2297

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. COM-30, NO. 10, OCTOBER 1982

in the

Phase-Locked Loops with Limiter Phase Detectors

Presence of Noise
WERNER ROSENKRANZ

Abstract-"
nonlinear mathematical model of phase-locked loops
with limiter phase detectorsin the presence of noiseis presented. The
model, which is an extension of the well-known baseband
model of
loops with sinusoidal phase detectors without limiters, incorporates a
modified nonlinear phase detector characteristic, the form ofwhich is
changed if the input carrier-to-noise ratio alters, as well as a modified
phase noise as aninput to the model. Both the modified phase detector
characteristic and the spectral density of the modified noiseterm are
calculated specifically for sinusoidal, triangular, and sawtooth types
of limiter phase detectors, allowing the application of various methods
to determine the loop noise performance. As an example, the phase
error variance of a first-order phase-locked loop
is calculated, thereby
showingastrongdependenceonthespecificphasedetectorrealization.

-+-

(a) SINUSOIDAL PO WITHOUT LIMITER (TYPE I)

IN

T u o Il
$

BP

vco A

(b) SINUSOIDALLIMITER

PO (TYPE II)

I. INTRODUCTION

HASE-LOCKED loops (PLL) with hard limiterspreceding the phase detector (PD), resulting, for example, in a
sinusoidal,triangular, or sawtooth type of nonlinearcharacteristic, are of great practical interest [ l ] , [2] . The theoretical examination of their noise performance, however, is difficult because of the hardlimiting of the noisy input signal and
the following nonlinear operation forming the specific phase
detector characteristic of Fig. l(b), (c),(d). Therefore,the
very well documented nonlinear theory, equivalentmodels,
and results (e.g., [ l ] , [2]), developed for the sinusoidal phase
detector (multiplier) without limiter, as illustrated in Fig. l(a),
are not immediately applicable.
Although there are a few papers [3]-161 dealing with some
aspects of limiter phase detectors in an open loop condition,
very little seems to be known about the noise performance of
the closed PLL. Therefore, it is worth looking at the problem
more closely, particularly as both the limitation and the specific nonlinear characteristic may strongly influence the noise
performance, as we will see later on in an example. The purpose of the present paper is to develop a more general equivalent model for phase-locked loops comprisingphase detectorswith limiters and,to some extent,arbitrary periodic
characteristicsin the presence of noise. The equivalent PLL
model is an extension of the well-known mathematical model
[ I ] , 123 mainly for two reasons.
1)The new general model, having the same structure,
allows the application of the well-known linear or nonlinear
methods for calculating the noise performance.
Manuscript received June 5, 1981; revised December 22, 1981. This
work has been supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinscha.
The author is withLehrstuhlfurNachrichtentechnik,Universitat
Erlangen-Niirnberg, D-8520 Erlangen, West Germany.

i
d TRIANGULAR LIMITER PO (TYPE 111)

(d) SAWTOOTHLIMITER

PO (TYPE

IV)

Fig. 1. Realizations of (a)sinusoidalphasedetectorwithoutlimiter

and (b), ( c ) , (d) limiter phase detectors.

2) Themodel clarifies the reasons for nonlinear effects,

thereby allowing the limits ofthe very usefullinearization
techniques for weak disturbances to be estimated.
11. GENERAL PLLMODEL FOR NOISY INPUT SIGNALS
The usual mathematical baseband model of the PLL(sinusoidal PD without limiter, i.e., an analog multiplier) with additive narrow-band Gaussian input noise n(t) of bandwidth B 1 ,
variance a n 2 ,and zero mean represents the phase detector by
means of a nonlinear element sin cp excited by the phase error
process cp(t) as definedin Fig. 2. Here sin cp is the low frequency term of the PD output signal resulting from the product of the signal u1( t ) [total input signal: u1(t) n(t)]

u l ( t ) = iil sin [o,t+ 41(t)]

andtheoutput
(VCO)

(1)

signal of the voltage-controlledoscillator

u z ( t ) = i i 2 cos [ q t+ 42(t)].

