© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE1

A 2.2GHz 7.6mW Sub-Sampling PLL with -126dBc/Hz In-band Phase Noise and

0.15psrms Jitter in 0.18μm CMOS

Xiang Gao, Eric Klumperink, Mounir Bohsali*, and Bram Nauta

University of Twente, The Netherlands* National Semiconductor, California

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE2

• PLL Noise Analysis

• Sub-sampling PLL

• Experimental Results

• Benchmark

• Conclusion

Outline

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE3

Why Low Noise PLL

Wireline and optical data links Radio transceivers

Analog to Digital converters

16 Bits

14 Bits

12 Bits

10 Bits

10 100 1000Signal frequency (MHz)

100

90

80

SNR

(dB

)

70

60

50

2 psclock jitter

0.5 ps

0.125 ps

Goal: PLL with low jitter & low power

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE4

Classical PLL Noise

÷N

PD/CPRef OutVCOLF

- Loop noise multiplied by N, dominates in-band

PLL phase noise

fm

)(£ mf

Bandwidth fc

Loop noise

VCO noise 21fm

This work focuses on reducing loop noise[ ] C. S. Vaucher, Architectures for RF Frequency Synthesizers, Kluwer, 2002

- In optimized PLL, Loop and VCO noise contributes equally

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE5

CP

CPnoutn

iβ

φ ,, ≈

- Define a CP feedback gain:

Main loop noise sources: usually CP and divider

Noise from CP

dCP KN×=

1β

-Kd F(s) KVCO/s

1/N

+

in,CP

outn,φβC

P

CP noise suppressed by βCP , large βCP desired

- Inside bandwidth, loop gain is big:

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE6

Classical 3-state PFD/CP

πβ

21

3CP

stateCPI

N×=,

‘1’

D Qrst

‘1’Ref

Div&

UP

DN

rst

D Q

CP Feedback Gain

IUP=ICP

IDN=ICP

÷N

OutVCOπ2−

π2

ICP

Iout

φΔ

- ICP

Can we get rid of N ?

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE7

Sampling Phase Detector

• Ref too early • Ref too late

Sub-Sampling PD for Integer-N PLL

[ ] J.A. Crawford, Frequency Synthesizer Design Handbook, 1994

VCO

Ref

Vsam

• Phase Locked

VDC

VDC

VCO

Ref

Vsam

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE8

SamplerVsamVCO

Ref

IUP=gmVsam

IDN=gmVDCVDC

Ioutπ−

π

AVCO gm

Iout

VCOφΔ

- AVCO gm

VCOmVCO

VCOVCOm

out

outdCP AgAgIK ≈

ΔΔ⋅

=ΔΔ

==φ

φφ

β )sin(

Sub-Sampling PD/CP (SSPD/CP)

• Voltage controlled CP • Ideal characteristic

Detection is fairly linear once in lock

locking point

Get rid of NYES WE CAN

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE9

Modeling of SSPLL

- Fits sub-sampling process

No divider but a virtual multiplier !

refVCOalias fNff ⋅−=

Sampler/CP VCORef OutLF

Φn,ref in,CP

N ∑-

Kd F(s) KVCO/s [Фout ]+[Фref ] +

dCP K=β

CP noise is not multiplied by ‘N’ !

- Ref noise still multiplied by ‘N’ as in classical PLLfref 2fref

……

N·fref

VCOAlias

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE10

effgs

VCO

mCP

VCO

stateCP

SSPDCP

VAN

gIAN

,,

,

/⋅⋅=⋅⋅= ππ

ββ

42

43

SSPLL VS Classical PLL

for same ICP, SSPLL has much larger βCP than classical PLL and suppresses CP noise more

CP noise

>1>>1

>>1

Divider noise

SSPLL has no divider noise

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE11

Design issue: Strength is Weakness

- Needs big Cap for stabilization

2c

CP

fC β∝

SSPD/CP has very high βCP

SSPLL has no divider

N ∑-

βCP KVCO/s [Фout ][Фref ]RC

- May lock to any integer N

- For given phase margin and KVCO:

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE12

βCP and Filter Cap

- Further larger βCP hardly affects overall loop noise and fc but needs bigger C to stabilize the loop

