Українською
  In English
Новини світу мікро- та наноелектроніки
Compound semiconductor market growing at 10.9% CAGR from $44.5bn in 2023 to $111.6bn in 2032
Simple 74181 example. First time doing something using only a datasheet and my knowledge
![]() | submitted by /u/TheRealZFinch [link] [comments] |
Celestial AI appoints Lip-Bu Tan to board
Luminus adds red and blue multi-mode lasers
My first ever trace repair
![]() | done with a 4$ iron, unleaded solder and no flux [link] [comments] |
Power Tips #137: Implementing LLC current-mode control on the secondary side with a digital controller

Inductor-inductor-capacitor (LLC) serial resonant circuits, as shown in Figure 1, can achieve both zero voltage switching on the primary side and zero current switching on the secondary side in order to improve efficiency and enable a higher switching frequency. In general, an LLC converter uses direct frequency control, which has only one voltage loop and stabilizes its output voltage by adjusting the switching frequency. An LLC with direct frequency control cannot achieve high bandwidth because there is a double pole in the LLC small-signal transfer function that can vary under different load conditions [1] [2]. When including all of the corner conditions, the compensator design for a direct frequency control LLC becomes tricky and complicated.
Current-mode control can eliminate the double pole with an inner control loop, achieving high bandwidth under all operating conditions with a simple compensator. Hybrid hysteretic control is a method of LLC current-mode control that combines charge control and ramp compensation [3]. This method maintains the good transient performance of charge control, but avoids the related stability issues under no- or light-load conditions by adding slope compensation. The UCC256404 LLC resonant controller from Texas Instruments proves this method’s success.
Figure 1 LLC serial resonant circuits that achieve both zero voltage switching on the primary side and zero current switching on the secondary side. Source: Texas Instruments
Principles of LLC current-mode control
Similar to pulse-width modulation (PWM) converters such as buck and boost, peak current-mode control controls the inductor current in each switching cycle and simplifies the inner control loop into a first-order system. Reference [2] proposes LLC charge control with the resonant capacitor voltage.
In an LLC converter, the resonant tank operates like a swing. The high- and low-side switches are pushing and pulling the voltage on the resonant capacitor: when the high-side switch turns on, the voltage on the resonant capacitor will swing up after the resonant current turns positive; conversely, when the low-side switch turns on, the voltage on the resonant capacitor will swing down after the resonant current turns negative.
Energy flows into the resonant converter when the high-side switch turns on. If you remove the input decoupling capacitor, the power delivered into the resonant tank equals the integration of the product of the input voltage and the input current. If you neglect the dead time, Equation 1 expresses the energy in each switching cycle.
In Equation 1, the input voltage is constant, and the input current equals the absolute of the resonant current. So, you can modify Equation 1 into Equation 2.
Looking at the resonant capacitor, the integration of the resonant current is proportional to the voltage variation on the resonant capacitor (Equation 3).
Equation 4 deduces the energy delivered into the resonant tank.
From Equation 4, it is obvious that the energy delivered in one switching cycle is proportional to the voltage variation on the resonant capacitor when the high-side switch turns on. This is very similar to peak current control in a buck or boost converter, in which the energy is proportional to the peak current of the inductor.
LLC current-mode control controls the energy delivered in each switching cycle by controlling the voltage variation on the resonant capacitor, as shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2 The LLC current-mode control principle that manages the energy delivered in each switching cycle by controlling the voltage variation on the resonant capacitor. Source: Texas Instruments
LLC current-mode control with MCUsFigure 3 shows the logic of a current-mode LLC implemented with the TMS320F280039C C2000 32-bit microcontroller (MCU) from Texas Instruments, which includes a hardware-based delta voltage of resonant capacitor (ΔVCR) comparison, pulse generation and maximum period limitation [4].
In LLC current-mode control, signal Vc comes from the voltage loop compensator, and signal VCR is the voltage sense of the resonant capacitor. A C2000 comparator subsystem module has an internal ramp generator that can automatically provide downsloped compensation to Vc. You just need to set the initial value of the ramp generator; the digital-to-analog converter (DAC) will provide the downsloped VCR limitation (Vc_ramp) based on the slope setting. The comparator subsystem module compares the analog signal of VCR with the sloped limitation, and generates a trigger event (COMPARE_EVT) to trigger enhanced PWM (ePWM) through the ePWM X-bar.
The action qualifier submodule in ePWM receives the compare event from the comparator subsystem and pulls low the high side of PWM (PWMH) in each switching cycle. The configurable logic block then duplicates the same pulse width to the low side of PWM (PWML) after PWMH turns low. After PWML turns low, the configurable logic block generates a synchronous pulse to reset all of the related modules and resets PWMH to high. The process repeats with a new switching cycle.
Besides the compare actions, the time base submodule limits the maximum pulse width of PWMH and PWML, which determines the minimum switching frequency of the LLC converter. If the compare event hasn’t appeared until the timer counts to the maximum setting, the time base submodule will reset the AQ submodule and pull down PWMH, replacing the compare event action from the comparator subsystem module.
This hardware logic forms the inner VCR variation control, which controls the energy delivered to the resonant tank in each switching cycle. You can then design the outer voltage loop compensator, using the traditional interrupt service routine to calculate and refresh the setting of the VCR variation amplitude to Vc.
For a more detailed description of the hybrid hysteretic control logic, see Reference [1].
Figure 3 LLC current-mode control logic with a C2000 MCU where the signal Vc comes from the voltage loop compensator, and the signal VCR is the voltage sense of the resonant capacitor. Source: Texas Instruments
Experimental resultsI tested the current-mode control method described here on a 1-kW half-bridge LLC platform with the TMS320F280039C MCU. Figure 4 shows the Bode plot of the voltage loop under a 400 V input and 42 A load, proving that the LLC can achieve 6 kHz of bandwidth with a 50-degree phase margin.
