ESE 568: Mixed Signal Design and

Modeling Basic 2-stage Opamp

Lec 6: September 19th, 2018

Basic 2-stage Opamp (con’t) and Advanced
Opamp Design

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 – Khanna adapted from Perrot

CPPSim Lecture notes

Basic 2-Stage Opamp Basic 2-Stage Opamp

!  This is a common “workhorse” opamp for
medium performance applications
"  Relatively simple structure with reasonable performance 
Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna
!  Key issue: two-stages lead to two poles that are
relatively close to each other
"  This leads to very poor phase margin
!  Inclusion of a compensation capacitor across
the second stage leads to pole splitting such that
stable performance can be achieved
"  A compensation resistor is also desirable to help eliminate
the impact of a RHP zero that occurs due
to compensation
3 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 4

2-Stage Opamp Frequency Response Key Specifications of Opamps (Open Loop)

!  DC small signal gain

!  Unity gain frequency
!  Dominant pole frequency
!  Parasitic pole frequencies

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 5 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 6

1
 2-Stage Opamp Frequency Response 2-Stage Opamp Frequency Response

Unity-gain frequency
DC gain g
ω 0 = m1
CC
DC gain
Dominant Pole

Dominant pole Parasitic pole

Parasitic pole
Unity-gain frequency
Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 7 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 8

Key Specifications of Opamps (Closed Loop) 2-Stage Opamp

!  Settling Time/Slew Rate

!  Offset voltage
!  Settling time (closed loop bandwidth)
!  Common-Mode Rejection Ratio (CMRR)
!  Power Supply Rejection Ratio (PSRR)
!  Equivalent Input-Referred Noise

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 9 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 10

2-Stage Opamp – Slew Rate 2-Stage Opamp

!  Settling Time/Slew Rate

dvout I CC I D5
max
SR ≡ = =
dt max CC CC

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 11 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 12

2
 Finite Slew Rate Effect Unity Gain Freq and Slew Rate
!  Ex. Unity-gain Follower !  Relationship between unity gain frequency and slew
rate:
g m1 I D5
ω0 = SR =
CC CC

vI = Asin(ω t)
dvo
= Aω
dt MAX

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 13 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 14

Unity Gain Freq and Slew Rate 2-Stage Opamp Offset: Systematic
!  Relationship between unity gain frequency and slew
rate:
g m1 I D5 I D5
ω0 = SR = SR = ω
CC CC
g m1 0

!  For 45° phase margin: ω 0 = p2

I D5
SR = p2
gm1
gm 7CC −g
p2 ≈ − ≈ m7
C1C2 + C1CC + CC C2 C2
Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 15 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 16

2-Stage Opamp Offset: Systematic 2-Stage Opamp Offset: Random

VOS = ΔVt (1−2)

#g &
+ΔVt (3−4) % m3 (
$ gm1 '
# W W &
% −Δ Δ (
(VGS −Vt )(1−2) % L(1−2) L(3−4) (
+ −
2 % W W (
% L L(3−4) ('
$ (1−2)

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 17 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 18

3
 2-Stage Opamp Offset: Random 2-Stage Opamp CMRR

Minimize by making
gm3,4<gm1,2

VOS = ΔVt (1−2)

#g &
+ΔVt (3−4) % m3 (
$ gm1 '
# W W &
% −Δ Δ (
Minimize by operating (VGS −Vt )(1−2) % L(1−2) L(3−4) (
+ −
input transistors at small 2 % W W (
Vgs-Vt % L L(3−4) ('
$ (1−2)

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 19 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 20

2-Stage Opamp CMRR 2-Stage Opamp PSRR+

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 21 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 22

2-Stage Opamp PSRR+ 2-Stage Opamp PSRR-

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 23 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 24

4
 2-Stage Opamp PSRR- 2-Stage Opamp Noise Analysis

!  Each opamp stage will contribute noise

"  Typically the spectral density of the noise will be of the same order at
each stage
@ high frequencies M6 looks diode connected

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 25 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 26

2-Stage Opamp Noise Analysis Noise Sources

!  Shot Noise
"  Discrete random event of charge jumping potential
barrier (i.e PN junction)
!  Thermal Noise
"  Random thermal motion of electrons
!  Each opamp stage will contribute noise !  Flicker Noise: 1/F Noise
"  Typically the spectral density of the noise will be of the same order at "  Usually due to impurities causing traps in material which
each stage capture and emit carriers randomly
!  Input referral of the noise reveals that the second stage noise
will have much less impact than the first stage noise
"  Input-referred noise calculations of an opamp need only focus on the
first stage

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 27 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 28

MOSFET Noise Model MOSFET Noise Model

!  Flicker noise as voltage on the gate !  Flicker noise as voltage on the gate

!  Thermal noise as current in the channel !  Thermal noise as current in the channel

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 29 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 30

5
 Input-referred MOSFET Noise Input-referred MOSFET Noise

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 31 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 32

Analysis of Opamp Noise (First Stage) Analysis of Opamp Noise (First Stage)

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 33 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 34

Analysis of Opamp Noise (First Stage) Analysis of Opamp Noise (First Stage)

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 35 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 36

6
 Input-referred Opamp Noise (First Stage) Input-referred Opamp Noise (First Stage)

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 37 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 38

Opamps Utilized in Wide Range of Applications 

Advanced Opamp Topologies

!  Each application comes with different opamp

requirements
"  Integrated opamps are typically custom designed for their
specific application

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 40

Single-Ended Vs. Fully Differential Topologies Fully Differential Basic Two Stage Opamp

