BSTJ 45: 10. December 1966: Intermodulation Noise in FM Systems Due to Transmission Deviations and AM/PM Conversation. (Cross, T.G.)

Survival, Water, Medical Field Manuals

Military Manuals

Document text

Intermodulation Noise in FM Systems 

Due to Transmission Deviations and 

AM/PM Conversion* 

By T. G. CROSS 

(Manuscript received August 2, 1966) 

Two noise contributors in FM systems are: (i) intermodulation noise 
due to transmission deviations; and (u) intermodulation noise due to trans- 
mission deviations and AM/PM conversion, designated AM/PM inter- 
modulation noise. Expressions for the second- and third-order AM/PM 
intermodulation noise are derived in terms of transmission medium coeffi- 
cients and a continuous pre-emphasis characteristic, with the unpre-em- 
phasized baseband signal being simidated by white Gaussian noise. These 
expressions have been programmed on a digital computer and representative 
noise responses and properties of AM/PM intermodulation noise were 
obtained. General ■properties and characteristics for the two noise contribu- 
tors are documented in parallel for comparative purposes. It was found that 
AM/PM intermodulation noise can be a significant noise contributor in 
FM systems. 

I. INTRODUCTION 

Intermodulation noise is produced whenever a phase modulated signal 
is passed through a linear transmission medium whose amplitude and 
phase characteristics are nonlinear functions of frequency. The output 
signal from this medium is both envelope and phase modulated, with the 
phase modulation being a distorted replica of the input phase function. 
The envelope modulation and phase modulation functions are similar in 
that both consist of first (linear), second-, third-, and higher-order func- 
tions of the input phase function. They differ in that the coefficients of 
the terms making up the two modulating functions are related in dif- 
ferent ways to the transmission medium characteristic. 

The distortion terms higher than first order, in the output phase 

* Portions of this paper were presented at the 1966 IEEE International Com- 
munications Conference in Philadelphia, Pa., June 16, 1966. 

1749 



1750 THE BELL SYSTEM TECHNICAL JOURNAL, DECEMBER 1966 

modulating function, produce intermodulation noise. This source of 
noise has been the subject of much work over the past ten to twenty 
years. The envelope distortion terms directly produce no degrading 
effects in linear systems. However, when the linear transmission medium 
is followed by a device that converts envelope variations at its input to 
phase variations at its output then a different noise-generating mech- 
anism exists. This latter source of noise will be designated as "AM/PM 
intermodulation noise" to distinguish it from the intermodulation noise 
produced directly by transmission deviations.* The two phenomena are 
illustrated in Fig. 1 which depicts the two-step process involved in the 



v(t) 



Y(o») 



v,(t) 



INTERMODULATION 
NOISE DUE TO 
TRANSMISSION 
DEVIATIONS 



dB 



v„(t) 



INTERMODULATION NOISE 
DUE TO TRANSMISSION 
DEVIATIONS AND AM/PM 
INTERMODULATION NOISE 



V(tJ = EXP L C 

V 1 (t)=EXpa(t) EXP L [ tu ct+9'o( t )J 
V n (t)=EXP a «W EXP L K:t-+9>o(t)+Ka(t)] 



WHERE 

<p{t)= PHASE MODULATING FUNCTION DUE TO MULTICHANNEL SIGNAL 
<P (t) = <p(t) + PHASE DISTORTION TERMS 

k =0.1516 K = PHASE MODULATION INDEX IN RADIANS DIVIDED BY 
THE AMPLITUDE MODULATION INDEX 

K = AM/PM CONVERSION CONSTANT MEASURED IN DE ^p EES 
ASSUMING a(t)«l d ° 

a,(t)^ a(t) IN GENERAL 

Y(ti>)= TRANSMISSION MEDIUM WITH TRANSMISSION DEVIATIONS 

Fig. 1 — Model illustrating sources of intermodulation noise due to transmission 
deviations and AM/PM conversion. 



AM/PM intermodulation noise generation. The AM/PM converter 
will be characterized by the constant K which has the dimension of 
degrees/dB and can be interpreted as the peak phase change at the out- 
put for a 1-dB change in envelope at the input. In reality, this K maybe 
a function of a number of quantities, e.g., carrier drive power, frequency 
(carrier and/or baseband), bias levels, or may even be complex. However, 
many presently developed broadband radio systems use TWT amplifiers 
as power output tubes which are often the major source of AM/PM 
conversion within a radio repeater. These tubes, when driven at moder- 

* Transmission deviations are defined as any deviation in the gain and phase 
characteristics from the ideal characteristics of constant gain and linear phase for 
all frequency components of the FM wave. 



NOISE IN FM SYSTEMS 1751 

ate, essentially constant input power level and biased from well controlled 
sources, are adequately characterized for small envelope fluctuations by 
a constant K degrees/dB. 1 

Both noise phenomena are of prime interest in frequency modulated 
systems. Intermodulation noise due to transmission deviations is of 
interest because it is a recognized significant noise source. AM/PM 
intermodulation noise is of interest because of the basic lack of knowledge 
which has existed on this subject. Due to this deficiency, the AM/PM 
phenomenon has become the underlying scapegoat for many system 
problems that appear to be unexplainable using existing system knowl- 
edge. 

The purpose of this paper is two-fold : (i) to present the mathematical 
development and ensuing solution for the problem of AM/PM inter- 
modulation noise in FM systems; and (it) to provide enough general 
information about the two noise contributors considered in this paper 
such that one can analyze a system's performance and/or set system 
requirements with some degree of confidence without having to neces- 
sarily utilize the associated digital computer programs. 

The analysis to follow considers a linear transmission medium, with 
generalized transmission deviations, followed by an AM/PM converting 
device. The baseband signal is simulated by a Gaussian distributed band 
of noise with flat power density spectrum which is pre-emphasized by a 
continuous pre-emphasis function before the FM process. The end result 
of the treatment is the signal-to-noise ratio for second- and third-order 
AM/PM intermodulation noise. The mathematical framework for this 
paper is derived from a recent paper which treated the subject of inter- 
modulation noise due to an imperfect transmission medium. 2 Certain 
facets of that work will be included here for the sake of continuity. 

