Author Topic: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000  (Read 1345816 times)

EE4all and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline julian1

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 735
  • Country: au
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1600 on: December 15, 2016, 05:16:31 am »
In principle there could be the option to tune the unregulated TC (via currents or possible series resistor) to get a small TC to start with, so that temperature regulation is not that critical any more. In this case the two temperature setting resistors could be much lower sensitivity  - up to the point that thin film ones could work.
Following this line of thinking for a bit,
 
The datasheet reference design for "Adjusting Temperature Coefficient in Unstabilized Applications" calls for a 200ohm trimmer.

Since the trimmer works as an in-series divider with the 120ohm to feed the zener voltage-drop into the inverting input of the op-amp - it is probably very tempco sensitive itself.

Vishay make a BMF 200ohm trimpot, Y4053200R000J0L, which has max tempco +-10ppm/C.  I'm wondering if that would be good enough? And if not, then what component the original app note authors might have been thinking of- when they were considering the circuit.
 

Online Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14210
  • Country: de
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1601 on: December 15, 2016, 04:22:18 pm »
For precision trimming one should initially use a pot, than measure the value and replace the pot with a suitable fixed resistor or resistor combination. The resistor for TC trimming in series to the zener is usually only contributing a relatively small amount to the voltage, like 10 Ohms times 5 mA = 50 mV. So even a 100 ppm change in that resistor will be something like 5 µV or 1 ppm of the total voltage.  A larger resistor could be a problem though.
Some adjustment could be via the 70 K resistor too: with a range of 50 K to 100 K one cold change the TC by about 15 mV/300 K = 50 µV/K or 8 ppm/K. Not much, but it could be enough for fine tuning or when you start with a "good" sample.
 

Online Andreas

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3248
  • Country: de
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1602 on: December 15, 2016, 09:15:46 pm »
Vishay make a BMF 200ohm trimpot, Y4053200R000J0L, which has max tempco +-10ppm/C.  I'm wondering if that would be good enough? And if not, then what component the original app note authors might have been thinking of- when they were considering the circuit.

Helllo,

dont forget that the cirquit without temperature regulation has  around 50 ppm/K.
And a 100 Ohms resistor will only contribute around 10% to the overall voltage or T.C.
So all in all you will get a better value than the 50 ppm/K.
Perhaps in the range of 1 ppm/K.
But not the 0.05 ppm/K of the heated cirquit.

With best regards

Andreas
 

Offline julian1

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 735
  • Country: au
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1603 on: December 15, 2016, 09:43:37 pm »
When a manufacturer specifies tempco for a precision resistor or trimpot (eg +- 10ppm/C )  - does that represent the expected range across different component samples?

Or is it the tempco change that cannot be controlled for when used in circuit - or over the lifetime of the component?

If it's the first scenario - then the tempco for the 200 ohm trimpot should be able to be trimmed/cancelled out against tempco changes from the zener and the pn junction of the sense transistor.

 

Online Andreas

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3248
  • Country: de
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1604 on: December 15, 2016, 09:52:12 pm »
Hello,

ok you are right.

most of the T.C. (except Hysteresis) is more or less repeatable.

The other problem is temperature tracking between the trimpot and the zener (which heats by around 35 mW)

with best regards

Andreas
 

Online Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14210
  • Country: de
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1605 on: December 16, 2016, 08:44:18 am »
Trimmpots have the additional problem that the mechanical wiper could introduce some kind of hysteresis or similar problems. So if possible one avoids trimmers in circuits that are planed to be long time stable. Normal thin film resistors are usually more stable and reliable than good trimmers. It just takes some extra work - not a really problem in a hobby project.

The purpose of TC trimming would be to come down from the initial 50 ppm/K TC of the unregulated (e.g. unheated) reference - already reducing the TC from 50 to 5 ppm/K would reduce the sensitivity to the temperature set-point divider by a factor of 10. The aim would be a low TC at the later regulated temperature - so the test / adjustment would be with a modulated heater.

The idea of trimming all the way to < 0.5 ppm/K  and than use the reference without a heater is not that attractive, as there is also a second order TC, so the low TC would be valid only for a small temperature range.
 