Figure 4 The Bode plot of a current-mode control LLC with a 400 V input and 42 A load. Source: Texas Instruments
Figure 5 compares the load transient between direct frequency control and hybrid hysteretic control with a 400-V input and a load transient from 10 A to 80 A with a 2.5 A/µs slew rate. As you can see, the hybrid hysteretic control current-mode control method can achieve better a load transient response than a traditional direct frequency control LLC.
For more experimental test data and waveforms, see Reference [5].
Figure 5 Load transient with direct frequency control (a) and hybrid hysteretic control (b), from 10 A to 80 A with a 2.5 A/µs slew rate under a 400 VDC input. Green is the primary current; light blue is the output voltage, with DC coupled; purple is the output voltage, with AC coupled; and dark blue is the output current. Source: Texas Instruments
Digital current-mode controlled LLCThe digital current-mode controlled LLC can achieve higher control bandwidth than direct frequency control and hold very low voltage variation during load transition. In N+1 redundancy and parallel applications, this control method can keep the bus voltage within the regulation range during hot swapping or protecting. So, this control method has been widely adopted in data center power and AI server power with this fast response feature and digital programable ability.
Desheng Guo is a system engineer at Texas Instruments, where he is responsible for developing power solutions as part of the power delivery industrial segment. He has created multiple reference designs and is familiar with AC-DC power supply, digital control, and GaN products. He received a master’s degree from the Harbin Institute of Technology in power electronics in 2007, and previously worked for Huawei Technology and Delta Electronics before joining TI.
Related Content
- Power Tips #84: Think outside the LLC series resonant converter box
- Power Tips #117: Measure your LLC resonant tank before testing at full operating conditions
- Power Tips #122: Overview of a planar transformer used in a 1-kW high-density LLC power module
- Power Tips #97: Shape an LLC-SRC gain curve to meet battery charger needs
- Power Tips #92: High-frequency resonant converter design considerations, Part 2
References
- Hu, Zhiyuan, Yan-Fei Liu, and Paresh C. Sen. “Bang-Bang Charge Control for LLC Resonant Converters.” Published in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics 30, no. 2, (February 2015): pp. 1093-1108. doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2014.2313130.
- McDonald, Brent, and Yalong Li. “A novel LLC resonant controller with best-in-class transient performance and low standby power consumption.” Published in 2018 IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC), San Antonio, Texas, March 4-8, 2018, pp. 489-493. doi: 10.1109/APEC.2018.8341056.
- “UCC25640x LLC Resonant Controller with Ultra-Low Audible Noise and Standby Power.” Texas Instruments data sheet, literature No. SLUSD90E, February 2021.
- Li, Aki, Desheng Guo, Peter Luong, and Chen Jiang. “Digital Control Implementation for Hybrid Hysteretic Control LLC Converter.” Texas Instruments application note, literature No. SPRADJ1A, August 2024.
- Texas Instruments. n.d. “1-kW, 12-V HHC LLC reference design using C2000
real-time microcontroller.” Texas Instruments reference design No. PMP41081. Accessed Jan. 16, 2025.
The post Power Tips #137: Implementing LLC current-mode control on the secondary side with a digital controller appeared first on EDN.
IQE raises full-year 2024 revenue and adjusted EBITDA guidance
Top 10 Robot Manufacturers in India
India’s robotics industry has witnessed tremendous growth in recent years, fueled by the rising demand for automation across various sectors such as manufacturing, healthcare, logistics, and agriculture. With a strong push toward innovation and Make in India initiatives, Indian robotics companies are making significant strides on the global stage. Here’s a look at the top 10 robot manufacturers in India, leading the charge in this transformative industry.
1. GreyOrangeHeadquarters: Gurugram
GreyOrange is a global name in robotics and warehouse automation. The company designs and manufactures AI-powered robotic systems such as Autonomous Mobile Robots (AMRs) and Sortation Robots. Their solutions are widely used in e-commerce, retail, and logistics industries. GreyOrange’s innovative approach has positioned it as a pioneer in robotic fulfillment solutions.
2. Hi-Tech Robotic SystemzHeadquarters: Gurugram
Hi-Tech Robotic Systemz specializes in autonomous mobility solutions and industrial automation. The company develops robotic systems for material handling, warehouse automation, and autonomous vehicles. Their expertise in AI and machine learning ensures highly efficient and scalable solutions.
3. Milagrow RobotsHeadquarters: Gurugram
Milagrow is a well-known name in consumer robotics, particularly for its floor-cleaning and service robots. The company offers a range of robots for domestic, industrial, and agricultural applications. Their focus on user-friendly designs and affordability has made them a household name in India.
4. SystemanticsHeadquarters: Bengaluru
Systemantics focuses on building industrial robots to enhance productivity in manufacturing. The company specializes in articulated robots and SCARA robots, which are used for tasks such as assembly, material handling, and packaging. Their indigenously developed solutions aim to make robotics more accessible to Indian manufacturers.
5. GridbotsHeadquarters: Ahmedabad
Gridbots is a leader in AI and robotics, providing solutions for industries like defense, nuclear, and automotive. The company develops robotic systems for inspection, quality control, and hazardous material handling. Their robots are known for their precision and reliability in complex environments.
6. Asimov RoboticsHeadquarters: Kochi
Asimov Robotics focuses on humanoid robots and robotics for healthcare, education, and customer service. The company’s robots are designed for applications such as patient care, training, and visitor assistance. Their innovation in humanoid technology is paving the way for advanced human-robot interaction.
7. ABB IndiaHeadquarters: Bengaluru
A subsidiary of the global automation giant ABB, ABB India is a key player in industrial robotics. The company offers a wide range of robotic solutions for welding, painting, assembly, and material handling. ABB India’s robots are widely used in automotive, electronics, and food processing industries.
