Opamp 24
Opamp 24
EE411 Final
Problem 24.1
Common mode voltage Vcm is defined as the voltage applied to the inputs of a differential
amplifier when the inputs are tied together. In other words, applying equal voltage to plus
and minus terminals.
The minimum common-mode voltage that can be applied to a differential amplifier is the
common-mode voltage that can be applied to the gates and still keep the MOSFETs
operating in the saturation region. For this amplifier, VCMMIN can be calculated using
equation 22.11:
To reduce VCMMIN for this circuit, there are two methods we will look at. From the equation,
we can see that by reducing either of the two terms, we will reduce VCMMIN.
To reduce the second part of the equation, the 2VDS,sat, we can eliminate one of the
transistors in the bias portion of the circuit. This will reduce VCMMIN by VDS,sat, since the
voltage to keep the transistors in saturation will only have to drop across 1 transistor,
instead of 2. Using the parameters from table 9.2, this results in a drop in VCMMIN of 50 mV.
This can be seen when comparing the simulation outputs between figure 1 and figure 2.
The peak of the derivative of Vout corresponds to point where the transistors are switching
from off or linear to saturation, and is therefore the definition of VCMMIN. The simulation
indicates a drop of about 40 mV.
The second method for reducing VCMMIN is to reduce the first part of equation 22.11, the VGS.
This can be accomplished by using wider devices, as is apparent in the modified NMOS
square law equation 2 (neglecting body effect):
2 ⋅ I DS , sat ⋅ L
2) VGS = Vthn +
KPn ⋅ W
This equation shows that to reduce VGS we can increase the width of the device. Due to the
biasing of the circuit, the other parameters can not be changed. Again using the
parameters in table 9.2, and increasing the width of the devices from 50 to 100, we get a
reduction in VCMMIN of 50 mV. This reduction is can be seen in simulations when comparing
figures 1 and 3 as about 60 mV, due to the body effect adjusting the threshold voltage,
which was not taken into account in equation 2.
Figure 1 - Response of given circuit
Solution 2 results in lower gain-bandwidth product, as parasitic poles are introduced (see
pole splitting). This can be seen in figure 6. The open loop gain for solution 2 is lower than
the given circuit, and the gain looks to fall off at 20db/dec, as opposed to 40db/dec for the
given circuit. The gm of solution 2 is higher than either solution, as can be seen by the
slope of the derivative of Vout graphs in figures 1-3.
The two-stage op-amp in Fig 24.2 is using the biasing circuit from Fig 20.47. This
biasing circuit has several outputs that are not needed for the two-stage op-amp. The op-
amp only uses Vbias3 and Vbias4 for biasing the op-amp, this allows us to discard all the
other biasing voltages from the circuit, which will decrease the power dissipated in the
Op-amp. When the other biasing voltages are taken out we are left with the following
circuit for biasing the Op-amp:
With this new design we lose four branches that go from Vdd to ground, thus the current
is reduced and since P=V*I the power is reduced also. Below is a table showing the
differences between the new and old values:
We reduced the current by 29% thus the power was reduced by 29% of its original value.
Below are the same plots as in Fig 24.3 but with the new designed bias circuit;
Netlist for simulations:
.control
destroy all
run
plot vout
plot deriv(vout)
.endc
*.op
.option scale=50n ITL1=300
.dc vp 495m 505m .1m
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
Vm Vm 0 DC 0.5
Vp Vp 0 DC 0.5
VMeas vmeas Vss DC 0
Xbias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas bias
.subckt bias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas
*amplifier
MA1 Vamp Vreg 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA2 Vbiasp Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA3 Vamp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MA4 Vbiasp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*start-up stuff
MSU1 Vsur Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MSU2 Vsur Vsur VDD VDD PMOS L=20 W=10
MSU3 Vbiasp Vsur Vbiasn 0 NMOS L=1 W=10
.ends
* BSIM4 models
*
* 50nm models from "BPTM which is provided by the Device Group at UC Berkeley"
* Modified by RJB. These models are for educational purposes only! They are *not*
* extracted from actual silicon.
*
* Don't forget the .options scale=50nm if using an Lmin of 1
* 1<Ldrawn<200 10<Wdrawn<10000 Vdd=1V
* Change to level=54 when using HSPICE
By Vehid Suljic
Problem Solution for 24.3
Op-Amp in text fig. 24.2 was simulated with Vp=500 mV and sweeping Vm from 499
mV to 501 mV without MOSFETs width mismatches. Results of simulation are shown in
figure 1, bellow. We can see that when Vp=Vm=500 mV, output is also at Vout=500
mV. So offset voltage is 0 volts (Vos=0V).
However, for only 0.2% mismatch in the widths of M1 and M2 (M1 is 50/2 and M2 is
49.9/2) we get results shown in figure 2. Now for Vp=Vm=500 mV we get output voltage
of 650 mV(Vout=650 mV).
1
Output offset voltage in Fig. 2 is 150 mV for only 0.2% mismatch and it can get very
high for 1% mismatch in the M1 and M2 widths. This high offset is due to the gain of
op-amp,
In order to find exacts offset between M1 (50/2) and M2 (49.5/2) I simulated op-amp in
inverting gain of 1 configuration with R1=R2=10k. Simulation results are shown in
Figure 3. From the figure bellow one can see that now for Vp=Vm=500mV offset
voltage VosN=1.5 mV.
Mismatch in the widths of M1-M2 and M3-M4 can be modeled as offset voltages VosN
and VosP as shown in Fig. 4.
2
Figure 4. Model for mismatch in the widths of M1-M2 and M3-M4
From the model in fig. 4 we can relate mismatch in M3-M4 (VosP) to the M1-M2
mismatch (VosN).
id3 = gmp Vosp and id2 = gmn Vosn, since id3 = id2 we get
Looking at this formula one can notice that if we increase gmn or decrease gmp we can
reduce offset voltage due to mismatch in the widths of M3 and M4. However, we cannot
reduce offset voltage due to the mismatch in the widths of M1 and M2. So mismatch in
the widths of M1 and M2 is worse.
To illustrate this point I increased widths of M1 and M2 four times to 200/2. M3 and
M4’s widths are set to 1% mismatch (M3 is 100/2 and M4 is 99/2). Simulation results
for inverting gain of 1 are shown in figure 5.
Now, we can see that offset voltage for Vp=Vm=500mV is only Vos=0.8 mV which is
almost twice less than offset voltage due to the widths mismatch of M1 and M2
(Vos=1.5mV as shown in fig. 3).
By increasing widths of M1 and M2 we increased gmn which reduced offset voltage due
to the mismatch in the widths of M3 and M4.
3
*** Problem 24.3 WinSpice Netlist***
.control
destroy all
run
plot vout
.endc
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
Vm Vm 0 DC 0
Vp Vp 0 DC 0.5
Xbias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas bias
.subckt bias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas
4
MP9 vp3 Vbias1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP10 Vncas Vbias2 vp3 VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
Rbias Vr 0 5.5k
*amplifier
MA1 Vamp Vreg 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA2 Vbiasp Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA3 Vamp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MA4 Vbiasp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*start-up stuff
MSU1 Vsur Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MSU2 Vsur Vsur VDD VDD PMOS L=20 W=10
MSU3 Vbiasp Vsur Vbiasn 0 NMOS L=1 W=10
.ends
5
Jared Fife
Problem 24.4
This problem asks to simulate the use of the “zero-nulling” circuit in Fig. 24.15 in the op-
amp of Fig. 24.8. The AC, operating-point, and transient (step) operation of the resulting
op-amp are to be shown. We’re also asked to verify that the gate of MP1 is at the same
potential as the gate of M7 in quiescent conditions.
vdMP1 vout1
vd1
We’ll use 100fF for CL as was used in Fig. 24.8 in the text. For CC, we’ll use a higher
value than the 100fF that was used originally in Fig. 24.8 in the text. Let’s set our unity
gain frequency to 10MHz as was done in eq. 24.10:
g m1 150µA / V
f un = = = 10MHz → C C = 2.4 pF
2π ⋅ C C 2π ⋅ C C
Quiescent conditions
The gate and drain voltages of M4 and MP1 is mirrored over from M3. Also, this same
voltage is mirrored to the gate of M7. To verify this in SPICE, we can perform an
operating point (.op) analysis. The following voltages were recorded from SPICE:
vout1 = 6.488707e-01
vdMP1 = 6.473535e-01
vd1 = 6.500546e-01
This verifies that the circuit is biased correctly and the node voltages are mirrored over as
we expected. We can also see from this analysis that we have a built in offset in the diff
amp of ~2mV from the voltage difference of nodes vd1 to vout1.
AC Response
To show the AC operation of the circuit, we’ll use the same configuration shown in Fig.
24.9 of the text.
fun
Figure 2. Open-loop frequency response of the op-amp shown in Figure 1 above.
As shown in Fig. 2, the phase margin is almost 90 degrees, so stability isn’t an issue as it
would be with a lower compensation capacitance. The phase margin drops to ~15
degrees if we use 100fF for CC.
Transient Analysis
For the transient or step response of the circuit we can use the configuration shown in Fig
24.12 or 24.14 in the text. The response is well behaved and similar to Fig 24.14 in the
text where CC was also set to 2.4pF.
