Oscillator Design

Behzad Razavi
Electrical Engineering Department
University of California, Los Angeles

Outline

Introduction

Basic Rings

Frequency Tuning

LC Oscillators

Small-Signal View

Ring Oscillators

Linear Model

Amplitude Limiting

Basic Rings

Other Rings

Voltage-Controlled Oscillators
Center Frequency
z Tuning Range:
- Band of Interest
- PVT Variations
z

Gain (Sensitivity)

Supply Rejection

Tuning Linearity
z Intrinsic Jitter
z Output Amplitude
z

Two Schools of Thought

Use differential rings

lower supply sensitivity
But
Use inverters with supply acting as control line.
wider tuning range
But

10

Differential Ring VCOs (I)

But large swing variation

across tuning range
z

Ring with Replica Biasing

[Young, JSSC, Nov. 92]

11

Differential Ring VCOs (II)

12

Tuning by Interpolation

Interpolation does not work well at low speeds.

13

Example of Wide-Range Tuning

[Maneatis, JSSC, Nov. 03]

14

Single-Ended VCOs

[van Kaenel, JSSC, Nov. 98]

[Mansuri, JSSC, Nov. 98]

15

CCO with Regulation

[Yan, ISSCC05]
16

But how to generate complementary outputs?

z

Synchronize two rings:

[Grozing, ESSCIRC 03]

17

Other Examples

[Searles, ISSCC07] (AMD)

18

[Desai, ISSCC07]

[Straayer, JSSC, April 09]

18-GHz Ring in 65 nm

[Gebara, ISSCC07]

19

Measured Tuning Range

[Gebara, ISSCC07]

20

Another Example

[Kossel, ISSCC05]

21

Delay Stage

[Kossel, ISSCC05]

22

Simulated Behavior

[Kossel, ISSCC05]
23

LC Oscillators

Much lower phase noise than rings

(for a given power budget and frequency)

Much faster than rings

Much narrower tuning range

Main entry barrier: accurate inductor and

varactor models
z

24

Basics

25

MOS Varactors

Simpler to use than pn junctions.

C/V characteristic scales with technology.
26

Q-Range Trade-Off

27

Symmetric Inductors

Inductors driven differentially have a higher Q.

28

Output Swing

Peak differential output voltage swing is given

by:

29

One-Port View

Example of negative resistance:

30

3-Point Oscillator

31

Oscillation Condition

Convert series resistance to parallel:

32

Differential Topology

R1 appears in series with the parallel combination of L1

and L2, lowering their Q and avoiding CM oscillation.

33

Cross-Coupled Oscillator

Looks like a diff pair with positive

feedback.
Oscillation freq is given by:

34

Problem of Swings

Peak Vds must not stress the transistors.

35

Supply Sensitivity

Voltage-dependent Cdb results in a finite Kvco

from Vdd to output frequency:

36

One-Port View

Oscillation condition easier to meet than in 3point topologies:

37

Frequency Tuning (Type I)

To maximize tuning range, we wish to minimize

C1.
But C1 is given by:
- Caps of M1 and M2 (including 4Cgd)
- Cap of L1
- Input cap of next stage
38

Use of Symmetric Inductor

Requires accurate model of inductor.

cant begin design without a useful
inductor library.
39

Tuning Range Limitations

40

Effect of Varactor Q

Now include the varactor:

41

VCO Type II

Select device dimension to set the

output CM level to about Vdd/2.

42

Varactor Modulation by IDD

Noise of current mirror becomes the

dominant source.
Does this effect exist in Type I VCO?
43

VCO Type III

Tuning range:

With 5% bottom-plate parasitic cap:

44

VCO Type IV

Select device dimension to set the

output CM level to about Vdd/2.
Output swing twice that of previous
topologies.
But tail noise modulates varactors.

45

Oscillation Amplitude vs. Frequency

Suppose the tank inductor has only

a series resistance:

Oscillation amplitude falls as freq is

lowered.

46

Discrete Tuning

But on-resistance of switches lowers tank Q:

47

Use of Floating Switch

48

LC VCO Design Procedure

49

Application as Reference

[McCorquodale, ISSCC08]

50

Results

[McCorquodale, ISSCC08]

51

Mathematical Model of VCOs

52