In article <1130523048.382433.145860@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups .com>,
"Johnson" <myshawaccount@shaw.ca> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I believe it is easy to use a high-end digital oscillator these days to
> generate a tracking pulse with a few nanoseconds delay compared to the
> reference pulse. However, I am thinking about the possibility to
> implement the task in a different way, a lower-cost way.
>
> Last month I designed a small circuit to generate the reference pulse
> sequence at 35.42MHz with DW9255 (35.42M central freq plus max 300ns
> GDR)at board. Now I want to add a few more components to the board so I
> can generate a tracking pulse sequence as well. I want the tracking
> pulse sequence is only a few nano-seconds delay compared to the
> inputing pulse sequence, and I want the delay between them is as stable
> as possible. For example, 10 nanoseconds delay with 1 nanosecond drms.
> In other word, I only care about the time difference stability between
> these two sequences.
>
> I am thinking about any possibilties at this moment and their costs as
> well, for example, a positive feedback circuit. Could anybody please
> provide me some ideas to implement this task? Lower cost will be
> better.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Johnson
In years past, there were some ECL logic level delay lines,
with programmable delay. A search term like "ecl programmable delay line"
might turn up a few. At least one of those products, was based on
gate delays, instead of using a network of LCs. Sometimes the
physical packaging of the device, gives away the implementation
method:
This one uses gate delays:
http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/MC10E196-D.PDF
This one is large enough to house LC networks and selector logic:
http://www.datadelay.com/datasheets/pdu1032h.pdf
There are some more modern programmable delay lines here. Intrinsic
delay 10ns plus delta delay (0..255)*0.15ns (DS1020-15 near the bottom).
http://para.maxim-ic.com/compare.asp...Timers.cfm&ln=
Perhaps one of the newsgroups in "sci.electronics" would be a better
place to ask a more detailed question - you should include more
background details on what you are trying to do, because your biggest
advantage first, is deciding whether the architecture of what you are
building is correct. Implementation is only a small part of the answer.
Paul