Offline Edwin G. Pettis

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 451
  • Country: us
  • The plural of anecdote is not data.
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1606 on: December 18, 2016, 06:24:54 pm »
When a manufacturer specifies tempco for a precision resistor or trimpot (eg +- 10 ppm/C )  - does that represent the expected range across different component samples?

This specification means that for a given component, the TC can be anywhere within the range given, this does not mean that the TC of the component will vary between + and - 10 PPM/°C (for your example) over its operating range.   The TC 'curve' can be linear or nonlinear with temperature, in many cases it is nonlinear, it will change some within its operating temperature range.  This characteristic depends on the material used in the component, for resistors there are quite a few different types of elements made from metal alloys and so-called plastic elements such as the cermet types.  The method of manufacture will also affect the TC 'curve', in their 'raw' form (this is before they are made into a component), the TC tends to be of a fixed characteristic, alloys such as Evanohm will have a fixed TCR that does not vary with normal use.  The manufacturing process of the component can affect the 'finished' TC in various ways, stress applied to the resistive element will cause the TCR to 'appear' to change but the actual TCR of the element does not change itself, stress causes change in the resistance which at the terminals appears to be TCR but it isn't and stress is usually a nonlinear function.

A cermet trimmer always has a +/- TCR range, it can be either + or - and the TCR tends to be less than linear, typical cermet trimmers have a TCR of +/- 200 PPM/°C (as an example) meaning that the actual TCR of the trimmer in your hand can be anywhere within that range (-25, +50, -100, +150, -200, ect.) but they will all have a similar  TCR 'curve'.  Wire wound trimmers generally have the lowest TCR and the most linear TC of all trimmer types but there are wide variances within the various trimmers available.  There is only one WW trimmer on the market which has very low and stable characteristics and is military qualified, it is made by Bourns and costs around $10 each, this one has the best long term stability of any trimmer on the market.

Virtually all passive components have TCs and few have linear curves over temperature.

Data sheets may show a TC 'curve' with temperature, this will tell you if the TC is linear or not, linear TC can be compensated for relatively easily, non-linear not so easily.  Some resistors will have a low TCR but very non-linear, in some cases, the 'curve' is quite lumpy and varies up and down with temperature, others are hyperbolic, ellipsoid or linear.  In some cases, a PWW resistor can have different TCRs above and below the reference temperature, I have one or two spools of wire like that.  All of the newer wire I have are single TCR over temperature, in effect linear.  Most PWW manufacturers have non-linear TCR curves with increasing TCR at the temperature extremes.  In general stress cannot be completely removed although with time it tends to slowly decrease.

Be careful of PPM measurements made with DVMs and ADCs, they can affect the actual readings in unexpected ways unlike a resistance bridge which essentially measures at a null point with extremely high impedance, DVMs and ADC converters do not have that advantage and also have active circuitry at their inputs which can affect the readings.  They can produce a non-linear (parallel) error into the readings, it is generally small but an error just the same.  While I use DVMs, for critical high accuracy readings a resistance bridge is the only accepted method.
 
The following users thanked this post: MisterDiodes, julian1, 2N3055

Online Andreas

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3248
  • Country: de
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1607 on: December 31, 2016, 05:27:59 pm »
Hello,

now I have long thought about the 7->10V transfer.
- heated oven for the resistors or a temperature compensated solution
- separate cirquit or on PCB
- etc. etc.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/metrology/ultra-precision-reference-ltz1000/msg1074698/#msg1074698
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/metrology/ultra-precision-reference-ltz1000/msg1074850/#msg1074850

The solution that convinces me most is based on the LT5400-3 idea from Lars:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/metrology/ultra-precision-reference-ltz1000/msg1081104/#msg1081104

Since my references are battery powered I do not want to use a additional heater.
So the solution will be temperature compensated.
For a easy adjustment I want to measure the temperature with a little controller.
(still not shure if a PIC12F683 with 10 bit ADC will be sufficient or if I will need a PIC24FV16KA301 with 12 Bit).
The adjustment of the T.C. (and eventually ageing drift) will be done with a LTC1257 12 Bit DAC with VREF taken from 10V output.