II. THEORY FOR AM/PM INTERMODULATION NOISE 

2.1 General Development 

Consider the system model shown in Fig. 1 where an FM signal is put 
into a linear transmission medium followed by an AM/PM converting 
device. The transfer function of the transmission medium is 

F(«) = exp [-a(w) - 0(a)] (1) 

and the impulse response is 

g ( x ) = _L / F(co) exp (iaz)da. (2) 

SIT •'—oo 



1752 THE BELL SYSTEM TECHNICAL JOURNAL, DECEMBER 1966 

The FM signal input to the transmission medium is 

v(t) = exp [i[ Ue t + <p(t)]} (3) 

and the output signal is 

«i(0 = exp [a(t)\ exp {i[u e t + <po(f)]}, (4) 

where co c is the carrier frequency and <p(t) is the phase modulating signal. 
Since F(a>) is a linear system, the input and output can be related by 

/oo 
v(t — x)g{x)dx. (5) 

Substituting (3) and (4) in (5) gives 

exp [a(t)] exp [i<p {t)\ = I exp [i<p(t — x) — iu c x]g(x) dx. (6) 

The output function, <p„(t), was the subject of a previous paper 2 and will 
not be considered further here. Our prime objective is to determine the 
envelope variation in terms of its functional relationship to the phase 
modulating signal, <p(t). It follows from (6) that 

a(t) = Re In / exp [up(t — x) — iu c x]g{x) dx. (7) 

J— 00 

It can be shown that 2 

a(t) = -a{f c ) + m u <p — -kt<p" + -^<p - -jr v + • • ■ 

■ hr I „ hr I I" X2r >2 hr „2 _i_ / \ 

-r-^<P<p — -q<p>p — ~2<P — -g<P -r ••• ko) 

■ hi 12 „ \%i 1% _i_ _i_ ^4r H 

+ 4* * --g"t» + ••• +24* "" ' 

where the subscripts r and i denote the real and imaginary parts of the 
corresponding coefficients, and the prime notation indicates the deriva- 
tive with respect to time. The argument of the phase functions in (8) 
is t — td where U is an arbitrary delay. 2 The moments, m„ , in (8) are 
related to the transmission medium by 



ra„ = 



% T^Vn Y ^° + «) exp (**,)] (9) 

Me) \_d(tU) n Jo>=0 



Y{o> E 
and the I and X coefficients are defined as follows : 



NOISE IN FM SYSTEMS 1753 

It = mA — 2m 1 m 3 — mi + 2wi 2 m 2 
h = m 3 — fflifflj 
Z 3 = 7n 4 — miW 3 

/ 5 = Mi — Wo 2 

X 2 = m* — mi 2 

A 3 = m 3 — 3mim 2 + 2m x 3 

X 4 = m 4 — 4miWa — 3w 2 2 + 12 rai 2 m 2 — 6rai 4 . 

As an example, we have 

Zi» = m« — 2m 2r m 2l - — 2mum 3r — 2mi; 2 m 2l - 

since m ir = (Appendix I of Ref . 2) . 
For the following transmission medium 

F(a) + W a ) = [1 + g\u + 02W + 03CO + 04^ 



-\-^Uj cos (Pj« +5/)] exp li[b 2 u + 6 3 w 3 + & 4 w 4 , . Q x 

+ T) i»j sin (qju + «rj) 



the moments m n given by (9) have been evaluated and expressed in 
terms of the transmission deviations in Appendix I of Ref. 2. 

For the analysis to follow, the transmission deviations in (10) are 
limited to values typically encountered in broadband radio relay systems. 
However, the ripple type transmission deviations must have ripple 
periods greater than approximately twice the top baseband frequency. 
These restrictions are dictated by the limited number of terms of a(t) 
which are to be considered. 

Referring once again to Fig. 1 , we see that when the output signal from 
F(«) passes through the AM/PM converter the envelope perturbation 
given by a(t) is converted into a phase perturbation, given by k a(t). 
The k coefficient is related to K (degrees/dB) as follows: the envelope 
distortion term expressed in dB is 

20 log exp k (<)] dB = 8.686 a(t) dB 

so the phase distortion, due to envelope perturbations, after AM/PM 
conversion is 



1754 THE BELL SYSTEM TECHNICAL JOURNAL, DECEMBER 1966 

8.686X" a(t) degrees = 0.1516 K a(t) radians. 

We will let 

k = 0.1516 K radians. 

Hence, the phase distortion function, due to envelope variations, after 
the AM/PM converting device is 

k a{t) radians, (11) 

where a(t) is given by (8). 

The analysis up to here has been perfectly general (except for the 
assumption that the AM/PM process may be represented by a constant 
factor). The terms in (8) consist of first- (linear), second-, third- and 
higher-order functions of the input phase modulating signal, <p(t). The 
linear terms produce baseband amplitude distortion which we shall not 
concern ourselves with in this paper. Also, terms higher than third 
order will not be considered. This is not an undue restriction because 
the prime contributors of intermodulation type noise in broadband 
systems are second- and third-order phase distortion terms. Therefore, 
neglecting linear, fourth-, and higher-order terms in (8) gives* 



1 / x\ I I *8r / * ^3r / /»/ A2r '2 far »2 

k a(t) = k — <p'<p" - — <pY - -j <p - — <p" \ 

+ k — - if> V" jr <P radians. 

Using the relationships 

J^-w^ + v 



(12) 



d 13 /2 „ 



in (12) gives 



k a(t) = Oi(t) + d s (t) = 6 T {t) radians, (13) 

where 



* It should be noted that additional second- and third-order terms exist which 
are not shown in (8) nor included in (12). These additional terms are considered 
to be negligible for the transmission deviation constraints previously mentioned. 