8. Fanuc IndiaHeadquarters: Bengaluru
Fanuc India, a subsidiary of Fanuc Corporation, is a market leader in CNC machines and industrial robots. Their robots are used for automation in sectors like automotive, aerospace, and electronics. Known for their reliability and precision, Fanuc India’s robots are a benchmark in industrial automation.
9. Kuka Robotics IndiaHeadquarters: Pune
Kuka Robotics India specializes in industrial robots and automation solutions. Their robots are used for applications such as welding, material handling, and assembly. Kuka’s advanced robotic systems are widely adopted in automotive and manufacturing industries across India.
10. Yaskawa IndiaHeadquarters: Bengaluru
Yaskawa India is a leading provider of robotics and automation solutions. Their offerings include industrial robots for welding, assembly, packaging, and palletizing. Yaskawa’s robots are known for their speed, precision, and adaptability in various industrial processes.
ConclusionIndia’s robotics industry is rapidly evolving, driven by the demand for automation and technological advancements. With continued investments in R&D and government support, these top 10 robot manufacturers in India are set to shape the future of automation, not just within the country but globally as well.
The post Top 10 Robot Manufacturers in India appeared first on ELE Times.
PseudolithIC raises $6m in seed funding to accelerate development and commercialization of hybrid semiconductors
Top 10 Drone Parts Companies in India
India’s drone ecosystem has seen remarkable growth in recent years, driven by government initiatives, advancements in technology, and a booming demand for drones across sectors like agriculture, defense, logistics, and surveillance. With the rise of drone manufacturing comes the need for reliable, high-quality components. Here, we take a look at the top 10 drone parts companies in India that are propelling this industry forward.
1. IdeaForgeHeadquarters: Mumbai
IdeaForge is one of India’s leading drone manufacturers, specializing in Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). Beyond making drones, the company also develops critical components like flight controllers and communication systems. Known for its rugged and high-performance designs, IdeaForge caters to industries like defense, mining, and disaster management.
2. Aero360Headquarters: Hyderabad
Aero360 has established itself as a key player in providing components like propellers, frames, and motors tailored for high-performance drones. The company emphasizes customizability, allowing clients to design solutions specific to their needs. Aero360’s products are widely used in both commercial and industrial applications.
3. Garuda AerospaceHeadquarters: Chennai
Garuda Aerospace specializes in agricultural and commercial drones but also develops vital parts such as battery systems, GPS modules, and autopilots. The company is heavily involved in precision farming and surveillance, and its in-house development of components ensures high reliability.
4. Asteria AerospaceHeadquarters: Bengaluru
Asteria Aerospace is another significant name in India’s drone landscape, focusing on both hardware and software solutions. They design and manufacture high-grade payload systems, gimbals, and communication modules that cater to sectors like surveillance, mapping, and infrastructure inspection.
5. Omnipresent Robot TechHeadquarters: Gurgaon
Omnipresent Robot Tech is a prominent provider of drone parts, including sensors, cameras, and propulsion systems. The company has made waves in areas such as industrial inspections, disaster management, and security. They are known for their focus on cutting-edge technology and seamless integration of components.
6. Dhaksha Unmanned SystemsHeadquarters: Chennai
Specializing in agricultural drones, Dhaksha Unmanned Systems also produces essential components like spraying mechanisms, power distribution boards, and electronic speed controllers. Their innovative solutions are particularly beneficial for India’s farming community, addressing challenges like crop monitoring and pesticide application.
7. TATA Advanced SystemsHeadquarters: Hyderabad
TATA Advanced Systems is a pioneer in the defense and aerospace sector, including the drone industry. The company develops advanced components such as sensors, communication systems, and power solutions, which are integrated into UAVs designed for military and industrial applications.
8. Adani Defence and AerospaceHeadquarters: Ahmedabad
Adani Defence and Aerospace is a key contributor to India’s UAV ecosystem, offering a range of components such as propulsion systems, surveillance payloads, and radar technologies. With a strong focus on defense, their products ensure high performance and reliability in critical missions.
9. BotLab DynamicsHeadquarters: New Delhi
BotLab Dynamics has gained attention for its innovative work in drone light shows and swarming technology. The company also develops parts like communication systems and flight controllers, enabling seamless coordination between multiple UAVs. Their technology is increasingly being used in events, defense, and entertainment.
10. Skylark DronesHeadquarters: Bengaluru
Skylark Drones focuses on enterprise solutions but also contributes to the component supply chain. They produce payload systems, camera mounts, and power solutions for drones used in mining, infrastructure, and surveying. Their ability to deliver scalable solutions has made them a trusted name in the industry.
ConclusionIndia’s drone industry is not just limited to manufacturing complete UAVs; it is also creating a robust supply chain of critical components. The top 10 drone parts companies in India, including IdeaForge, Garuda Aerospace, and Asteria Aerospace, are leading the charge by innovating and producing reliable parts that meet diverse industry demands. As the industry continues to evolve, these companies will play a crucial role in defining India’s position in the global drone ecosystem.
The post Top 10 Drone Parts Companies in India appeared first on ELE Times.
BayaTronics Expands Testing Capabilities with Seica Pilot V8 NEXT Flying Probe System
Seica, Inc. is pleased to announce that BayaTronics, a leading technology, supply chain and manufacturing solutions provider, has expanded its advanced testing capabilities with the acquisition of the PILOT V8 NEXT. The system was recently installed in BayaTronics’ new state-of-the-art facility in Concord, NC.
This state-of-the-art flying probe test system reaffirms BayaTronics’ commitment to producing top-quality PCBs for critical applications across various industries.
