% 10° Wy, = (2.86 x 10°) = 0.391 X 10-9 (numeric) = 4.08 abn From (4) System IMr 3) (Pigs PD = Q/3)[-4.08 dBm — 110 dBm)) (4.08 + 110) = 106 dB. If the stages in the above example comprised the blocks of f receiver, this would be the IM performance level of the receiver. Effect of Input Selectivity on Intercept Point Consi 1n input signal to a stage at a spurious frequency fe which generates an undesired response at frequency fy at the output of the stage (see Fig. 6). Adding AdB of input selectivity at / level to the stage by AdB from Fy sired output response is also reduced. To bring the undesired ‘output response back up 10 its previous level (te produce 20 dB quieting in an EM receiver, for example), the level fof f, at the input of the selectivity must be increased by ASB. Since the input level required to produce the same output reduoes its input to Pig. Hence the unde- 7 | 5 e Fundamental and undesired response a= (m— 1m © 2=1Km=2) @ Spectram analyzer aisplay Ir, =P, #6(0RR) e 1-1-6 o URr= ad) 6 Fie. 5 “work, Pr and Pare astally measured in dBm (2B referea TEN; therefore ff aad IP) ave usually specified In dBm, w ‘eaten in dB. Equations used in intercept point calculations, For receive has now increased by AdB, the rejection ratio has been in- creased by AdB, Hence a dB-for-dB relationship exists between ‘ejection ratio and input selectivity when the stage plus see: tivity are considered a8 one equivalent stage, and an intercept point 4P/' may be defined for the equivalent stage. This I’ re ects the improvement in the undesired response rejection ratio, URe, due to the addition of selectitity. Fig. 7 shows 2 stage with intercept point IP; preceded by a stage of selec ‘An expression for IP/ can be found from (4): URr=a Pi) ‘Assuming a lossless passband response (G, = 0 6B in Fig. 7), the input sensitivity level, P, does not change with the addition of selectivity. Therefore holding P, constant in (4) while allow ing IP, to vary gives A.URr= 0d IP,128 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAK TECHNOLOGY, VOL. VI-32, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 1983, response Poul) Pia(@B) Fig. 6. Selectivigy and intecopt poi (jo) URe| = A 1, Bur AUR= A dB added selectivity ‘hesefore (1/a)[d dB added selectivity] = 4 1, Also 1r/ =P, + ae, Hence IP = 1, + (1/e)[ AB added selectivity] ‘This result, along with some other useful relationships, is summarized in the following equations Stage preceded by a lossless stage of selectivity (G, = 0B). IP = 1D), + (A/a) dB added selectivity] (4B). (198) Stage preceded by lossy nonselective stege (AdB selectivity 0.1P, ==) i=), —G, (68). (asp) ‘Stage preceded by lossy selective stage IP/ = IP, + (1/ed[A eB selectivity] -—G, (4B). (196) Efffect of Loss on URr When a stage (or the input to a system of cascaded sta is preceded by a lossy nonselective stage, IPiggg lnproves B-fordB with added loss (19b), but in order to maintain the same signal power st the output, 2, must also inevease dB-for GB, Hence the increases in gy and P, offset each other in (4), and URr does not change. When working with intercept points and cascaded stages, it fs mpoctant to remember the following , equals on-channel input sensitivity or reference level. Lossless selectivity at f; does not change 2 G equals onchannel stage gains; where AdB of selectivity at fy is added to an existing stage, the on-channel guin of the equivalent stage G’ may be found as C2046, (&B). (asd) Stages contriburing 10 an undesired response which occur in a system prior to a stage of selectivity will degrade the effectiveness of the selectivity on the system URr When input selectivity is added to a stage, th point of the equivalent stage is found accordin cor (19¢), and the gain of the equivalent stage is found ac cording to (19d). The cascaded intercept formula, (18), may then be used to find the system intexcept point Example $: Consides the following