The principle cirquit is shown below.
The 20K/50K divider (R2,R3) is built from LT5400-3
R4 (0.1% max 15ppm/K between 511K and 1 Meg)
gives the gain for the first adjustment stage.
R5 + R6 do the raw adjustment. R6 consists of 2 resistors in series.
R7 sets the gain for the fine adjustment.
R8 + R9 do the fine adjustment. R9 again 2 resistors in series.
R11 sets the gain for the adjustment range of the DAC.
With the configuration shown the range is around + 12 / -4 ppm
for temperature adjustment and some ageing drift
(LTZ usually drifts down so compensation has more room for the + direction).
The 12 bit DAC resolution gives about 40nV/LSB @ 10V.
So switching between 2 steps is below resolution of a 8.5 digit DMM.
Power consumption will be 4-5mA @ 14V so 56-70mW instead of 300-500mW with a heated solution.
I plan to do this as sub-print on the AUX-connector of my LTZ1047B design.

With best regards

Andreas
 

Online Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14210
  • Country: de
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1608 on: December 31, 2016, 07:02:55 pm »
It depends on the sensor used and the analog front end if the 10 Bit ADC is good enough. Normally the DAC for the output should be higher resolution, as much of the adjustment range will be used to set the correct absolute value and only a part of it to compensate for temperature effects.

The power for a heated version very much depends on insulation. So it should be possible to get below the 300-500 mW. But usually it will be more than with a compensation solution.
 

Offline martinr33

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 363
  • Country: us
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1609 on: December 31, 2016, 07:25:41 pm »
Might be worth looking at the Atmel parts. I've found them a bit easier to work with, because of the Arduino tools.
http://www.atmel.com/Images/Atmel-2548-8-bit-AVR-Microcontroller-Battery-Management-ATmega406_Datasheet.pdf

This part is designed as a Li-ion battery controller.
Things I like:
 - on-chip voltage regulator
 - 12-bit ADCs

I've found the Arduino tools a bit more accessible than the Microchip stuff.

Using a null detector, you can set the output of the controller circuit to match precisely the 7.x output of t he lTZ1000A. Then, it should be possible to calculate the 10V value and get a result accurate the the linearity of the DAC. Plus, the output can always be trimmed byt tweaking a bit.   

Going with an off-chip regulator opens up a few more possibilities.

As all the LTZ circuits seem to predate modern microcontrollers, there could be some opportunities for improvement using some software. One thing, ideally the microcontroller would be suspended once the DAC voltage is set.

 

Online Echo88

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 826
  • Country: de
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1610 on: December 31, 2016, 08:29:01 pm »
My idea:
Assuming the LTC1043 is inherently stable over time: Zenervoltage 7,15V * 2 / 3 * 2 = 9,533V, so were talking about 0,5Vdiff instead of 3Vdiff from Zenervoltage to 10V. Then throw a highly stable resistor divider + age-correction-DAC against it or a PWM-divider (not that easy) to get 10V. All highly insulated in an oven  + lead-battery-pack + battery-charger-stuff (so it can travel by plane with varying ambient temperature and avoiding LTZ-hysteresis-problems, without those Lithium-battery-restrictions).

 

Offline martinr33

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 363
  • Country: us
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1611 on: December 31, 2016, 10:53:41 pm »
The LTC1043 is not restricted to standard ratios. The clock can be overriden by an external source. So we could use it to digitally trim the reference.


Datasheet: http://cds.linear.com/docs/en/datasheet/1043fa.pdf

The best reference is on page 13, where  they show a frequency to voltage converter with an accuracy of .005%, which is about 5 digits of precision. So we would need to stack two of them, and eliminate pretty much all noise in the first stage.

The first stage should get us to 10V +/-1mV. Then, the second stage would have to kick in 4 more digits to get us 100nV trimming. The trick is, getting the noise in the first stage into that sub microvolt range. Definitely worth further investigation.