NOISE IN FM SYSTEMS 



1755 






^4r 1 „2 



with 



and 



^4 r = 4?3r — 3t5r 



/,v , f X3i - hi d \ 13 



' [^} 



(14) 



(15) 



(16) 



In the Appendix it is shown that the second-order distortion, 6 2 (t), 
and the third-order distortion, 6 3 (t), are uncorrected. Hence, the total 
AM/PM intermodulation noise power density spectrum, considering 
only second- and third-order distortions, is the sum of the two individual 
noise power density spectra. 

2.2 Second-Order Noise Power Density Spectrum 

In this section we will derive the equation for the second-order 
AM/PM intermodulation noise power density spectrum. The time repre- 
sentation for the second-order phase distortion due to AM/PM conver- 
sion was derived in the previous section and is 

™->[-T + ™-V9Y + h \$f- (17) 

The terms in brackets are operators on their respective functions, so (17) 

can be represented by the block diagram shown in Fig. 2, 

where 



Jaw -ft J 



and 



<p' 2 (t) 



G.M 



\2r 

T 



X(t) 



+ i 






(18) 



,(t) 



<r 2 (t) 



G,(w) 



yet) 



Fig. 2 — Second-order noise block diagram. 



1756 THE BELL SYSTEM TECHNICAL JOURNAL, DECEMBER 1966 

!(*(«) = ±hr. (19) 

It can easily be shown, using the relationship for the cross-correlation of 
linearly transformed random functions, 3 that the power density spectrum 
of 6 2 (t) is 

<Se 2 (w) = G\( — u>) G\(u>) S^*{u>) -f- G\{ — <x>) Gi{w) <S v 'i v "j(co) 

+ ft(-») &(«) S„»V»(*0 + Gi(-<*) &(«) S,"i(ft>) 

where, for example, aS V 'V 2 (&0 is the cross-power density spectrum of 
vs 2 (0 and p 2 (i). As in Ref. 2, (20) can be expressed as 

&,(«) = 2 | Gk(«) | 2 ff[Vto] + 2 | G 2 (o>) | 2 JF[/2,»'(t)] 

(21) 
+ 2[ft(-«)ft(«) + <?,(-«)(&(«)] ff[^»*(r)], 

where (ri(a>) and Qa(a) are given by (18) and (19), respectively, and 5 
stands for the Fourier transform. 

Now, redefining the transfer functions given in (18) and (19) we can 
write 

p&,(«) = 2\G i (u>)\ 2 Z[RAT)]+2\G,(u,)\ 2 5[R,AT)} m) 

+ 2[GM-»)<W«) + GW-«)<Ww)l ffUW'V)] 
where now 

^)-fe« -^]+*[t w ] (23) 

G*(«)=^k. (24) 

Equation (22) is the second-order AM/PM intermodulation noise power 
density spectrum weighted by the AM/PM conversion parameter. The 
ability to pull the k out of the calculation provides great flexibility. 

2.3 Third-Order Noise Power Density Spectrum 

The time representation for the third-order phase distortion due to 
AM/PM conversion is, from (16), 

*»-*[- fc+ a s>" (25) 

which can be represented by the block diagram in Fig. 3 where 



NOISK IX FM .SYSTEMS 



1757 



<p' 3 (t) 



G,M 



BAt) 



Fig. 3 — Third-order noise block diagram. 

I 

I: 



fi ^-[-¥i +i \% u \ 



(26) 



It follows that the third-order AM/PM intermodulation noise power 
density spectrum is 

SeM = | G 3 (a>) | 2 S^i(«). 



It can he shown that 6 

which can be written 

SX*>) = 65F[#/(t)] 



(27) 



(28) 



since 9 i?/(0) £,'(«) is a scaled power density spectrum of the input FM 
signal and hence can be neglected since it does not contribute to the 
distortion.* Therefore, 

S,M = 6 I GM | 2 IFlV(f)] (29) 

where G a (u>) is given by (26). Redefining the transfer function we have 



i$,(«) = 6|Gi(«) | 2 5F[/e/(r)] 



where now 



</.(«) = 






+ i 



hi 

12 



(30) 



(31) 



Hence, (30) gives the third-order AM/PM intermodulation noise power 
density spectrum weighted by the AM/PM conversion parameter. 

A quantity of interest in engineering problems is the signal-to-noise 
ratio. Thus, we now characterize the simulated multichannel baseband 
signal. 

2.4 Pre- Emphasized Signal Power Density Spectrum 

The basic block diagram arrangement for a typical signal transmission 
path is shown in Fig. 4. The unpre-emphasized baseband signal is ob- 

* This term causes baseband amplitude distortion instead of intermodulation 
noise. 



1758 THE BELL SYSTEM TECHNICAL JOURNAL, DECEMBER 1966 



BASEBAND 
SIGNAL 



f[W 



PRE-EMPHASIS 

NETWORK 

P(W) 



PRE- 
EMPHASIZED 
BASEBAND 



<P'(t) 



FM 
MODULATOR 



FM 
SIGNAL 



Y(«ii) 



V(t) = COS [<o c t+g>(t)] 



Fig. 4 — Typical signal transmission path. 

tained from the frequency division multiplex terminals, directly or via a 
transmission facility, and is pre-emphasized prior to being applied to a 
FM modulator. The output of the FM modulator is consistent with v(t) 
shown in Fig. 1 . Assume that the unpre-emphasized baseband signal has 
a Gaussian distribution and a flat power density spectrum, P , between 
—fb and fb , where f b is the top baseband frequency. The output power 
density spectrum from the pre-emphasis network is 

SA<*) = Po\P(o>)\\ |/| ^ fb (32) 

where P(co) is the transfer function of the pre-emphasis network. Letting 



| P(a>) | 2 = a + a 2 P + aj* + a 6 f, 
where the a's are real constants, we have 

SA") = Po[ao + (hf 2 + a 4 p + o,n 
It can easily be shown that 2 

(27T(t) 2 



/I ^ fb, 



(33) 



l/l Sjfl. (34) 



Po = 



Of f . I a 2/b I a *f>> 



+ 



7 / 



, (rad/sec) /Hz 



(35) 



where a = rms frequency deviation, in Hz, due to the baseband signal, 
and f b is in Hz. Equation (34) gives the power density spectrum of the 
pre-emphasized baseband signal in terms of the coefficients of a con- 
tinuous pre-emphasis characteristic, and in terms of system parameters, 
a and fb . 

