Designer’s Guide Community

Julian18 Community Member Offline Posts: 55	Different simulation result for gm and d(Id)/d(vg) Oct 23^rd, 2007, 7:02pm use cadence to simulate a single CS MOS, plot gm vs. vg and d(Id)/d(vg) vs. vg, get different results (similar but different plots) , why? Thanks
Back to top	IP Logged

Julian18 Community Member Offline Posts: 55	Re: Different simulation result for gm and d(Id)/d Reply #1 - Oct 23^rd, 2007, 8:20pm here is my simulation result
Back to top	snapshot_001.png IP Logged

rajeee1000 Junior Member Offline Posts: 15 Bangalore	Re: Different simulation result for gm and d(Id)/d Reply #2 - Oct 23^rd, 2007, 9:12pm The difference is probably due to the error in the computation of the derivative. Finite difference tends to the actual derivative as the sweep step approaches zero. May be, you will see the curves closer and closer as you progressively decrease the VGS sweep step. Rajesh
Back to top	IP Logged

Julian18

Community Member

Offline

Posts: 55

Re: Different simulation result for gm and d(Id)/d
Reply #3 - Oct 23^rd, 2007, 11:20pm

rajeee1000 wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2007, 9:12pm:

The difference is probably due to the error in the computation of the derivative. Finite difference tends to the actual derivative as the sweep step approaches zero. May be, you will see the curves closer and closer as you progressively decrease the VGS sweep step.

Rajesh

Thanks Rajesh
I use very small increment to simulate this but I still get the result as before. difference still be there. below is the simulation result

Back to top

snapshot_002.png

IP Logged

buddypoor

Community Fellow

Offline

Posts: 529
Bremen, Germany

Re: Different simulation result for gm and d(Id)/d
Reply #4 - Oct 24^th, 2007, 12:26am

Hello Julian,

since I am not familiar with Cadence: where is the source of "gm" ? Does Cadence have an output parameter called "gm" ?
In Addition, gm is the "mutual conductance" and comprises more than purely the slope of the Id-vg-curve (e.g. the influence of the backward conductance). May be this is the difference.
Regards
Lutz (Germany)

Back to top

LvW (buddypoor: In memory of the great late Buddy Rich)

IP Logged

Julian18

Community Member

Offline

Posts: 55

Re: Different simulation result for gm and d(Id)/d
Reply #5 - Oct 24^th, 2007, 2:50am

buddypoor wrote on Oct 24^th, 2007, 12:26am:

Hello Julian,

since I am not familiar with Cadence: where is the source of "gm" ? Does Cadence have an output parameter called "gm" ?
In Addition, gm is the "mutual conductance" and comprises more than purely the slope of the Id-vg-curve (e.g. the influence of the backward conductance). May be this is the difference.
Regards
Lutz (Germany)

Hi Lutz:
In cadence you can get gm of a MOS using save statement, spectre will give a variable to you called /M0/gm, and you can use it to plot. As to the mutual conductance, Is the definition of gm d(Id)/d(Vg)?? what else does it have to include to become mutual conductance?

Thanks

Back to top

IP Logged

buddypoor

Community Fellow

Offline

Posts: 529
Bremen, Germany

Re: Different simulation result for gm and d(Id)/d
Reply #6 - Oct 24^th, 2007, 4:25am

Hi, Julian !
In fact, there are three small-signal parameters for the transconductance g:
1.) The mutual transconductance measures
the amount of drain current increase caused by the increment in the gate bias:
2.) The drain transconductance measures the amount of drain current increase caused
by the increment in the drain bias.
3.) Finally, the bulk transconductance consideres the effect of back-gate bias on the drain current

Perhaps, the g values corresponding to 2) resp. 3) are not included in the g-calculation of the simulator.
In this context it is, of course, important whether you are simulating the pure MOSFET or the MOSFET with a load resistance.
Moreover, there may be a difference between an "intrinsic" transconductance and the transconductance measured between the terminals of the DUT (influence of internal resistances).
Finally, here is a good reference fpr MOS-modelling:
iwailab.ep.titech.ac.jp/pdf/mnakagawa/mnakagawa_mthesis.pdf

Regards
Lutz[size=12][/size]

Back to top

LvW (buddypoor: In memory of the great late Buddy Rich)

IP Logged

Ken Kundert Global Moderator Offline Posts: 2386 Silicon Valley	Re: Different simulation result for gm and d(Id)/d Reply #7 - Oct 24^th, 2007, 9:41am Is there any source degeneration? That would be included in dId/dVg but not in gm. -Ken
Back to top	IP Logged

genuineintel New Member Offline Posts: 2	Re: Different simulation result for gm and d(Id)/d Reply #8 - Oct 24^th, 2007, 8:38pm The error might come from the AC part of Gm model, I guess.
Back to top	IP Logged

HdrChopper Community Fellow Offline Posts: 493	Re: Different simulation result for gm and d(Id)/d Reply #9 - Oct 25^th, 2007, 7:01pm Hi, When computing the d(Id)/d(vg) you are also considering the effect of the output impedance of the device, while when computing the gm you get the actual value of the controlled output current source "with the output shorted" (no effect of finite output impedance) in the two port model. tosei
Back to top	Keep it simple IP Logged

RobG

Community Fellow

Offline

Posts: 570
Bozeman, MT

Re: Different simulation result for gm and d(Id)/d
Reply #10 - Oct 25^th, 2007, 7:59pm

I noticed the same thing a few weeks ago... I've been designing analog for 15 years so I don't think ;) I was doing something dumb. I did a parametric sweep of a current source into a diode connected device. The slope dI/dVgs did not match gm. It might have been the Rs and Rd terms - I never thought to pursue that. There might be affects from Vds if that is changing too. It will be a while before I can get back to it...

Be aware some companies, including one that begins with N, have a sub-circuit for their mosfets that includes more than just a mosfet. This could make gm different than dI/dVgs

rg

Back to top

IP Logged

nxing Community Member Offline God help the person who help themselves Posts: 46 China	Re: Different simulation result for gm and d(Id)/d Reply #11 - Nov 13^th, 2007, 5:26pm I think the difference is coming from the "big" gm and "small" gm. means for big gm, you get the gm at every DC point, for small gm, you get actually the derivative at that point. they are not necessary the same.
Back to top	IP Logged

jimwest

Junior Member

Offline

Posts: 26

Re: Different simulation result for gm and d(Id)/d
Reply #12 - Nov 15^th, 2007, 6:56pm

Hi Julian,
It's the difference between the gm(just the parameter of the mos) and the effective gm (the ability of converting the voltage to the current).
There are guys who will affect the drain current such as vds.
When plotting gm at the OP, the effect of vds will not be involved. But when plotting the dI/dv, everything which will affect the drain current is introduced.

Kinda Regards,

Jim

Back to top

IP Logged