 

Online Echo88

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 826
  • Country: de
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1612 on: January 01, 2017, 10:19:56 pm »
Never looked at it that way, thanks for the idea! I dont really understand your 2-stage-approach, can you explain it in more detail? Since for a 7 to 10V converter im only interested in absolute stability, while avoiding resistors and having a simple means of adjusting the ratio for age drift of the LTZ1000. Since im not familiar with frequency-generator-topologies: What would be a fitting low cost solution for a 10KHz square signal generator with high stability and resolution (sub-Hz)? Im thinking about PPL/DDS/digital-counter-topology coupled with a sufficiently stable oscillator. 

Of course all in a well isolated oven, so temperature/hysteresis-problems dont concern me.
 

Offline martinr33

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 363
  • Country: us
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1613 on: January 02, 2017, 12:33:12 am »
Looking at the LTC1043 datasheet, their most precise example is .005%, about 5 digits. Therefore, we can only correct the 10V level to maybe 10.000000, if we only use the DAC to adjust the last 100mV.

However, if we stack the second channel on top of this, we can get another 5 digits. The first DAC might have a 3V range, and the second DAC a 3mV range.  That does mean that we are reliant on a stable resistor divider. It should be possible to autocal the ratio using the overlap bits. Then, the major error would come from nonlinearities in the DACs.

The two DACs will overlap by a couple of bits. I think this is how the Datron unit works, and I have seen it in an Advantest unit.

I would use a simple microcontroller to set the frequency. Might also be useful to have a null detector, so the DAC could first null against the reference voltage, and then output the precise 10V.

This is all very tricky at 8.5 digits - but modern DACs and micros make it much easier.
 

Offline julian1

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 735
  • Country: au
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1614 on: January 10, 2017, 05:52:21 am »
Are there other ways to guarantee zener startup - apart from using a 1n4148 on the op-amp output to force it to source and not sink - as the reference circuit does it?

I've built a few zener references and most have no problems starting don't require anything after the op-amp output. Experimenting a bit by removing it though - shows that the ltz1000 reference circuit is a bit finicky and sometimes fails to start.

Did I see mentioned somewhere the possibility of using a low value pull-up resistor to +VE on the ref-output which would then bias the non-inverting input?

Would that be problematic in coupling noise from +VE onto the ref output?

I wonder about biasing it and then turning the bias off after a short time, perhaps with transistor + charging capacitor.
 

Offline mimmus78

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 676
  • Country: it
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1615 on: January 10, 2017, 11:19:51 am »
Someone remind me to post my experiences with the LTZ1000 in about 10 month. I had a design, few hundred of these were built into some equipments, and my NDA will be over by then.

NDA expired? ;)
 

Offline TiN

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4543
  • Country: ua
    • xDevs.com
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1616 on: January 10, 2017, 11:27:58 am »
+1 :) Always fun to see what such references are used for. I see somebody was reading thru.
YouTube | Metrology IRC Chat room | Let's share T&M documentation? Upload! No upload limits for firmwares, photos, files.
 

Offline mimmus78

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 676
  • Country: it
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1617 on: January 10, 2017, 12:03:47 pm »
You can write a book just making some copy paste from this thread ...

Inviato dal mio Nexus 6P utilizzando Tapatalk

 

Offline mimmus78

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 676
  • Country: it
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1618 on: January 10, 2017, 03:41:14 pm »
I today received this little board, okay it didn't receive I had to collect it from the toll. It was named to be a LTZ1000 reference. The curious fact is, that the IC that used to be the reference has absolut no marking on it, but the circuit indicates a LTZ like style schematic.
Does anybody know something about such a board? It seems to be part of some test gear, beside the Linear Technology label and the date code 10/84 there is a mirrored "Superman" icon on top of the pcb. On the backside is another date code 46-84 and an icon that seems to be a growing sun?
I guess the first thing to do is to reverse engineer the schematic before powering up the beast.