2.5 Signal-to-Noise Ratio 

We are now in a position to express the signal-to-noise ratio for second- 
and third-order AM/PM intermodulation noise. The expressions given 
in (22) and (30) are for PM distortions so we convert them to FM dis- 
tortions by multiplying by a> 2 . Hence, the signal-to-noise ratios can be 



NOISE IN FM SYSTEMS 1759 

expressed as 

* W - 201 °^ (36) 



U log 4^1 = io log j^r: : 

L *",S 9 »J 2ndorder ^ &,(« 



and 



) 



ri0 1og4^Tl-101og/«Y &(tt) 



- 20 log k, , 37 ^ 



where *M«) is given by (34), 1/fc 2 &,(«) is given by (22), and 1/fc 2 
S«,,(a>) is given by (30). A digital computer program has been written 
which will evaluate (36) and (37) for any values of the transmission 
deviation coefficients, pre-emphasis coefficients, rms frequency deviation 
due to the baseband signal, top baseband frequency, and AM/PM con- 
version factor. The derivations of 5[R/(t)], SF[i2, V '*(r)L $IK" 2 ( T )1 
and 5[R v >\t)] in a form applicable to a digital computer program are 
given in Appendix II of Ref. 2. 

III. NOISE PROPERTIES AND CHARACTERISTICS 

The previous material provided the mathematical treatment of 
AM/PM intermodulation noise. In this section we will document the 
various properties of both AM/PM intermodulation noise and inter- 
modulation noise due to transmission deviations.* Also, the charac- 
teristics of these two noise phenomena will be explored by utilizing a 
representative system model. Both noise contributors are treated in 
parallel throughout the section for comparison purposes. The results 
are presented in three discrete modes: (*) properties which are true in 
general; (it) properties which are approximately true; and (m) charac- 
teristics which are derived from a representative system model. The 
theoretical treatment previously presented was for a transmission 
medium given by (10). In this section we will confine our analysis to 
the power series transmission deviations in (10). This is done for two 
reasons: (i) the properties of the two noise phenomena can be concisely 
documented for power series transmission deviations; and (ii) the gain 
and phase ripple properties need more analysis as well as mathematical 
treatment in order to fully characterize the effects of ripples in the 
transmission medium. 

* The information for this latter noise contributor was obtained from Ref. 2, 
which gives it implicitly, as well as from the associated digital computer program. 






1760 THE BELL SYSTEM TECHNICAL JOURNAL, DECEMBER 196(5 

3.1 General Properties 

Equation (8) of this paper and (23) of Ref. 2 have been expressed 
in terms of the transmission deviations and tabulated as shown in Table 
I. This table is an extension of Table 21-1 of Ref. 4. 

Table I — -Amplitude and Phase Modulation Caused 
by Transmission Deviations 



Type of transmission 


Resulting amplitude 


Resulting phase 


deviation 


modulation, a(/) 


modulation, ip (l) — <p{t) 


Linear gain, 0i 


gi<p' - toiV* + iffiV 




Parabolic gain, g> 


g*p'' + h 'V 


-gvp" + ff»VV 


Cubic gain, g 3 


—gvp'" + g*p" 


— 'Mhf'f" 


Quartic gain, g 4 


— 4g i <p'<p"' — 3g 4 <p" 2 


gup"" - iSgw'W 


Parabolic phase, bi 


bvp" + 26 2 V V" + 6 2 V" 2 


+ 262VV" 


Cubic phase, 63 


obvp ip 


-bvp'" + b 3 >p' 3 


Quartic phase, b.\ 


—hvp"" + (ibitp 'V" 


— 4&4fp ip — Sbitp" 2 


Interaction terms 


-\gM + gibi]?'" 


-gib-xp'" + gig*p'<p" 




+ [2gib«\<p'<p" + g,g 3 <p'<p'" 


— -i(gib 3 + 02&2W" 




—gigvp'* + [%i&i + 4gib< 


— 3<(/,6 3 + 0262V 2 




— 2gri 2 6o]^>'V" 


+ (301 03 - 01 2 02)<p'V 



Input signal = exp \i[u r l + <p(I)]\ ; output signal = exp \a(l)] exp \i\u c t + <p o (0}} ; 
transmission medium transfer function = Y(u + w d ) = [1 + giu -j- 02« 2 + 3 oj 3 
+ g A co 4 } exp \i\b-iu, 2 + b 3 u 3 + b 4 u*\\. 

The argument of all the amplitude and phase functions is t. 

The order of the noise produced by different transmission deviations 
(e.g., <7i , 6 2 ) arc given in Table II for intermodulation noise due to 
transmission deviations and for AM/PM intermodulation noise. Two 
rules of thumb can be stated. For intermodulation noise due to trans- 
mission deviations the rule is: 

Even-order gain and delay transmission deviations cause odd-order noise. 

Table II — Order of Noise 



Intermodulation noise 











Due to transmission deviations 


Due to AM/PM conversion 


Linear gain (01) : 


No noise 


•Second and third 


Parabolic gain {gi) : 


Third 


Second 


Cubic gain (0 3 ) : 


Second 


Third 


Quartic gain (g t ) : 


Third 


Second 


Linear delay (62): 


*Second and third 


Second 


Parabolic delay (63): 


Third 


Second 


Cubic delay (64) : 


Second 


Third 



* Indicates predominant component of the two possible. 