In SSPLL, CP noise becomes negligible

CP noiseOther Loop noise

fm

Larger βCP

Some way of βCP control is desired

2c

CP

fC β∝

optimum fc

)(£ mf

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE13

SSPD/CP with Gain Control

A proper choice of DRpul reduces Cap area while still keeps CP noise low

pulmVCOCP DRgA ⋅⋅=β

Ref

VCOP Sampler

VDC

Iout

Sampler

Ref Pulser

VCOP

VDC

Iout

• One T&H, pulserreused as 2nd T&H

• Need two T&H

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE14

Ref Out

Classical PLL with Dead Zone as FLL

Sampler VCOCP

Pulser

3-statePFD

÷ N

CPDZ

Proposed SSPLL Architecture

1. During locking, ∆Ф > DZ, FLL has large gain, brings loop to lock

2. Close to locking, ∆Ф < DZ, FLL has zero gain, not injecting noise

Core loop

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE15

Vtune

VCO & Sampler Design

Ref

VsamPVsamN

Ref

XTAL

- Differential sampling doesn’t need VDC, cancels clock feed-through and charge injection

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE16

Pul

PulPul

Iout

VsamP VsamN

Pul

Charge Pump Design

- Differential pair + cascode current mirror

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE17

Die Photograph

0.18um CMOS

Active Area: 0.18mm2

VDD: 1.8V

- VCO 1mA

VCO

50Ω buf.bias

CP

LoopFilter

FLL

PD,b

uf.

FLL

0.4mm

0.45 mm

pul.

VCO

buff.bias

LoopFilter

FLL

0.4mm

0.45 mm

PD/CP

- FLL 0.8mA (disabledafter locking)

- Core Loop 3.2mA

Power Consumption

24-pin LLP package

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE18

PLL Output Spectrum

- Out frequency 2.21GHz, Ref spur -46dBc- 55.25MHz XTAL as Reference

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE19

Measured Phase Noise

- In-band Phase Noise: -126dBc/Hz @ 200kHz

- Integrated Jitter [10k, 40M]: 0.15ps

10k

-60

-80

-100

-120

-140

-160

-40

100k 1M 10M 100M

Phas

e N

oise

(dB

c/H

z)

∆f (Hz)40M

-126dBc/Hz @ 200kHz

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE20

Benchmarking

- Normalized phase noise floor for benchmarking

refbandinnorm fN loglog££ 1020 −−= −

- Loop Noise is systematically related to N and fref

Benchmarking Loop performance

Benchmarking PLL performance

mWP

sFOM t

110

120 loglog +=

σ

- PLL jitter is systematically related to power

- PLL FOM:

[ ] D. Banerjee, PLL Performance, Simulation, and Design, National Semiconductor, 2006

[ ] X. Gao, et al., Trans. Circuits Syst. II , 2009

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE21

2

Swaminathan’07

Gu’06Lin’00

Craninckx’98

FOM = -220dBFOM = -230dB

FOM = -240dB

Hsu’08Terrovitis’04

van de Beek’03FOM = -250dB

This work

Power P (mW)

Jitte

r Var

ianc

e σ t

2(p

s)2

ISSCC Low Jitter PLL Comparison

This work improves FOM by 9.5dB, normalized to same jitter, it consumes ~10x less power

1

0.1

0.01

10

1 10 100 1000

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE22

0.180.187.6

-235

-126

0.1555.25 2.21

This Work

0.130.9539

-222

-108

0.250

3.67 Hsu’08

0.130.4325

-220

-108

0.5662.5 3.125Gu’06

0.18Technology (Оm)0.71Active Area (mm2 )81Power (mW)

-215Norm. In-band Phase Noise (dBc/Hz2 )

-109In-band Phase Noise (dBc/Hz)

0.22rms Jitter (ps)2.5 Ref Freq (MHz)10 Out Freq (GHz)

van de Beek’03

PLL Performance Summary

This work has 13dB lower £Norm , with several times lower power and smaller area

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE23

Conclusion

- High βCP, CP noise not amplified by ‘N’

- No divider noise

A SSPLL achieves low jitter & low power

- Large filter Cap (Difficulty of integration)

- Limited frequency locking range

Solved SSPLL design issues

SSPD/CP with pulse width gain control

Classical PLL with dead zone as FLL

© 2009 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference © 2009 IEEE24

Acknowledgement

The authors wish to thank

- Ali Djabbari, Jerry Socci and Kim Yeow Wong for useful discussions

- Glen Wells for layout assistance

- Gerard Wienk and Henk de Vries for practicalassistance