.control
destroy all
run
set units=degrees
plot ph(vout)
plot db(vout)
.endc
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
Vp Vp 0 DC 0.5 AC 1
Cc Vout cc 2.4p
Cl Vout 0 100f
Xbias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas bias
.subckt bias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas
Rbias Vr 0 5.5k
*amplifier
MA1 Vamp Vreg 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA2 Vbiasp Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA3 Vamp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MA4 Vbiasp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*start-up stuff
MSU1 Vsur Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MSU2 Vsur Vsur VDD VDD PMOS L=20 W=10
MSU3 Vbiasp Vsur Vbiasn 0 NMOS L=1 W=10
.ends
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
Vin Vin 0 DC 0 PULSE 500m 505m 500n 0 0 250n 500n
For the .op analysis we comment out the .ac line in the netlist above and add the
following:
.op
print vd1 vout1 vdMP1
Problem 24.5
(Mayuri Vasireddi)
The following is the model to determine the frequency response of circuit seen in Fig. 24.17
vout
iCC =
1 + 1
jωCC g mcg
1 2
+ CC +
R1 C1 R2
gm1vs v1 gm2v1 CL vout
_ 1/gmcg _
vout R1
⇒ v1 = g m1 ∗ v s + ∗
1 1 1 + jwC1 R1
+
jwC g
c mcg
re - arranging the equation and substituting jw = s
sC
vout ∗ c
g m1 ∗ g m1 ∗ R1
⇒ v1 = v s + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (1)
sC c 1 + sC1 R1
+
g mcg
1
At node 2 the equivalent output impedence is (lets say 'α '
1 1 1
α = R2 // + //
sC
sC C g mcg L
R ∗ 1 + 1
2 sC
C g mcg 1
⇒α = //
1
1 L sC
R2 + +
sC
C g mcg
⇒α =
[
R2 ∗ g mcg + sC C ] 1
//
sC C R2 g mcg + sC C + g mcg sC L
sC
R2 g mcg 1 + C
⇒α = g mcg - - - - - - - - - (2)
sC
g mcg 1 + C + sR2 g mcg (C C + C L ) + s 2 R2 C C C L
g mcg
For output node 2,
Vout = − g m 2 ∗ V1 ∗ α
substituting V1 from (1) in the above equation, we get
sC
vout ∗ C
g m1 ∗ g m1 ∗ R1
vout = − g m2 ∗ α ∗ vs +
sC C 1 + sC1 R1
1+
g mcg
sg m 2 R1C C α −g g Rα
⇒ vout 1 + = m1 m 2 1
v s
1 + sC1 R1
( + ) ∗ 1 + sC C
1 sC R
1 1 g mcg
sC
− g m1 g m 2 R1α 1 + C
g mcg
v
⇒ out =
vs
(1 + sC1 R1 ) ∗ 1 + sC C + sg m 2 R1αCC
g mcg
Substituting the value of α in the above equation we get,
sC
R2 g mcg 1 + C
sC g
mcg
− g m1 g m 2 R1 1 + C ∗
g mcg sC C
g mcg 1 + + sR2 g mcg (C C + C L ) + s R2 C C C L
2
vout g mcg
=
vs sC
R2 g mcg 1 + C
g mcg
(1 + sC1 R1 ) ∗ 1 + sCC + sg m 2 R1CC ∗
g mcg sC C
g mcg 1 + + sR2 g mcg (C C + C L ) + s R2 C C C L
2
g mcg
sC R2 g mcg
− g m1 g m 2 R1 1 + C ∗
g
g sC
+ sR2 g mcg (C C + C L ) + s R2 C C C L
mcg
mcg 1 +
C 2
vout g mcg
⇒ =
vs
R2 g mcg
(1 + sC1 R1 ) + sg m 2 R1CC ∗
sC C
g mcg 1 + + sR2 g mcg (C C + C L ) + s R2 C C C L
2
g mcg
sC
− g m1 g m 2 g mcg R1 R2 1 + C
g mcg
⇒
vout
=
vs
(1 + sC1 R1 ) ∗ g mcg 1 + sCC + sR2 g mcg (CC + C L ) + s 2 R2 CC C L + (sg m 2 g mcg R1 R2 CC )
g mcg
sC
− g m1 g m 2 R1 R2 1 + C
g mcg
⇒
vout
=
vs sC C s 2 R2 C C C L
(1 + sC1 R1 ) ∗ 1 +
+ sR2 (C C + C L ) + + (sg R R C )
m2 1 2 C
g mcg g mcg
sC
− g m1 g m 2 R1 R2 1 + C
g mcg
⇒
vout
=
vs C RC C RC C
1 + s R1C1 + C + R2 (C C + C L ) + g m 2 R1 R2 C C + s 2 1 C 1 + R1 R2 C1 (C C + C L ) + 2 C L
g mcg g g mcg
mcg
R R C CC
+ s3 1 2 C 1 L
g mcg
Looking at the above equation we find a LHP zero at
g mcg
fz =
2πCC
To find the output pole, we look at the denominator of the above equation,
RC C RC C
1+ s R1C1 + C + R2 (CC +CL )+ g m2 R1R2CC + s 2 1 C 1 + R1R2C1(CC +CL )+ 2 C L
C
g mcg g mcg g mcg
RR C CC
+ s3 1 2 C 1 L
g mcg
Now,
RC C RC C
let K =1+ s R1C1+ C + R2 (CC +CL )+ g m2 R1R2CC + s 2 1 C 1 + R1R2C1(CC +CL )+ 2 C L
C
g mcg g mcg g mcg
R R C CC
2π 1 2 C 1 L
g mcg
RC C RC C
Assuming R1 R2 C1 (C C + C L ) >> 1 C 1 and 2 C L , we get
g mcg g mcg
R1 R2 C1 (C C + C L )
f2 ≈
R R C CC
2π 1 2 C 1 L
g mcg
g mcg (C C + C L )
⇒ f2 ≈
2πC C C L
Using this formula we calculate for C C = 240 fF and C L = 100 fF , the output pole to be
150 µ ∗ (240 fF + 100 fF )
f2 = = 338.2MHz
2π ∗ 240 fF ∗ 100 fF
This matches the value from SPICE simulation (simulation results attached)
To check if the above derived equation is correct, let us find out the f 2 for different values :
1.C C = 520 fF and C L = 100 fF
150µ ∗ (520 fF + 100 fF ) 150µ
f2 = = 284.64MHz ; fz = = 45.9MHz
2π ∗ 520 fF ∗ 100 fF 2π ∗ 520 fF
fz
f2
fz
f2
fz
f2
Problem 24.6
Bhavana Kollimarla
Hand Calculations
Cc = 2.4 pF
C L =100 fF
C1 = Cgs7 +Cdg ,4 A +Cdg , MCG +Cdg,4 +Cgd ,2 =18.86 fF
R1 = ron // rop =111.2KΩ
R2 = ro p // Rocasn = rop = 333KΩ
gm1 = gmn =150µA/V
gm2 = gmp =150µA/V
1 1
Location of first pole f1 = = =12KHz
2π ·gm2·R1·R2·Cc 2π · 150µ· 111.2K · 333K · 2.4p
gm2· Cc g m2· Cc 150µ· 2.4p
Location of second pole f 2 = ≈ = ≈1.2GHz
2π ·C1·C2 2π ·C1·(CL +Cc ) 2π ·18.86f· (2.4p+100f)
g m1 150µ
Unity Gain Frequency fun = = =10MHz
2π · Cc 2π · 2.4p
gm1 150µ
fz = = =10MHz ·
2π · Cc 2π · 2.4p
AOL = gm1·gm2·R1·R2 =150µ·150µ·111.2K·333K = 831.6V/V ≈ 58.3dB
fun = AOL· f3dB = 831.6· 12KHz = 9.9MHz
f 2 ≈ 328MHz
∠AOL ( f )
fun ≈ 410MHz
PM =81o
Hand Calculations Simulations
f1 12KHz 10KHz
f2 1.2GHz 0.3GHz
AOL 58.3dB 58.8dB
fz 10MHz 10MHz
fun 10MHz 410MHz
The hand calculations and simulation results for f1, f2, AOL, fz are close but the values for
the unity gain frequency don’t match because of the LHP zero in between the two poles
which adds to the phase response and increases the speed (ft).
Netlist
.control
destroy all
run
set units=degrees
plot ph(vout)
plot db(vout)
.endc
.option scale=50n ITL1=300 rshunt=1e9
.ac dec 100 1k 1G
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
Vp Vp 0 DC 0.5 AC 1
Rbig Vout Vm 10MEG
Cbig Vm 0 10u
Cc Vout Vd10 2.4p
Cl Vout 0 100f
Problem 24.7
For the op-amp in Figure 24.21 determine the CMRR using hand calculations. Verify your hand
calculations using simulations. How does the CMRR change based on the DC common-mode voltage?
Solution
Using equation (24.26) shown below along with AOL ( f ) = Ad ⋅ A2 , where Ad is the differential-mode
gain of the diff amp, Ac is the common-mode gain of the diff amp, and A2 is the gain of the second stage of
the op amp in Figure 24.21.