I think this is a reversed Z like "Repus Renez" that reversed is "Super Zener" ... full story here:

  http://analogfootsteps.blogspot.it/2014/03/pranking-prankster-jim-williams-and.html

ok I think now I know everything about this "can" (just kidding).
« Last Edit: January 10, 2017, 04:49:45 pm by mimmus78 »
 

Offline dr.diesel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2214
  • Country: us
  • Cramming the magic smoke back in...
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1619 on: January 11, 2017, 08:43:47 pm »
Probably a good place to ask this question vs starting a new thread.

When modding the 3458A oven temp with a 100K resistor (in parallel with the 15K), is the 1PPM/C Vishay Foils adequate for the task?

Offline ap

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 282
  • Country: de
    • ab-precision
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1620 on: January 11, 2017, 11:27:51 pm »
It is more than adequate, its impact is only about 1/6th of the original reistor. Even if you go with a 5ppm/K resistor thats ok. You need a new calibration (=adjustment) after the mod.
Metrology and test gear and other stuff: www.ab-precision.com
 

Online Andreas

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3248
  • Country: de
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1621 on: January 21, 2017, 03:53:25 pm »
Hello,

update from my measurements on LTZ#3-LTZ#6 for 3-9 kHrs of operation
see also:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/metrology/ultra-precision-reference-ltz1000/msg1021549/#msg1021549


here the updated table with averaged drift from all measurements and the charts:

I recorded (weekly) readings to determine ageing drift against my ADCs and against LTZ#2 with two 6.5 digit DMMs in 100 mV range.

Evaluation is from day 128 (after all adjustments done) to day 371 so around 9 kHrs.
The readings indicate all below 2 uV / kHr or below 2 ppm/year compared to my measurement setup.

LTZ#2 drifts about -1.57ppm/year.
the ADCs drift also in the range of 1-2 ppm over one year with some seasonal changes.
All in all there is not much difference in LMS slope between the (absolute) ADC readings and the DMM differential reading.

LTZ4 has developped to the lowest drifter (positive drift against LTZ#2, so canceling the negative drift of LTZ#2 partly).

With best regards

Andreas
 
The following users thanked this post: TiN

Offline 3roomlab

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 825
  • Country: 00
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1622 on: February 27, 2017, 09:21:54 pm »
i think i might have interpreted the LTZ1000 circuit wrongly, but i am not too sure. could anyone give my schematic a sanity check?
(the purple resistors are suppose to be thermally coupled)

** updated
i made alot of mistakes woops ...
redrawn to andreas' version.

i am guessing this version should be fine?
« Last Edit: March 02, 2017, 07:21:15 am by 3roomlab »
 

Online Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14210
  • Country: de
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1623 on: February 28, 2017, 01:05:52 pm »
The capacitor C7 is wrong - it gives too much load to the output of the OP. R13 is also unusual - it won't help, but also won't hurt very much. It only makes sense if an extra cap for improved tolerance to capacitive loading is added.

It is a little odd to use three resistors in series to set the temperature: this resistor should be low drift so it is odd to use three expensive resistors if not needed. If for some reason a fine adjustment is wanted, the more obvious way would be to adjust the other side resistor of the divider with a parallel one: this way would could still use just one resistor and add the second one only if really needed.

Similar R7 and R19 are a little strange: there is no need to have exactly 70 K for that resistance. So 68 K or 75 K would be perfectly fine, even 30 K or 100 K should work too. More resistors only adds costs, size and solder joints.
 
The following users thanked this post: 3roomlab

Offline mimmus78

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 676
  • Country: it
Re: Ultra Precision Reference LTZ1000
« Reply #1624 on: March 09, 2017, 04:54:58 pm »
What is the best way for averaging 4 LTZ1000 in one output?

I tested 3 LTZ1000 with "just a resistor" as per datasheet but it leads to more instability than benefits.
I can register many random jumps up to half ppm and much more noise on my 3458a.
Test where made with 200 ohms and 4K ohms resitors.
The latter one was much better but still more noisier and unstable than just one LTZ1000.

So after those tests my idea is to buffer each single reference, and than connect the buffered output
as explained in the Datron 4910 manual (200 ohm per channel + 50 ohm before output).

Will it be better or in any case I must I expect a "stable" result with just the resistor method?

 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf