http://www.circuitdesign.info/blog/2008/12/chopping-to-alleviate-im2/ Tutorials and Insights in Electronics and Circuit Design Wed, 07 Sep 2011 12:13:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://www.circuitdesign.info/blog/2008/12/chopping-to-alleviate-im2/comment-page-1/#comment-197 Asymmetric chopping for improved IM3 | A dead-end research topic? | Circuit Design Mon, 05 Jan 2009 05:16:46 +0000 http://www.circuitdesign.info/blog/?p=545#comment-197 [...] my prior post, I discussed the use of "chopping" (or pre- and post-mixing) to improve the IM2 of [...] [...] my prior post, I discussed the use of “chopping” (or pre- and post-mixing) to improve the IM2 of [...]

]]> http://www.circuitdesign.info/blog/2008/12/chopping-to-alleviate-im2/comment-page-1/#comment-191 Poojan Wagh Wed, 24 Dec 2008 18:42:41 +0000 http://www.circuitdesign.info/blog/?p=545#comment-191 @Robert Tso: You're absolutely right. I fixed it. The coefficients of x ($$ x^2 $$) should not have changed. Thanks Robert! Good eye! @Robert Tso: You’re absolutely right. I fixed it. The coefficients of x ($$ x^2 $$) should not have changed. Thanks Robert! Good eye!

]]> http://www.circuitdesign.info/blog/2008/12/chopping-to-alleviate-im2/comment-page-1/#comment-190 Robert Tso Wed, 24 Dec 2008 18:13:38 +0000 http://www.circuitdesign.info/blog/?p=545#comment-190 Sorry, but b1 and b2 are the coefficients for the x^2 term, but in the last two equations they suddenly became coefficients for the x^3 term, simply by multiplying by p again. Is this correct? It would seem to me the magnitude is still determined by x^2, but the frequency is shifted by p^3. Sorry, but b1 and b2 are the coefficients for the x^2 term, but in the last two equations they suddenly became coefficients for the x^3 term, simply by multiplying by p again. Is this correct? It would seem to me the magnitude is still determined by x^2, but the frequency is shifted by p^3.

]]>