The PILOT V8 NEXT delivers unmatched performance, speed and flexibility. Its vertical architecture allows for simultaneous probing on both sides of the Unit Under Test (UUT), optimizing efficiency and ensuring precise test results. This dual-sided probing capability significantly enhances productivity while maintaining the high testing standards required for today’s advanced electronics manufacturing.
“At BayaTronics, we produce top-quality PCBs for critical applications,” said Dirk Warriner, CEO of BayaTronics. “Seica’s state-of-the-art flying probe test system enhances our testing processes, ensuring superior accuracy and efficiency, which is critical for the success of our customers’ products.”
As a trusted partner for domestic customers, BayaTronics provides high-volume, cost-competitive solutions without compromising on quality. The company specializes in printed circuit board assembly (PCBA), final assembly, and material management, offering comprehensive support for end-to-end supply chain requirements. By assisting customers with design for manufacturability, new product introduction, and material procurement, BayaTronics helps optimize costs and streamline production processes.
BayaTronics’ acquisition of the PILOT V8 NEXT reinforces its leadership in advanced manufacturing solutions, enhancing its capacity to deliver precision and efficiency to meet customer needs.
The post BayaTronics Expands Testing Capabilities with Seica Pilot V8 NEXT Flying Probe System appeared first on ELE Times.
Light Sensor Market Illuminating Trends and Innovations Shaping the Future of Sensing Technology
The Light Sensor Market has been experiencing significant growth in recent years, driven by technological advancements, a rise in smart devices, and increasing demand across various industries such as automotive, consumer electronics, and healthcare. The market is projected to continue its upward trajectory, spurred by innovations that are enhancing the accuracy, efficiency, and functionality of light sensing technologies.
The Light Sensor Market is expected to surpass a valuation of US$ 4.8 billion by the close of 2032, maintaining a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 8.2% from 2022 to 2032. During this period, the market is projected to witness an absolute dollar opportunity of US$ 2.6 billion, driven by rising demand for light sensors across various industries.
As the world becomes increasingly connected, light sensors are poised to play a pivotal role in shaping the future of sensing technology, enabling smarter and more intuitive systems in our daily lives.
Key Trends and InnovationsOne of the most notable trends in the Light Sensor Market is the integration of these sensors into a broad range of devices and applications. The automotive industry, for example, has embraced light sensors to enhance vehicle safety and functionality. Adaptive headlights, which adjust the direction and range of a car’s headlights based on the surrounding light conditions, are just one application that relies heavily on light sensors. This innovation improves driving safety by optimizing visibility in changing environmental conditions, such as fog, rain, or low-light scenarios.
Another significant trend is the growth of smart homes and buildings. The increasing adoption of Internet of Things (IoT)-enabled devices has driven the demand for light sensors to automate lighting control systems. These sensors detect ambient light levels and adjust lighting accordingly, offering energy efficiency and cost savings. According to Persistence Market Research, sensors that enable features like automated window shading and intelligent daylight harvesting are becoming more prevalent, ensuring that buildings maintain optimal lighting conditions without wasting energy.
Technological AdvancementsTechnological advancements have significantly improved the performance and versatility of light sensors. One of the most impactful developments has been the integration of multiple sensing capabilities into a single sensor unit. This multi-sensor approach allows for more complex and precise measurements, providing valuable data for applications such as smart cities and industrial automation. These sensors can now detect not only light intensity but also color temperature, UV exposure, and even proximity, making them highly adaptable for a variety of use cases.
Miniaturization of sensors is another innovation that is transforming the market. As devices continue to get smaller and more portable, the demand for compact, efficient light sensors has surged. The advancement of microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) technology has been a key enabler of this miniaturization. MEMS-based light sensors offer improved accuracy and sensitivity while maintaining a small footprint, making them ideal for applications in wearables, smartphones, and other consumer electronics.
Market Drivers and OpportunitiesThe increasing adoption of smart devices and automation systems is a key driver of the Light Sensor Market. As consumers demand more intelligent and energy-efficient products, manufacturers are incorporating light sensors into a wide range of devices, from home appliances to health monitoring systems. The automotive sector, too, is capitalizing on these advancements, particularly in the development of autonomous vehicles, where light sensors are integral to providing real-time data for navigation and environmental awareness.
Furthermore, the rise of energy-conscious consumers has created a robust market for light sensors in energy management applications. By enabling more efficient lighting control, light sensors are helping to reduce energy consumption in both residential and commercial settings. This trend is particularly relevant in the context of global sustainability efforts, where energy efficiency and conservation are top priorities.
The healthcare industry is also a growing source of demand for light sensors. These sensors are being used in medical devices that monitor patients’ health conditions, such as pulse oximeters that measure blood oxygen levels through light absorption. As healthcare becomes more personalized and technology-driven, the role of light sensors in patient care and monitoring is expected to expand significantly.
Challenges and RestraintsWhile the Light Sensor Market presents vast opportunities, it is not without its challenges. One of the key obstacles is the high cost associated with advanced light sensor technologies. Although the miniaturization and increased efficiency of these sensors have made them more affordable, the initial investment in cutting-edge solutions can still be a barrier for smaller businesses or emerging markets.
Another challenge is the need for greater standardization across the industry. As the market continues to evolve, there is a pressing need for standardized protocols and communication systems to ensure seamless integration across various devices and applications. This will be essential for promoting widespread adoption and ensuring compatibility between different manufacturers’ products.
ConclusionThe Light Sensor Market is evolving at a rapid pace, driven by advancements in technology and the increasing integration of sensors into a wide range of industries. As smart devices, IoT, and automation continue to shape our world, the role of light sensors in providing real-time data and enabling intelligent systems will become more important than ever. With ongoing innovations and a growing focus on energy efficiency and sustainability, the future of light sensors looks bright, offering exciting opportunities for manufacturers, developers, and end-users alike.
The post Light Sensor Market Illuminating Trends and Innovations Shaping the Future of Sensing Technology appeared first on ELE Times.
Keysight Introduces Comprehensive LPDDR6 Solution for End-to-End Memory Design and Test Workflows
Keysight Technologies, Inc. announced the Low-Power Double Data Rate 6 (LPDDR6) design and test solution, a complete design and test solution to support the next technology wave for memory systems. The solution significantly improves device and system validation, providing new test automation tools necessary for advancing AI, especially in mobile and edge devices.
The memory market is evolving due to the rising demand for high-performance computing, AI, and energy-efficient mobile applications. LPDDR6 significantly enhances performance and efficiency to support next-generation compute system requirements, making it a crucial upgrade for contemporary devices.
Test complexity has grown with the adoption of next-generation memory devices such as LPDDR6, HBM4, and GDDR7. These technologies demand advanced test methods to ensure reliability and performance, and reducing test times while maintaining accuracy is a constant challenge.
Keysight’s complete workflow solution consists of transmitter and receiver test applications and the Advanced Design System (ADS) Memory Designer workflow solution. The LPDDR6 test solution can be paired with Keysight EDA software and the Keysight Memory Designer bundle to achieve faster design confidence from simulation to verification and test. The LPDDR6 test automation solution is based on Keysight’s UXR oscilloscope and high-performance M8040A Bit Error Ratio Tester.
LPDDR6’s impact is expected to reach beyond mobile devices. The new memory standard’s combination of high performance and power efficiency makes it particularly suitable for AI and machine learning applications, high-speed digital computing, automotive systems, data centers, and other edge applications areas where the balance between processing power and energy consumption is crucial.
Key Benefits of Keysight’s LPDDR6 Test Solution: Accelerate Time-to-Market with Advanced Transmitter Testing- Reduce validation time with fully automated compliance testing and characterization
- Capture precise measurements quickly using industry-leading low-noise technology
- Debug design issues faster with streamlined data analysis tools
- Analyze device BER performance with extrapolated eye mask margin testing
- Achieve accurate signal measurements directly from BGA packages with specialized de-embedding capabilities
- Validate designs confidently using proven Bit Error Ratio testing methodology
- Pinpoint performance issues early by testing against multiple jitter, crosstalk, and noise scenarios
- Maximize signal integrity through detailed BER analysis and receiver equalization optimization
- Ensure high interoperability with both device and host controller validation
- Enable faster user experiences with higher data rates support
- Extend battery life and reduce power consumption in mobile and data center applications
- Build more reliable products with enhanced data integrity and system stability features
Dr. Joachim Peerlings, Vice President and General Manager, Network and Datacenter Solutions, Keysight, said: “As a leader in memory design and test solutions, Keysight continues to collaborate with JEDEC to develop the LPDDR6 standard. This new LPDDR6 standard is set to revolutionize the market, offering unprecedented speed, efficiency, and reliability, enabling the industry’s AI Edge rollout. As the deployment and use of next-generation memory devices are growing, Keysight has achieved a significant milestone in enabling faster time to market for LPDDR6 memory designs.”
The new receiver and transmitter solution will be shown to the public for the first time at DesignCon 2025, Jan 29-30, at booth number 1039 in Santa Clara, California.
The post Keysight Introduces Comprehensive LPDDR6 Solution for End-to-End Memory Design and Test Workflows appeared first on ELE Times.
Microchip Launches the Next Generation of its Low-Noise Chip-Scale Atomic Clock Featuring a Lower Profile Height of Less Than ½ Inch
The Low-Noise Chip-Scale Atomic Clock, model SA65-LN, enables frequency mixing for battery-powered devices
Developers need ultra-clean timing devices for aerospace and defense applications where size, weight, and power (SWaP) constraints are critical. A Chip-Scale Atomic Clock (CSAC) is an essential reference for these systems, providing the necessary precise and stable timing where traditional atomic clocks are too large or power-hungry and where other satellite-based references may be compromised. Microchip Technology today announces its second generation Low-Noise Chip-Scale Atomic Clock (LN-CSAC), model SA65-LN, in a lower profile height and designed to operate in a wider temperature range, enabling low phase noise and atomic clock stability in demanding conditions.
Microchip has developed its own Evacuated Miniature Crystal Oscillator (EMXO) technology and integrated it into a CSAC, enabling the model SA65-LN to offer a reduced profile height of less than ½ inch, while maintaining a power consumption of <295 mW. The new design is optimal for aerospace and defense mission-critical applications such as mobile radar, dismounted radios, dismounted IED jamming systems, autonomous sensor networks and unmanned vehicles due to its compact size, low power consumption and high precision. Operating within a wider temperature range of -40°C to +80°C, the new LN-CSAC is designed to maintain its frequency and phase stability in extreme conditions for enhanced reliability.
“A significant advancement in frequency technology, our next generation LN-CSAC provides exceptional stability and precision in a remarkably compact form,” said Randy Brudzinski, corporate vice president of Microchip’s frequency and time systems business unit. “This device enables our customers to achieve superior signal clarity and atomic-level accuracy, while also benefiting from reduced design complexity and lower power consumption.”
The LN-CSAC combines the benefits of a crystal oscillator and an atomic clock in a single compact device. The EMXO offers low-phase noise at 10 Hz < -120 dBc/Hz and Allan Deviation (ADEV) stability <1E-11 at a 1-second averaging time. The atomic clock provides initial accuracy of ±0.5 ppb, low frequency drift performance of <0.9 ppb/mo, and maximum temperature-induced errors of < ±0.3ppb. Together, the LN-CSAC can save board space, design time and overall power consumption compared to designs that feature two oscillators.
The crystal signal purity and low-phase noise of LN-CSAC are designed to ensure high-quality signal integrity, which is essential for frequency mixing. The atomic-level accuracy allows for longer intervals between calibrations, which can help extend mission durations and potentially reduce maintenance requirements.