0090-6778/82/1000-~2297$00.750 1982 IEEE

(2)

2298

IEEE TRANSACTIONS
ON

*,I

-PD

LP

vco

V = @,I-*,:
phaseerror
KO: p h a s ed e t e c t o rg a i n
KO: VCO g a l n
F ( s ) :l o o pf i l t e rt r a n s f e rf u n c t i o n

P L L i n p u ts i g n a l :u , ( t ) + n ( t ) =
i,sin(w,t+$,)+n(t)=
A(t)sin(w,t+O,+Q,)

V C O o u t p u ts i g n a l :

Fig. 2.

u,(t)= ~ , c o s ( w , t + ~ , )

COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. COM-30, NO. 1 0 , OCTOBER 1982

In (7) uo is a random process depending on the two random

processes cp and Gn via the nonlinear PD characteristic. Proceeding on the same assumption B1 S BL that leads to ( S ) , a
phase error cp results which is much smaller and varies much
more slowly than the input phase noise G n . To establish an
equivalent model where, as in ( S ) , the PD output signal is
described as the sum of a noise term and asignal term, we shall
first consider cp fixed. Then, uo may be written as a mean depending on the low frequency phase error plus a broad-band
zero-mean noise term associated with the inputnoise n(t)

u O ( t , cp) = KDLEk(q + 4 n ) I

+ n(t, cp)]

= KD[g(P) I Z ( ~ ,

(8)

The low frequency component of uo may then be evaluated

from the expectation

General equivalent PLL model and definitions.

g(cp) = Ek(cp + 4 n ) I PI.

The input noise n(t) is introduced into the model as modified

baseband phase noise n(t) resulting from the product
1

n(t) = - n(t) u2(t)

KD
with KD = 1/2 l i l i i 2 as phase detector constant. It has been
reasonable assumption that the
shown [ l ] , [2] that, on the
closed loop noise bandwidth BL (one-sided) is much smaller
than the input noise bandwidth B , , the modified phase noise
n(t)is independent ofcpor G2 and hasvariance anr2= an2/iil,
bandwidth B 1 = B 1 , anda powerspectraldensity
Sn(O),
which is assumed to be constant in the input band B 1 ,i.e., for
frequencies -rrBl < o < rrB1.

(9)

g(cp) is a modifiednonlinearPDcharacteristicwhich

enters
the equivalent model in Fig. 2 and is in general not equal to
the actual PD characteristic g(-).
The rapidly varying noise term n(t, cp) is generally also a
function of cp. Comparison of (7) to (8) yields

n(t, CP)
= dc~
+ G n ) -g(V>.

(10)

The variance O , ~ ( ~ J >of this noise term has been evaluated for
specific g(.) and fixed cp in [4] and [8], with the result that
onr2 is not altered much from
itsmaximum value at O,L = 0
even if cp is as large as, say, r / 4 . Moreover, the smaller the input
carrier-to-noise ratio is (the case when large values of cp are
expected at all), the smaller is the deviation of anr2(cp)from
its value at q = 0. Therefore, we neglect the state dependence
of the modified phase noise and (IO) becomes simplified in all
cases where cp(t)has zero-mean (no static phase error)

As a result, the mathematicalbaseband model is made up from

n ( 0 = g(@n>.
(1 1)
the baseband output signal uo(t) of the phase detector which
is described by the sum of a nonlinearitysin cp, and a modified With the PD output signal given by (8), the equivalent basephase noise term n(t) with known andsimple statistics
band model of the
closed loop is depicted in Fig. 2. It contains phase detector, loop filter(LP), and the voltage inputuo(t, cp) = [ul(t) + 4t>l * u 2 ( 0
phase output relationship of the voltage-controlled oscillator.
= KD [sin q(t)+ n(t)].
(5) Using the key relationships (9) and (1 1) it is now possible to
determine quantitatively the modified characteristic g(cp), and
In the case of a limiter phase detector the output signal uo the statistics, i.e., variance a, and bandwidth B , of n, to
is primarily given as a nonlinear function g(.)(e.g., sinusoidal, yield its spectral density No in the interesting range around
triangular, or sawtooth) of the phase difference between the
zero frequency. This is carried out in the following section for
input phase and the phase G2 of the VCO-signal. From
three specific characteristics of limiter phase detectors, i.e., of
the sinusoidal, triangular, and sawtooth type.
ul(t) + n(t) = A ( t ) sin [ o l t+ @ l ( t ) + #n(t)l
(6)
111. THE MODIFIED PHASE DETECTOR
(see Fig. 2 ) with random envelope A and random phase Gn the
CHARACTERISTIC
total input phase is G1 &.Therefore,
From [3] -[SI it is known that the characteristic of a lim-

where KO

= const.

iter phase detector deteriorates from its noise-free sinusoidal,

triangular,,or sawtooth form in the presence of noise. Here we
show that by applying (9) and expanding the periodic characteristic g(.)in a Fourier series, a relatively clear analytical expression for g(p) may be found.

