The Designer's Guide Community Forum
https://designers-guide.org/forum/YaBB.pl Analog Verification >> Analog Performance Verification >> ADC verification for ENOB close to Nyquist frequency https://designers-guide.org/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1340177753 Message started by weber8722 on Jun 20th, 2012, 12:35am |
Title: ADC verification for ENOB close to Nyquist frequency Post by weber8722 on Jun 20th, 2012, 12:35am Hi, in Cadence ADE calculator the spectrumMeas function is available to get the ENOB of an ADC with sine drive :). It works fine for finput<<fclk, but close the fclk/2 it delivers completely wrong results :-?. Maybe it is a general problem to get ENOB e.g. at 200MHz with 500MHz clock, because you have 2.5 samples only to calculate ENOB (OK you can run a bit longer and take 3 samples). These samples I can pass through an ideal 250MHz low-pass and get a continous signal for frequency calculation. But in simulation this would take a lot of time, so I wonder what would be the correct mathematical way? Does anybody has C or matlab or veriloga or skill code to do this? Bye Stephan |
Title: Re: ADC verification for ENOB close to Nyquist frequency Post by ywguo on Jun 25th, 2012, 7:06pm Hi Stephan, It is glad to know that calculator has a function for ADC performance evaluation. I found the following information in Virtuoso Visualization and Analysis XL User Guide, Product Version 6.1.5 May 2012. Quote:
What is your product version? How many samples do you use for measuring? Best Regards, Yawei |
Title: Re: ADC verification for ENOB close to Nyquist frequency Post by weber8722 on Jul 4th, 2012, 5:40am Hi Yawei, thanks for response. I am using ic615-isr11. I think the bad enob calculation comes because only few points will be hit close to Nyquist frequency. The worst result I got at fin=fNyquist/2=fclk/4. Here 4 points are taken, and you have no benefit in using multiple periods - you just simulate the same stull in the next period. Here spectrumMeas gives me something like 20 as enob for a 6-bit flash-ADC!!! Using not fNyquist/2 but e.g. 0.9*fNyquist/2 and many many periods is much better - but takes much more simulation time. Bye Stephan |
The Designer's Guide Community Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.2.2! YaBB © 2000-2008. All Rights Reserved. |