AOL ( f ) A
CMRR = 20 ⋅ log = 20 ⋅ log d
Ac ⋅ A2 Ac
Also, calculating Ac similar to equations (22.24) and (22.26), with Ro=4.2MΩ which is the output
resistance of the cascode current source created by M6T and M6B,
1
v out ,diffamp g m 3, 4 1 1
Ac = = = =
vc 1
+ 2 ⋅ Ro 1 1
g m3, 4 ⋅ + 2 ⋅ Ro 150uA / V ⋅ + 2 ⋅ (4.2 MΩ)
g m1, 2
g m1, 2 150uA / V
Ac = 7.93 × 10 −4 V / V
Ad − 16.68V / V
CMRR = 20 ⋅ log = 20 ⋅ log = 86.46dB
Ac 7.93 × 10 − 4 V / V
In order to verify the hand calculations with SPICE, the configuration in Figure 24.25 is used. The
simulation result, with a DC common-mode voltage of 700mV, is shown in the following plot. The result
shows a CMRR of about 86dB, which agrees closely with the hand calculations. Also, at high frequencies,
CMRR falls. This is caused by the capacitance at the sources of M1, M2 dominating at high frequencies,
which results in a decrease of the impedance to ground at that node. Since this capacitance is in parallel
with Ro, Ac will increase with high frequency, which causes CMRR to decrease. This drop in CMRR can
be seen in the simulation results for frequencies greater than 1MHz.
CMRR of DC common-mode voltage of 700mV
Variations in the DC common-mode voltage will cause the voltage at the source of M1, M2 to vary. As a
result, the voltage across the current source created by M6 will also vary. Higher DC common-mode
voltages will cause the voltage across M6 to be larger, resulting in higher Ro for the current source created
by M6. As a result, CMRR will go up as the DC common-mode voltage increases. This is true since Ro
directly affects Ac, as outlined in the discussion above. The plot shown below is the CMRR with a DC
common-mode voltage of 500mV. The CMRR drops to about 50dB for a common-mode voltage of
500mV.
.control
destroy all
run
let CMRR=vaol/vaca2
plot db(CMRR)
.endc
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
Vin Vin 0 DC 0.7 AC 1
Xbias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas bias
.ends
.subckt bias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas
Rbias Vr 0 5.5k
*amplifier
MA1 Vamp Vreg 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA2 Vbiasp Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA3 Vamp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MA4 Vbiasp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*start-up stuff
MSU1 Vsur Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MSU2 Vsur Vsur VDD VDD PMOS L=20 W=10
MSU3 Vbiasp Vsur Vbiasn 0 NMOS L=1 W=10
.ends
* BSIM4 models
Problem 24.8 Russell Benson, CNS
Problem:
Simulate the Power Supply Rejection Ratios (PSRRs) for the op-amp in Figure 24.8 (with
Rz of 6.5KΩ and a Cc of 2.4pF) and compare the results to the op-amp in Fig 24.21 when
Cc is set to (also) 2.4pF (so each op-amp has the same gain-bandwidth).
Solution:
When designing an op-amp, a designer has many things to be concerned with including
power supply rejection ratio (PSRR). The PSRR is a quantitative figure of merit for an
op-amps ability to reject noise fed into the op-amp through VDD or ground. Read the
discussion in Chapter 24 for a better understanding of how noise on the power supplies
feeds through to the output. The equations for PSRR are as follows:
Ideally, an op-amp with infinite output resistance would show no change in vout with
respect to small changes on VDD or ground. Therefore, vout/v- would go to 0 and the
PSRR term would be infinite. However in reality, CMOS op-amps have a finite output
resistance that continues to worsen as the l of devices decreases into the nanometer range.
The schematic used to determine PSRR can be found in Figure 24.27. Note, when
running simulations, only vary one of the power supplies (v+ or v-) at a time while
holding the other constant. Generating all three graphs (AOL, v+, and v-) can be
accomplished in one netlist by setting up the op-amp as a sub-circuit and calling the sub-
circuit three times (once for each of the terms above). See netlists at the end of the
solution for an example. A couple of other things to mention about the netlists are that
the ac signals on VDD and ground are fed to the bias circuit as well, but are not fed to
CBig which is only used to bias up the op-amp properly for simulation.
Graphs for AOL, v+, and v- for the two op-amps (Figure 24.8 and 24.21) are shown in
Figures 1 and 2 on the following page.
Figure1 - simulations results for op-amp in Figure 24.8.
To start, notice that for both op-amp topologies, the AOL, vout/v+, and vout/v- graphs have
the same form as those given in Figure 24b, c, and d. Note, the graphs in Figure 24 are
all linear plots. Therefore for vout/v+ = 1, that is the same as above where vout/v+ = 0dB.
From the figures above it can be seen that the Figure 24.21 op-amp design does a better
overall job of rejecting noise on ground in the lower frequencies. vout/v- for Figure 24.8
op-amp is ~8 while it is ~4 for Figure 24.21. This in turn increases the PSRR- for the
figure 24.21 op-amp. However, one must notice that the overall open-loop gain is larger
for the figure 24.8 op-amp resulting in similar PSRR- for the two topologies. vout/v+
shows no difference between the two op-amp topologies resulting in the Figure 24.21 op-
amp to have a lower PSRR+ overall compared to the Figure 24.8 op-amp.
Netlists (note netlists do contain the bias circuit, but do not contain models):
*** Problem 24.8 Figure 24.8 Netlist Russell Benson, CNS ***
.control
destroy all
run
set units=degrees
plot db(vout), db(vop), db(vom)
let psrrp=db(vout)-db(vop)
let psrrm=db(vout)-db(vom)
plot psrrp, psrrm
*print all
.endc
***********************Common Nodes**********************************
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
VGRND VGRND 0 DC 0
VPP VPP 0 DC 500m
VPM VPM 0 DC 500m
***********************Compensation**********************************
Cc Vout vout1 2400f
*RZ VRZ vout1 6.5k
***********************Op-Amp Circuit********************************
M1 vd1 vm vss VGRND NMOS L=2 W=50
M2 vout1 vp vss VGRND NMOS L=2 W=50
M6B Vdb1 Vbias4 VGRND VGRND NMOS L=2 W=100
M6T vss Vbias3 vdb1 VGRND NMOS L=2 W=100
M3 vd1 vd1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M4 vout1 vd1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M7 vout Vout1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M8T Vout vbias3 vd8b VGRND NMOS L=2 W=50
M8B vd8b vbias4 VGRND VGRND NMOS L=2 W=50
Xbias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas VGRND bias
.ends
***********************Bias Circuit********************************
.subckt bias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas VGRND
MP1 Vbias3 Vbiasp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP2 Vbias4 Vbiasp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP3 vp1 vp2 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP4 vp2 Vbias2 vp1 VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP5 Vpcas Vpcas vp2 VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP6 Vbias2 Vbias2 VDD VDD PMOS L=10 W=20
MP7 Vhigh Vbias1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP8 Vbias1 Vbias2 Vhigh VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP9 vp3 Vbias1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP10 Vncas Vbias2 vp3 VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*amplifier
MA1 Vamp Vreg VGRND VGRND NMOS L=2 W=50
MA2 Vbiasp Vbiasn VGRND VGRND NMOS L=2 W=50
MA3 Vamp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MA4 Vbiasp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*start-up stuff
MSU1 Vsur Vbiasn VGRND VGRND NMOS L=2 W=50
MSU2 Vsur Vsur VDD VDD PMOS L=20 W=10
MSU3 Vbiasp Vsur Vbiasn VGRND NMOS L=1 W=10
.ends
*** Problem 24.8 Figure 24.21 Netlist Russell Benson, CNS ***
.control
destroy all
run
set units=degrees
plot db(vout), db(vop), db(vom)
let psrrp=db(vout)-db(vop)
let psrrm=db(vout)-db(vom)
plot psrrp, psrrm
*print all
.endc
***********************Compensation**********************************
Cc Vout Vout1 2400f
***********************Op-Amp Circuit********************************
M1 vd1 vm vss VGRND NMOS L=2 W=50
M2 vout1 vp vss VGRND NMOS L=2 W=50
M6B Vdb1 Vbias4 VGRND VGRND NMOS L=2 W=100
M6T vss Vbias3 vdb1 VGRND NMOS L=2 W=100
M3T vd3t vd1 VDD VDD PMOS L=1 W=100
M3B vd1 vd1 vd3t VDD PMOS L=1 W=100
M4T vd4t vd1 VDD VDD PMOS L=1 W=100
M4B vout1 vd1 vd4t VDD PMOS L=1 W=100
Xbias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas VGRND bias
.ends
***********************Bias Circuit********************************
.subckt bias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas VGRND
MP1 Vbias3 Vbiasp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP2 Vbias4 Vbiasp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP3 vp1 vp2 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP4 vp2 Vbias2 vp1 VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP5 Vpcas Vpcas vp2 VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP6 Vbias2 Vbias2 VDD VDD PMOS L=10 W=20
MP7 Vhigh Vbias1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP8 Vbias1 Vbias2 Vhigh VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP9 vp3 Vbias1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MP10 Vncas Vbias2 vp3 VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*amplifier
MA1 Vamp Vreg VGRND VGRND NMOS L=2 W=50
MA2 Vbiasp Vbiasn VGRND VGRND NMOS L=2 W=50
MA3 Vamp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MA4 Vbiasp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*start-up stuff
MSU1 Vsur Vbiasn VGRND VGRND NMOS L=2 W=50
MSU2 Vsur Vsur VDD VDD PMOS L=20 W=10
MSU3 Vbiasp Vsur Vbiasn VGRND NMOS L=1 W=10
.ends
24.9) Ben Rivera
Simulate the operation of the op-amp in Fig. 24.28. Show the open-loop frequency response of the op-
amp. What is the op-amp’s PM? Show the op-amp’s step response when it is put into a follower
configuration driving a 100fF load with an input step in voltage from 100mV to 900mV.