NOISE IX FM SYSTEMS 



1761 



Odd-order gain and delay transmission deviations cause even-order noise. 
For AM/PM intermodulation noise the rule is, for those transmission 
deviations that cause significant relative noise (will become apparent 
later) , 

Even- order gain and delay transmission deviations cause even-order noise. 

Odd-order gain and delay transmission deviations cause odd-order noise. 

The two types of intermodulation noise are related to the magnitude 
of the transmission deviation coefficient by the relationships shown in 
Table III. Once a noise response is obtained for a particular system and 
transmission deviation coefficient value, then the system noise for any 
other coefficient value typically encountered in transmission systems 
can be easily predicted. 

3.2 Approximate Properties 

The variation in the top message channel noise, for both noise con- 
tributors, with number of channels, assuming the peak frequency devia- 
tion remains constant as the number of message channels increase, is 
shown in Table IV for the different transmission deviations. These 
approximate relationships yield results with an error of <1 dB for 
smooth pre-emphasis functions typically used in broadband radio 
systems. 

The assumptions used were that the peak frequency deviation re- 
mained constant, and that a typical frequency division multiplex plan 
was used. The rms frequency deviation, due to the baseband signal, 



Table III — Variation of Relative Noise with Transmission 
Deviation Coefficient Value 





Intermodulation noise 


T m' 'on deviation 








Due to transmission deviations 


Due to AM/PM conversion 


Linear gain (01) : 


No noise 


*40 log | gi'/gil, 60 log 
1 0i70i 1 


Parabolic gain (0») : 


40 log | 2 ' /ff2 | 


^20 log 1 02V02 1 (approxi- 
mation error <? dB) 


Cubic gain (g 3 ) : 


20 log 1 g 3 '/g 3 1 


20 log 


03 IO\ 




Quartic gain (gt): 


20 log | gt'/gi \ 

*20 log | bi'/bo | , 40 log 


20 log 


Q\'l S* 




Linear delay (bo); 


40 log 


6»7&i 






I b 2 '/b, | 




Parabolic delay (b 3 ): 


20 log I b 3 '/b 3 1 


20 log 1 b 3 '/b 3 1 


Cubic delay (6«): 


20 log 1 h'/bt \ 


20 log 1 64764 1 



Where the prime (') notation depicts the terminal value and the unprimed 
notation indicates the initial value. 

* Indicates predominant component of the two possible. 



1762 THE BELL SYSTEM TECHNICAL JOURNAL, DECEMBER I960 

Table IV — Variation of Top Channel Noise with Number of 

Message Channels 





Intermodulation noise 


Transmission deviation 


Due to transmission deviations 


Due to AM/PM 
conversion 


Linear gain (gi): 
Parabolic gain (gi): 

Cubic gain ({73) : 

Quartic gain (g A ) : 

Linear delay (b 2 ): 

Parabolic delay (63) : 

Cubic delay (b 4 ) : 


No noise 

Relative lop channel noise increase 

^il log N'/N 
Relative top channel noise increase 

S& 39 log N'/N 
Relative top channel noise increase 

S :41 log N'/N 
Relative top channel noise increase 

^211ogiVyJV 
Relative lop channel noise increase 

^ 23 log iV'/JV 
Relative lop channel noise increase 

^ 58 log N'/N 


^ 20 log N'/N 
^ 21 log N'/N 
^ 21 log N'/N 
^ 57 log N'/N 
S 58 log N'/N 
^ 39 log N'/N 
^ 40 log N'/N 



Where N' = increased number of channels; N = initial number of channels. 

was allowed to change, accordingly, as the number of message channels 
increased. 



3.3 Noise Characteristics 

3.3.1 Representative System Model 

As a system model, we will use the following system parameters: 
N = number of message channels = 1200 
fb = top baseband frequency = 5.772 MHz 
AF = peak frequency deviation = 4 MHz 
a = rms frequency deviation due to the multichannel baseband 
signal = 0.771 MHz. 
The pre-cmphasis characteristic is shown in Fig. 5 and can be expressed 
by 

I P(u>) I 2 = 0.9989 + 3.5839 X 10" 1 / 2 

-5.0245 X IO- 3 / 4 + 3.894 X lO" 6 / 6 , 

where / is in MHz. 

3.3.2 Noise Response for the Individual Transmission Deviations 

It is instructive to show the individual noise responses on a compara- 
tive basis. This can be done by letting all gain transmission deviations 



NOISE IN FM SYSTEMS 



1763 



8 


























/ 






























f 

1 1 

l 






4 


























1 

i i 
I i 
i | 






























i ' 

i 

i 

i 
i 





















0.312 


0.5 
l 
1 

i 

: 


54 






4.148 5.772 
l > 
1 

l l 
I 1 



0.01 0.02 0.04 



0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 1.0 2 

BASEBAND FREQUENCY IN MHZ 



Fig. 5 — Pre-emphasis characteristic. 



have 1 -dB distortion, relative to the carrier, at 10 MHz away from the 
carrier. Also, we let all delay transmission deviations have 1 nanosecond 
(ns) distortion, relative to the carrier, at 10 MHz away from the. carrier. 
This allows us to directly compare the noise contributions of the different 
gain and phase transmission deviations, respectively, and also allows 
for some sort of pseudo comparison between a 1-dB gain distortion and 
a 1-ns delay distortion. The intermodulation noise response, due to 
transmission deviations, for the different transmission deviations are 
shown in Fig. 6. Similarly, the AM/PM intermodulation noise responses 
are shown in Fig. 7. Note that the responses in Fig. 7 are for k = 1.0 
radian or a 6.6 degrees/dB AM/PM conversion device. For any other 
value of k, say fci , we raise or lower the responses according to 20 log 
fci , as indicated by (36) and (37). 

It is interesting to note that linear delay is an important contributor 
to intermodulation noise, due to transmission deviations, but is not a 
significant AM/PM intermodulation noise contributor. Also, we observe 
that parabolic gain is a large relative contributor for AM/PM inter- 
modulation noise but is a negligible relative contributor for intermodula- 
tion noise due to transmission deviations. As a side point, we point out 
that parabolic gain is also a significant source of baseband amplitude 
distortion. 

The phase transmission deviation noise responses in Figs. 6 and 7 
are of particular interest because the values used in these two figures 
are realistic even for an equalized system; this is not the case for the 















|93l 


:ldB AT 10 MHz 


+ 6 












| 


3 2 | 

3,1 


: ins AT 10 MHz 

: 1 dB at ioMHz- 












1 














— Ib-.| 


: i ns AT 10 MHz 


o 

c 












|b a | 


: i ns AT 10 MHz 


m 


^ 


^ 










T 


2 


/ 










|g 2 | 


idB at 10MHz 


§-34 

z 


































-54 
-74 





































12 3 4 5 6 7 

BASEBAND FREQUENCY IN MHZ 

Fig. 6 — Intermodulation noise due to transmission deviations. 




+ g 2 : 1 dB at 10 MHz* 
g 4 |: 1 dB AT ioMHzJ 



|g 3 |: idB at io MHz 
b 3 |: i ns AT 10 MHz 

g,|: 1 dB at 10MHz- 

b 4 | : i ns at io MHz 



♦negative value of g 2 has a 

NOISE RESPONSE WITHIN 0.2 dB 



b 2 : i ns AT 10 MHz 



3 4 5 

BASEBAND FREQUENCY IN MHZ 



Fig. 7 — AM/PM intermodulation noise (k — 1.0 radian). 
1764 



NOISE IN PM SYSTEMS 1765 

gain transmission deviation values used so one need not be unduly 
alarmed at first inspection of the noise responses shown. However, the 
gain deviation noise responses are of interest in order to determine 
which types of gain deviations a particular noise source is most sensitive 
to. 

Comparison of Figs. G and 7 and Table II show that for all transmis- 
sion deviations of significance, the order of the noise distortions are 
different for the two noise phenomena. Coupling this with the results 
of the Appendix shows that for a given transmission deviation, the two 
noise responses are uncorrected. 

Of great significance and importance is the parabolic delay AM/PM 
intermodulation noise response. We see from Fig. 7 that this particular 
delay deviation is, by far, the largest contributor of AM/PM inter- 
modulation noise compared to the other delay terms. The importance 
of this finding lies in the fact that TWT amplifiers, when used as output 
power tubes in broadband radio systems, are separated from transmitter 
modulators (used to go from IF to RF) by band pass filters which may 
possess large amounts of parabolic delay. Hence, we have large parabolic 
delay distortion prior to an important AM/PM conversion device. 
The noise impairment due to this typical system arrangement will be 
examined in a later section. 

Another point of interest is the noise response for linear gain. We 
see that linear gain is not a significant AM/PM intermodulation noise 
contributor. This is useful knowledge because in the past system require- 
ments for linear gain have been set based on speculated AM/PM inter- 
modulation noise impairments, as well as on derivable baseband ampli- 
tude distortion due to linear gain and AM/PM conversion. 

3.3.3 Effects of Interaction Terms 

Referring back to Table I we note the row marked interaction terms. 
By the form of the terms involved it is obvious why they are so named. 
If one were to evaluate (22) and (30) in terms of the transmission devia- 
tions explicitly, he would find that over 80 percent of the terms are 
interaction terms. To examine the effects of these interaction terms we 
compare the response we would get if we combined the curves shown 
in Fig. 6, for example, on a power basis with the response we would 
obtain by using all the transmission deviations at once, i.e., by taking 
into account the interaction terms. There are a large number of possi- 
bilities that could be examined, but to put the problem in perspective 
the analysis considered only the cases shown in Table V. The results 
for the two noise phenomena are shown in Figs. 8 and 9. The responses 



1766 THE BELL SYSTEM TECHNICAL JOURNAL, DECEMBER 1966 

Table V — Cases Considered in the Study of 
Interaction Effects 



Case 



Condition* 



g 

10 



Power addition of noise responses due to individual transmission devia- 
tions (all g's and 6's positive) 
Noise response under the condition: g x negative and all other g's and 

6's positive 
Noise response under the condition: Qz negative and all other g's and 

b's positive 
Noise response under the condition: gz negative and all other g's and 

6'a positive 
Noise response under the condition: g t negative and all other ^'s and 

6's positive 
Noise response under the condition: b 2 negative and all other g's and 

6's positive 
Noise response under the condition: 63 negative and all other g's and 

b'B positive 
Noise response under the condition: 64 negative and all other g's and 

6's positive 
Noise response under the condition: all g's and 6's positive 
Noise response under the condition: all g's and 6's negative 



Where | gi 



01 


= 1 dB at 10 MHz 


ffj 


= 1 dB at 10 MHz 


<h 


= 1 dB at 10 MHz 


f/4 


= 1 dB at 10 MHz 


6 2 


= 1 ns at 10 MHz 


b 3 


= 1 ns at 10 MHz 


b< 


= 1 ns at 10 MHz 



* All the conditions take into account the effects of interaction terms except 
for case 1. 



shown in Fig. 8 are rewarding from a systems analysis standpoint be- 
cause it indicates that the interaction components for intermodulation 
noise, due to transmission deviations, do not significantly perturb 
the noise response obtained by adding up the individual transmission 
deviation noise responses on a power basis. Hence, for this noise source, 
a system analyst could set requirements based on power addition of 
the individual noise responses and be fairly confident that the actual 
system noise response, due to transmission deviations, will be within 
a dB of that response. 