!  Analog circuits are sensitive to noise from the power supply

and other coupling mechanisms !  We can separate this into differential and common mode
!  Fully differential topologies can offer rejection of common- circuits, similar to a single-ended differential amplifier
Differential behavior same as the single-ended opamp 
mode noise (such as from supplies) " 

"  Note that we have twice the effective range in input/output swing due to the
"  Information is encoded as the difference between two signals differential signaling
"  More complex implementation than single-ended designs "  Common mode setting needs to be dealt with (Vbias)

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 41 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 42

7
 Common Mode Influence Common-Mode Gain From Input

!  Analysis is same as for single-ended design

!  Maximum swing for fully differential signals requires  "  Can be simplified to common-mode “half-circuit”
"  Accurate setting of the common mode value
"  Suppression of common mode noise
"  Common-mode output is sensitive to common mode input
Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 43 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 44

Common-Mode Gain From Input Bias Common Mode Feedback Biasing (CMFB)

!  Common mode “half circuit” can still be used !  Use an auxiliary circuit to accurately set the common mode
output value to a controlled value Vref
"  Need to be careful not to load the outputs with the common mode
sensing circuit (Rlarge in this case)
"  Common-mode output is extremely sensitive to Vbias!
"  Need to design CMFB to be stable

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 45 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 46

Single-Ended Versus Fully Differential Cascoded Current Source

!  Advantages of fully differential topologies

"  Improved CMRR and PSRR across a wide frequency range 
"  Twice the effective signal swing
!  Disadvantages of fully differential topologies
"  Power and complexity
!  Most opamp topologies can be modified to support either
single-ended or fully differential signaling
Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 47 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 48

8
 Cascoded Current Source Cascode Current Mirror

!  Offers increased output resistance

"  Reduces small signal dependence of output current on the
output voltage of the current source 
"  We derived:
!  Output resistance boosted by intrinsic gain of M3,
gm3ro3 

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 49 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 50

Cascode Current Mirror Telescopic Opamp (Fully Differential)

!  What is Z0?
!  Popular for high frequency applications
"  Single stage design
"  Limitation: input and output swing quite limited
Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 51 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 52

Telescopic Opamp Frequency Response Telescopic Opamp Frequency Response

DC gain

Dominant pole Parasitic pole

Unity-gain frequency
Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 53 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 54

9
 Telescopic Opamp Frequency Response Telescopic Opamp Frequency Response

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 55 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 56

Telescopic Opamp Frequency Response Folded Cascode Opamp

!  Modified version of telescopic opamp

"  Significantly improved input/output swing
"  High BW (better than two stage, worse than telescopic) 
"  Only single stage of gain (lower than telescopic)

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 57 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 58

Folded Cascode Frequency Response Two Stage with Cascoded Output Stage

!  Higher DC gain than with two stage or folded cascode 

"  Two gain stages with boosted gain on the output stage
!  Same output swing as folded cascode 
"  Lower than for basic two stage

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 59 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 60

10
 Two Stage with Cascoded Output Stage –Frequency Response Two Stage with Cascoded Input Stage

!  Compared to two stage with cascoded output 

"  Similar DC gain
"  Improved output swing
"  Reduced input swing

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 61 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 62

Two Stage with Cascoded Input Stage –Frequency Response
Big Ideas
!  Opamp topologies can be configured to process
fully differential signals
"  Provides improved immunity to noise from common-
mode perturbations such as power supply noise
"  Increases effective signal swing by a factor of two
"  Carries additional complexity for CMFB and increased power
consumption
!  Integrated opamps are often custom designed for a given
application
"  Each application places different demands on DC gain, bandwidth,
signal swing, etc.
"  Opamp topologies considered today include telescopic, folded
cascode, and modified two stage (cascoded input/output)
"  Each carries different tradeoffs on the above specifications

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 63 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 64

Admin More Advanced Techniques (Extras)

!  HW 2 and HW 3 !  Gain boosting technique
"  Due Sunday !  Nested Miller technique
!  HW 4 posted Sunday
"  Characterize and design an opamp

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 – Khanna 65 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 66

11
 Gain Boosting of Current Sources A Simple Gain Boosting Amplifier

!  We can achieve increased output impedance of !  Common source amplifier utilized

a current source with an amplifier
"  The amplifier essentially increases gm1 by factor K:

!  Key issue: what is a convenient implementation of the above !  Issue: current source requires significant headroom
circuit? due to the fact that Vds2 = Vgs4
Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 67 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 68

Folded Cascode Gain Boosting Amplifier Differential Version of Gain Boosting Amp

!  Leverage fully differential nature of current

!  Folded cascode yields sources within the opamp
"  PMOS gain devices are now part of a differential pair 
"  Need CMFB to set common-mode gate voltages of M1
"  Improved headroom and higher gain! and M2 (I.e. to set Vbias0) 
Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 69 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 70

Symbolic View of Folded Cascode Gain Boosting Amp Folded Cascode with Gain Boosting

!  Pro: Gain boosting provides substantial increase of

DC gain while maintaining good input and output swing
!  We can apply this to the overall folded cascode "  Gain is on the order of (gmro)4
opamp !  Con: very complex!

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 71 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 72

12
 Nested Miller Compensation Nested Miller Example

!  Advantage: increased DC gain with high input and

!  Intermediate gain stages must be non-inverting in order
output swing to achieve stable feedback
!  Issue: more parasitic poles to deal with !  Compensation resistors should also be included to eliminate
"  Leads to lower unity gain bandwidth for the impact of RHP zeros
reasonable phase margin "  Not shown for simplicity

Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 73 Penn ESE 568 Fall 2018 - Khanna 74

13