2299

R O S E N K R A N Z : P H A S E - L O C K E D LOOPS W I T H L I M I T E RP H A S E D E T E C T O R S

A. Limiter PD withSinusoidal Characteristic

On accountofthe
sinusoidalcharacteristic s(.) we find
from (9), after a trigonometric manipulation and considering
that the input phase noise

Here

has zeromean,

B. Limiter PD with Trianguhr Characteristic

Expanding the periodic triangular characteristic g(cp + &)
in a Fourier series and averaging, with cp remaining fixed, yields
(k=2v- 1 , u E N )

is the input carrier-to-noise ratio.

Now from (1 2)-(14) with the factors p,, in (1 7) the modified phase detector characteristic which enters the equivalent
model may be expressed as in Table I. Numerical evaluation
yields the graphs of gr(cp) in Fig. 3 and of gof, the slope of
g(q) at the origin cp = 0 in Fig. 4 as a function of CNR. Both
the slope go and the maximum values ofg(cp) are degraded if
CNR decreases.

IV. THE MODIFIED PHASE NOISE

C. Limiter PD with SawtoothCharacteristic

Applying the same procedure as before we obtain (v EN)
g(cp) = 2

(-1)

v=1,2,3

- E {cos v&}

- sin vcp.

The modified phase noise n(t) whichcharacterizes the

noise term at the phase detector output has variance anr2and
spectral bandwidth B1 in the baseband. As will be shown subsequently, B1 is only slightly differentfrom B1 and B1 is
much larger than B L , the loop noise bandwidth. As a result,
the phase noise n f ( t ) is regarded as an approximatelywhite
process with constant (two-sided) spectral density

(14)

In order to determine g(cp) readily from(12)-(14) it is necessary to evaluate the expectation

Therefore, Nor will be determined by calculating the power

anf2and the spectral bandwidth B1 from the definition given
in (1 1).

A . Limiter PD with Sinusoidal Characteristic

where p(&) is the probability density function (pdf) of the
random phase @n of the noisy input signal according to (6).
p($,) may berepresented
[7] inintegral form as marginal
(-n <
pdfofthe
envelope A (0 < A S w) and phase
dn

Starting with(1 1) thevariance becomes

r+

<4

with p(&) as in (16). Evaluation [6] of (20) yields (see Fig. 5)

rm

1
The asymptotic values for very low and very high CNR are,
respectively,
on2 = L ,
2

Equation (15) with (16) has been solved elsewhere [3]. The
result is known as signal suppression factor pv [8] and may
be expressed in terms of modified Bessel functions I of order
(v f 1)/2 P I

CNR < 1

(22)

The noise bandwidth B I r of the modified phase noise n(t) is

equal to the bandwidth of the noise term at the output of the
bandpass-limiter preceding the multiplier [see Fig. l(b)] which
has been determined in [ 8 ] . Referring to [8],the bandpasslimiter output noise, being the spectral component of the first
zone [8] at the limiter output,has the bandwidth

2300

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. COM-30, NO. 10, OCTOBER 1982

TABLE I
CHARACTERISTIC VALUES O F THE GENERAL EQUIVALENT
PLL MODEL WITH DIFFERENTTYPES OF
PHASE DETECTORS

1.2

Type I

1.0

CNR =

- 10
I

0.6

1.2

0.1

0.01

10

CNR

I
loo

Fig. 4. Slope go' ofthemodifiedphasedetectorcharacteristicsfor

different types of phase detectors.

0.0 1

Fig. 5.

01

10

CNR

loo

Variance un'2 of the modified phase noise for different types

of phase detectors.

Equation (24) is an approximation in the sense that, although

the asymptotic values

B,'=BI,
and (for a
sity)
(c)
Modified phase detector characteristics for different values of
(a) Sinusoidal. (b) TriCNR and different limiter phase detectors.
angular. (c) Sawtooth.

