Constant-Techniques For Rail-to-Rail CMOS Amplifier Input Stages: A Comparative Study
Constant-Techniques For Rail-to-Rail CMOS Amplifier Input Stages: A Comparative Study
Constant-Techniques For Rail-to-Rail CMOS Amplifier Input Stages: A Comparative Study
I. I NTRODUCTION
During the past decade, there have been considerable
interests in the design of low-voltage CMOS operational
amplifiers (opamps). Rail-to-rail common-mode (CM) input
voltage range is demanding for a high signal swing and thus a
high signal-to-noise ratio in certain amplifier (such as unity
gain buffer) configurations. The total effective input stage
transconductance ( ) of rail-to-rail input CMOS amplifiers
should be maintained as constant as possible over the entire
input CM voltage range [1] [20]. Hence, necessary constanttechniques need to be developed for rail-to-rail CMOS
opamps. A number of rail-to-rail schemes were proposed in the
past years, and necessitate a detailed review and comparison.
This paper is organized as follows. In section II, several difinput stages are discussed and
ferent schemes of constantcompared. Section III introduces a new constant- technique.
In section IV concludes this paper with with a comparison
table of different input stage schemes.
Throughout this paper we use the following notations.
Total transconductance of the amplifier input stage is denoted
by
. The and are the transconductance
and tail current of the n(p)-channel input differential pairs,
respectively. = and = are the transconductance parameter of the N and P input transistors. The input
CM voltage and slew rate are denoted by
and ,
respectively. The current summation circuits [2] to add the
currents from the constant- N- and P- input differential pairs
together and converts to a single-ended output, are omitted in
the figures for simplicity.
II. R EVIEW AND D ESIGN G UIDELINES OF C ONSTANTT ECHNIQUES
Techniques to maintain a nearly constant
over the
entire
range in rail-to-rail amplifiers have been reported
in [2] [20]. Most of them used N-P complementary input
2571
D. Constantages
, respectively. Thus
by a factor of
and
can be obtained while the tail currents of the
a constant
2572
TABLE I
S UMMARY AND COMPARISON OF CONSTANTtechnique
variation
SR variation
universality
I
15
20
2 times or constant
some (e.g. [2])
relies on
the square law
simple
fast
complexity
speed
R EFERENCES
TECHNIQUES .
II
5
7
constant
universal
III
8
9
constant
universal
new
3
constant
universal
moderate
moderate
moderate
fast
simple
fast
IV. C ONCLUSION
We have investigated several published constanttechniques for low-voltage rail-to-rail CMOS amplifier input
stages. The tail-current varying technique is relatively simple
variations. The maximum/minimum selection
but has large
technique has smaller
variation but lacks good transient
performance. Level shifting technique only needs additional
variation is sensitive to mismatch
source followers but its
and power supply voltage change. In Section III, we briefly
present an innovative constant- technique based on dynamic
current scaling technique. Table I provides a brief comparison
techniques discussed
of the characteristics of the constantin the previous sections. The authors cordially acknowledge
the critical comments and suggestions from the anonymous
reviewers.
V. A PPENDIX
In this appendix, we will prove that the total
of the
input stage in Fig. 2(b) has around 15 deviation over the
full input common-mode range. Refer to Fig. 2(b), if
is
between and , transistor M116 is partly
conducting, and the rest of tail current flows through M3 and
M4, which is assumed to be here. The tail current of the
. Therefore,
P input pair M1-M2 is thus
the total
of the input stage is given by
=
= . Calculate
where
maximum value of (1), we can obtain that when
reaches its maximum value, which yields
(1)
the
,
(2)
is
about
15
above
its
nominal
value
.
hence
2573
VDD
VDD
MBp
IP
M2p
Vi
M1n M2n
pair active
region
Region I
Region III
M17
M16
Io+
active
VCMP
VDD
M2
Vi+ M1
region
gmP
gmN
Vi
M3 M4
Io
IP (gmP)
IN (gmN)
pair active
region
Vss
VSS
VSS
(a)
IN
VDD
VSS
M11
(c)
(b)
M12
VDD
M121
M122
1.4V
(b)
Fig. 5. Rail-to-rail constantinput stage using constant[8], (a) working principle, (b) circuit example.
Vi
M1
M3
M2
M4
IN
Vi+
M2
M1
M116
M4
Vi
Iref
1.4V
SW1
M113
Iref
Mb1
Mb2
M7
M9
M8
IP
Iref
M1
VSS
M10
M2
M6
M5
M114
M3 M4
Vi+
VSS
1:3
Mb3
gm
SW2
SW2
In
M124
M3
VDD
Current Summation
and Subsequent
Stages
Current Summation
and Subsequent
Stages
Vi+
technique II
Iref
SW1
IP
VDD
1:3
Iref
M22
Maximum Selection II
(a)
M21
Maximum Selection I
In
M17
M16
Both pairs
VSS
IN
IP
Itail (gm)
P-channel
MBn
VDD
Current Summation
and Subsequent Stages
Region II
M1p
Vi+
N-channel
gm
Vi
To the
next
stage
VSS
IN
(b)
VSS
Fig. 2. Rail-to-rail constantinput stage using constant[4], (a) conceptual circuit, (b) real circuit.
Fig. 6. Rail-to-rail constantinput stage using constant[11], (a) working principle, (b) circuit example.
Iref
M10
M1B M1A
SWP
M2A
Vi+
M3B M3A
M7
Vb2
M4A
M2B
Vi
M4B
SWN
M5
Iref
M6
VSS
(a)
VDD
M2A
M1A M1B
M1C
M2C
Vi+
Vi
M3A M3B
M4B
M4A
Vi
Vi+
M1
M2
M6
M3 M4
Vi
To the
next
stage
VSS
Vis
Vis+
M1
Vis
M2
M6
M5
M3 M4
Vi+
Iref
Vi
Iref
VSS
Vis+
(b)
(a)
Fig. 7. Rail-to-rail input stages using constantexample [12], (b) circuit example [13].
M4C
M3C
Iref
Iref
M10
M5
Vi+
To the
next
stage
M9
M8
IP
IN
M2B
VDD
Mb3
Mb2
M7
Iref
Iref
Current Summation
Iref
technique III
VDD
Mb3
Mb2
Tuning for transition region
overlapping
M9
(b)
(a)
M8
DC
level
shifters
technique I
VDD
Vb1
VDD
Input Common-Mode Voltage Vi,cm
FF Canceling Stage
(a)
Iref
VSS
(b)
Fig. 3. Rail-to-rail input stages using constantpair circuit in [6], (b) backup-pair circuit in [9].
gm
p(Vi,cm)
2.4
MPA
MPB
Vi+
Vi
MNA
2.4
1-p(Vi,cm)
MNB
1-p(Vi,cm)
Vi,cm
VDD
(a)
VDD
(b)
VSS
Vi,cm
Vi,cm
VSS
IN
1.0
1.0
1.0
VSS
2.0
2.0
2.0
Current Summation
p(Vi,cm)
VSS
(a)
(b)
VDD
(c)
Fig. 8. The new input-stage, (a) basic architecture, (b) simulation result of
vs.
characteristics of the proposed input stage .
2574