system. fa t28Rm, V7 interoept oo The mixer (Stage $) gene tes an undesired response from ‘signal f, which can enter the front end via the antenna, To improve the rejection of the system to fy, 2 stage of loss las selectivity is added in front of the mixer as showa. Assume that the first three stages do not contcibute to the generstion of the undesired response, hience their IP/s are considered infinite. Find the intercept point of the system IP, andSAGERS: INTERCEPT POINT AND UNDESIRED RESPONSES LY 208 selactiaty a 129 From (18), with m = 2 and q = 1/ ___ ¢ 7 1 | \E 2 ao selectivity at, Guipasshondga Dis’ a Tinga (numeric), aquivalent intercept pont of a sage with el GGGs jon ratio UR¢ of the system to this unde sxample, let the undesired response caleulate the reje sired response. For this be the halfIF spur Solution: From Table I the half-IF response has the fel owing properties: a=1/2 Equation (4) becomes URr = IFr = (1/2)1P; - P), This expression gives the half'lF spur rejection ratio (Fr) for a single stage. After the selectivity is accounted for, stage IP/’s may be combined according to (18) to calculate the over all halfIF zejection ratio for the system. Combining Stages 4 and $ to account for the effect of selectivity on IPig I,’ = IP,, + (1/a)(A dB added selectivity) =30¢Bm + = 50 dBm Since the right side consists of only one term, it may be com- veniently expressed in 4B as IP, = Wis G1 — GaGa (4B) = 50 dBm—(—2 dB) — (12 dB8)— (4 dB) ‘The system half-IF rejection ratio, IPr, is now calculated by means of (4) IFr = (1/2)(P,y, 2) 2) (36 dBm ~ (-1 = (1/2)(36 + 110) =736B, If the stages shown in this example comprised the blocks of a receiver, then the system IFr calculated above would be the half-IF spur rejection ratio of the receiver. ‘Example 6: Suppose Stage 2 now contributes to the half. 1F tesponse of the system in the previous example, Find IPiy, and calculate the system IF 36 dBm Bm) saa, Y Lirsts oe = [ a ——130 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. V7-32, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 198 fon: Stages 4 and 5 are combined to gh lntereept point as in the previous example an equivalent CONCLUSION Undesired responses generated by the nondinear properties | of electronic devises may be analyzed by moans of power ries expansions and intercept points, In a system consisting of cascaded stages, IP's of the same order may be combined 10 give an overall system intercept point. his system IP be used to calculate the system rejection to an uns} sponse ofa given ord; When applied to receiver design, the concept of intercept | point allows calculation of the receiver zejection to various distortion and spurious responses, such as IM and mixer spurs By considering stage guins, selectivity, and device intescept points, a receiver system design may be analyzed on paper and the distortion and spurious response performance predicted, Adjustments may then be made to individual stages in the system 0 that the receiver will meet its desired performance goals cept points to numeric values - may th Ramer desired APPENDIX T IP, and URR measurements must be made at the output of a stage in the absence of output selectivity. A mixer, how ever, will often have a resonant elzeult at the output which will be tuned to f = fe. The selectivity at f,, presented by this resonant circuit will distort the URR ratio by making URR appear larger than it really is. A method of measuring URR which overcomes this problem is shown below. The desired output at fig =f is frst generated and P, recorded. [Gi )" 22)"T mm (2 631)(15.849)2.51 _ output Selectivity 1.00 Ge Byyg= 1733 ‘os The desired output at f, should be centered inthe passband oF =0.0136 (aumetie) the output selectivity. This will cause fg to be unattenuated © that its output level can be properly measured, Afier | Py,=113 dBm recording P, at fg, the frequencies of the RF and LO signals are adjusted to pat fy in the cents P) maintaining of the passband while e same frequency difference between fy and fi, System r= Q/2)0P,,, = (1/2){11.3 — (110) = G/2)1.3 +110) = 60.7 dB, The effects of selectivity st Stage 4 are reduced due to the half-IF contribution of Stage 2. Selectivity could be added ahead of Stage 2 to bring the system IF: back up to its previe ous lev —en SAGERS: INTERCEPT POINT AND UNDESIRED RESPONSES. 