CNRS 1

(25)

rectangular shape of the input noise spectral den-

Fig. 3.

were calculated analytically, the exponential relationship was

postulated on the basis of numerical evaluations. Experimental
measurements of the noise bandwidth at the output of a lim-

2301

ROSENKRANZ: PHASE-LOCKED LOOPS WITH LIMITER PHASE DETECTORS

1.4

t
0.8
0.0 1

0.1

10

C. Limiter PD with Sawtooth Characteristic

100

CNR

Fig. 6 .

ular phase dgector may also be approximatedforourpurposes by(24)-(26) as in the sinusoidal case. Apart from the
fact that an analytical evaluation does not seem possible, this
approximation may bejustifiedfromthe
results of careful
measurements of the noise bandwidth at the PD output (see
Fig. 6). It is confirmed that B, does not alter much if CNR
changes. This again justifies the approximation,

In this case the variance is from (1 1)

Bandwidth B1 of the modified phase noise for different types

of phase detectors.

iter PD, carried out by the author,

ment with (24) (see Fig. 6).

were also ingood agreewhich may be evaluated, as is shown in the Appendix, in terms
of p u (v EN) as defined in (1 7 ) :

B. Limiter PD with Triangular Characteristic

In order to calculate the variance of the modified phase
noise we first simplify the integration due to the fact that both
the pdf p ( @ , ) and the square of the triangular characteristic
g(*)
are even functions:

1
(33)

v-1.2

The asymptotic values become (see Fig. 5)

rn

Substitution of the variable in the secondterm

yields

of the sum

Equation (28) may be evaluated with the pdf (16) as indicated

in the Appendix. We find an infinite sum of expressions of the
same form as in (17). Therefore, we write in terms of the signal suppression factors pz,1 = 2v, v E N .

Equation (29) is plotted in Fig. 5 as a function of CNR. By

considering the properties of the signal suppression factors the
asymptotic values of unr2become

The bandwidth B1 of the modified phase noise for a triang-

Again, the bandwidth B1 cannot be calculated analytically for

arbitrary values of CNR. However, analytical methods may be
used to determine the asymptotic values. The high CNR limit
is as before B1 = B , , which is easy to show. The maximum
value of B1 is achieved in the limit CNR -+ 0 and has been
evaluatedin [IO] using some properties of the narrow-band
Gaussian input noise. For a rectangular spectral density of the
input noise, the asymptotic value becomes

As in the other cases the bandwidth of the noise term is not

affected much by the nonlinear phase detectoroperation.
Therefore, it seems to be a good policy to approximateB1 by
an analogous exponential relationship as before.

Measured results are in good agreement with this equation as

is shown in Fig. 6.
The derived analytical expressions ofthe
characteristic
values of the equivalent PLL model in Fig. 2 are summarized
in Table I and compared to the simple multiplier PD case. The
diagrams of these values in Figs. 3-6 may be useful in applying
the equivalent model as, for example, in calculating the phase
error variance, which is shown in the next section.

2302

IEEE TRANSACTIONS
ON

V. EXAMPLE: PHASE ERROR VARIANCE

OF THE FIRST-ORDERLOOP
The phase error variance of a first-order PLL (F(s) = 1)
is calculatedin ordertodemonstratean
application of the
equivalent model in a simple but important example. In the
case of a sinusoidal phase detector without limiter (i.e., multiplier), this problem has been solved using Fokker-Planck techniques [ I ] , [2] to account for the nonlinear behavior in the
low CNR case, whereas, in most practical applications, useful
approximate results are achieved by linearizing the PLL. Both
techniquesmay beapplied directly to the limiter phase detector case because of the common structureof the equivalent
model.
Overall Linearization: Linearizing the loop with multiplier
means
neglecting
thenonlinearity
of the phase detector
characteristic. The PLL (F(s) = 1) may then be regarded, in
respect toitsabilityto
restore the noisy input signal, as a
linearfilter
withbandwidth BL = KO K D / ~In. this case
(sinusoidal PD without limiter andlinearization sin cp: = cp) the
variance up2 bf the phase error becomes independent of the
PD characteristic

COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. COM-30, NO. 10,OCTOBER 1982

placed by g,.cp. The closed-loop transfer functionG(s) is

(43)
Thus, we findthe
analysis

phase error variance fromlinearsystems

with u as in (39) and gor,o n t 2 ,and B1 from Table I or Figs.

