0
\$\begingroup\$

Content is from the book Design of Analog CMOS Integrated Circuits (https://electrovolt.ir/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Design-of-Analog-CMOS-Integrated-Circuit-2nd-Edition-ElectroVolt.ir_.pdf) on Page 112.

Due to a manufacturing error, in the circuit of Fig. 4.19, \$M_2\$ is twice as wide as \$M_1\$. Calculate the small-signal gain if the DC levels of \$V_{in1}\$ and \$V_{in2}\$ are equal.

enter image description here

The following is my analysis. Since it's symmetrical, we can use virtual ground to analyze this circuit:

enter image description here

First, we only analyze the left part with KCL:

$$ -\frac{V_{out2}} {R_D} = V_{in} g_{m1} + \frac{V_{out2}} {r_{o1}}$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{V_{out2}} {V_{in}} = -g_{m1} (R_D \parallel r_{o1})$$

Now we only analyze the right part with KCL:

$$ -\frac{V_{out1}} {R_D} = -V_{in} g_{m2} + \frac{V_{out1}} {r_{o2}}$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{V_{out1}} {V_{in}} = g_{m2} (R_D \parallel r_{o2})$$

We combine this two equation into one:

$$\frac {V_{out2} - V_{out1}} {2 V_{in}} = -\frac{1}{2} (g_{m1} + g_{m2}) R_D$$

Since \$g_{m2} = 2 g_{m1}\$ $$\frac {V_{out2} - V_{out1}} {2 V_{in}} = -\frac{3}{2} g_{m1} R_D$$

But the book said:

$$|A_v| = \frac{2 R_D} {1/g_{m1} + 1/ g_{m2}} $$ $$|A_v| = \frac{4} {3} g_{m1} R_D$$

\$\endgroup\$
13
  • \$\begingroup\$ Your calculation seems correct but the result is wrong because you cannot split the circuit like that as it's not symetric. The voltage vgs of M1, M2 in this case are not same magnitude as you drew. \$\endgroup\$
    – internet
    Commented Dec 16, 2023 at 12:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ @internet What should you use to analyse this circuit? \$\endgroup\$
    – kile
    Commented Dec 16, 2023 at 13:48
  • \$\begingroup\$ You can always draw the small signal model to calculate gain but for this circuit I can do it in my head. Assume that you use T model for the mosfets and ignore the output impedance. id1 = (Vin1 - Vin2)/(1/gm1 + 1/gm2) Vout = Vout1 - Vout2 = id1*RD - (-id1)*RD = 2id1*RD = 2RD(Vin1 - Vin2)/(1/gm1 + 1/gm2) So Vout/(Vin1-Vin2) = 2RD/(1/gm1 + 1/gm2) = 4/3*gm1*RD with gm2 = 2*gm1 \$\endgroup\$
    – internet
    Commented Dec 16, 2023 at 14:00
  • \$\begingroup\$ @internet Could you please show me the small signal circuit diagram to make it easier to understand you equation? \$\endgroup\$
    – kile
    Commented Dec 16, 2023 at 15:04
  • \$\begingroup\$ check this: yourimageshare.com/ib/fqwo6Yy3wO \$\endgroup\$
    – internet
    Commented Dec 16, 2023 at 15:18

1 Answer 1

0
\$\begingroup\$

The following is my analysis.

enter image description here

Firstly, we analyse the left part of this circuit with the use of KCL.

$$- \frac{V_{out2}} {R_D} = (V_{in1} - V_p) g_{m1} + \frac{V_{out2} -V_p} {r_{o1}}$$

$$\Rightarrow - V_{out2} (\frac{1} {r_{o1}} + \frac{1} {R_D}) = V_{in1} g_{m1} - V_p (g_{m1} + \frac{1} {r_{o1}})$$

$$\Rightarrow V_p = \frac{V_{in1} g_{m1} + V_{out2} (\frac{1} {r_{o1}} + \frac{1} {R_D})} {g_{m1} + \frac{1} {r_{o1}}}$$

Secondly, we analyse the right part of this circuit with the use of KCL.

$$ \frac{V_{out1}} {R_D} = -(V_{in2} - V_p) g_{m2} + \frac{V_p -V_{out1}} {r_{o2}}$$

$$\Rightarrow V_{out1} (\frac{1} {r_{o1}} + \frac{1} {R_D}) = - V_{in2} g_{m2} + V_p (g_{m2} + \frac{1} {r_{o2}})$$

We could substitute \$\frac{V_{in1} g_{m1} + V_{out2} (\frac{1} {r_{o1}} + \frac{1} {R_D})} {g_{m2} + \frac{1} {r_{o2}}}\$ for \$V_p\$ from what we previously got.