131 From (3) a lm rm is the slope of the undesired response Substituting this expression for 8 into (21) gives: 1 +m—1] = P.0= 1) =mPz—(m—1)IP, (2B), 2) Tn numeric form, (22) becomes = Pa Pe") 3) Equation (23) shows the relationship between output inter .d power output from the mth P,.(€8) ie 8 cept polat and the undes Jed stages: F,, will now be unattenuated so that its output level can be properly measured. The difference between P, levels of fy ba and fy,Pog —Po,o then gives the correet value for URR. cn APPENDIX II R Derivation of Caseaded Intercept Formula \ Consider a single stage with its inteseept point relation ships as shown below Pg, = dosred output from fundamental response in Stage 1 P, Pe Py = undesired output from mth order response in Stage 1 Poy = desced output from fundamental response in St sired output frommth order response in Stage 2. where sired output power from fundam: ndesired output power from response h order response. Note that in Fig. 8 the relationships are in dB. From that figure URR. Pa Pa Py —URR 0) From (2) But IP, = Py +8 URR IP, ~Py = 8 URR URR = (IP, — Py) = 6. Gy Substituting this value for UR into (20) gives Py = Py— OP, Pay a P(t + 1/8)— Pei QD Pa" =Pas" G2"‘The undesired output at Ry, from Stage 1 is Pa"6, The undesired output at Ry, from Stage 2 is Past Pax) The undesired voltage at R,, from Stage 1 is The undesired voltage at R, from Stage 2is T Pal Ir P,.@0 Total undesi-ed voltage at Ry, is Vy uy + Fag =V Pay” Ry Tee" Total undesired power across Ry, Is PR, a law) “er ‘The definition of URR is ORR = Pa, 1 At the intercept point, URR = 1 and Pay = Pogo, (For cas- caded system), Hence BEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TE ‘ 1 7, oF "HNOLOGY, VOL, VT-32, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 1983 74 er ery Let a=@m~1)72. Thea @, zk Now BR, Par @.) | Popo Giot = Boga / GG Multiplying both sides by GG B=, (6, and Wi =Po/G Hencegt SAGERS: INTERCEPT POINT AND UNDESIRED RESPONSES, 133 where REFERENCES [1] B, Ebstein, R. Huenemann, and R. Sea, “The correspondence of a= inicemodulation and cross modulation ia amplifirs and mixer, Proc TEEE, vol 35, pp. 114-1315. Aus. 1967 2) “Measucemean of ‘adioftequency” specirim characteristics, Extending the above procedure to more than two stages gives, Mil. Stand. Mil-StL-449D, Feb, 22, 1973. (Albo Notice 1, Mile Std-449D, May 18, 1976.) [3] RUG. Huenemasn, "Recsiver spurious response measurements,” TEEE Trans, Commun, Technol. ol. COMI, pp- 417-419, Jab alle JG): 190, GiGsG,\)__ + (GBS, Py where \ =e an Richard ©. Sagers (S'77-M°78-M'82) received © Ieee obeer ACKNOWLEDGMENT ‘ eens nesters ete . : vata oeD Agony ‘The author expresses appreciation to J. H. Yoakum and } “Ye ls curenily a Staf Engineer atthe Mobile L.A Plymale for ther Hess and comments, which stilted Conmaunzaion Dom. Matra ne Fo the weting of this paper. Appreciation is alo expressed to eet, rt ek a RE. Goodspeed and L. E. Cobleigh for ther efforts with a typesetting and graphics. Correetion to “Co-Channel Interference an its Avoidance in Close Spaced Systems” ARTHUR C. STOCKER, The equation cof the above paper! should have read a page 14 nt @ ‘where @ is the distance attenuation constant shown in the fist paragraph under the section heading Propa- gation on page 145, y Manuscript rscived September 27,1982, ‘The author at 16659 SE 27th St, Belevs, WA 98008, A.C. Stocker, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. vol. VI-31, po 3, pp 145-180, Aug. 1982.