Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
2
1 + +
2
(3.1)
Where CR () is the cell ratio defined as
=
1
/
1
5
/
5
Since the cell is fully symmetrical, the CR is the same for Q
2
and Q
6
. Typically, in order to
ensure a non-destructive read and an adequate noise margin, CR must be greater than one and
can be varied depending on the target application of the cell from approximately 1 to 2.5.
Larger CRs provide higher read current I
read
(and hence the speed) and improved stability at
the expense of larger cell area. Smaller CRs ensure a more compact cell with moderate speed
and stability. Leakage through the access transistors should be minimized to ensure robust
read operation and to reduce the leakage power.
A preferred sizing solution can be to use a minimum-width access transistors with a slightly
larger than the minimal length channel and a larger than minimal width with a minimal length
driver transistors [20]-[22].
Once the complementary bit line discharges to a certain V
BLB
=V
DD
V voltage level
sufficient for reliable sensing by the sense amplifier, the sense amplifier is enabled and
amplifies the small differential voltage between the bit lines to the full-swing CMOS level
output signal.
3.2.2 WRITE OPERATION
The write operation is similar to a reset operation of an SR latch. One of the bit lines, BL in,
is driven from precharged value (V
DD
) to the ground potential by a write driver through
transistor Q
6
. If transistors Q
4
and Q
6
are properly sized, then the cell is flipped and its data is
14
effectively overwritten. A statistical measure of SRAM cell write ability is defined as write
margin. Write margin is defined as the minimum bit line voltage required flipping the state of
an SRAM cell [23]. The write margin value and variation is a function of the cell design,
SRAM array size and process variation. A cell is considered not writeable if the worst-case
write margin becomes lower than the ground potential.
Note that the write operation is applied to the node storing a 1. This is necessitated by the
non-destructive read constraint that ensures that a 0 node does not exceed the switching
threshold of inverter Q
2
Q
4
. The function of the pull-up transistors is only to maintain the
high level on the 1 storage node and prevent its discharge by the off-state leakage current of
the driver transistor during data retention and to provide the low-to-high transition during
overwriting [23]-[25].
Assuming that the switching will not start before 1 node is below V
TH Q1
, a simplified over-
write condition can be expressed as:
"1"
= V
DD
V
THn
V
DD
V
THn
2
2
n
PR V
DD
V
THp
V
DSATp
V
DSATp
2
2
(3.2)
where the pull-up ratio of the cell, PR, is defined as:
=
4
/
4
6
/
6
The V
1
requirement is normally met using minimal-sized access and pull-up transistors only
due to
= 2
0
2
1/2
24
+ 2
Where
ln
K
Si
is the relative permittivity of silicon,
0
is the permittivity of a vacuum, q is the charge on
an electron, V
FB
is the flat band voltage, C
OX
is the capacitance of the gate oxide film, k is
Boltzmanns constant, T is the absolute temperature, and n
i
is the intrinsic impurity
concentration. T
B
is taken to be the width of the channel depletion layer when a threshold
voltage is applied (with a surface potential of 2
F
). To make an FD-SOI device, the channel
depletion layer must just reach the BOX, thus depleting the entire body region, which means
that the thickness of the body region must be no larger than T
B
. That is, T
B
is the maximum
thickness. More precisely, in an FD-SOI MOSFET the body region must remain fully
depleted over the range of gate voltages from 0 V up to the threshold voltage. Accordingly,
since the body must be fully depleted at a surface potential of approximately
F
and not 2
F
,
T
B
should be thought of as a rough estimate of the maximum allowable thickness of the body
region of an FD-SOI MOSFET [49].
The threshold voltage actually depends on the drain voltage, that is, it decreases with drain
voltage due to parasitic bipolar effects in FD-SOI devices, as described below. The threshold
voltages are thus the values at low drain voltages.
Under these assumptions, to obtain an FD-SOI MOSFET with a 5-nm-thick gate oxide film
and a threshold voltage of 0.30.4 V, for example, the thickness of the body region must be at
most 5060 nm.
PD-SOI devices exhibit none of the advantages of FD-SOI MOSFETs described below (kink-
free drain current-voltage characteristics, steep subthreshold characteristics, stability with
regard to dynamic floating-body effects, etc.); and their characteristics are basically the same
as those of bulk-Si MOSFETs. However, they do have the advantages of SOI structures (low
parasitic capacitance, excellent latch-up immunity, low junction leakage current, high
immunity to soft errors). To obtain a low junction capacitance, which is an important reason
for using SOI technology, the source and drain layers must either extend all the way down to
the BOX or come very close to doing so. However, unlike in FD-SOI devices, the channel
25
depletion layer must not be allowed to reach the BOX. So, the body region of a PD-SOI
device must be at least 100 nm thick [42]-[49].
Fig 5.4 Dependence of Body Thickness and Impurity Concentration of Body in an FDSOI
MOSFETs.
5.4 CHARACTERISTICS OF FDSOI MOSFETS
(a) Kink in Drain Current-Voltage Characteristics
PD-SOI devices exhibit what is called a kink , which is a sharp rise in drain current as the
drain voltage increases at a fixed gate voltage. Electrons flowing in the channel are
accelerated and jump to higher energies in the high-electrical-field region near the drain,
thereby generating large numbers of electrons and holes by impact ionization. The electrons
flow towards the drain, and the holes flow towards the source along the bottom of the body
region. Since there is a potential barrier to holes at the source end, the holes begin to
accumulate in the body region. As more and more accumulate, the body potential increases
and the barrier height decreases, which allows more holes to flow out to the source across the
barrier. Consequently, the number of holes that can accumulate in the body region is such
that the number flowing out to the source balances the number generated by impact
ionization.
26
(a) (b)
Fig 5.5 Drain current-voltage characteristics of (a) FD-SOI and (b) PD-SOI nMOSFETs.
(From J. P. Colinge, IEEE Press 1998.)
