MPC951
MOTOROLA
TIMING SOLUTIONS
6
and record peak–to–peak as well as standard deviations of
the jitter. Care must be taken that the measured edge is the
edge immediately following the trigger edge. If this is not the
case the measurement inaccuracy will add significantly to the
measured jitter. The oscilloscope cannot collect adjacent
pulses, rather it collects data from a very large sample of
pulses. It is safe to assume that collecting pulse information
in this mode will produce jitter values somewhat larger than if
consecutive cycles were measured, therefore, this
meas urement will repres ent an upper bound of
cycle–to–cycle jitter. Most likely, this is a conservative
estimate of the cycle–to–cycle jitter.
Figure 3. PLL Jitter and Edge Displacement
1
212
12
1
232
12
3
Peak–to–Peak PLL Jitter
Peak–to–Peak Period Jitter
Peak–to–Peak PLL Jitter
Peak–to–Peak Period Jitter
There are two sources of jitter in a PLL based clock driver,
the commonly known random jitter of the PLL and the less
intuitive jitter caused by synchronous, different frequency
outputs switching. For the case where all of the outputs are
switching at the same frequency the total jitter is exactly
equal to the PLL jitter. In a device, like the MPC951, where a
number of the outputs can be switching synchronously but at
different frequencies a “multi–modal” jitter distribution can be
seen on the highest frequency outputs. Because the output
being monitored is affected by the activity on the other
outputs it is important to consider what is happening on those
other outputs. From Figure 3, one can see for each rising
edge on the higher frequency signal the activity on the lower
frequency signal is not constant. The activity on the other
outputs tends to alter the internal thresholds of the device
such that the placement of the edge being monitored is
displaced in time. Because the signals are synchronous the
relationship is periodic and the resulting jitter is a compilation
of the PLL jitter superimposed on the displaced edges. When
histograms are plotted the jitter looks like a “multi–modal”
distribution as pictured in Figure 3. Depending on the size of
the PLL jitter and the relative displacement of the edges the
“multi–modal” distribution will appear truly “multi–modal” or
simply like a “fat” Gaussian distribution. Again note that in the
case where all the outputs are switching at the same
frequency there is no edge displacement and the jitter is
reduced to that of the PLL.
Figure 4 graphically represents the PLL jitter of the
MPC951. The data was taken for several different output
configurations. By triggering on the lowest frequency output
the PLL jitter can be measured for configurations in which
outputs are switching at different frequencies. As one can
see in the figure the PLL jitter is much less dependent on
output configuration than on internal VCO frequency.
Figure 4. RMS PLL Jitter versus VCO Frequency
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
160
240
320
400
480
560
Conf 1
Conf 2
Conf 3
Conf 1 = All Outputs at the Same Frequency
Conf 2 = 4 Outputs at X, 5 Outputs at X/2
Conf 3 = 1 Output at X, 8 Outputs at X/4
VCO Frequency (MHz)
RMS
Jitter
(ps)
Figure 5. Peak–to–Peak Period Jitter versus
VCO Frequency
150
200
250
300
350
400
160
240
320
400
480
560
Conf 2
Conf 3
Conf 2 = 4 Outputs at X, 5 Outputs at X/2
Conf 3 = 1 Output at X, 8 Outputs at X/4
VCO Frequency (MHz)
Paek–to–Peak
Jitter
(ps)
MPC951
Low Voltage PLL Clock Driver
NETCOM
IDT Low Voltage PLL Clock Driver
Freescale Timing Solutions Organization has been acquired by Integrated Device Technology, Inc
MPC951
6