~55db
gain margin
phase margin~30˚
Step response of the amplifier in the follower configuration driving a 100fF load capacitance.
Step response doesn’t look that good when trying to pull the voltage to ground. To improve this we
can allow the NMOS transistors to sink more current by reducing the length size on the output NMOS
transistors, results are shown below.
*** Figure 24.28***
.control
destroy all
run
set units=degrees
*plot ph(vout)
*plot db(vout)
plot vin vout ylimit 250n 500n
.endc
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
*Vin Vin 0 DC 0.5 AC 1
Vin Vin 0 DC 0 Pulse(100m 900m 100n 0n 0n 100n 200n)
Xbias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas bias
.ends
.subckt bias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas
Rbias Vr 0 5.5k
*amplifier
MA1 Vamp Vreg 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA2 Vbiasp Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA3 Vamp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MA4 Vbiasp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*start-up stuff
MSU1 Vsur Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MSU2 Vsur Vsur VDD VDD PMOS L=20 W=10
MSU3 Vbiasp Vsur Vbiasn 0 NMOS L=1 W=10
.ends
Name:Vijayakumar Srinivasan
Problem: 24.10
Given the gain-bw(funity) product of the opamp is 100MHz. The gain of the
amplifier seen in Figure 1 is -5.
Gain= -R2/R1= -5
Bandwidth=100MHZ/gain= 20MHz.
Also we have (Av*f3db)= funity, so that gives us the f3b as 20MHz. f3db is
the frequency where the gain of the amplifier is down by 3db from its low
frequency value.
Simulating this amplifier we get, the f3b as approx. 22MHz. The difference
might be due to the lot of approximation we made in our calculations. The
simulation result is shown below in Figure 2.
.control
destroy all
run
set units=degrees
plot vout vin
.endc
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
Vcm Vcm 0 DC 0.5
vin Vin 0 DC 0.5 AC 50m sin 0.5 80m 1Meg
.subckt bias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas
Rbias Vr 0 5.5k
*amplifier
MA1 Vamp Vreg 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA2 Vbiasp Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA3 Vamp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MA4 Vbiasp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*start-up stuff
MSU1 Vsur Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MSU2 Vsur Vsur VDD VDD PMOS L=20 W=10
MSU3 Vbiasp Vsur Vbiasn 0 NMOS L=1 W=10
.ends
To understand what problem one will encounter when the 500mV common mode voltage
is removed and use ground instead, let’s find out how the output voltage range is affected
by analyzing the feedback network using the minimum and maximum input voltage
allowed.
1) With input voltage (Vin) at 0V and both V+ and V- at 0V, below is the calculation for
the output voltage (Vout):
Ia = Ib
! (Vin-V-) / 10k = (V--Vout) / 50k
! Vout = 0V
2) With input voltage (Vin) at 1V and both V+ and V- at 0V, below is the calculation for
the output voltage (Vout):
Ia = Ib
! (Vin-V-) / 10k = (V--Vout) / 50k
! 1/10k = -Vout / 50k
! Vout = -5V
From the result above, the output voltage range will be limited to within 0V and -5V
which is not ideal or practical.
In order to be able to have positive output voltage, one need to have an input common
mode voltage to be set, usually is the average of the two inputs in order to keep the diff
amp operates in saturation region. (For example in problem 24.10, with input commode
mode at 500mV)
In problem 24.10, the output voltages are at 250mV and 750mV, with an input of 0V and
1V respectively.
PROBLEM 24.12
Submitted by T.Vamshi Krishna
Figure 1.
The op amp in the given above configuration can source maximum amount of current
when the MON transistor is off and similarly it can sink maximum amount of current
when MOP is off. In the above figure since MOP and MON are sized to be 10 times than
the regular sizes given in table 9.2, the amount of current that flows through each of the
transistors is also increased by 10 times.
Keeping 100Ω resistors in series with the transistors will not affect the amount of current
that can be sourced or sinked by the op amp. Thus the maximum amount of current the op
amp can source or sink with 100Ω resistors present is still the same as the op amp
without the resistors. The op amp still sources maximum current when MON transistor is
off and sinks maximum amount of current when MOP is off.
But in order to demonstrate what happens if the output is shorted, consider the op amp
connected in unity gain configuration as shown in figure 2 below. Now if the output is
shorted then the inverting terminal of the op amp is at ground as a result the gate of the
MOP will also be at ground thus turning on the MOP transistor fully. Connecting 100Ω
resistors will limit the amount of current that flows through the MOP. Similar argument
can be made for MON i.e. if output is connected to VDD.
Vout
0.5V
Figure 2.
To determine how the closed loop output resistance of the op amp is affected we connect
a test voltage at the output and measure the test current that flows in the circuit. Thus the
ratio of test voltage and test current gives the closed loop output resistance. The
schematic diagram of the op amp in inverting gain of one configuration is shown below
in figure 3. The load resistor and capacitor are not shown in the figure.
Figure 3.
The figure below shows connecting a test voltage at the output so as to measure the
closed loop output resistance of the op amp shown in figure 3.
Figure 4.
gm1R1 is the gain of the first stage, while R2 is the resistance of the second stage, which is
given as rmonllrmop and RA and RB are the feedback resistors.
First we will derive an expression for closed loop output resistance without taking the
100Ω resistors into consideration. After deriving an expression for closed loop output
resistance then we will see how the 100Ω resistors affect the closed loop output
resistance of the op amp.
The test current that is flowing as a result of test voltage can be written as
vt vt
it = + + g m1 R1 g m 2 ( v p − vm ) − − − − − (1)
R2 R A + RB
vt vt vt
it = + + g m1 R1 g m 2 ( )
R2 R A + RB 1 + ACL
If we assume the current through the feedback path is small then the closed loop output
resistance is given by
vt 1
= Rout ,CL =
it 1 g m1 R1 g m 2
+
R2 1 + ACL
vt R2 (1 + ACL ) R (1 + ACL )
= Rout ,CL = = 2 − − − − ( 2)
it 1 + g m1 R1 g m 2 R2 AOLDC
where AOLDC is the DC open loop gain of the op amp and R2 = rmonllrmop.
Thus the closed loop output resistance of the op amp is given by eq (2).
Now connecting 100Ω resistors at the output as shown in the figure 1, changes the output
resistance of the second stage. So now the output resistance becomes
Thus the second stage output resistance doesn’t change much if 100Ω resistors are
connected at the output, so does the closed loop output resistance of the op amp. But by
adding 100Ω resistors as said earlier we get protection from output shorting to ground or
VDD.
Now to see the how the step response is affected by adding 100Ω resistors we simulate
the operation of the op amp in the topology as seen in figure 3 with load resistor and
capacitance connected at the output.
The simulation results are shown in next page, first without 100Ω resistors and then we
again simulate the same circuit but with 100Ω resistors connected as shown in figure 1.
Without 100Ω resistors at the output:
We can see that output swings only from 100mV to850mV if 100Ω resistors are
connected. The drop in swing is due to the voltage drop across the 100Ω resistor.
SOLUTION:
The figure for which the followed discussion is related is as shown below:
The transconductance and unity gain frequency expressions for the OTA for the
schematic shown above are:
The terminology 1:K in figure determines that M4 and M5 can be sized ‘K’ times
larger than the other MOSFETs in the circuit.
K . gm
And fun = …………………………(2)
2πCL
Where gm=transconductance of the normal sized MOSFETS.
To better understand the problem, lets see how the unity gain frequency
changes when the factor K is changed form 1 to 10.
Figure3: Showing the gain response for output MOSFETs sized by a factor of
K=10.
Since the output resistance and trans conductance cannot be determined exactly
with equations for short channel MOSFETs, we will do some simulations to
extract the values of the same for a device with increased width (K=10).
OUTPUT RESISTANCE:
Figure4:Ro for NMOS device 500/2 Figure5: Ro for a PMOS device 1000/2
HAND CALCULATIONS:
(1) From equation 24.41 the Trans conductance of the OTA is given by:
gmOTA = K .gm =10. 150uA/V=1.5mA/V.
(2) Unity gain frequency:
K .gm 1500uA / V
fun = = = 240 MHz .
2πCL 2π .1 pF
Which is comparable to the simulation results in figure3.To get a more exact
match with the simulated value it is advisable to extract gm of the increased
size devices from simulations.
(3) 3-dB Frequency:
1 1
f 3 db = = = 13.9 MHz.
2π (ro 4 // ro 5)CL 2π (17 k // 35k ).1 pF
output resistance values are taken from simulations in figure 4 and 5.
(3) Low frequency gain:
PART 2:
PARASITIC POLES:
So far we did not pay much attention to the parasitic poles in the circuit. Lets
see if they are really important to be considered or not.
Here lets consider the poles associated with the gates o M4 and M5.
The gate of M4 is connected to a gate drain connected MOSFET which is
M41.So the resistance of this MOSFET is 1/gm. This resistance is in parallel
with the gate to source capacitance of M4 (Csg).
So the the pole associated with the gate of M4 is given by:
1 1
fparasiticM 4 = .= = 286.2MHz
2π (1 / gm 41)Csg 4 2π (1 / 150uA / V ).(8.34 * 10 fF )
So the parasitic pole is shown in figure below. At about this frequency, the plot
starts to roll off at 60dB/dec which indicates the presence of the second parasitic
pole created by M5.
If K is around a 100 then these poles will fall below the unity gain frequency.
So the bottom line is that as we increase the factor K,the poles associated with
the gates of M4 and M5 become comparable to unity gain frequency and can
affect the gain response in the frequency of interest region.
NETLIST:
.control
destroy all
run
set units=degrees
plot ph(vout)
plot db(vout) xlimit 10k 1g ylimit -20 30
.endc
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
Vin Vin 0 DC 0.5 AC 1
Xota VDD vout vin vm ota
Rbig vout vm 1MEG
Cbig vm 0 100u
CL vout 0 1p
.subckt ota VDD vout vp vm
Xbias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas bias
M1 vd1 vm vss 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M2 vd2 vp vss 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M31 vd1 vd1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M3 vd3 vd1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M41 vd2 vd2 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M4 vout vd2 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=1000
M51 vd3 vd3 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M5 vout vd3 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=500
M6 vss vbias4 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=100
.ends
.subckt bias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas
Rbias Vr 0 5.5k
*amplifier
MA1 Vamp Vreg 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA2 Vbiasp Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA3 Vamp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MA4 Vbiasp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*start-up stuff
MSU1 Vsur Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MSU2 Vsur Vsur VDD VDD PMOS L=20 W=10
MSU3 Vbiasp Vsur Vbiasn 0 NMOS L=1 W=10
.ends
Problem 24.14 Miles Wiscombe
Question:
Using the OTA in fig. 24.35 design a lowpass filter with a 3 dB frequency of 1MHz.
Solution:
Since we are using the OTA as a lowpass filter instead of an amplifier I will connect the
circuit in the unity follower configuration shown below.
V in +
V out
-
= C
The first step in the design is to determine the output transfer function of this
configuration. We know that the output voltage is equal to the output current times the
impedance of the load capacitance.
1
Vout = iout ∗ (Equation 1)
jω C
In this configuration iout is mirrored from the dif-amp structure. This causes iout to equal
gm * (Vplus – Vminus). In the unity follower configuration this corresponds to the
following equation.
gm * (Vin – Vout) (Equation 2)
Plugging in equation 2 for iout the transfer function can be simplified to the following
equation.
Vout 1
= (Equation 3)
Vin 1
1 + jω (C * )
gm
1
From equation 3, the 3 dB frequency is equal to .
1
2π (C * )
gm
When this is set to 1MHz and the gm value in table 9.2 (since we are designing using
these sizes) of 150 uA/V is used we can solve for C. Doing so, we receive a value of
23.87pF. The following plots are the simulation results for figure 24.35 in the unity
follower configuration (diagram1) with a load capacitance of 23.87 pF.
The above plot of Vout shows that the output is at about 550 mV at 1MHz. The equation
got us very close but in order to fine tune our design, simulations must be ran to more
closely reach a value of 707 mV ( 3 dB down) at 1MHz. By adjusting the capacitance
value to 18 pF we closely match the 3dB frequency of 1MHz specification. The
following plot shows this situation.
Netlist:
*** Problem 24.14 ***
.control
destroy all
run
set units=degrees
plot ph(vout)
plot db(vout)
.endc
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
Vin Vin 0 DC 0.5 AC 1
CL vout 0 18p
Xbias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas bias
M1 vd1 vm vss 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M2 vd2 vp vss 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M31t vd31t vd1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M31b vd1 Vbias2 vd31t VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M3t vd3t vd1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M3b vd3b Vbias2 vd3t VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M51t vd3b vbias3 vd51b 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M51b vd51b vd3b 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M41t vd41t vd2 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M41b vd2 vbias2 vd41t VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M4t vd4t vd2 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M4b vout vbias2 vd4t VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M5t vout vbias3 vd5b 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M5b vd5b vd3b 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M6tr vss vbias3 vd6br 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M6br vd6br vbias4 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M6tl vss vbias3 vd6bl 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M6bl vd6bl vbias4 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
.ends
.subckt bias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas
Rbias Vr 0 5.5k
*amplifier
MA1 Vamp Vreg 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA2 Vbiasp Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA3 Vamp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MA4 Vbiasp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*start-up stuff
MSU1 Vsur Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MSU2 Vsur Vsur VDD VDD PMOS L=20 W=10
MSU3 Vbiasp Vsur Vbiasn 0 NMOS L=1 W=10
.ends
Problem 24.15 Solution by Robert J. Hanson, CNS
Let’s begin the solution by calculating (by hand) the gain of each stage in the Cascode
OTA circuit with common-source output buffer given in Figure 24.37. Then we will
simulate the circuit in Figure 24.37 with M8T in the circuit and compare the results with
that of the hand calculations, and with the results when M8T is removed from the circuit:
(The mathematical formulas and results below are copied from MATHCAD)
1.) Calculating the gain of the first stage A1, using the values listed in Table 9.2:
6
gmn1 150.0. 10
6
gmp1 150.0. 10
3
ron1 167. 10
3
rop1 333. 10
2
Rocasn1 gmn1. ron1
2
Rocasp1 gmp1. rop1
6
Rocasn1 = 4.183 10
7
Rocasp1 = 1.663 10
1
Ro1
1 1
Rocasn1 Rocasp1
6
Ro1 = 3.343 10
A1 gmn1. Ro1
A1 = 501.399
2.) Calculating the gain (V/V) of the second stage A2OLD, with M8T IN the circuit. Note that
gmn and gmp are 10x larger here and ron and rop are 10x smaller due to the 10x increase in W
compared to the values listed in Table 9.2, also calculating the total low frequency gain AtotOLD:
6
gmn2 1500. 10
6
gmp2 1500. 10
3
ron2 16.7. 10
3
rop2 33.3. 10
2
Rocasn2 gmn2. ron2
5
Rocasn2 = 4.183 10
1
RoutOLD
1 1
rop2 Rocasn2
4
RoutOLD = 3.084 10
A2OLD gmn2. RoutOLD
A2OLD = 46.267
AtotOLD A1. A2OLD
4
AtotOLD = 2.32 10
3.) Calculating the gain (V/V) of the second stage A2NEW and the total low frequency gain
AtotNEW, with M8T REMOVED from the circuit:
1
RoutNEW
1 1
rop2 ron2
4
RoutNEW = 1.112 10
A2NEW gmn2. RoutNEW
A2NEW = 16.683
AtotNEW A1. A2NEW
3
AtotNEW = 8.365 10
4.) Calculating the total low frequency gains in dB with M8T in and out of the circuit:
4.) Important point: Notice that with M8T removed from the circuit the output
resistance of the second stage changes from approximately rop2 (33.3k) to about 11.1k.
This is because the output resistance when M8T is removed is just ron2 and rop2 in
parallel. And, since ron2 is half of rop2, it follows that the resistance becomes 1/3* rop2
5.) Now let’s compare the hand calculations with SPICE simulations using BSIM4 50nm
design rules. First, the graph below shows the open loop gain of the circuit in Figure
24.37 with M8T in the circuit, the low frequency gain is about 70.7dB:
6.) Removing MOSFET M8T from the circuit and the output shorted to the drain of M8B
results in the following simulation results where the low frequency gain is about 68.8 dB.
7.) The table below shows a direct comparison between the calculated and simulated
results:
M8T in Circuit M8T Removed
Hand Calculation (dB) 87.3 78.4
Simulation (dB) 70.7 68.8
Hand Calculation (V/V) 23200 8365
Simulation (V/V) 3427 2754
As a rough estimate based on the note in #4, we can estimate the change in the gain using
the following:
The discrepancy between the simulation and hand-calculation results is because the
values used in the hand calculations are only approximations, due to differences in device
sizing and biasing. This solution does, however, illustrate how the gain of the circuit in
figure 24.37 is degraded, due to the decrease in the stage-2 output resistance when
MOSFET M8T is removed from the circuit.
The SPICE NetList used for generating the simulations with M8T removed is provided
below for reference (the BSIM4 Level 14 parameters and biasing circuitry can be
downloaded from CMOSEDU.COM and are omitted to save space):
*** Figure 24.37 with MOSFET M8T removed from the circuit ***
.control
destroy all
run
set units=degrees
plot ph(vout)
plot db(vout)
.endc
.option scale=50n ITL1=300 rshunt=1e9
.ac dec 100 100 1G
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
Vin Vin 0 DC 0.5 AC 1
Xo VDD vout vin vm opamp
Rbig vout vm 10MEG
Cbig vm 0 10u
*CL vout 0 1p
Xbias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas bias
M1 vd1 vp vss 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M2 vd2 vm vss 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M31t vd31t vd1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M31b vd1 Vbias2 vd31t VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M3t vd3t vd1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M3b vd3b Vbias2 vd3t VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M51t vd3b vbias3 vd51b 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M51b vd51b vd3b 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M41t vd41t vd2 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M41b vd2 vbias2 vd41t VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M4t vd4t vd2 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M4b vout1 vbias2 vd4t VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
M5t vout1 vbias3 vd5b 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M5b vd5b vd3b 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M6tr vss vbias3 vd6br 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M6br vd6br vbias4 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M6tl vss vbias3 vd6bl 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M6bl vd6bl vbias4 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M7 Vout Vout1 VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=1000
*M8t Vout vbias3 vd8b 0 NMOS L=2 W=500
M8b Vout vbias4 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=500
Cc Vout vd5b 240f
.ends
Aaron Johnson
EE511
Problem 24.16
Problem Statement
Suppose, to simulate the open-loop gain of an OTA, the big resistor and capacitor used in Fig. 24.43
are removed and the inverting input is connected to 500mV. Will this work? Why or why not?
What happens if the OTA doesn’t have an offset voltage? Will it work then?
Simulations
The configuration change is shown in Figure 1 below.
The first step to determine if the configuration works is to simulate the new circuit and compare it
to the old circuit. The netlist can be seen at the end of the problem. The first simulation will look at
the case where there is NO offset. Upon simulation of the circuits shown in figures 1 and 2, the
plots in figures 3 and 4, respectively, were obtained.
Figure 3: Plot of the output of the circuit in figure 24.43 showing the open loop gain of 47.5dB.
Figure 4: Plot of the output of the circuit for problem 24.16 showing the open loop gain of 46dB.
After looking at the plots in figures 3 and 4, it can be seen that the response is basically the same
and therefore the circuit can be used to simulate the open loop gain for the case when there is
not an offset.
The next step is to see if the circuit will work with an offset. As discussed in the book, there are
various ways an offset may be introduced. The first way of introducing an offset will be to add a
voltage source, VOS = 10mV, in series with the sources in the noninverting input in figure 2. When
this was done, the plot in figure 5 was produced. The figure shows that by adding 10mV of offset,
the gain was decreased by 29dB. When VOS was increased even further, the gain decreased even
more.
Figure 5: Plot showing how an offset voltage affects the open loop gain (17dB instead of 46dB) for the
circuit shown in figure 2.
In the next example, we will introduce a systematic offset. The widths of the transistors in the
current source on the output branch, namely M10, and M12 will be increased by 5% or 52.5um
drawn. By increasing these widths, the transistors will want to sink 105% the normal current or
10.5 uA. When this was done, the plot in figure 6 was produced. The figure shows that this
modification decreases the gain by 19dB. Similarly as before, when the widths were increased even
more the gain dropped more. (In fact, when doubling the width, the gain went to –4dB, thus
attenuating the signal.)
An offset was introduced to the original circuit (figure 1) by doubling the widths of M10 and M12,
making those transistors wanting to sink 20 uA. Upon doing this, the gain dropped just slightly to
44 dB.
So, this circuit configuration can not be used to simulate the open loop gain for the case when
there is an offset.
Figure 6: Plot showing how a 5% transistor width increase affects the open loop gain (27dB instead of
46dB) for the circuit shown in figure 2.
Discussion
The circuit configuration seen in figure 2, is not a good circuit to use to find the open loop gain.
The circuit’s simulated gain changes dramatically with a small offset. As discussed in the book,
there are unavoidable offsets such as process shifts and matching that cannot be avoided, so this
configuration would never give an accurate gain.
The circuit in figure 2 does not have any feedback, however, the circuit in figure 1 does have
feedback at DC (The resistor is basically a short at DC because there is no current flowing). This
allows the Vm node to be regulated, which is why this configuration is a better choice.
Netlist with some comments for Problem 24.16
*** Problem 24.16 CMOS: Circuit Design, Layout, and Simulation ***
.control
destroy all
run
set units=degrees
plot db(vout)
.endc
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
Vin Vp 0 DC 0.5 AC 1
* To add VOS just increase Vin’s DC value by 10mV.
Vin2 Vm 0 DC 0.5
Xbias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas bias
M1 vd1 vp vss 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M2 Vd2 vm vss 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M3LT vss vbias3 vd3lb 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M3LB vd3lb vbias4 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M3RT vss vbias3 vd3rb 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
M3RB vd3rb vbias4 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
.subckt bias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas
.ends
EE 5/411-001 Fall 2003
Problem 21.17
Qawi Harvard
Boise State University
Why is the non-inverting topology (Fig. 24.49) inherently faster than the inverting
topology (Fig. 29.39)? What are the feedback factors, β, for each topology? Use the op-
amp in Fig. 24.48 to compare the settling times for a +1 and a -1 amplifier driving 10pF.
A hint to the solution is given in the problem statement. Begin this problem by analyzing
the non-inverting and inverting topologies given below in figure 1.
10k
10k _
_
Fig. 24.37
Fig. 24.48
+ +
1k 10p 1p
+
_ 500 mV
The feedback factor represents the amount of output that is feedback to the input of the
op-amp. The non-inverting topology seen at the left of figure 1 shows that the output is
directly feedback to the input of the op-amp and therefore has a β = 1. To determine the
feedback factor of the inverting topology, it is easiest to note the voltage divider that is
obtained when the input voltage is zero. When the input is low the output is high and the
voltage on the inverting terminal of the op-amp is 0.5vout. After realizing this voltage
divider, it is clear to see that β = 0.5 for the inverting configuration seen in figure 1. The
topologies that are analyzed for this problem are in the closed loop form therefore the
closed loop gain must be calculated.
AOL ( f )
ACL ( f ) =
1 + β AOL ( f )
Assuming that the op-amp is compensated correctly the open loop frequency response of
the amplifier can be approximated to be:
AOLDC
AOL ( jω ) =
jω
1+
ω 3dB
where the frequency response of the op-amp behaves as if there is a single low frequency
pole at ω3dB. Using the two equations above determine the frequency response of the
closed loop gain.
Analyze this equation to be sure that it is understood. The closed loop frequency
response is determined by the feedback factor, bandwidth, and open loop gain of the op-
amp. For the non-inverting topology with β =1 the DC (closed loop) gain is
approximately 1 and the bandwidth increases (the op-amp reacts faster). The inverting
topology has a larger DC gain and a smaller bandwidth (slower). This is why the
inverting configuration behaves slower than the non-inverting configuration. Another
intuitive analysis is to realize that the non-inverting configuration has both inputs of the
op-amp being driven, while the inverting configuration has only one input node driven,
this will result in slower operation of the op-amp.
When placing op-amps into closed loop configurations this effect (known as Bandwidth
Extension/Reduction) must be taken into consideration. When an op-amp is placed into a
closed loop topology the following analogy can be made: As β increases the gain goes
down and the bandwidth (ω3dB = 2πf3dB) goes up, as β decreases the gain goes up and the
bandwidth goes down.
To analyze the performance of the op-amp in figure 24.48 in a plus 1 and minus 1
configuration use the two topologies in figure one. Figure 2 shows the simulation results
of step responses of the op-amp.
Figure 2 Simulation results of the op-amp in Fig. 24.28 in a +1 and -1 gain configuration
Figure 2 shows that the settling times of both configurations. The load capacitance was
10pF, and R1 = R2 = 10k. The settling time of the non-inverting configuration is less than
that of the inverting configuration.
Problem 24.18 Submitted by: S. Sandhya Reddy
Fig 24.50 Diff Amps with source-follower level shifters for use in GE
DC ANALYSIS:
With the lengths of current source/sink MOSFETs Mp1-3 and Mn7-9 increased from 2u
to 10u, the VSG/VGS of the amplifying device will change (infact decrease). The current
that flows with L=2 devices is 10uA.
Now when the lengths of the above mentioned devices are increased the current that
flows through Mp1, Mp3 in PMOS DIFF AMP and Mn7, Mn9 in NMOS DIFF AMP are
both equal to 7.8u (this was found with a ‘. OP’ statement). The figure below shows the
ID-VGS plots of a L=2 device. The VGS value corresponding to 7.8uA current can be
extracted from the graphs shown below and they turn up to be 320mV both for NMOS
and PMOS (from the Sims fig 2).
Fig2.ID vs. VGS plot for a 50/2 NMOS device. ID vs. VSG plot for a 100/2 PMOS device
AC ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENTIAL AMPLIFIERS (GE):
P Diff Amp:
With devices of length=2 (biasing Mosfets), gain (gmronllgmrop) =3.39dB and f3dB is 80.7
KHz as shown in the figures below (fig 3a).
Now as gate to source voltage of the amplifying device is decreased 320mV we would
expect f3dB to decrease, gain gmronllgmrop to increase.
From Sims gmronllgmrop with the L=10 devices is 4.43dB and f3dB is 79 KHz which agrees
with the above statement. This can be observed from sim (fig 3b).
Fig3a. AC response of P diff Amp with 100/2 Fig3b. AC response of P diff Amp with 100/10
biasing devices. biasing devices.
N Diff Amp:
With L=2 biasing devices— gain is 1.97dB and f3dB is 79 KHz.
With L=10 biasing devices—gain is 3.70dB and 75.8 KHz.
This can be observed from sim (fig4a, 4b).
Fig4a. AC response of N diff Amp with 50/2 Fig4b. AC response of N diff Amp with 50/10
Biasing devices. Biasing devices.
From the results obtained above we see that there is only a small decrease in f3dB and a
small increase in the gain.
Frequency response of op-amp with modified GE is as shown in fig (6). From fig (6)
Gain=75.1dB, f3dB=48dB and fun=380 MHz.