Since a PD-SOI device has a higher potential barrier to holes than an FD-SOI device does, it
allows more holes accumulate in the body region. When a large number of holes accumulate
there, the potential of the body region rises to a positive value; and this bias effect causes the
threshold voltage of a MOSFET to drop, thereby increasing the drain current. As a result, as
shown in Fig 5.5, acute impact ionization takes place as the drain voltage increases, causing a
kink to appear in the drain current-voltage characteristics. Thus, the kink effect in PD-SOI
MOSFETs originates from the change in the body potential.
One feature of FD-SOI devices is that they do not exhibit this sort of kink. In an FD-SOI
device, the potential barrier to holes at the source end is small, even deep within the body
region, because the body region is depleted all the way down to the bottom. As a result, there
is little accumulation of holes in this region; so a kink cannot appear. Since there is no need
to resort to a body terminal to eliminate kink, FD-SOI devices have the advantage of being
smaller than PD-SOI devices with a body terminal, and can thus be integrated into LSIs at
higher densities. They make it easier to design layout patterns, and they make it possible to
draw upon existing resources for circuit design and layout design that have previously been
developed for devices fabricated on a bulk-Si substrate [40]-[46].
(b) Steep Subthreshold Slope in FDSOI-MOSFETs
An important feature of FD-SOI MOSFETs is their steep subthreshold characteristic. The
subthreshold swing of an FD-SOI device is close to 60 mV/dec at room temperature, which is
the limiting value for MOSFETs. The subthreshold characteristics are the drain current vs.
27
gate voltage (I
D
vs.V
G
) characteristics at gate voltages below the threshold voltage. In this
region, the drain current increases exponentially with gate voltage because it is proportional
to the number of carriers with enough thermal energy to cross the potential barrier between
the source and channel, as shown in the formula
= exp
where is a constant of proportionality and
B
is the barrier potential.
B
can be written in
terms of the built-in potential (V
bi
) of the source-channel p-n junction and the channel surface
potential (
S
) as follows:
As the gradient of log(I
D
) vs. V
G
in the subthreshold region becomes steeper, the drain
leakage current (off current) at V
G
= 0 becomes smaller. In addition, for a given off current, a
steeper gradient allows the threshold voltage to be made smaller. Producing high-speed LSIs
with a low power dissipation requires the use of MOSFETs with a low threshold voltage and
a small off current, which in turn requires a steep gradient. The gradient is expressed as the
subthreshold swing, S, which is defined to be the change in gate voltage needed to change the
drain current by one decade in the subthreshold region, as shown by the following formula.
(S is given in units of mV/dec.). S becomes smaller as the rate at which the channel surface
potential changes with gate voltage become larger, resulting in steeper subthreshold
characteristics.
Fig .6 shows typical subthreshold characteristics of FD-SOI and bulk-Si MOSFETs (and PD-
SOI MOSFETs). As mentioned at the outset, FD-SOI devices have steeper subthreshold
characteristics than bulk or PD-SOI devices, with S being close to the limiting value. To put
it another way, for a given change in gate voltage, the channel surface potential changes more
in an FD-SOI device than in bulk or PD-SOI devices. The reason for this is explained below
[40]-[46].
Fig 5.6 Subthreshold characteristics of FD-SOI, PD-SOI, and bulk-Si MOSFETs.
28
(c) Dynamic Floating-Body Effects
Since an SOI device is fully isolated, the body potential is not fixed and changes for a variety
of reasons. The effects brought about by these changes are referred to collectively as floating-
body effects. In particular, dynamic floating-body effects that occur when a device is
operating in a circuit can give rise to complex behaviour. The main causes of changes in body
potential are impact ionization and majority carrier redistribution in the body region, which
occur as the gate and drain switch between high and low levels [45].
(i) Effect of Impact Ionization
For the nMOSFET, some of the holes generated by impact ionization in the high-electric-
field region near the drain accumulate in the body region and raise the body potential to a
positive value. Since the number of accumulated holes depends on the time constants of hole
creation and annihilation, the device exhibits complex behaviour when operating dynamically
in an LSI.
As the drain voltage increases, the holes pile up faster in the body region and the threshold
voltage drops at a faster rate, causing the increase in drain current to take place sooner. In this
way, differences in the number of holes generated during the operation of a PD-SOI device
give rise to differences in the rate at which holes accumulate in the body region, which
appear as differences in the transient characteristics. On the other hand, no such transient
characteristics are observed in FD-SOI devices. Thus, at voltages for which impact ionization
occurs, a PD-SOI MOSFET will exhibit complex behaviour that depends on the pulse
conditions, while an FD-SOI MOSFET will function stably. This difference arises because
the entire body region of an FD-SOI device is depleted, which makes the potential barrier to
holes between the source and body region smaller than in a PD-SOI device, thereby allowing
fewer holes to accumulate in the body region.
As described above, a PD-SOI device exhibits pronounced dynamic floating-body effects
associated with impact ionization. To suppress these effects, the device must be provided
with an extra terminal to fix the body potential by extracting holes. In contrast, an FD-SOI
device can be said to be stabilized against dynamic floating-body effects, and thus has no
need of a body terminal [40]-[46].
(ii) Effects of Majority Carrier Redistribution
When the gate voltage changes from the low to the high level, the channel depletion layer
grows wider, driving away the holes (majority carriers) that it encounters along the way. The
holes accumulate at the bottom of the body region and raise the body potential to a positive
29
value. Since the source junction is forward-biased, the holes then flow out towards the
source. Next, when the gate returns to the low level, holes are needed to make the channel
depletion layer narrower so that a neutral region can form. But since the holes have already
flowed out, there is a shortage, which creates a negative body potential that causes holes to be
supplied from the source as a reverse-biased junction current. In this way, the body potential
varies due to the surplus or shortage of holes in the body region arising from the outflow and
supply of holes at the source junction and the expulsion and restoration of holes due to the
growth and contraction of the channel depletion layer. In addition, since similar phenomena
are associated with the growth and contraction of the drain depletion layer as the drain
changes between high and low levels, the body potential of devices operating in an LSI
exhibits complex behaviour. The phenomena associated with majority carrier redistribution
only cause problems in PD-SOI MOSFETs; while in principle, they do not even occur in FD-
SOI devices because the entire body region is always depleted [43]-[45].
(d) Parasitic Bipolar Effects in FDSOI MOSFETs
A major part of the appeal of FD-SOI MOSFETs is that they suppress the kink in the drain
current-voltage characteristics without using a body terminal. But although a kink does not
appear, the devices are still susceptible to a kind of floating-body effect known as parasitic
bipolar effects. These effects occur when the source, body, and drain of MOSFETs act as the
emitter, base, and collector of parasitic transistors in which the base current consists of
majority carriers produced by impact ionization. Since the body region is more depleted in
FD- than in PD-SOI devices, the injection efficiency of the emitter of the parasitic bipolar
transistors is higher, which makes these effects more likely to occur. When they do occur,
they have a number of consequences, such as a reduction in the breakdown voltage between
the source and drain, abnormally steep subthreshold characteristics beyond the theoretical
limit, a larger off current, and a smaller threshold voltage [49]-[52].
Suppressing parasitic bipolar effects in FD-SOI devices entails:
Suppressing the generation of majority carriers by impact ionization
Reducing the injection efficiency of the emitter of parasitic bipolar transistors.
Lowering the transport efficiency with which minority carriers injected into the base
are conveyed to the collector.
Techniques that are reported to be effective include introducing electron-hole recombination
centers near the source by Ar ion implantation, and using SiGe for the source region to
30
reduce the potential barrier to holes between the source and body. In both techniques, holes
(for an nMOSFET) are extracted from the body region to prevent the potential there from
becoming positive and to reduce the emitter injection efficiency [47].
(e) Self-Heating Effects
We have seen the beneficial effects that the buried insulating film underneath an SOI
MOSFET has on the electrical characteristics. However, the thermal properties must also be
considered. The thermal conductivity of the silicon oxide film typically used for the buried
insulator is 1.4 Wm
1
K
1
, which is two orders of magnitude smaller than that of Si
(140 Wm
1
K
1
). As a result, the Joule heat generated by the drain current cannot easily
escape through the BOX and the substrate. This gives rise to self-heating, which raises the
channel temperature.
A large amount of Joule heat is generated in the saturation region, where the drain voltage
and current are both large; and the resulting increase in temperature reduces the drain current
by lowering the carrier mobility, and may lead to the appearance of a differential negative
resistance in the drain current-voltage characteristics. Accordingly, different drain current-
voltage characteristics may be obtained when measuring the steady-state drain current with a
DC supply, and when measuring the drain current with a pulse supply, which causes less
heating and is thus less likely to induce self-heating, even under the same drain and gate bias
conditions.
The Joule heat generated in the channel is dissipated by the interconnections via the contacts
on the source and drain layer, and via the gate oxide film and gate electrode. Consequently,
considering the ease with which Joule heat is dissipated, the increase in channel temperature
caused by self-heating is governed by the structural parameters of the device, such as the
thickness of the SOI layer, the distance between the channel and the source/drain contacts,
and the thickness of the BOX [45]-[52].
31
CHAPTER 6: MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS OF SRAM CELL
6.1 ANALYTICAL SNM EXPRESSION FOR A 6T SRAM CELL
Employing the same long-channel MOS current equations for the circuit in Fig .1 and
assuming that transistors Q1 and Q4 are saturated and transistors Q2 and Q5 are in the linear
mode:
Fig 6.1 A six-transistor full CMOS SRAM cell in a read-accessed mode
2
=
2
5
(
5
0.5
5
)
(6.1)
2
= 2
2
(
2
0.5
2
)
(6.2)
Where
, =
.
The Kirchhoff equations for the 6T SRAM cell are [53]:
1
=
+
2
5
=
5
=
4
=
2
Thus,
32
2
+
2
=
2
(
2
2
+
2
)
2
= 2
2
0.5
2
Where
Eliminating
2
and
2
from the above equation yields a fourth-degree equation.
Assuming local linearity of the transfer characteristic on inverter Q2Q4 around its operating
point where Q2 is in the linear region, it can be simplified as [53]:
2
=
0
2
Where
+1
+1
+1
1 + +
0
=
+
1 +
1 + +
After eliminating V
DS2
from the above equation and simplification, we get:
2
1 +2 +
2
+2
+ +
2
= 0
Where
=
2
=
0
+ +1
Similarly to the derivation in the double-root stability criterion was applied to obtain the
SNM:
6
=
1
+1
2 + 1
+1
1 +
( + 1)
1 +
1 +2 +
(6.3)
33
6.2 ANALYTICAL SNM EXPRESSION FOR A LOADLESS 4T SRAM
CELL
Shockleys MOSFET model, represented by Equation 3.37 was used to analytically calculate
circuit parameters for long-channel transistors. However, the Shockley model is increasingly
inaccurate in describing the behaviour of the modern short-channel transistors. Short-channel
effects, such as the carrier velocity saturation, must be taken into account for accurate
analytical characterization of sub-micron MOSFETs.
In scaled-down transistors, Shockleys square-law dependence does not hold. The shift of
V
DSAT
and discrepancies in the saturation region called for the Alpha-Power Law (APL)
proposed in. Drain current in the APL is then proportional to (V
GS
V
TH
)
, where is the
velocity saturation index. While in the Shockley model = 2, the measured values can
range from one to two. The APL model is defined as [54]:
=
0,
/2
<
0
Where
/2
(6.4)
(6.5)
Assuming that both inverters comprising a four-transistor loadless SRAM cell are equivalent,
we used the following equivalent circuits to derive the SNM expression. Since we are
interested in the worst-case SNM, we will consider the cell in the read-accessed mode, i.e.
with the activated word line. In the case of a four-transistor loadless SRAM cell, which is
using PMOS transistors as both the access and the load, the read-accessed mode corresponds
to V
WL
= 0, i.e. when the gate of Q4 is grounded. Since many of the parameters in the APL
model are technology-dependent, we will differentiate between n and p transistors as well as
between the linear and saturated modes of the transistors. For instance, the velocity saturation
index , the threshold voltage V
TH
and the saturation voltage V
D0
will vary with the transistor
type and operating mode.
Analytically Static Noise Margin of the SRAM cell is found out and verified from the VTC
curve. The Noise Margins are found out graphically, which would be represented by the sides
34
of the rectangle drawn between the two VTCs of the half-cells. For analytical calculations,
we can express the SNM of a loadless four-transistor SRAM cell as the diagonal of the
rectangle with the sides equal to NMH and NML. The final expression can be presented as:
Fig 6.2 Equivalent circuit of a 4T loadless SRAM half-cell
4
=
2
+
2
Where,
From the Analysis carried out, the following results were obtained:
/2
(6.6)
We define
= 1, thus
1
1
2(1
( )
)
+
( )
(6.7)
( )
/2
(6.8)
We define
= 1, thus
35
+2
+2
+
( )
(6.9)
Thus the Noise Margins are:
2
(
+2
+2
+
()
)
(6.10)
1
1
21
2
(6.11)
6.3 ANALYTICAL SNM EXPRESSION FOR A PROPOSED LOADLESS
4T SRAM CELL
Similar to the analysis of loadless 4T-SRAM discussed above, the analysis of 4T-SRAM
proposed is also done in similar fashion. To calculate the SNM of the 4T-SRAM, the Noise
Margin is calculated for the Half-Cells and the square root of the sum of squares of the Noise
Margin gives us the Static Noise Margin value.
4
=
2
+
2
Where,
36
Fig 6.3 Equivalent circuit of Proposed 4T loadless SRAM half-cell
From the Analysis carried out, the following results were obtained:
( )
/2
+
(6.12)
Where
= |
|,
2
1
+
(6.13)
/2
(6.14)
+2
+2
+
(6.15)
37
Thus,
Therefore,
2
+
2
+
2
1
+
+2
+2
+
(6.16)
38
CHAPTER 7: RESULTS
7.1 SPECTRE SETUP FOR SRAM CELL DESIGNED IN 28 nm BULK
TECHNOLOGY
The 4T- and 6T- SRAM cell was designed in 28 nm Bulk technology and then simulated in
Cadence Spectre simulator using 28 nm Bulk Technology. The following are the snap shots:
Fig 7.1 Proposed 4T-SRAM Cell Setup in Cadence Vituoso Environment
Fig 7.2 Proposed 4T-SRAM Cell : Simulation for SNM Curve
39
Fig 7.3 Proposed 4T-SRAM Cell : Simulation for WNM Curve
Fig 7.4 6T-SRAM Cell Setup in Cadence Vituoso Environment
40
Fig 7.5 6T-SRAM Cell : Simulation for SNM Curve
Fig 7.6 6T-SRAM Cell : Simulation for WNM Curve
41
7.2 SPECTRE SETUP FOR SRAM CELL DESIGNED IN 28 nm FDSOI
TECHNOLOGY & SIMULATION GRAPH USING ELDO SIMULATOR
Fig 7.7 4T-SRAM Cell Setup in Cadence Vituoso Environment designed in 28 nm FDSOI
Technology
Fig 7.8 Proposed 4T-SRAM Cell Setup in Cadence Vituoso Environment designed in 28 nm
FDSOI Technology
42
7.3 SIMULATED OUTPUT
7.3.1 ANALYSIS FOR STATIC NOISE MARGIN FOR PROPOSED 4T-SRAM
DESIGNED IN 28 nm BULK TECHNOLOGY
Table 7.1: Cell Ratio Modulation, V
DC
= 1.0 V
Cell Ratio Pull-Down (nm) Pass-Gate (nm) SNM (mV)
1.0 120 120 230
1.5 180 120 312
2.0 240 120 360
2.5 300 120 400
3.0 360 120 440
Fig 7.9 Cell Ratio Modulation, V
DC
= 1.0 V
Table 7.2: Cell Ratio Modulation, V
DC
= 1.1 V
Cell Ratio Pull-Down (nm) Pass-Gate (nm) SNM (mV)
1.0 120 120 235
1.5 180 120 318
2.0 240 120 365
2.5 300 120 418
3.0 360 120 456
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
S
t
a
t
i
c
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
)
S
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Cell Ratio
Cell Ratio Vs SNM
Vdc = 1 V
43
Fig 7.10 Cell Ratio Modulation, V
DC
= 1.1 V
Table 7.3: Cell Ratio Modulation, V
DC
= 1.2 V
Cell Ratio Pull-Down (nm) Pass-Gate (nm) SNM (mV)
1.0 120 120 241
1.5 180 120 325
2.0 240 120 385
2.5 300 120 440
3.0 360 120 490
Fig 7.11 Cell Ratio Modulation, V
DC
= 1.2 V
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
S
t
a
t
i
c
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
)
S
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Cell Ratio
Cell Ratio Vs SNM
Vdc = 1.1 V
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
S
t
a
t
i
c
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
)
S
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Cell Ratio
Cell Ratio Vs SNM
Vdc = 1.2 V
44
Table 7.4: Cell Ratio Modulation, V
DC
= 1.3 V
Cell Ratio Pull-Down (nm) Pass-Gate (nm) SNM (mV)
1.0 120 120 260
1.5 180 120 356
2.0 240 120 426
2.5 300 120 482
3.0 360 120 518
Fig 7.12 Cell Ratio Modulation, V
DC
= 1.3 V
Table 7.5: Supply Voltage Modulation PD= 120 nm, PG= 120nm and CR=1
V
supply
(V)
SNM (mV)
1.0 230
1.1 235
1.2 241
1.3 260
Fig 7.13 Supply Voltage Modulation, PD= 120 nm, PG= 120nm and CR=1
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
S
t
a
t
i
c
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
)
S
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Cell Ratio
Cell Ratio Vs SNM
Vdc = 1.3 V
225
230
235
240
245
250
255
260
265
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
S
t
a
t
i
x
c
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
S
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Supply Voltage in Volts
Supply Voltage Vs SNM
CR = 1
45
Table 7.6: Supply Voltage Modulation PD= 180 nm, PG= 120nm and CR=1.5
V
supply
(V)
SNM (mV)
1.0 312
1.1 318
1.2 325
1.3 356
Fig 7.14 Supply Voltage Modulation ,PD= 180 nm, PG= 120nm and CR=1.5
Table 7.7: Supply Voltage Modulation PD= 240 nm, PG= 120nm and CR=2
V
supply
(V)
SNM (mV)
1.0 360
1.1 365
1.2 385
1.3 426
Fig 7.15 Supply Voltage Modulation, PD= 240 nm, PG= 120nm and CR=2
300
310
320
330
340
350
360
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 S
t
a
t
i
x
c
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
S
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Supply Voltage in Volts
Supply Voltage Vs SNM
CR = 1.5
350
360
370
380
390
400
410
420
430
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
S
t
a
t
i
x
c
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
S
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Supply Voltage in Volts
Supply Voltage Vs SNM
CR = 2
46
Table 7.8: Supply Voltage Modulation PD= 300 nm, PG= 120nm and CR=2.5
V
supply
(V)
SNM (mV)
1.0 400
1.1 418
1.2 440
1.3 482
Fig 7.16 Supply Voltage Modulation, PD= 300 nm, PG= 120nm and CR=2.5
Table 7.9: Supply Voltage Modulation PD= 360 nm, PG= 120nm and CR=3
V
supply
(V)
SNM (mV)
1.0 440
1.1 456
1.2 490
1.3 518
Fig 7.17 Supply Voltage Modulation, PD= 360 nm, PG= 120nm and CR=3
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
S
t
a
t
i
x
c
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
S
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Supply Voltage in Volts
Supply Voltage Vs SNM
CR = 2.5
420
440
460
480
500
520
540
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
S
t
a
t
i
x
c
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
S
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Supply Voltage in Volts
Supply Voltage Vs SNM
CR = 3
47
7.3.2 ANALYSIS FOR WRITE NOISE MARGIN FOR PROPOSED 4T-SRAM
DESIGNED IN 28 nm BULK TECHNOLOGY
Table 7.10: Pull-Up Ratio Modulation, V
DC
= 1.3 V
Cell Ratio Pass Gate (nm) Pull-Up (nm) WNM (mV)
1.0 120 120 521
1.1 110 120 523
1.2 100 120 534
1.3 90 120 550
1.5 80 120 579
Fig 7.18 Pull-Up Ratio Modulation, V
DC
= 1.3 V
Table 7.11: Supply Voltage Modulation, PD= 120 nm, PG= 120nm and CR=1
V
supply
(V)
WNM (mV)
1.0 375
1.1 410
1.2 463
1.3 521
Fig 7.19 Supply Voltage Modulation, PD= 120 nm, PG= 120nm and CR=1
500
520
540
560
580
600
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
W
r
i
t
e
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
W
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Pull Up Ratio
Pull Up Ratio Vs WNM
Vdc = 1.3 V
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
W
r
i
t
e
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
W
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Supply Voltage in Volts
Supply Voltage Vs WNM
CR = 1
48
7.3.3 OTHER METRICS ANALYSIS FOR PPROPOSED 4T-SRAM DESIGNED IN 28
nm BULK TECHNOLOGY
Table 7.12: On Current and Off-Current of 4T-SRAM
On-Current Off-Current
111.19 A 11.282 pA
Table 7.13: Read Access and Write Access Time of 4T-SRAM
Read Access Time Write Access Time
1185 ps 105.2 ps
7.3.4 ANALYSIS FOR STATIC NOISE MARGIN FOR 6T-SRAM DESIGNED IN
28 nm BULK TECHNOLOGY
Table 7.14: Supply Voltage Modulation PD= 300 nm, PG= 150nm and CR=2
V
supply
(V)
SNM (mV)
0.7 267
1.0 380
1.3 385
Fig 7.20 Supply Voltage Modulation PD= 300 nm, PG= 150nm and CR=2
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
S
t
a
t
i
c
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
S
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Supply Voltage in Volts
Supply Voltage Vs SNM
CR = 2
49
Table 7.15: Supply Voltage Modulation PD= 300 nm, PG= 150nm and CR=2 in various
Process Corners
V
supply
(V)
SNM (mV)
TT FF FS SF SS
0.7 267 276 255 280 261
1.0 380 362 353 407 392
1.3 385 380 365 415 399
Fig 7.21 Supply Voltage Modulation PD= 300 nm, PG= 150nm and CR=2 in various Process
Corners
7.3.5 ANALYSIS FOR WRITE NOISE MARGIN FOR 6T-SRAM DESIGNED IN
28 nm BULK TECHNOLOGY
Table 7.16: Pull-Up Ratio Modulation, V
DC
= 1.3 V and PD=225 nm
Pull-Up(nm) Pass-Gate (nm) Pull-Up Ratio WNM (mV)
100 150 0.67 561
110 150 0.73 567
120 150 0.8 571
130 150 0.87 573
140 150 0.93 577
150 150 1.0 582
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
S
t
a
t
i
c
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
S
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Supply Voltage in Volts
FF
SS
FS
TT
SF
50
Fig 7.22 Pull-Up Ratio Modulation, V
DC
= 1.3 V and PD=225 nm
7.3.6 OTHER METRICS ANALYSIS FOR 6T-SRAM DESIGNED IN 28 nm BULK
TECHNOLOGY
Table 7.17: On Current and Off-Current of 4T-SRAM
On-Current Off-Current
120.19 A 32.282 pA
Table 7.18: Read Access and Write Access Time of 4T-SRAM
Read Access Time Write Access Time
854.458 ps 90.311 ps
7.3.7 ANALYSIS FOR STATIC NOISE MARGIN FOR PROPOSED 4T-SRAM
DESIGNED IN 28 nm FDSOI TECHNOLOGY
Table 7.19: Cell Ratio Modulation, Vdc= 0.8 V
Cell Ratio Pull-Down (nm) Access (nm) SNM (mV)
1.0 120 120 163
1.5 180 120 209
2.0 240 120 262
2.5 300 120 303
3.0 360 120 321
555
560
565
570
575
580
585
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
W
r
i
t
e
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
W
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Pull-Up Ratio
Pull-Up Ratio Vs WNM
Vdc = 1.3 V
51
Table 7.20: Cell Ratio Modulation, Vdc= 0.9 V
Cell Ratio Pull-Down (nm) Access (nm) SNM (mV)
1.0 120 120 180
1.5 180 120 273
2.0 240 120 335
2.5 300 120 407
3.0 360 120 444
Table 7.21: Cell Ratio Modulation, Vdc= 1.0 V
Cell Ratio Pull-Down (nm) Access (nm) SNM (mV)
1.0 120 120 233
1.5 180 120 355
2.0 240 120 380
2.5 300 120 446
3.0 360 120 470
Table 7.22: Cell Ratio Modulation, Vdc= 1.1 V
Cell Ratio Pull-Down (nm) Access (nm) SNM (mV)
1.0 120 120 290
1.5 180 120 398
2.0 240 120 567
2.5 300 120 594
3.0 360 120 633
Table 7.23: Cell Ratio Modulation, Vdc= 1.2 V
Cell Ratio Pull-Down (nm) Access (nm) SNM (mV)
1.0 120 120 346
1.5 180 120 558
2.0 240 120 688
2.5 300 120 742
3.0 360 120 809
Table 7.24: Cell Ratio Modulation, Vdc= 1.3 V
Cell Ratio Pull-Down (nm) Access (nm) SNM (mV)
1.0 120 120 418
1.5 180 120 545
2.0 240 120 715
2.5 300 120 775
3.0 360 120 737
52
Fig 7.23 Supply Voltage and Cell Ratio Modulation Vs SNM
7.3.8 ANALYSIS FOR WRITE NOISE MARGIN FOR PROPOSED 4T-SRAM
DESIGNED IN 28 nm FDSOI TECHNOLOGY
Table 7.25 Pull-Up Ratio Modulation, Vdc = 1.0 V
Pull-Up Ratio Pull-Up (nm) Access (nm) WNM (mV)
1.0 120 120 233
1.5 180 120 351
2.0 240 120 450
2.5 300 120 513
3.0 360 120 570
Table 7.26 Supply Voltage Modulation, Process Corner = TT
Pull-Down
Ratio
Voltages (V) Pull-Up (nm) Access (nm) WNM (mV)
1.0
0.8
120
120
158
0.9 193
1.0 233
1.1 474
1.2 540
1.3 652
53
Table 7.27 Supply Voltage Modulation, Process Corner = FF
Pull-Down
Ratio
Voltages (V) Pull-Up (nm) Access (nm) WNM (mV)
1.0
0.8
120
120
161
0.9 196
1.0 236
1.1 280
1.2 328
1.3 377
Table 7.28 Supply Voltage Modulation, Process Corner = FS
Pull-Down
Ratio
Voltages (V) Pull-Up (nm) Access (nm) WNM (mV)
1.0
0.8
120
120
133
0.9 165
1.0 198
1.1 237
1.2 282
1.3 329
Table 7.29 Supply Voltage Modulation, Process Corner = SF
Pull-Down
Ratio
Voltages (V) Pull-Up (nm) Access (nm) WNM (mV)
1.0
0.8
120
120
184
0.9 224
1.0 270
1.1 317
1.2 367
1.3 441
Table 7.30 Supply Voltage Modulation, Process Corner = SS
Pull-Down
Ratio
Voltages (V) Pull-Up (nm) Access (nm) WNM (mV)
1.0
0.8
120
120
153
0.9 189
1.0 230
1.1 277
1.2 324
1.3 377
54
Fig 7.24 Supply Voltage and Pull Ratio Modulation Vs WNM
7.3.9 OTHER METRICS ANALYSIS FOR PROPOSED 4T-SRAM DESIGNED IN
28 nm FDSOI TECHNOLOGY
Table 7.31: On Current and Off-Current of 4T-SRAM
On-Current Off-Current
19.34 A 14.8 pA
Table 7.32: Read Access and Write Access Time of 4T-SRAM
Read Access Time Write Access Time
725.235 ps 102.457 ps
7.3.10 ANALYSIS FOR STATIC NOISE MARGIN FOR CONVENTIONAL 4T-
SRAM DESIGNED IN 28 nm FDSOI TECHNOLOGY
Table 7.33 Supply Voltage Modulation, CR=1
Cell Ratio Pull-Down (nm) Access (nm) Supply Voltage (V) SNM (mV)
1.0
120
120
0.8 163
0.9 209
1.0 222
55
Fig 7.25 Supply Voltage Modulation, CR=1
Table 7.34 Cell Ratio Modulation
Supply Voltage Cell Ratio SNM
1.0 1 222
1.5 370
2 390
Fig 7.26 Cell Ratio Modulation, Vdc = 1V
7.3.11 ANALYSIS FOR WRITE NOISE MARGIN FOR CONVENTIONAL 4T-SRAM
DESIGNED IN 28 nm FDSOI TECHNOLOGY
Table 7.35 Pull-Up Ratio Modulation
Supply Voltage (V) Pull-Up Ratio WNM (mV)
1.0 1.0 233
1.5 351
2.0 450
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
S
t
a
t
i
c
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
S
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Supply Voltage in Volts
Supply Voltage Vs SNM
CR = 1
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
S
t
a
t
i
c
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
S
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Cell Ratio
CR Vs SNM
Vdc = 1 V
56
Fig 7.27 Pull-Up Ratio Modulation
7.3.12 OTHER METRICS ANALYSIS FOR CONVENTIONAL 4T-SRAM
DESIGNED IN 28 nm FDSOI TECHNOLOGY
Table 7.36: On Current and Off-Current of 4T-SRAM
On-Current Off-Current
16.7 A 11.5 pA
Table 7.37: Read Access and Write Access Time of 4T-SRAM
Read Access Time Write Access Time
698.163 ps 99.481 ps
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
W
r
i
t
e
N
o
i
s
e
M
a
r
g
i
n
(
W
N
M
)
i
n
m
V
Pull-Up Ratio
Pull-Up Ratio Vs WNM
Vdc = 1 V
57
CONCLUSION
It is seen from the above result that the 4T Loadless SRAM designed in both Bulk and
FDSOI technology is a new replacement to 6T-SRAM. Also observed that 4T variant
consumes less power compared to the 6T variant and also low area too. The FDSOI variant
produces strong metrics compared to its Bulk counterpart, with Low Power consumption.
From the results, it is clearly seen in Chapter 7, the Static Noise Margin, Write Noise
Margins and other figure of merits of SRAM cell are quite stable in 4T-SRAM, especially in
the FDSOI technology. The stability of 4T-SRAM is more or less same as that of 6T-SRAM,
since the SRAM cell metrics are quite stable. Thus, the 4T-SRAM, FDSOI technology and
the combination of both can bring a change to the fast growing technological world, in the
Low-Power and Low-Area applications of Memory Design.
58
FUTURE WORK
In next level, towards the research work, a detailed study about the FinFET technology will
be carried out. Post the study work, analysis will be carried out with various parameters to
distinguish the merits of FinFETs over the FDSOI technology. In future, the loadless 4T-
SRAM will be implemented in FinFET technology and a comparison study would be carried
out to draw the basic conclusion for choosing the best technology to implement 4T Loadless
SRAM cell.
59
REFERENCE
[1] T P Haraszti, CMOS Memory Circuits, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000.
[2] G Lueeke, J P Mize and W N Carr, Semiconductor Memory Design and Application,
McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1973.
[3] W D Brown and J E Brewer, Nonvolatile Semiconductor Memory Technology, IEEE
Press, 1997.
[4] S Przybylski, The New DRAM Architecture, IEEE ISSCC 97, Tutorial, pp. 9-13,
February 1997.
[5] J L Henessy and D A Patterson, Computer Architecture: A Quantitative Approach,
Morgan Kaufman, 1990.
[6] B Prince, High Performance Memories, John Wiley and Sons, 1996.
[7] J M Rabaey, M Pedram and P Landman, Low Power Design Methodologies, Kluwer
Academic, pp. 201-251, 1996.
[8] H J Yoo, A Study of Pipeline Architectures for High-Speed Synchronous DRAMs,
IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, Vol. 32, No. 10, pp.1597-1603, October 1997.
[9] T P Haraszti, High Performance, Fault Tolerant Orthogonal Shuffle Memory and
Method, United States Patent Number 5,612,964, March 1997.
[10] T Kohonen, Content-Addressable Memories, Springer-Verlag, 1980.
[11] J Handy, The Cache Memory Book, Academic Press, 1993.
[12] S A Przybilsky, Cache and Memory Hierarchy Design, Morgen Kaufmann, 1990.
[13] R Myravaagens, Rambus Memories Shipping from Toshiba, Electronics Products,
November 1993.
[14] H Ikeda and H Inukai, High Speed DRAM Architecture Development, IEEE Journal
of Solid-State Circuits, Vol. 43, No. 5, pp. 685-692, May 1998.
[15] Ramlink Committee, Electronics Industries Association, Standard for Semiconductor
Memories, JEDEC No. IESD216, IEEE Computer Society No. P1596.4, 1996.
[16] C E Chen et al., Stacked CMOS SRAM Cell, IEEE Electron Device Letters, Vol.
EDL-4, No. 8, pp. 272-274, August 1983.
[17] J P Noel, O Thomas, C. Fenouillet-Beranger, M A Jaud1 and A Amara, Robust Multi-
VT 4T SRAM Cell in 45nm Thin Box Fully-Depleted SOI Technology with Ground
Plane, IEEE Press, 2009
[18] J. Rabaey, A. Chandrakasan, and B. Nicoloc Digital Integrated Circuits: A Design
60
Prospectiv, Second Edition. Prentice Hall, 2003.
[19] N. Lu, L. Gerzberg, and J. Meindl Scaling limitations of monolithic polycrystalline-
silicon resistors in VLSI Static RAMs and logic, IEEE Journal of Solid State Circuits
(JSSC), SC-17:312320, April 1982.
[20] K. Zhang, U. Bhattacharya, Z. Chen, F. Hamzaoglu, D. Murray, N. Vallepali, Y.
Wang, B. Zheng, and M. Bohr A 3-GHz 70-Mb SRAM in 65-nm CMOS technology
with integrated column-based dynamic power supply, IEEE Journal of Solid State
Circuits (JSSC), 41:146151, January 2006.
[21] K. Imai et al. A 0.13m CMOS technology integrating high-speed and low power/high
density devices with two different well/channel structures, IEEE International
Electron Devices Meeting IEDM Technical Digest, pages 667690, October 1999.
[22] NEC. In ISSCC Digest of Technical Papers, February 2001.
[23] S. Masuoka et al. A 0.99-m
2
loadless four-transistor SRAM cell in 0.13m generation
CMOS technology, Digest of Technical Papers of Symposium on VLSI Technology,
pages 164165, June 2000.
[24] K. Takeda et al. A 16-Mb 400-MHz loadless CMOS four-transistor SRAM macro,
IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits (JSSC), 35:16311640, November 2000.
[25] C. Lage, J. Hayden, and C. Subramanian Advanced SRAM technology the race
between 4T and 6T cells, IEEE International Electron Devices Meeting IEDM
Technical Digest, pages 271274, December 1996.
[26] K. Noda, K. Matsui, K. Takeda, and N. Nakamura A loadless CMOS four-transist
SRAM cell in a 0.18-m logic technology IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices,
pages 28512855, December 2001.
[27] P. Bai et al. A 65nm logic technology featuring 35nm gate lengths, enchanced channel
strain, 8 Cu interconnect layers, low-k ILD and 0.57m
2
SRAM cell, IEEE
International Electron Devices Meeting IEDM Technical Digest, pages 657660,
December 2004.
[28] F. Arnaud et al. Low cost 65nm CMOS platform for low power and general purpose
applications, Symposium on VLSI Technology Digest of Technical Papers, pages 10
11, June 2004.
[29] F. Boeuf et al. 0.248m
2
and 0.334m
2
conventional bulk 6T-SRAM bit cells for 45nm
node low cost general purpose applications, Symposium on VLSI Technology
Digest of Technical Papers, pages 130131, June 2005.
61
[30] M. Yamaoka, K. Osada, and K. Ishibashi 0.4V Logic-library-friendly SRAM array
using rectangular-diffusion cell and delta-boosted-array voltage scheme, Pages 934
940, June 2004.
