Breaking News
Blog

Another Tool in the Box to Deliver Better Energy Efficiency

NO RATINGS
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
GSKrasle
User Rank
Author
Test Engineer's cross to bear with AVS
GSKrasle   7/16/2014 4:09:00 PM
NO RATINGS
As a sometime Test Engineer, I have dealt with AVS and similar schemes, and there are particular issues in both Design and Test that have to be dealt with. First of all, the regulator should be designed for efficiency with a view of the use-scenario of the product. If it spends 1% of its time pulling maximum voltage, it probably doesn't make sense to maximize the efficiency then, if it means a loss of efficiency during the other times. So a reasonable use-scenario is important to take best advantage of this technology. For many battery-operated devices, it is probably most important to be efficient during "idle" modes. Or maybe not. The other issue is in Test. When testing power-use, we usually make a tacit assumption that the supply voltage is constant and only the current varies in the VxI=W calculation. That may even be a reasonable incremental approximation in battery devices with slow Vbat changes, but it is not valid for AVS or situations where Rbat is significant; then the problem becomes non-linear, non-time-invariant, and special care has to be used in data acquisition: multiplying Vavg with Iavg does not give Wavg then. Since "averaging" is just low-pass filtering, a data acquisition system can't use low sample-rates and aggressive anti-aliasing filtering; you have to use fa$t sampling, followed by multiplication, THEN filtering+decimation... See http://www.eetimes.com/messages.asp?piddl_msgthreadid=45315&piddl_msgid=302942#msg_302942 for some discussion on this.

Most Recent Comments
michigan0
 
SteveHarris0
 
realjjj
 
SteveHarris0
 
SteveHarris0
 
VicVat
 
Les_Slater
 
SSDWEM
 
witeken
Most Recent Messages
9/25/2016
4:48:30 PM
michigan0 Sang Kim First, 28nm bulk is in volume manufacturing for several years by the major semiconductor companies but not 28nm FDSOI today yet. Why not? Simply because unlike 28nm bulk the LDD(Lightly Doped Drain) to minimize hot carrier generation can't be implemented in 28nm FDSOI. Furthermore, hot carrier reliability becomes worse with scaling, That is the major reason why 28nm FDSOI is not manufacturable today and will not be. Second, how can you suppress the leakage currents from such ultra short 7nm due to the short channel effects? How thin SOI thickness is required to prevent punch-through of un-dopped 7nm FDSOI? Possibly less than 4nm. Depositing such an ultra thin film less then 4nm filum uniformly and reliably over 12" wafers at the manufacturing line is extremely difficult or not even manufacturable. If not manufacturable, the 7nm FDSOI debate is over!Third, what happens when hot carriers are generated near the drain at normal operation of 7nm FDSOI? Electrons go to the positively biased drain with no harm but where the holes to go? The holes can't go to the substrate because of the thin BOX layer. Some holes may become trapped at the BOX layer causing Vt shift. However, the vast majority of holes drift through the the un-dopped SOI channel toward the N+Source,...

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed