Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T18:27:28.448Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Ultra compact multi-standard low-noise amplifiers in 28 nm CMOS with inductive peaking

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 November 2017

Elena Sobotta*
Affiliation:
Chair of Circuit Design and Network Theory, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany
Guido Belfiore
Affiliation:
Chair of Circuit Design and Network Theory, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany
Frank Ellinger
Affiliation:
Chair of Circuit Design and Network Theory, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany
*
Corresponding author: E. Sobotta Email: elena.sobotta@tu-dresden.de
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This work presents the design of two compact multi-standard low-noise amplifier (LNA) in a 28 nm low-power bulk CMOS process. The transistor parameters were optimized by the gm/ID method taking into account the parasitics and the behavior of highly scaled transistors. To cover the industrial science medical (ISM)-bands around 2.4 and 5.8 GHz, the WLAN band as well as the Ku band a bandwidth enhancement is required. Two versions of LNAs, one with vertical inductors and one with active inductors, are implemented and verified by measurements. The noise figure (NF) exhibits 4.2 dB for the LNA with active inductors and 3.5 dB for the LNA with vertical inductors. The voltage gain reaches 12.8 and 13.4 dB, respectively, with a 3 dB-bandwidth of 20 GHz. Both input referred 1-dB-compression points are higher than −12 dBm making the chips attractive for communication standards with high linearity requirements. The chips consume 53 mW DC power and the LNA with active inductors occupies a core area of only 0.0018 mm2, whereas the version with vertical inductors requires 0.021 mm2.

Information

Type
Research Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and the European Microwave Association 2017 
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Schematic representation of the LNA.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Simplified model of the LNA [10].

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Intrinsic gain gm/rDS versus transconductance efficiency gm/ID.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Transit frequency fT versus transconductance efficiency gm/ID.

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Saturation voltage VD, sat versus transconductance efficiency gm/ID.

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Current per width ID/w versus transconductance efficiency gm/ID.

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Product of transconductance efficiency and transit frequency.

Figure 7

Fig. 8. Minimum noise figure versus current at constant ID/w.

Figure 8

Table 1. Comparison of inductive components.

Figure 9

Fig. 9. Setup of a enhanced symmetrical planar inductor.

Figure 10

Fig. 10. Inductance of the symmetrical enhanced planar and the symmetrical vertical inductor versus frequency.

Figure 11

Fig. 11. Quality factor of the symmetrical enhanced planar and the symmetrical vertical inductor versus frequency.

Figure 12

Fig. 12. Schematic representation of the LNA with active inductors.

Figure 13

Fig. 13. Small signal model of the active inductor.

Figure 14

Fig. 14. Magnitude of the impedance of the inductors versus frequency.

Figure 15

Fig. 15. Real and imaginary parts of the impedance of the active inductor.

Figure 16

Fig. 16. Magnitude of the impedance of the small signal model active inductor. (a) R = 300 Ω; Ca = [40 fF, 150 fF]. (b) Ca = 105 fF; R = [100 Ω, 500 Ω]

Figure 17

Fig. 17. Setup of the vertical inductor.

Figure 18

Fig. 18. Schematic representation of the LNA with vertical inductors.

Figure 19

Fig. 19. Photograph of the die of the LNA with active inductors.

Figure 20

Fig. 20. Photograph of the die of the LNA with vertical inductors.

Figure 21

Fig. 21. Measurement and simulation results of the forward transmission.

Figure 22

Fig. 22. Measurement and simulation results of the input reflection coefficient.

Figure 23

Fig. 23. Noise figure versus frequency.

Figure 24

Fig. 24. Compression point versus frequency.

Figure 25

Table 2. State-of-the-art.