[time-nuts] Affordable 160 GHz Sampler

[Joseph Gwinn]

On Thu, 02 Sep 2021 03:30:18 -0400, time-nuts-request at lists.febo.com 
wrote:
> Send time-nuts mailing list submissions to
> 	time-nuts at lists.febo.com
Re: time-nuts Digest, Vol 209, Issue 1

> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2021 13:42:38 -0400
> From: "Mike Monett" <zak at teksavvy.com>
> Subject: [time-nuts] Affordable 160 GHz Sampler
> To: time-nuts at lists.febo.com
> Message-ID: <8d3258$53vemf at smtp11.teksavvy.com>
> Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
> 	boundary="1C2F05C9202109011342380980001"
> 
> Conventional samplers for home brewers usually go to 1 GHz. The SD-32
> sampler for the Tektronix 11801C mainframe goes to 50 GHz. The HP 110GHz
> oscilloscope costs around $1.3 Million USD, with a 10-bit resolution. Very
> impressive.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXYje2B04xE
> 
> I have invented a new sampling technology that promises 160 GHz bandwidth,
> yet is affordable to home experimenters. If you can afford an IPhone or
> IPad, you can afford this sampler.
> 
> This technology is not pie-in-the-sky. I made a basic 5 GHz version for the
> University of Ludwigshafen, Germany, and they were very pleased with the
> results. I am attaching images of the response compared to a 
> Tektronix 1502 TDR and the pcb as proof.
> 
> This was the first prototype, and I have made significant improvements
> since then.
> 
> I have two questions for the time-nuts group:
> 
> 1. where would a sampler with this bandwidth be useful?

Everywhere.

 
> 2. where can I find signal sources at these frequencies to check the
> response?

If you have such a source, you'll be interested.  If  not, no need.


It turns out that this first appeared circa 2003, on electronics 
newsgroups.  Google on "Mike Monett ghz sampler" (without quotes) for 
the stories.

Such as: 
<https://www.electronicspoint.com/forums/threads/final-report-binary-sampler.18908/>

What has changed since then?  It's been almost 20 years, and 
undersampling is now common, often being called "operating in the Nth 
Nyquist zone" (ie, above the Nyquist sampling limit) or the like.

Joe Gwinn


PS:

>