[time-nuts] Single ended or differential input to TDC chip
dk4xp at arcor.de
Mon Mar 27 20:00:11 EDT 2017
Somewhere you'll have to produce sharp differential edges and this
semi-analogue stuff is probably hard on a chip shared with thousands of
other gates and a digital process. Going differentially into the chip will
reduce the effects of ground bounce etc a lot.
This is what you can expect from an ADCMP580 on a homebrew
board and soldered-in semi rigid cable:
Some will cry: eeek - a comparator, and an ECL or CML one at that, but
in the end
it is just a differential amplifier like that Wenzel design, made by
know their SiGe process.
If you have a slowly rising source, you'll need multi-stage slope
and low pass filtering in Collins style anyway which will be safer to do
If you can specify the interface, go for something speedy, then
the guys who do the the signal source have the hard time and
can be pointed at. :-))
Am 27.03.2017 um 18:05 schrieb Attila Kinali:
> We (the group I am with and a group at TU Vienna) are currently designing
> an ASIC (digital 65nm process) that will contain a TDC part. The TDC will
> be a simple delay line TDC design using differential buffers, which we
> expect to give us something in the order of 20ps of resolution (hopefully
> better, but we will not know until we get post-layout simulation data).
> We are loosely following the design CERN came up with for their new TDC chip.
> Now, the TDC expects a differential input, but the system gets single-ended
> pulses as input (50R coax input, level likely to be CMOS 3.3V, but level not
> fixed yet, ie can be freely choosen). I can either convert these single-ended
> signals into differential off-chip or on-chip. Unfortunately, I lack knowledge
> and experience to judge either approach. The issues I see are:
> * Single-ended input in a chip might lead to shifting ground potential
> on the chip and thus to measurment jitter.
> * There are different architectures to preform the single-ended to differential
> conversion on-chip, but I have no clue which one to choose or even how
> to judge them without extensive simulations for which we do not have the
> time, know-how and probably not even the tools.
> * Conversion to differential off-chip means another component off-chip
> that might introduce additional delay uncertainty (our application is
> very sensitive to that) and an unknown amount of jitter.
> My google foo has been so far not strong enough to find answers to these
> I would appreciate if someone could give me some hints in this matter
> or tell me where I could find appropriate literature and maybe even
> tell me whether I am missing anything.
> Thanks in advance
> Attila Kinali
>  https://indico.cern.ch/event/228972/contributions/1539621/attachments/378552/526492/TDC_TWEPP_2013.pdf
More information about the time-nuts