AOLDC AGEDC
⇒ AOLGE ( f ) = • ----------- (2)
f f
1+ j 1+ j
f 3dB f 3dBGE
AOLDC
If f>>>f3dB then AOLGE ( f ) = • AGE ( f ) ------ (3)
f
f 3dB
1
f 3dB = -- (4) (From eq. 24.61 of textbook)
2.π .( R0casn C R0 casp ). AGE ( f ).CC
AOLGE ( f ) =
AOLDC
----- (4)
2.π . f .( R0 casn C R0casp ).CC
From the above equations it is clear that the bandwidth (f3dB) of the added amplifier may
not be wide. As long as their (added amplifiers) bandwidth is larger than the OP-AMP the
GE works as desired. As from fig (3a, 3b) and fig (4a, 4b) we can see that the f3dB of GE
is larger than that of OP-AMP though the lengths of the biasing mosfets increased. So it
is because of this reason we couldn’t observe any change in the frequency response of the
OP-AMP.
The current drawn from power supply (VDD) in the modified op-amp (using the lower
power GE diff amps) was 6uA less than that seen in fig 24.53. The results of the
simulations are as below:
. OP Results:
With L=10 Biasing devices With L=2 Biasing devices
Element 0:vdd Element 0:vdd
Volts 1.0000 Volts 1.0000
Current -425.6308u Current -430.9439u
Power 425.6308u Power 430.9439u
Total voltage source power dissipation= Total voltage source power dissipation=
425.4667u watts 430.7762u watts
Transient response:
Fig 7. Current from VDD in op-amp with fig8. Current from VDD in op-amp with
L=2 biasing devices in the GE amplifier. L=10 biasing devices in the GE amplifier.
CONCLUSION:
The power consumption of the OP-Amp can be decreased by increasing the lengths of
the biasing devices in the GE amplifier (decreasing the biasing current and hence the
power). Doing this will no way affect the AC response of the Op-Amp as far as the f3dB
(bandwidth) of the GE amplifier is more than the bandwidth of the Op-Amp.
NOTE:
Simulations were done in HSPICE using the same netlist used for figure 24.53 except
that the biasing devices were changed to L=10.
Problem 24-19
Eric Becker
[email protected]
Discussion: Figure 1 shows an N-type diff-amp
that can be utilized for gain enhancement in
op-amp design. The purpose of the source
follower level shifters is to allow
amplification of signals near ground (for P-
type amps) or VDD (for N-type amps). For
the N-type case M1 and M2 remain in the
saturation region because VG1,2 is held at
VDD - VGS. Looking at the saturation
equation for M1 gives: VDD – VSG ≥ VDD –
VGS – VTHN ! VGS-VSG ≥ -VTHN which is
always true based on values from table 9.2.
Figure 1. N-type Gain Enhancement Diff-amp This justifies the need for source followers
in this topology of amplifier.
Figure3. AC response of the op-amp in Fig 24.51 with Folded Cascode OTAs as Gain Enhancement Amps
Figure 3 shows the simulation results of the circuit in Fig 24.51 when GE Folded
Cascode OTAs are used instead of GE diff-amps. Compared to Fig 24.53 the unity gain
frequency and the phase margin at this frequency remain approximately the same. The open
loop gain, however has increased substantially by about 10dB.
Figure 4. Step Response and Current draw of the op-amp in Fig 24.51 with GE Folded Cascode OTAs
Figure 4 shows the transient step response and current draw of this op-amp. Note that the
step response is nearly identical to that of Fig 24.53. This is because the GE amps do not effect
the overall speed of the op-amp. The tHL=1.5ns (time high-to-low) and tLH=1.25ns (time low-
to-high). Also to negate overshoot the gain enhancement compensation capacitors were doubled
to 480fF. The static current draw of this circuit with folded cascode OTAs is approximately
30uA more than the regular draw GE diff-amps. This makes sense because there are four 10uA
branches in the GE diff amp, but six 10uA branches in the GE folded cascode OTA. Since are
two GE amps (N and P type) the net current difference is 40uA (very close to the observed 30uA
or so).
In conclusion, the folded cascode OTA offers a viable gain enhancement substitute over
the common GE diff-amp. The main benefit is increased gain with a constant unity gain
frequency (which means constant speed). The drawbacks are increased power dissipation and
increased susceptibility to instability (which just requires more attention while compensating).
.ends
Figure 1.
Vout AOL ( f )
ACL ( f ) = = (24.5)
Vin 1 + β * AOL ( f )
1
If AOL ( f ) → ∞ , then the closed loop gain ACL ( f ) → , and:
β
1 Vin 250mV 1
Vout = ACL ( f ) * Vin = * Vin ⇒ β = = =
β Vout 500mV 2
Now, if AOL(f) does not go to ∞ , then using equation 24.5, and solving for Vout,
AOL ( f ) AOL ( f )
Vout = Vin * ⇒ 500mV ± 1mV = 250mV *
1 + β * AOL ( f ) 1
1 + * AOL ( f )
2
500mV ± 1mV
⇒ AOL ( f ) = ≈ 1000
500mV ± 1mV
250mV −
2
Problem 24.21. (Ken Waller)
Design a voltage regulator that can supply at least 50 mA of current at
500mV with VDD as low as 600mV using the minimum amount of Cload.
The voltage regulator circuit that I chose, shown in Figure 1, can pull the
gate of the large PMOS output device, P5, very close to VSS to meet the
600 mV VDD specification. The device size for P5 was determined by
calculating the width needed to source 90 mA with VDD at 600 mV. I
picked 90 mA to guarantee that the design will have margin to process
parameters and operating conditions such as temperature. I calculated the
width using both the short and long L equations and simulations verified that
the long L equation gave a better answer. I rounded the width of P5 up to
50,000u.
Long L Equation:
W = 48,000u
Short L Equation:
I shifted the 500 mV VREF signal down by 5% so that I did not have to
directly connect VREG to the gate of N2. This allows the VREG voltage to
be adjusted either up or down by changing the value of resistor R3 and or
R6. I only shifted the REF voltage at the gate of N0 down 5% to keep
current source transistor N1 in the saturation region.
The transient response of the voltage regulator circuitry with three types of
current spikes was investigated. They were a fast ramp up to a large DC
current, 50 mA, followed by a fast ramp back to no current, a slow ramp up
to a 75 mA current followed by a slow ramp down, and two short duration
50 mA current spikes. Figures 2, 4 and 8 show how the voltage regulator
circuitry reacted to these three type of current spikes with three different
values of capacitive loads. Figure 2 had a 1 nF load, Figure 4 had a 10 nF
load, and Figure 8 had a 100 nF load.
Figure 2 – Transient Response With A 1 nF Load Capacitance
In Figure 2, the top waveform, I(ivreg), is the transient current stimulus that
is applied to the VREG output node. PT1 is at the start of the 1ns ramp up to
pulling a 50 mA current out of the voltage regulator. Notice that the V(vreg)
voltage falls from 500mV to 101 mV before recovering. The signal GPU is
the gate of the 50,000 drawn micron device (final size is 2,500u), P5. When
the fast current ramp occurs, most of the current will be supplied by the
capacitive load until GPU reaches a low enough value to set P5’s VGS to
supply 50 mA. It takes the voltage regulator 12 ns to get GPU biased and
stop VREG from falling and 38 ns before VREG recovers to the correct
voltage. At 600 ns the 50 mA current is turned of in 1 ns and notice that
VREG overshoots the 500 mV target by 90 mV before GPU gets to a high
enough voltage so P5 only supplies the bias current. Due to the small
amount of biasing current on the VREG node, it will take a long time,
thousands of nano-seconds, to reach the 500 mV target.
PT2 is at the start of the 700 ns ramp up to 75 mA. VREG dips to 396 mV
before recovering in 47 ns to the correct voltage. The two current spikes at
the end of the simulation output show the circuit’s response to a 10 ns wide
(332 mV) and a 4 ns wide (451 mV) 50 mA current spike. Notice that
VREG is poorly regulated for both of these current spike cases. The 1 nF
capacitor is not large enough to hold the VREG voltage while the voltage
regulator turns on.
PT2 is at the start of the 700 ns ramp up to 75 mA. VREG dips to 445 mV
before recovering in 90 ns to the correct voltage. The two current spikes at
the end of the simulation output show the circuits response to a 10 ns wide
and a 4 ns wide 50 mA current spike. VREG is able to stay within 10 mV of
the 500 mV target during these two current spikes. With a 10 nF load
capacitance, the voltage regulator can handle large short duration current
spikes but stills has trouble with the fast current ramp to a large DC current.
Its response to the slow ramp case is not very good but with extra bias
current this can be corrected.
The frequency response was hand calculated for the 10 nF load capacitance
case. Figure 5 shows the schematic I used to calculate the input and output
poles. Node V1 corresponds to node GPU and node V2 corresponds to node
VREG in Figure 1.
R1 = RONp4 || RONn3 = 333K * 100 / 600 || 167K * 50 / 300
R1 = 55.5K || 27.8K = 18.5K
C2 = Cload + Cgdn5 = 10 nF
I wanted to increase the biasing current to 2 mA to improve the fast ramp off
condition and reduce the fast ramp on dip voltage but this lowered the phase
margin to 25 degrees. The extra current moved the unity gain frequency up
to 3 MHz and the AOLDC to 36.7 dB. Pole f2 moved out to 100 KHz and
pole f1 occurred at 1.1 MHz. Changing transistor N5 size or the VREG bias
current dramatically moved the location of the unity gain frequency, the
output pole location and the open loop gain. I picked a size of 1600/2 or a
bias current of 350 uA to keep the phase margin around 80 degrees. This
change reduced the dip voltage to 425 mV.
