Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 313 views

    Solution Gates 2 Samples

    Uploaded by

    luqmansulyman
    This document discusses implementing combinational logic gates in complementary CMOS and pseudo-NMOS logic. It also discusses the implementation of multiplexers in static and dynamic CMOS logic. The document analyzes which logic gate implementation, NAND or NOR, is better suited for complementary CMOS and pseudo-NMOS logic. It also calculates signal probabilities and switching power for static and dynamic CMOS multiplexer implementations. The document considers issues like device sizing, input patterns affecting resistance, clocking schemes for domino logic, and whether calculated switching power accounts for total dynamic logic power.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Solution Gates 2 Samples

    Uploaded by

    luqmansulyman
    313 views9 pages
    This document discusses implementing combinational logic gates in complementary CMOS and pseudo-NMOS logic. It also discusses the implementation of multiplexers in static and dynamic CMOS logic. The document analyzes which logic gate implementation, NAND or NOR, is better suited for complementary CMOS and pseudo-NMOS logic. It also calculates signal probabilities and switching power for static and dynamic CMOS multiplexer implementations. The document considers issues like device sizing, input patterns affecting resistance, clocking schemes for domino logic, and whether calculated switching power accounts for total dynamic logic power.

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses implementing combinational logic gates in complementary CMOS and pseudo-NMOS logic. It also discusses the implementation of multiplexers in static and dynamic CMOS logic. The document analyzes which logic gate implementation, NAND or NOR, is better suited for complementary CMOS and pseudo-NMOS logic. It also calculates signal probabilities and switching power for static and dynamic CMOS multiplexer implementations. The document considers issues like device sizing, input patterns affecting resistance, clocking schemes for domino logic, and whether calculated switching power accounts for total dynamic logic power.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    313 views9 pages

    Solution Gates 2 Samples

    Uploaded by

    luqmansulyman
    This document discusses implementing combinational logic gates in complementary CMOS and pseudo-NMOS logic. It also discusses the implementation of multiplexers in static and dynamic CMOS logic. The document analyzes which logic gate implementation, NAND or NOR, is better suited for complementary CMOS and pseudo-NMOS logic. It also calculates signal probabilities and switching power for static and dynamic CMOS multiplexer implementations. The document considers issues like device sizing, input patterns affecting resistance, clocking schemes for domino logic, and whether calculated switching power accounts for total dynamic logic power.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 9
    At a glance
    Powered by AI
    The document discusses the implementation of logic gates in CMOS circuits and domino logic. It also analyzes the switching power of static and dynamic logic circuits.

    For complementary static CMOS, NAND gates are smaller since the PMOS transistors are in parallel, while NOR gates require larger PMOS transistors in series. However, for pseudo-NMOS logic, NAND gates are physically larger since the NMOS transistors are in series.

    Removing the evaluate switches could cause a short circuit if the pull-down networks remain active during precharge since the precharged nodes would discharge through the active pull-downs.

    ECE 438 Spring 2004 Assignment #5 Combinational Logic Gates in CMOS

    Chapter 6, Digital Integrated Circuits 2nd

    1)

    Implement the equation X = ((A + B) (C + D + E) + F) G using complementary CMOS. Size the devices so that the output resistance is the same as that of an inverter with an NMOS W/L = 2 and PMOS W/L = 6. Assuming L = 1 unit. Which input pattern(s) would give the worst and best equivalent pull-up or pull-down resistance?

    2)

    Either NAND gates or NOR gates can be used for implementing Boolean functions. Discuss which one of the two is more appropriate to be implemented in (i) complementary static CMOS logic, (ii) pseudo-NMOS logic. Explain in a few sentences. Solution

    NAND gate in complementary CMOS

    NOR gate in complementary CMOS

    NAND gate in pseudo-NMOS

    NOR gate in pseudo-NMOS

    The figures above show the complementary static CMOS implementation and pseudo-NMOS implementation of NAND and NOR gates. Lets first consider the complementary static CMOS implementation. For the NAND gates, the PMOS transistors are in parallel whereas, for the NOR gate they are in series. The PMOS transistors in series would need twice the width of the transistors in parallel to have the same current drive. We also know that the mobility of PMOS transistors is 2 to 3 times lower than that of NMOS transistors. Hence the size of the NAND is smaller than the size of NOR if both are implemented in complementary static CMOS logic. For the pseudo NMOS implementation, the PMOS transistors in both NAND and NOR are equally sized (assumption). The NMOS transistors in the NAND gate are in series, which imposes that NAND is physically bigger than NOR gate if they are sized for the same performance.

    3)

    Consider the circuit in Figure P3. Assuming short channel transistors in 0.25 m CMOS technology.

    Figure P3 a) What is the output voltage if only one input is high? If all four inputs are high? Solution

    b) What is the average static power consumption if, at any time, each input turns on with an (independent) probability of 0.5? 0.1?

    4)

    Consider a conventional 4-stage Domino logic circuit as shown in Figure P4 in which all precharge and evaluate devices are clocked using a common clock . For this entire problem, assume that the pulldown network is simply a single NMOS device, so that each Domino stage consists of a dynamic inverter followed by a static inverter. Assume that the precharge time, evaluate time, and propagation delay of the static inverter are all T/2. Assume that the transitions are ideal (zero rise/fall times).

    Figure P4 a) Complete the timing diagram for signals Out1, Out2, Out3 and Out4, when the IN signal goes high before the rising edge of the clock as given below. Assume that the clock period is 10 T time units.

    b) Suppose that there are no evaluate switches at the 3 latter stages. Assume that the clock is initially in the precharge state (=0 with all nodes settled to the correct precharge states), and the block enters the evaluate period (=1). Is there a problem during the evaluate period, or is there a benefit to the overall performance? Explain. Solution There is no problem during the evaluate stage. The precharged nodes remain charged until a signal propogates through the logic, activating the pull-down network and discharging the node. In fact, this topology improves the circuits robustness in terms of charge sharing affecting the output for any generic pull-down network, and reduces the body effect in the pull-down network. c) Assume that the clock is initially in the evaluate state (=1), and the block enters the precharge state ( = 0). Is there a problem, or is there any benefit, if the last three evaluate switches are removed? Explain. Solution There is a problem during the precharge stage. If all precharged nodes are discharged during the evaluate stage, when the precharge FETs simultaneously turn on, the pull-down networks will initially remain on, creating a short circuit. This continues in each gate until the previous gate charges, disabling its pull-down network.

    5)

    Consider the circuit of Figure P5 fabricated in 0.25m CMOS. Let Cx = 50 fF, Mr has W/L = 0.375/0.375, Mn has W/Leff = 0.375/0.25. Assume the output inverter doesnt switch until its input equals VDD/2. Use the 0.25m CMOS model in textbook for calculations.

    Figure P5

    a) How long will it take Mn to pull down node x from 2.5 V to 1.25 V if In is at 0 V and B is at 2.5V?

    b) How long will it take Mn to pull up node x from 0V to 1.25V if VIn is 2.5V and VB is 2.5V?

    c) What is the minimum value of VB necessary to pull down Vx to 1.25V when VIn = 0V?

    6)

    Figure P6 shows a two-input multiplexer. For this problem, assume independent, identicallydistributed uniform white noise inputs at A, S, and B.

    Figure P6 a) Find the exact signal (P1) and transition (P0 1) formulas for nodes X, Y, and Z for: (1) a static, fully complementary CMOS implementation, and (2) a dynamic np-CMOS implementation. Assume only one transition during a clock cycle.

    For Z,
    A 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 S 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 B 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 S 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 Z 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1

    If its a dynamic np-CMOS implementation: For X, P1 = 0.75. In order to obtain the transition probability, an n-tree dynamic gate will be assumed. In this case: P01 = P0 = 0.25

    (Reference for the above is on page 289 in 2nd edition textbook) b) Compute the switching power consumed by the multiplexer in Figure P6. Assuming that all significant capacitances have been lumped into the three capacitors shown in the figure, where C = 0.3 pF. Assume that VDD = 2.5 V and independent, identically-distributed uniform white noise inputs, with events occuring at a frequency of 100 MHz. Perform this calculation on (1) a static, fully complementary CMOS implementation, and (2) a dynamic CMOS implementation. On a static, fully complementary CMOS implementation

    We calculated in part(a) the probabilities of a 0

    1 transistion for each node: 8

    P0 1 for X and Y is 0.1875 and for Z is 0.25.

    On a dynamic CMOS implementation We calculated the probabilities in part (a): For X and Y is 0.25 and for Z is 0.5. Thus, PSW = (2*0.25+0.5)*100MHz*0.3pF*2.52 = 187.5uW. c) Is the switching power PSW of the dynamic implementation in part (b) reflecting the total power consumed? Explain, in a few sentences. In part (b), the clock power is assumed = 0. Indeed, the clock power of dynamic logic can be significant. For a fair comparison, the clock power due to the circuit load must be taken into considerations. In modern IC, the clock power of dynamic logic is taking up more than 30% of the total chip power consumption.

    You might also like