4-6. With CNR = a-v as in (38) it is possible to depict graphically the variance as a function of l/a with u as a parameter.
This was done in Fig. 7 for a typical value u = K o K D / ( ~ B=~ )
1/50. Now, even thoughthe equivalent model is linearized
with respect toits nonlinear element g(cp), the phase error
variance depends on the specific characteristic of the limiter
phase detector. From Fig. 7 it is evident that the variance may
improve
dramatically from that of the no limiter case. Considwhere
ering the PLL model, this may be explained by the degradation of go with increasing noise, thereby decreasing the ef(39) fective loop noise bandwidth in an adaptive sense. Moreover,
(44) is a good approximation as long as the phase error process
does not substantially exceed the linear portion ofg(cp).
and l/a is a common abbreviation for the phase error variance
Fokker-Planck Techniques: If we want to take the nonas calculated from the approximation (38). For the multiplier linear nature of the phase detector into full account we have
phase detector (38) is a good approximation as long as u92 < to refer to the Fokker-Planck differential equation [2], [7].
0.2, which means that CNR may be rather small as long as BL Omitting the details, the Fokker-Planck equation, taking the
is substantially smaller than B , .
nonlinear equivalent model of Fig. 2 as a basis, yields the pdf
However, in the case of limiter phase detectors, the phase of the phase error which must be integrated numerically to
error variance is only equal to (38) (i.e., up2 = l/a) and, thus, achieve the variance. The results obtained by this technique
independent of the specific nonlinear phase detector, for com- are also depicted in Fig. 7, in order to compare them with the
paratively high CNR, that is, if the asymptotic values (see Sec- above approximations and with measurements. A description
tions I11 and IV)
of the experimental setup is given in the Appendix. As can be
seen, the experimental points are in good agreement with the
g(lP) = cp
>dcp
(40)
nonlinear theoretical results.
The above example demonstrates one of the possible applications, and verifies the accuracy, of the derived PLL model.
We recognize that as long as the phase error variance is small
(i.e., up2 2 0.2) the model with the linearized modified phase
detector characteristic i s applicable, whereas the result u92 =
l/a of the overall linearization is restricted torather high
are achieved. This is roughly true if CNR > 10 as is seen in carrier-to-noiseratios (CNR > 10) if limiter phase detectors
Figs. 4-6. Therefore, the result up2 = l / a , although widely ap- are applied.
plicable for multiplier phase detectors, is far less useful in the
VI. CONCLUSIONS
limiter phase detector case. Here linearization of g(cp) yields
A nonlinear equivalent phase-locked loop model has been
comparable results.
Linearization of Modified Characteristic g(cp): Linearizing developed (Fig. 2) which describes loopswith generalized
the modified phase detector characteristic g(cp) aroundthe
phase detectors, includinglimiter
phase detectors, in the
origin cp = 0 results in a linear equivalent model withg(cp) re- presence of noise. The model is based on a representation of

ROSENKRANZ:
PHASE-LOCKED
LOOPS

WITH
PHASELIMITER

Apart from the example demonstrated in this paper, other

noise characteristics of phase-locked loops with limiter phase
detectors may be obtained from the nonlinear model. Referring to methods which were developed for the multiplier phase
dete&r, higher order loops or thecycle-slipping phenomenon,
for&!mple, have been studied [ 101 . Also, the acquisition behavior and the performance of the loop as an FM-receiver have
been investigated in [ 101 with the aid of the described model.

1.0

/
/

0.8
/'
/'

0.6

2303

DETECTORS

-F O K K E R -

0.4

APPENDIX

PLANCK
LINEAR

Variance of the Modified Phase Noise, Triangular, and

Sawtooth LimiterPD

0.2

0.2

0.6

0.4

0.8

According to (28) and (32), integrals of the form

10

(a)

lla

Y
/

0.4 -

-F O K K E R -

./

F=

PLANCK

_ _ _ LINEAR

I_:

4n2P(4n) d4n = 2

6'

4n2P(4n> d4rI

(-41)

are to be solved. With the pdf ~(4,) as in (16) and with the
Anger-Jacobi formula [9]

,/'

(*l>'Iu(a>COS ~4~

e+-acosGn= ~ ~ ( a 2)
u= 1

(AI) takes on the following series representation:

0.6 -

0.4 -

lla ./

-FOKKER-

--- LINEAR

PLANCK

/'
/'
/'

/.