Microchip’s products for aerospace and defense are designed to meet the stringent requirements of these markets, offering high reliability, precision and durability. The company’s solutions include microcontrollers (MCUs), microprocessors (MPUs), FPGAs, power management, memory, security and timing devices that ensure optimal performance in mission-critical applications such as avionics, radar systems, and secure communications. Visit Microchip’s aerospace and defense solutions web page for more information.
The post Microchip Launches the Next Generation of its Low-Noise Chip-Scale Atomic Clock Featuring a Lower Profile Height of Less Than ½ Inch appeared first on ELE Times.
The world’s smallest eSIM solution for mobile consumer devices: Infineon launches OPTIGA™ Connect Consumer OC1230
Wearables, smartphones, tablets: In the consumer sector in particular, the demand for ever greater functionality, simplicity, and battery lifetime is increasing. Infineon Technologies AG contributes to these requirements with the introduction of the OPTIGA Connect Consumer OC1230. It is the world’s smallest GSMA-compliant and first 28 nm eSIM solution. OPTIGA Connect Consumer allows up to 50 percent less energy consumption compared to eSIMs on the market, extending the lifetime of the device’s battery without compromising on performance. It also contributes largely to more convenience since eSIMs can be managed remotely, making haptic SIM changes abundant thus saving time and resources and allowing for greater flexibility. Smartphone users can switch between different providers more easily, manufacturers can be more flexible in their design since physical access is not required. This can be a large advantage in IoT devices. Above all, OPTIGA Connect Consumer OC1230 is ideal for consumer devices such as smartphones, tablets, and notebooks, and even for small devices such as smartwatches and other wearables as well as 5G routers and POS payment terminals.
The OPTIGA Connect Consumer OC1230’s security architecture is based on Arm v8 and Infineon’s Integrity Guard 32 technology for increased performance and reduced power consumption. It enables a gain of 25 percent power/performance ratio compared to existing eSIMs on the market, thus extending the lifetime of the device’s battery. Remote SIM provisioning (RSP) and multiple enabled profiles (MEP) compliant with GSMA SGP.22 v3 enhance the end user experience. Users can download and store several mobile network operator profiles and remotely activate multiple profiles simultaneously.
With only 1.8 x 1.6 x 0.4 mm, the ultra-small chip-scale packaging reduces printed circuit board (PCB) space requirements by a factor of 37 relative to Nano SIMs and by a factor of 130 compared to standard SIMs. The OPTIGA Connect Consumer OC1230 is also available in X2QFN20 (3.0 x 3.0 x 0.3 mm) package. The eSIM solution features a large memory of 1 MB to accommodate multiple network operator profiles along with additional applications and user data.
OPTIGA Connect Consumer OC1230 is security evaluated according to BSI-CC-PP-0100-2018, specified in GSMA SGP.25 and is based on post-quantum-cryptography-(PQC) ready hardware.
The post The world’s smallest eSIM solution for mobile consumer devices: Infineon launches OPTIGA™ Connect Consumer OC1230 appeared first on ELE Times.
Fortune Cookie
![]() | This was inside my fortune cookie at lunch today. [link] [comments] |
TRUMPF and iThera demo VCSEL-based subsystem for optoacoustic medical imaging and sensing
Ortel transfers C-band high-power cw laser from Emcore fab to Canadian Photonics Fabrication Centre
III–V Epi advocates GaAs epi regrowth for emerging semiconductor laser applications
Error assessment and mitigation of an innovative data acquisition front end

The recent design idea (DI) “Negative time-constant and PWM program a versatile ADC front end” disclosed an inventive programmable gain amplifier with integral samples-and-holds. The circuit schematic from the DI appears in Figure 1. Briefly, a PWM signal controls the switches shown. In the X0 positions, a differential signal connected to the inputs of op amps U1a and U1b drives a new voltage sample across capacitor C1 through switches U2a and U2b. Because switch U2c’s X-to-X1 connection is open, capacitor C2 is “holding” a version of the previous sample. This “held” version was amplified by the subcircuit consisting of U2a, U2b, U1c, C1, R1, R2, and R3 with switches in the X1 position. The U1c-based gain-of-two amplifier applies positive feedback through R1 and U2a to the load of C1 in series with the resistance of U2b. This causes the voltage across the load to increase exponentially (with a positive time constant), affording a gain which is a function of the time period that the switches are in the X1 position. The advantage of this approach is that programmable, wideband gains of 60 dB or more can be achieved because the op amps’ maximum closed loop gain is only 6 dB; bandwidth is not sacrificed to achieve a high closed-loop gain.
Wow the engineering world with your unique design: Design Ideas Submission Guide
Figure 1 Two generic chips and five passives make a versatile and unconventional ADC front end.
As with any design, this one has errors and characteristics whose nature must be understood before compensation can be considered. These include passive component tolerances; op amp input currents (negligible) and offset voltages; switch turn-on and turn-off times; leakage currents; as well as resistances and switching-induced charge injections. A non-obvious error can also exist which might be termed a “dead zone”. At time t = 0 when the X1 positions are initially active, the sum of a positive low amplitude VIN – (-VIN) input voltage sample and various errors can yield a negative voltage at the non-inverting input of U1c. Consequentially, U1c’s output voltage would not trend positive and, assuming the analog-to-digital converter (ADC) driven by VOUT accepts only positive voltages, the circuit would not work properly. To understand how to bound this undesirable behavior and for other reasons, it’s wise to develop equations to analyze circuit behavior. Some analytic simplicity is possible when the switches are in the X0 position and operation is mostly intuitive. But operation in the X1 position will require a bit of a deeper dive.