We see from Fig. 9 that the above desirable property does not hold 
for AM/PM intermodulation noise. The responses shown in Fig. 9 
deviate significant amounts from the power addition response (case 1) 
by mere shifts of signs, the greatest departures occurring for parabolic 
and quartic gain distortion which are, in their own right, the largest 
relative noise contributors as evident from Fig. 7. The relative tendencies 
indicated in Fig. 9 also occur when typical equalized repeater trans- 




3 4 5 

BASEBAND FREQUENCY IN MHz 



Fig. 8 — Intel-modulation noise due to transmission deviations — effects of in- 
teraction terms (refer to Table V for case listing). 




3 4 5 

BASEBAND FREQUENCY IN MHz 



Fig. 9 — AM/PM intermodulation noise — effects of interaction terms (fc = 
1.0 radian) (refer to Table V for case listing). 

1767 






17G8 THE BELL SYSTEM TECHNICAL JOURNAL, DECEMBER 1966 

mission deviation values are used. In fact, least squares approximations 
on equalized repeaters, RF band pass niters, etc., yield values for para- 
bolic and quartic gain which are either, or both, negative, i.e., a loss 
with increasing frequency. Hence, even under practical situations one 
cannot, in general, expect power addition of the individual transmission 
deviation AM/PM intermodulation noise responses to yield representa- 
tive AM/PM intermodulation noise performance. 

3.3.4 Noise Response for a Representative Radio System Repeater 

The results up to this point utilized representative system parameters, 
but normalized values for the transmission deviations were used. Of 
interest is the predicted noise response for a typical situation, i.e., making 
use of values typically encountered in practice. We will now use the 
representative gain and delay responses shown in Fig. 10 for an un- 
equalized and equalized radio repeater. The predicted intermodulation 
noise responses, due to transmission deviations, are shown in Fig. 11. 
It is obvious that the equalization has greatly improved the system's 
noise response. 

To examine the AM/PM intermodulation noise we take note of the 
previously mentioned fact that the TWT has a band pass filter (whose 
gain and delay responses are given in Fig. 10) preceding it. The AM/PM 
intermodulation noise due to the band pass filter and the TWT amplifier 
(assuming 2.5 degrees/dB) is also shown in Fig. 11. 



O 1.010 

z 

5 1.005 - 



1.000 - 



0.995 - 



0.990 _ - 



*BPF (BANDPASS FILTER PRIOR TO THE TWT) 
CURVES USE THE SCALES ON THE RIGHT 



- 40 m - 1.02 




""5 

cc 
1.00 2 

3 

0.98 jjjj 

O 

0.97 p 

UJ 
N 

0.96 -i 
< 

0.95 S 

Z 

0.94 
0.93 



66 68 70 72 74 

FREQUENCY IN MHz 



Fig. 10 — Gain and delay characteristics. 



NOISE IN FM SYSTEMS 



1769 




INTERMODULATION 
NOISE DUE TO 
TRANSMISSION 
DEVIATIONS - 
UNEQUALIZED 
REPEATER 

AM/PM 
INTERMODULATION 
NOISE DUE TO THE ~ 
BPF BEFORE THE 
TWT(2.5DEGREES/dB) 

INTERMODULATION 
NOISE DUE TO _ 

TRANSMISSION 
DEVIATIONS- 
EQUALIZED 
REPEATER 



2 3 4 5 6 7 8 

BASEBAND FREQUENCY IN MHZ 

Fig. 11 — Representative radio system noise response. 

We see from Fig. 11 that the AM/PM intermodulation noise in the 
top channel is much larger than the intermodulation noise due to trans- 
mission deviations for an equalized repeater. The repeater equalizer 
is designed to correct for gain and delay shapes obtained from measure- 
ments which do not recognize the AM/PM conversion phenomenon. 
Hence, repeater equalizers based on such measurements, even though 
effective for reducing intermodulation noise due to transmission devia- 
tions, prove ineffective for AM/PM intermodulation noise which occurs 
as indicated. In other words, the system has an AM/PM intermodula- 
tion noise floor which is transparent to external gain and delay measure- 
ments. 

The transmission deviation of the band pass filter which is the major 
noise contributor is the parabolic delay term. Hence, to reduce the 
AM/PM intermodulation noise one must devise some method of cor- 
recting for this transmission deviation. Two means of equalizing the 
band pass filter are: (i) p re-equalization at IF prior to up-converting 
in the transmitter modulator; and (it) microwave equalization directly 
before or after the bandpass filter. The first method may not yield 
perfect correction because up-converters using varactor diodes possess 
AM/PM conversion characteristics, in some cases 1 degree/dB. In 
essence, it would effectively be like trading noise due to 2.5 degrees/dB 
for noise due to 1.0 degrees/dB or an 8-dB improvement in the ideal 



1770 THE BELL SYSTEM TECHNICAL JOURNAL, DECEMBER 1966 

case, i.e., no compression in the up-converter and a perfect inverse 
band pass filter characteristic. However, an improvement anywhere 
near this value would greatly reduce the effects of AM/PM conversion. 

IV. CONCLUSIONS 

Two noise contributors in FM systems are: (*) intermodulation noise 
due to transmission deviations; and (ii) intermodulation noise due to 
transmission deviations and AM/PM conversion. This latter source 
of noise is designated "AM/PM intermodulation noise" in this paper. 
Analysis was carried out in order to predict the second- and third-order 
AM/PM intermodulation noise for the transmission medium given in 
(10) and a continuous pre-emphasis function. Flat Gaussian noise was 
used to simulate the unpre-emphasized baseband signal so the results 
are consistent with the laboratory system tests using "noise loading". 
Expressions were derived which specify the signal-to-noise ratio in 
terms of system parameters, transmission deviations, pre-emphasis 
characteristics and AM/PM conversion parameter. The latter param- 
eter, assumed to be a real constant, was separated from the bod}' of the 
calculations so that the resulting noise responses could be easily altered 
for any value of AM/PM conversion. 

The paper presented general noise properties and characteristics for 
the two noise contributors. This material was presented in parallel, 
for the two noise contributors, for comparison purposes. The order of 
the noise component for different transmission deviations was given 
so that one would know if a given transmission deviation causes second - 
or third-order noise. The variation of the relative noise with transmission 
deviation coefficient value was given so that a system analyst can deter- 
mine the relative detriment to a system response that would result from 
a change in a given transmission deviation. Another useful result was 
the variation of top channel noise with number of message channels. 
This would be of use in the case where one is interested in increasing a 
system's message channel capacity. 

Noise responses were given using a representative radio system model. 
It was found when all gain transmission deviations had the same distor- 
tion and when all delay transmission deviations had the same distortion 
that: (t) for intermodulation noise due to transmission deviations the 
cubic and quartic gain terms created the greatest top channel noise 
due to gain transmission deviations, and that linear delay created the 
greatest top channel noise due to delay transmission deviations; and 
(ii) for AM/PM intermodulation noise the parabolic and quartic gain 



NOISE IN FM SYSTEMS 1771 

terms created the greatest top channel noise due to gain transmission 
deviations, and that parabolic delay created the greatest top channel 
noise due to delay transmission deviations. The effects of interaction 
terms were examined. It was found that interaction terms do not signifi- 
cantly perturb the noise response from that of the case of power addition 
of the individual noise responses for intermodulation noise due to trans- 
mission deviations. However, this desirable property did not hold for 
AM/PM intermodulation noise which says that power addition of the 
individual noise responses may be in gross error; in other words, inter- 
action terms must be considered when evaluating AM/PM intermodula- 
tion noise. 

The intermodulation noise due to both noise contributors was pre- 
dicted for a representative radio system repeater. It was observed that 
the AM/PM intermodulation noise due to the band pass filter preceding 
the TWT amplifier created more top channel noise than that due solely 
to the equalized transmission characteristic, i.e., intermodulation noise 
due to transmission deviations. Possible correction methods were given. 

A point of interest, is that the two noise contributors considered in 
this paper are correlated so that combining the two spectra together 
assuming random addition, i.e., power addition, is not sufficient in 
general. The significance of this correlation is presently being examined 
and will be reported on in a later paper. 

V. ACKNOWLEDGMENT 

The author wishes to express his gratitude to Miss J. D. Witkowski, 
of Bell Telephone Laboratories, for programming the AM/PM inter- 
modulation noise equations on a digital computer, and to M. Liou, 
of Bell Telephone Laboratories, for his motivation and interest in this 
paper. 

APPENDIX 

Uncorr elated Second- and Third-Order Distortions 

We will show here that the second-order distortion, 2 (£), and the 
third-order distortion, 6 3 (t), are uncorrected. Consider 

9 T (t) = d 2 (t) + 6 3 (t). (38) 

Now the autocorrelation function of 6 T {t) is 

Rb t (t) = Re t (r) + Rg 3 (r) + B m ,(t) + Re 3 e 2 (r) (39) 






1772 THE BELL SYSTEM TECHNICAL JOURNAL, DECEMBER 1966 

where, e.g., Re 2 e a (r) is the cross-correlation function of 2 (O and 6 3 (t). 
Taking the Fourier transform of (39) gives 

Se T (u) = Se 2 (o)) + Se 3 (o>) + Se 2 $ 3 (a>) + Se 3 e 2 (t>)). (40) 

From Fig. 2, we have 

2 (O = x(t) + y(t) (41) 

so it follows that 

Rhh(T) = R x e 3 (r) + R v e 3 (r). (42) 

Referring to Figs. 2 and 3 we have, using the relationship for the cross- 
correlation of linearly transformed random functions, 3 

&,•» = (■&(-«) (7i(») 5 /v .(«) + ft(-«) £ 3 (o>) fl,» v .(«). (43) 

Now we can write 

<W(«) = JF [fl/^'iCr)] = S[ave (*>V 3 )] (44) 

and 

S/'V«(») = * IWWl = ff t ave (^V 3 )], (45) 

where 5 stands for the Fourier Transform. 

The phase modulating signal, <p(t) represents the multichannel message 
load and so for a large number of talkers <p(t) is Gaussian with zero 
mean. 5 It follows that derivatives of <p(t) are Gaussian with zero mean. 
It can be shown that 6 



ave 



[xi l ■ ■ ■ x n rn ] =0, £ n odd (46) 



where x\ • • • x„ are Gaussian random variables with zero mean, and 
ri ■ • ■ r» are any set of integers. Hence, letting 



in (44), and letting 



in (45) gives, using (46), 



Xi = cp 
X2 = <p' 

Xx = <p" 

Xi = <p' 

Se 2 e 3 (<>)) = 0. 



NOISE IN FM SYSTEMS 1773 

Similarly, 

*S'« 3 8 2 (o)) = 0. 

Hence, 2 (O and 6z(t) are uncorrelated so 

Se T (u)) = Se 2 (io) + Se 3 (o)). 

REFERENCES 

1. Laico, J. P., McDowell, H. L., and Moster, C. R., Minimum-Power Traveling- 

Wave Tube for 6000-mc Radio Relay, B.S.T.J., 35, November, 1956, pp. 1285- 
1346. 

2. Liou, M. L., Noise in an FM System Due to an Imperfect Linear Transducer, 

B.S.T.J., 1,5 November 1966, pp. 1537-1561. 

3. Lee, Y. W., Statistical Theory of Communication, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 

1960, pp. 348-51. 

4. Members of the Technical Staff, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Transmission 

Syste?ns for Communications, Revised Third Edition, 1964. 

5. Holbrook, B. D. and Dixon, J. T., Load Rating Theory for Multichannel Ampli- 

fiers, B.S.T.J., IS, October, 1939. 

6. Laning, J. H., Jr. and Battin, R. H., Random Processes in Automatic Control, 

McGraw-Hill Book Co., N. Y., 1956, pp. 82-85. 



-