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

(C)

Now the identities [9]

xe-ax21u(bx) dx

--0

0.2

0.4

0.6

LINEAR
0.8

1.0

and

(4

Fig. 7. Phase error variance of first-order PLL calculated with different

approximations, and measured points. u = B L / B ~=, K O K D / ( ~ B =I )
1/50.(a) Sinusoidal PD without limiter. (b) Sinusoidal, (c) triangular,
(d) sawtooth limiterPD.

may be used to yield

the phase detector by a modified phase detector characteristics
g'(p) and a modified phase noise n'(t). All necessary data of
I or in the diagrams of
the modelaresummarizedinTable
Figs. 3-6, specifically for sinusoidal, triangular, and sawtooth
characteristics.
The phase error variance of a first-order loop is calculated
to provide an example of an application of the model. The
results are in good agreement with experimental outcomes and The second term contains signal suppression factors as defined
show that a specific phase detector realizationmay strongly in (17). Therefore, for the sawtooth characteristic, the
result
influence the noise performance.
in (33) is obtained directly.

2304
WHITE
NOISE

TRANSACTIONS
IEEE
COMMUNICATIONS,
ON
6,;
12,SkHz

VOL. COM-30, NO. 10, OCTOBER 1982

REFERENCES

PLL,6,=KoK,/4-256 Hz
A. J. Viterbi. Principles of Coherent Communication. New York:
r-----------i
McGraw-Hill,1966.
GEN.
I
I
W. C. Lindsey, S-vnchronizution Systems in Communicationand
Control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972.
A. H. Pouzet,"Characteristics of phase detectors in presence of
noise," in Proc. 8rh Int. Telem. Conf., Los Angeles, CA, 1972, pp.
818-828.
I
I
F. H.Raab."Square-wave
correlation phase detector with VLF
L _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _
J
atmosphericnoise,"
IEEE Trans.Aerosp.Electron.
S w t . . vol.
AES-15,pp. 726-732, 1979.
B. N . Biswar et a l . . "Phase detector response tonoisy and noisy
RMSfading signals," IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst.. vol. AESVOLTMETER
16. pp. 150-157, 1980.
S . A. Butman and J . R. Lesh, "The effects of bandpass limiters on
Fig. 8. Experimental setup for phase error measurement.
n-phase tracking systems," IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. COM-25,
pp. 569-576. 1977.
For a triangular phase detector the result (29) may be calD. Middleton, An Introduction to Srutistical
Communication
Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.
culated from (28) in a similar way, bearing in mind the new
J . C. SpringettandM.
K . Simon, "An analysis of the phase
limits of integration and the substitution p(@,).
in
coherent-incoherent output of the bandpass limiter,'' IEEE Trans.
Commun. Technol.. vol.COM-19. pp. 42-49. 1971.
Experimental Setup
I . S . Gradshteyn and I . M. Ryzhik, Table oj'lntegruls. Series and
Products. New York: Academic,1965.
The outline of the experimental setup for the measurement
W. Rosenkranz, "Ein allgemeines Ersatzmodell zur nichtlinearen
of uv2 is shown in Fig. 8. Any one of the four phase detectors
Berechnung des Storverhaltens von Phasenregelkreisen ( A general
equivalentmodel for thenonlinearcalculation
of the noiseperin Fig. l(a)-(d) was connected with a VCO to form a firstformance of phaselockedloops)."
AusgewiihlteArbeitenuber
order PLL. Each PD includes an RC low-pass filter (PD-LP in
Nachrichrensysteme no. 44, issued by Prof.
Dr.-lng.
H.
W.
larger thanthe
Fig. 1) withacutofffrequencysufficiently
Schiissler, Erlangen, West Germany, 1980.

PLL bandwidth but small enough to suppress any significant

high frequency disturbances. A voltage proportionaltothe
phase error (mod 2n) was obtainedby means of a highly
linear phase detector(sawtooth). During the measurements
all parameters were held constant; only the noise power was
changed to yield different values of l / a which were computed
from the measured CNR at the PLL input.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author wishes to thank Prof.M. Brunk of the Lehrstuhl
fur N a c h r i c h t e n t e c h n i k , U n i v e r s i t y of Erlangen-Nurnberg, who

has encouragedthis work through numerous discussions and

valuable suggestions. He is also grateful tothe
Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) for their support.