Quantcast
Channel: Cadence Custom IC Design Forum
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 4906

PNoise simulation of dynamic comparator

$
0
0

Dear experts,

There has been some prior discussion on this topic (https://community.cadence.com/cadence_technology_forums/f/custom-ic-design/16943/noise-analysis-on-dynamic-comparator) and based on the RAK that was recommended in the post I set up a PSS+PNoise testbench for a clocked comparator. In this process, I noticed that the RAK suggests changing the beat period to 2*period where period is the clock period of the comparator clock. The question is, why should the beat period be set to 2*period and not just set based on what auto calculate returns (which happens to be period, given there is only one large signal clk in the design)? Subsequently when I run the PNoise analysis and compute the total integrated noise (as suggested in the RAK), I did notice a difference by up to 20% in the computed IRN (IRN is 20% less when beat period is set to period instead of 2*period). I would appreciate if some one can throw light on the right beat period to be set in this case.

Thanks and regards


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 4906

Trending Articles



<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>