$$\Rightarrow V_{out1} (\frac{1} {r_{o1}} + \frac{1} {R_D}) = - V_{in2} g_{m2} + \frac{V_{in1} g_{m1} + V_{out2} (\frac{1} {r_{o1}} + \frac{1} {R_D})} {g_{m1} + \frac{1} {r_{o1}}} (g_{m2} + \frac{1} {r_{o2}})$$

Since we already assume \$g_{m1} r_{o1} \gg 1\$ and \$g_{m2} r_{o2} \gg 1\$

$$\Rightarrow V_{out1} (\frac{1} {r_{o1}} + \frac{1} {R_D}) = - V_{in2} g_{m2} + \frac{V_{in1} g_{m1} + V_{out2} (\frac{1} {r_{o1}} + \frac{1} {R_D})} {g_{m1}} (g_{m2})$$

$$\Rightarrow V_{out1} (\frac{1} {r_{o1}} + \frac{1} {R_D}) = - V_{in2} g_{m2} + V_{in1} g_{m2} + V_{out2} (\frac{1} {r_{o1}} + \frac{1} {R_D}) \frac{g_{m2}} {g_{m1}}$$

$$\Rightarrow V_{out1} (\frac{1} {r_{o1}} + \frac{1} {R_D}) - V_{out2} (\frac{1} {r_{o1}} + \frac{1} {R_D}) \frac{g_{m2}} {g_{m1}}= V_{in1} g_{m2} - V_{in2} g_{m2} $$

We also assume \$r_{o1} \gg R_D\$ and \$r_{o2} \gg R_D \$

$$\Rightarrow V_{out1} (\frac{1} {R_D}) - V_{out2} (\frac{1} {R_D}) \frac{g_{m2}} {g_{m1}}= V_{in1} g_{m2} - V_{in2} g_{m2} $$

$$\Rightarrow (\frac{1} {R_D}) (V_{out1} - V_{out2} \frac{g_{m2}} {g_{m1}}) = V_{in1} g_{m2} - V_{in2} g_{m2} $$

For third equation.

$$- \frac{V_{out2}} {R_D} = \frac{V_{out1}} {R_D}$$

$$\Rightarrow - V_{out2} = V_{out1} $$

Substitute \$-V_{out2}\$ for \$V_{out1}\$

$$\Rightarrow (-\frac{1} {R_D}) V_{out2} (1 + \frac{g_{m2}} {g_{m1}}) = g_{m2} (V_{in1} - V_{in2}) $$

The gain will be

$$\frac{V_{out2} - V_{out1}} {V_{in1} - V_{in2}} = \frac{2 V_{out2}} {V_{in1} - V_{in2}} = \frac{2 g_{m2}} {-\frac{1} {R_D} (1 + \frac{g_{m2}} {g_{m1}})} $$

$$\frac{V_{out2} - V_{out1}} {V_{in1} - V_{in2}} = - \frac{2 R_D g_{m2}} {(1 + \frac{g_{m2}} {g_{m1}})} $$

As we all know \$g_{m2} = 2 g_{m1}\$

$$\frac{V_{out2} - V_{out1}} {V_{in1} - V_{in2}} = - \frac{2 R_D g_{m2}} {(1 + 2)} =- \frac{4 R_D g_{m1}} {3} $$

\$\endgroup\$
8
  • \$\begingroup\$ @internet Could you please have a look at my answer. What's wrong here? \$\endgroup\$
    – kile
    Commented Dec 17, 2023 at 16:21
  • \$\begingroup\$ @G36 Could you please have a look at my answer. What's wrong here? \$\endgroup\$
    – kile
    Commented Dec 17, 2023 at 16:21
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Hearth Could you please have a look at my analysis? \$\endgroup\$
    – kile
    Commented Dec 17, 2023 at 16:43
  • \$\begingroup\$ Hi @kile, I only came across this by chance--you can't @-ping someone who hasn't already commented on the same post, so none of us got notifications for this. I'm afraid I don't have the energy or focus to go through this analysis on my day off, though. \$\endgroup\$
    – Hearth
    Commented Dec 17, 2023 at 20:18
  • \$\begingroup\$ It would be much simpler if you ignore ro1, ro2 at the beginning. I haven't checked your equations but if you need to solve for the general cases, you should write one more KCL equation at node Vp. So now, you would have three equations and three variables Vp, Vout1, Vout2 to solve. \$\endgroup\$
    – internet
    Commented Dec 17, 2023 at 23:41

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.