Charge injection errorOp amp input offset voltages and switch resistances are commonly well-understood. As for switch leakage current and charge injection, there’s a referencei that provides an excellent discussion of each. Charge injection Q is most pernicious when the switch transitions from “on” to “off” and a switch terminal is connected to a circuit path which includes a capacitor C and is characterized by a high resistance.
This extends the time for the error voltage Q/C impressed upon the capacitor to “bleed off”. This is not a concern for U2b’s X pin at any time, because both X0 and X1 positions provide a low “on” resistance path. But it must be considered for U2a and U2c when respectively, X0 and X1 turn off. For U2a, X1 is in series with relatively large resistance R1. When U2c’s X1 is turned off and C2 is in hold mode (allowing an analog to digital conversion), C2 sees X1’s multi-megaohm “off” resistance. There is no mechanism to bleed off and recover from U2c’s charge injection error; it is inherent in circuit operation until the PWM reactivates X1 for “tracking” mode, during which time conversions are precluded.
Leakage currentThis same high resistance might create a real problem due to leakage current. Such currents flow continuously from U2’s power supplies through its internal ESD diodes to the switch terminals. What saves the circuit from these errors is that an analog to digital (A-to-D) conversion of VOUT can be triggered quickly after X1 turns off, before significant leakage current errors can accumulate. Leakage from terminal X of U2b can be ignored because as mentioned before, it’s always connected to a low resistance through X1 to ground or X0 to U1b’s output. Not so the X terminal of U2a with its connection to moderately high resistance R1. Here the leakage current effect must be considered.
LTspice model and equation validationTaking all this into account, equations can be developed with reference to the circuit seen in Figure 2. Figure 2 is an illustration of the LTspice file developed to model Figure 1 circuit operation and compare it with the equations (which are also evaluated in the file) to ensure their accuracies.
U2a charge injection is not explicitly shown in the circuit, but is incorporated by summing it with the intended input sample voltage Vin in the .param Vc0 statement. The .param statements and the circuit constitute the model. These statements and the algebraic expressions assigned to voltage sources eq_1 and eq_VOUT validate the equations by allowing direct comparisons with the performance of the model. This is accomplished by graphing simulations of the circuit and evaluations of the voltage sources and confirming that eq_1 = e_1 and that eq_Vout = Vout. Not accounted for are switch turn on and turn off times. Their effects will be addressed later.
Figure 2 The LTspice file comparing the performances of the circuit model and the equations developed of it.
Reference Figure 1 and Figure 2, particularly Figure 2’s .param statements. At time t = 0 when the X0 switches turn off and the X1’s turn on, the voltage across C1 has been initialized to Vc0 as seen in the C1 initial condition (IC) and the .param Vc0 statements. We can write that the current (w) through C1 can be seen in [1].
Therefore:
Assuming a solution of the form:
Where t = time, [3] and [4] can be seen:
And:
Therefore, the voltage at terminal e_1 can be seen in [6].
To evaluate the voltage at terminal e_2 in the model, it is necessary to convolve the signal at e_1 with the impulse response h(t) of the rc and C2 network shown in [7].
Where the exponential time constant can be seen in [8].
The convolution is given by [9].
This evaluates to [10].
Where:
Allowing for the U2c charge injection and U1d input offset, shown in [12].
or equivalently:
The model and this last equation above predict the circuit output at any time t = t1 immediately after the charge injection of U2c has occurred due to the enabling of the X0 switches.
AssessmentsLet’s get some worst-case error parameter values for U1 and U2. The original DI proposed specific op amp TLV9164ii, but not a particular 74HC4053. Surprisingly, there are significant differences between parts from different 74HC4053 manufacturers. The MAX74HC4053Aiii looks like a reasonable choice. Let’s consider operation of both IC’s in the commercial temperature range of 0 to 70°C. Refer to Table 1 and Table 2.
Supply |
Temperature range |
Input current, typical |
Input offset voltage |
Input offset voltage drift |
Open loop gain minimum |
5-16 V |
-40 to +125oC |
± 10 pA |
± 1.3 mV |
± 0.25 µV/oC |
104 dB |
Table 1 The TLV9164 maximum parameter values.
Supply |
Temperature range |
Switch resistance |
Switch resistance differences |
Flatness, VCOM= ±3V, 0V |
COM current |
NO current |
Charge injection |
Switch t(on) |
Switch t(off) |
± 5 V |
0 to 70 oC |
125 Ω |
12 Ω |
15 Ω |
± 2.5 nA |
± 5 nA |
± 10 pC |
250 ns |
200 ns |
5 V |
0 to 70 oC |
280 Ω |
– |
– |
± 5 nA |
± 10 nA |
± 10 pC |
275 ns |
175 ns |
3 V |
0 to 70 oC |
700 Ω |
– |
– |
± 5 nA |
± 10 nA |
± 10 pC |
700 ns |
400 ns |
Table 2 MAX74HC4053 parameters, maximum values. Note performance degradations when powered by a single supply.
The output of U1c will not move in a positive direction if the sign of the parameter J in [5] is negative. Assuming ADCs whose most negative input value is ground, the circuit will fail to function properly. It’s unlikely that parameters Q1, Voffab, Voffc, and iLeak all take on their worst-case values in a particular circuit, but if they do, Vin will have to be more positive than 10pC/1nF + 2·1.2mV + 1.2mV + 2.5nA * 14300 = 14mV to avoid this “dead zone”. Of course, you’re free to use criterion other than the sum of the worst possibilities, but Caveat Designer!
Another consideration is the circuit settling time in successive PWM periods for the sampling voltage of C1, particularly in the transit between an ADC full-scale voltage to half of its LSB (this is the most extreme case which might not be a requirement for some applications). For a ±5-V powered MAX74HC4053A, two 125-ohm switches in series drive the 1-nF C1. With a 12-bit ADC, the required time is (2·125)·1e-9·ln(212+1) = 2.3 µs. Add the switch on-time of 250 ns, and the PWM should enable the X0 switches for tmin = three of its 1 µs cycles for accurate voltage sample acquisition. By comparison, 8-bit ADC’s can get by with 2 µs.