Figure 12A and 12B show the frequency response for the circuit shown in
Figure 9 with a 10 nF load capacitance. The unity gain frequency was 550
KHz with a phase margin of 72 degrees. The phase margin and unity gain
frequency can be moved by changing the VREG bias current or the size of
N5.
The voltage regulator current was 1 mA including the 350 uA VREG bias
current. If you could add more load capacitance or tolerate a dip voltage of
425 mV the current could be lowered by 430 uA by sizing up P1 and P2. I
used a beta multiplier circuit’s VBIASN to drive BIAS.
Soln.
The op-amp in Fig. 24.58 is a NMOS diff amp driving an inverter.
M3 M4
vout1
M7
vm M1 M2 vp
vout
Vbias4 M6 M8
vout
vin
0.5V
Operating Point Analysis
vd1 = 0.65
vout = 0.512
vout1 = 0.49
vm = 0.49
vp = 0.5
vss = 0.12
v7#branch = 71 µA
v8#branch = 71 µA
v3#branch = 9.5µA
vdd =1
vdd#branch = -200 µA
vhigh = 0.78
vlow = 0.15
vbias1 = 0.64
vbias2 = 0.36
vbias3 = 0.54
vbias4 = 0.36
vncas = 0.8
vpcas = 0.2
vp#branch = -0.23e-10
Operation
Using an .op analysis we can analyze the issues with the operation of this op-amp.
When both the inverting and non-inverting inputs are at 0.5V,
Current through diff-amp = 10 µA
Current through M7/M8 = 12 µA
vout
10mV
Offset
0.5V 0.5V
We see that the current in M7/M8 has increased around 5 times the current in diff-
amp. So we clearly see that the op-amp has a poor systematic input-referred offset
voltage.
To find the current in M7 and M8, zero volt voltage sources [which act as current
ammeters] are inserted in spice. By doing an .op analysis, we can find the currents
in M7 and M8 [op-amp in configuration seen in Fig. 24.9 of the material].
I1
M3 M4
M7
vm M1 M2 vp
vout
I2
Vbias4 M6 M8
We see significant change in the current in M7 and M8 with change in VDD. The
current flowing in the push-pull output stage is not set by a bias circuit. So it
varies significantly with process, temperature and power supply variations. Here
we see a significant variation of 77 µA in the currents with a 200mV change in
power supply.
NETLIST
.control
destroy all
run
let i1= - V7#BRANCH
let i2= - V8#BRANCH
PRINT i1 i2
PRINT V3#BRANCH
.endc
.op
VDD VDD 0 DC 1
Vp Vp 0 DC 0.5 AC 1
Rbig vout vm 10MEG
Cbig vm 0 100u
v7 vdd vd7 0
M7 vout Vout1 vd7 VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
v8 vout vd8 0
M8 vD8 vout1 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
Xbias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas bias
.subckt bias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas
Rbias Vr 0 5.5k
*amplifier
MA1 Vamp Vreg 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA2 Vbiasp Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA3 Vamp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MA4 Vbiasp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*start-up stuff
MSU1 Vsur Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MSU2 Vsur Vsur VDD VDD PMOS L=20 W=10
MSU3 Vbiasp Vsur Vbiasn 0 NMOS L=1 W=10
.ends
* BSIM4 models
-----------------------
.end
Problem 24.23 Roger Porter
When the circuit in Figure 24.59 is simulated with unity feedback and the .op analysis,
M7 and M8 have the following currents.
VDD = 1
Current in M7 = 3.19uA
Current in M8 = 3.19uA
VDD = 1.2
Current in M7 = 16.6uA
Current in M8 = 16.6uA
As can be seen, the current changes considerably with variations in VDD. This is because
the current in the output stage isn’t being controlled.
When VDD = 1, the gate of M8 is at a value that is being set by the source follower and
the level-shifter mosfets. The source follower wants that node to be at a value of a VGS
drop below the value of the drain of M2. The drain of M2 is ideally at the same value as
the drain(and gate) of M1. The value of the drain of M1 is a VSG drop below VDD. For
the biasing conditions of Table 9.2 this is VDD-350mV = 650mV. If the gate of the
source-follower is at 650mV then the gate of M8 should be a VGS drop below this value,
650 mV –350mV = 300mV. This is above the threshold voltage of M8 but is below the
desired VGS for M8 (350mV). If the source follower is not in its own well then we can
expect the body effect to cause its VGS to be more than 350mV. Another issue with this
node voltage is that it is considerably higher than the VDSsat for the level shifter and since
its output resistance is finite, it is going to sink slightly more current than 10uA. The
current that goes through the level-shifter must also go through the source-follower,
leading to a slight increase in the VGS of the source follower. This means that the drain of
M2 will be slightly higher than the drain of M1. For M1 and M2 to have the same
current, the gate and/or drain of M1 will need to increase slightly. When we simulate this
circuit, both increase a little. This causes there to be an input referred offset.
The actual voltage on the gate of M8 (g8) is 0.289 V which is very near the threshold
voltage, M8 is barely on. The drain of M2 (d2) is 0.711V which is indeed above VDD-
VSG = 0.65 V as we expected. The drain of M1(d1) is 0.684 is also above 0.65 V as we
expected. The gate of M1 is .5014 V, about 1.4 mV above the gate of M2 that is tied to
0.5 V. This is the input-referred offset mentioned above.
To see this offset visually, lets run a DC sweep of the gate of M2 while we tie the gate of
M1 to 0.5 V and plot the output voltage.
Since we tied the gate of M1 to 0.5 V, which is opposite of what we did in the .OP
analysis the offset is in the other direction. Vout is at 0.5 mV at about 1.4mV before it
should be.
As can be seen the gate of M8 is above the desired VGS of M8 (350 mV) causing more
current to flow through the output branch. As stated above, the current through M8 is
16.6uA when VDD=1.2.
Note.
If the source follower is placed in it’s own well, the circuit will improve and the offset
will be reduced. The simulation results for this case are shown below (VDD=1)
Now the offset is only about 5 µV. But, the output stage current will still vary greatly
with VDD variations.
Problem 24.24: Solution submitted by Jagadeesh Gownipalli
Fig 1 OP-AMP
Fig 1 shown above is Op-Amp shown in Fig 24.60 of the text book with compensated
capacitors Cc , compensated capacitors are added from vout to two high impedance
nodes vd12 and vd4.
AOLDC = A1 .A2 . A3
Where A1 = Gain of first stage(Diff amp) = gm1 . R1
A2 = Gain of second stage = gm. R2
A3 = Gain of (Class AB) push pull amp) = (gm7 + gm8) . R3
Therefore
AOLDC = 9231 V/V (79.3 dB)
From simulations both gain and fun are verified with hand caluculations and phase margin
is about 50 degrees.
Simulations:
Spice file
*** Problem 24.24 CMOS: Circuit Design, Layout, and Simulation ***
.control
destroy all
run
plot i(vdd)
plot vout vin
.endc
.subckt bias VDD Vbias1 Vbias2 Vbias3 Vbias4 Vhigh Vlow Vncas Vpcas
Rbias Vr 0 5.5k
*amplifier
MA1 Vamp Vreg 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA2 Vbiasp Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MA3 Vamp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
MA4 Vbiasp Vamp VDD VDD PMOS L=2 W=100
*start-up stuff
MSU1 Vsur Vbiasn 0 0 NMOS L=2 W=50
MSU2 Vsur Vsur VDD VDD PMOS L=20 W=10
MSU3 Vbiasp Vsur Vbiasn 0 NMOS L=1 W=10
.ends
Fig 2 Open Loop Response
Fig 2 shows the open loop response of OP-Amp configuration used to calculate AOLDC.
Hand caluculated values for AOLDC and fun are verified from Fig 3.
Fig 7 Current pulled from VDD for VDD=1V Fig 8 Current pulled from VDD for VDD=1.2V
From Fig 7 and Fig 8 it shows that current pulled from VDD for 1V and for 1.2V are
relatively constant( about 4uA difference)
Problem 24.25 Submitted by: Motheeswara Salla (Morty)
Replace the common source output stage in the op-amp of fig 24.61 with a class AB output
stage like the one seen in fig24.60. Simulate the operation of the amplifier (Ac and
Transient)
Figure 1
Figure 24.61 is modified and a class AB stage is added as shown in figure 1. The simulation
results are given below
Figure 2
The phase response of Figure 1 is apparently not good. The above response is a program
issue. We have a small Rbig resistance which is connected to Vm. The resistance is very small
which interfered with output resistance and caused a parasitic zero. When Rbig and Cbig are
modified to 100Meg and 100uF, the response looked like the one shown in figure 3. Please
note that at this time there is no compensation capacitance added to node 4.
Figure 4
Figure 5
The phase and frequency response looks good. The phase margin and gain margin is not
great. The step response may not look so great.
Netlist:
*** Figure 1 ***
.control
destroy all
run
set units=degrees
plot ph(vout)
plot db(vout)
.endc
VDD VDD 0 DC 1