[31] R. Venkatraman, R. Castagnetti, O. Kobozeva, F. Duan, A. Kamath, S. Sabbagh, M.
Vilchis-Cruz, J. Jhu Liaw, Jyh-Cheng You, and S. Ramesh The design, analysis, and
development of highly manufacturable 6T SRAM bitscells for SoC applications, IEEE
Transactions of Electron Devices, 52:218226, February 2005.
[32] B. Cheng, S. Roy, and A. Asenov The impact of random doping effects on CMOS
SRAM cell, Proc. IEEE Solid-State Circuits Conference ESSCIRC, pages 219222,
Leuven, Belgium, 2004.
[33] T. Hirose et al. A 20-ns 4-Mb CMOS SRAM with hierarchical word decoding
architecture, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits (JSSC), 25:10681073, October
1990.
[34] B. Amurtur and M. Horowitz A replica technique for wordline and sense control in
lowpower SRAMs, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits (JSSC), 33:12081219,
August 1998.
[35] M. Eisele et al. The impact of intra-die device parameter variations on path delays on
the design for yield of low voltage digital circuits IEEE International Symposium
Low Power Electronic Design, pages 237242, October 1996.
[36] Sandeep R, N T Deshpande and A R Aswatha, Design and Analysis of New 4T SRAM
Cell in Deep Submicron CMOS Technologies, 2
nd
International Conference on
Emerging trends in Engineering and Technology, 2009.
[37] D Mukherjee, H K Mondal and B V R Reddy, Static Noise Margin analysis of SRAM
cell structures, International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications, 2013.
[38] Y. Kado, H. Inokawa, Y. Okazaki, T. Tsuchiya, Y. Kawai, M. Sato, Y. Sakakibara, S.
Nakayama, H. Yamada, M. Kitamura, S. Nakashima, K. Nishimura, S. Date, M. Ino,
K. Takeya, and T. Sakai, Substantial Advantages of Fully-depleted CMOS/SIMOX
Devices as Low-Power High-Performance VLSI Components Compared with its Bulk-
CMOS Counterpart, IEDM Tech. Dig., pp. 635-638, 1995.
[39] J. P. Colinge, Reduction of Kink Effect in Thin-Film SOI MOSFETs, IEEE Electron
Dev. Lett., Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 97-99, Feb. 1988.
[40] T. Tihanyi and H. Schlotterer, Influence of the Floating Substrate Potential on the
Characteristics of ESFI MOS Transistors, Solid-State Electronics, Vol. 18, pp. 309-
62
314, 1975.
[41] T. Iwamatsu, Y. Yamaguchi, Y. Inoue, T. Nishimura, and N. Tsubouchi, CAD-
Compatible High-Speed CMOS/SIMOX Gate Array Using Field-Shield Isolation,
IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, Vol. 42, No. 11, pp. 1934-1939, Nov. 1995.
[42] J. P. Colinge, Subthreshold Slope of Thin-Film SOI MOSFETs, IEEE Electron Dev.
Lett., Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 244-246, April 1986.
[43] K. Kato and K. Taniguchi, Numerical analysis of switching characteristic in SOI
MOSFETs, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 133-139, Jan. 1986.
[44] T. Tsuchiya, T. Ohno, and Y. Kado, Proc. Int. Symp. on SOI Tech. and Devices,
Present Status and Potential of Subquarter-micron Ultra-Thin-Film CMOS/SIMOX
Technology, ECS, Vol. 94-11, pp. 401-412, 1994.
[45] I. J. Kim, H.-O. Joachin, T. Iwamatsu, Y. Yamaguchi, Y. Inoue, K. Eikyu, K.
Ishikawa, K. Ueda, H. Morinaka, K. Mashiko, and H. Miyoshi, Transient Effects of
SOI Transistors in Circuit Operation, Proc. Electrochem. Soc. Spring Meet., Vol. 96-
1, pp. 548-556, 1996.
[46] A. Wei and D. A. Antoniadis, Measurement of Transient Effects in SOI DRAM/SRAM
Access Transistors, IEEE Electron Dev. Lett., Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 193-195, May 1996.
[47] M. M. Pelella, J. G. Fossum, D. Suh, S. Krishnan, K. A. Jenkins, and M.J. Hargrove,
Low-Voltage Transient Bipolar Effect Induced by Dynamic Floating-Body Charging
in Scaled PD/SOI MOSFETs, IEEE Electron Dev. Lett., Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 196-198,
May 1996.
[48] G. G. Shahidi, A. Ajimera, F. Assaderaghi, R. J. Bolam, E. Leobandung, W. Rausch,
D. Sankus, D. Schepis, L. F. Wagner, K. Wu, and B. Davari, Partially-Depleted SOI
Technology for Digital Logic, ISSCC Dig. of Tech. Papers, pp. 426-427, 1999.
[49] C.-E. Daniel Chen, M. Matloubian, R. Sundaresen, B.-Y. Mao, C. C. Wei, and G.P.
Pollack, Single-Transistor Latch in SOI MOSFETs, IEEE Electron Device Lett.,
Vol. 9, No. 12, pp. 636-638, Dec. 1988.
[50] T. Ohno, M. Takahashi, A. Ohtaka, Y. Sakakibara, and T. Tsuchiya, Suppression of
the Parasitic Bipolar Effect in Ultra-Thin-Film nMOSFETs/SIMOX by Ar Ion
Implantation into Source/Drain Regions, IEDM Tech. Dig., pp. 627-630, 1995.
[51] M. Yoshimi, M. Terauchi, A. Murakoshi, M. Takahashi, K. Matsuzawa, N. Shigyo,
and Y. Ushiku, Technology Trends of Silicon-On-Insulator Its Advantages and
Problems to be Solved, IEDM Tech. Dig., pp. 429-432, 1994.
63
[52] L. J. McDaid, S. Hall, W. Eccleston, and J. C. Alderman, Negative Resistance in the
Output Characteristics of SOI MOSFETs, Proc. IEEE SOS/SOI Tech. Conf., pp. 33-
34, 1989.
[53] A Pavlov and M Sachdev, CMOS SRAM Circuit Design and Parametric Test in
Nano-Scaled Technologies, Springer, 2008.