CalibrationThe iLeak·R1 and the temperature-sensitive portions of U1’s input offset voltage errors are negligible in comparison with the ones caused by charge injection. However, as noted in the referencei and in typical curves provided in the switch datasheetiii, the magnitudes and signs of voltages will significantly affect the sizes of the charge injections Q1 (U2a) and Q2 (U2c) and also somewhat the ra, rb and rc resistances. For Q1, ra, and rb, the U1a and U1b input voltages are not determinable from A-to-D conversions. Increasing the values of capacitors C1 and C2 will reduce the Q/C charge injection-created error magnitudes but will also necessitate increases in PWM times. Avoiding such time increases by reducing the R1 value magnifies the errors due to mismatches of ra, rb and rc.
The resistances ra, rb and rc will vary with both temperature and voltage levels. Applying algebra to [13] shows surprisingly that if ra, rb and rc resistances are identical, there is zero error introduced regardless of their value! (This assumes that enough time has elapsed for the e-t/Tc term to be negligible. ) While not identical, the slightly less than 1% maximum mismatch error can be calibrated out, but only for a given set of switch voltages and temperature. The datasheet does not provide the information required to determine the errors that could occur when the voltages and temperature are other than those present during calibration.
With the circuit as it stands, I know of no way to eliminate temperature- and voltage-sensitive errors. But there are errors insensitive to these conditions that can be calibrated out. The following procedure assumes an ADC of negligible error (its resolution and accuracy require further investigation) and conversion factor CF counts/volt, one perhaps present on the assembly line of a product incorporating this design.
For any instance of this circuit to which specific and accurately known Vin and -Vin (See Figure 1) voltages are applied at a given temperature, [13] can be thought of as a function of time and Vin: VOUT(t, Vin). VOUT(t1, Vin), VOUT(t2, Vin), and VOUT(t3, Vin) can be captured such that t3/3 = t2/2 = t1 > tmin. A t1 value of 15 µs is suitable, and Vin = 20 ms avoids the dead zone. (The reason for such a small input voltage is given later.) A t3 of 45 µs applies a gain of less than 24 and keeps things under a 1.8 V full scale A-to-D level. It will be appreciated that et3/T = (et1/T)3 and et2/T = (et1/T)2 and that:
where each VOUT(t, Vin) is scaled by CF to a measurement made by the product line A-to-D. The difference terms cancel the constant terms in [13], and the ratio cancels the A·N term. Such cancellations are necessary if T is to be determined accurately. [14] is a quadratic equation, the desired of the two solutions of which is given by :
From this, the value of T can be obtained (note that T depends slightly on ra because of Req and so it also depends on voltage and temperature):
Further:
Allowing the solution:
N( ) is a function of Vin (see .param N) and is equal to SVin + U where S and U are unknown and again are slightly dependent on the usual. The process of equations [14] to [18] will need to be repeated with a value Vin2 different from Vin to arrive at an AN2 term. We could use different values of t, but we might as well keep the same ones. We can safely choose Vin2 = 25 mV (incurring a charge injection and switch resistances very close to that with Vin = 20 mV) and calculate:
From [13] it can be seen that:
so that:
Given an A-to-D conversion count and reversing [22], it can be seen that:
never forgetting that even this result is influenced by the usual.
Because of their negligible sensitivities to voltage and temperature, NPO/COG capacitors and 25 ppm or better metal film resistors are recommended. 1% or better parts are available at costs around .01 USD in quantity.
ConclusionsThis innovative circuit has several features to recommend it. It offers differential to single ended conversion with very high CMRR and wide common mode operating range. It offers gains starting at 6 dB in increments of .6dB limited only by the combination of the sampled voltage and saturation at the positive supply rail. Op-amp gains are no greater than 6 dB, so there is no loss of bandwidth due to operation at high closed-loop gains. But this design has some disadvantages.
A detailed calibration scheme is needed which requires the availability on the production line of an ADC whose requirements for accuracy and resolution have not yet been determined. Even with calibration, various errors which cannot be rescued by calibration can impose an operational “dead zone” for circuit input voltages less than up to 14 mV. Errors due to switch charge injection and switch resistance vary with temperature and applied voltages and are difficult if not impossible to calibrate out. The MAX74HC4053A discussed here is a better ‘4053 than others, but another part may exist with less variations in resistance and charge injection.
I would suggest disconnecting the U2c X0 pin. This connection is of limited usefulness and does damage—it injects charge into U1c, affecting the signal fed through R1 to C1. (The effect on C2 during the “hold” mode can be neglected, being of very short duration due to the X1 rc “on” resistance in the C2 path.) If it is decided to retain this connection, please note that its effects have not been accounted for in the foregoing analysis.
Finally, I’d like to acknowledge the comments of eldercosta, a review and comments with some unique perspectives by David Lundquist, and especially the comments and contributions of Stephen Woodward, who designed the circuit discussed in this DI.
Christopher Paul has worked in various engineering positions in the communications industry for over 40 years.
References
ihttps://www.analog.com/media/en/training-seminars/tutorials/MT-088.pdf
iiihttps://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/MAX4051-MAX4053A.pdf
Related Content
- Negative time-constant and PWM program a versatile ADC front end
- In-situ software calibration of the flying capacitor PGINASH
- Brute force mitigation of PWM Vdd and ground “saturation” errors
- Parsing PWM (DAC) performance: Part 3—PWM Analog Filters
- Minimizing passive PWM ripple filter output impedance: How low can you go?
The post Error assessment and mitigation of an innovative data acquisition front end appeared first on EDN.
Сторінки
