This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

Reducing a digital signal's rise-time from 2ns to 60ns

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TMUX6112, LMK01801, DSLVDS1048, TMUX1101

  1. Hello
  2. I am trying to drive an analog switch TMUX 6112 with digital SEL inputs having a bandwidth of 250MHz which is just too fast for the Switch. Now I need to reduce the bandwidth such that the risetime reduces to around 60ns. Can you please suggest me any such bandwidth scaling ICs? 

Thank you

Best

Faisal

  • Hi Faisal, 

    Can you share a schematic of the design? Also, what is the behavior of the TMUX6112 when you provide it with these fast rise-time inputs? As far as I'm aware there shouldn't be a maximum bandwidth limitation as long as you wait for the enable turn on/off time. 

    Regards, 

    Connor 

  • Hello Connor

    Here is the schematic and output waveform ( Green) that is obtained after summing the outputs of the switch. Please disregard the yellow  wave.

    I can see  Spikes at the transition of the SEL inputs. Also, the off channels also show spikes at the transition of SEL input of any other channel.  

    Thank you

    Faisal

  • Hi Faisal,

    Like I mentioned in the other thread, you will need to reduce the frequency you are feeding into the SEL pins of the mux as they need sufficient time to properly switch each channel on and off. You may be able to use something like the LMK01801 which divides the clock to a programmable frequency.

    Thanks,

    Bryan

  • Hello Bryan

    I looked at the clock buffers. The output bandwidth still looks very high for all of the available chips. 

    Thanks

    Faisal

  • Hi Faisal,

    Reducing the rise / fall time of a signal is very easy with discrete components - just add an RC filter (low pass) to drop your rise time to the desired value. This is extremely common in modern communications systems -- almost every bus line has an RC filter on it.

    The 10% to 90% transition time of an RC circuit is approximately: t_t = 2.2 * R * C 

    So, for your case, I would follow these steps:

    (1) Get time constant -> tau = R*C = t_t / 2.2 = 60ns / 2.2 = 27.27ns

    (2) Choose a capacitor value that gives R less than 100k:

    C is chosen as 10pF

    R = 27.27ns / 10pF = 2.727 kohm

    (3) Assuming you don't need precisely 60ns rise time, we can choose a nearby resistor value from standard resistors:

    2.74 kohm is the next available value for 0.1% resistors

    (4) Back-calculate the expected rise time:

    The total capacitance is likely going to be around 15-20pF (10pF from the capacitor, plus board traces, plus device inputs), depending on your circuit design. I will choose 15pF for my estimation:

    t_t = 2.2 * 2.727kohm * 15pF = 89.991 ns or ~90ns.

    (5) Test the circuit with the values to see how well it works - the resistor value is the easiest to adjust (more values are available).

  • Thanks a lot Emrys. I was thinking of doing things in an unnecessarily difficult way. I will apply this in my design. Btw, can I apply the same technique to reduce the Bandwidth of an LVDS signal (250MHz) to match with a LVDS TTL receiver( DSLVDS1048 200MHz)?

    Best

    Faisal

  • Hey Faisal,

    I'm not very familiar with the LVDS standard, but I've seen this method used across almost all signal types for numerous reasons. I would suspect that the edge rate of the LVDS signal would be less critical since it's likely going into a CMOS device rather than an analog switch.

  • Hello Emrys

    So I followed the suggestions and made an other board. Here  the rise and fall time of the select signal is 150ns and the IC is powered by Vdd = 10V (single) I can still see the spikes on the Output pins as well as on the input pins with reduced amplitude on the out. I can also  see spikes during the switching even when there is no power provided to  the TMUX6112 IC. I am confused if it is for bypass/decoupling capacitor or some other reason it behind this. I have used decoupling capacitor of 0.1uF very close to Vdd and VS. Please advice.

    Above picture represents the situation when the IC is turned of .Cyan color represents the output signal and the purple color represents the SEL  input signal. Can see spikes on the output pin when switching in SEL happens.

      

    Above picture represents the situation when the IC is turned on . Green color represents the input signal, Cyan color represents the output signal and the purple color represents the SEL  input signal. Can see spikes at both input and output pins when switching in SEL happens.

    Thanks

    Faisal

  • Hi Faisal,

    It looks to me like you're getting less than 50mV of switching noise -- which is extremely good and shouldn't have any impact on operation. What's the issue?

  • Hello Emrys

    The problem is I am suppose to pass analog signals of amplitude of 50to 500mV. It is throwing that signal off and also reduces the amplitude of the signal as you can see from the picture. 

    Thanks

    Faisal

  • I see -- it sounds like you need to have a dedicated analog board and remove any digital circuitry which will cause noise.

  • Hello Emrys

    I am getting the digital signal from an FPGA. So, it is separate already. I am just feeding the digital signal from the board to the input pins of the Tmux 6112 using SMA connectors of 50ohm. I  also using 50ohm controlled impedance in the traces.

    Thanks 

    Faisal

  • Hi Faisal,

    Can you share an image of your setup?

    1. Emrys
    2. The board ports are as indicated. The output is fed to an Oscilloscope with 50ohm parallel termination.
  • Hey Faisal,

    Thanks for the image - this helps me to understand your setup.

    It looks to me like this mux is drawing power with it's switching circuitry that's coupling across to the analog lines. I don't know if this is inherent to the device or an issue with your specific setup... I also don't know if this is specified in our datasheet. I've notified the mux team to take a look at this thread to see if they have any comments.

    I would recommend trying to identify the frequency of those spikes and see if you can improve your bypass circuit for those particular frequencies. Most likely the 0.1uF is good enough, but it can't hurt to add some smaller (0.01uF) and larger (1uF) caps in parallel (you can solder them right on top of the existing SMT capacitor).

  • Thanks Emrys. Can you tell me if you have any Evaluation board for this switch or for any analog switch? I can't find any. 

    I really appreciate your effort.

    Best

    Faisal

  • Hi Faisal,

    You can order some EVMs for this device here:

    https://www.ti.com/tool/LEADED-ADAPTER1

    In addition, there will be something in our muxes called charge injection that happens when switching channels. This is inherent to any mux and there will always be some charge injected into the output when this happens. See below for details:

    Thanks!

    Bryan

  • Hello Bryan

    Anyway of reducing the injection other than/i addition to using the decoupling capacitor? I will be feeding the outputs to a summing amplifier. But the switch produces spikes at all the outputs during switching so the spikes will get added by the summing circuit. Can you suggest me similar 1:1spst  switch with one channel only? Thanks 

  • Hi Faisal,

    Not really, like I mentioned, this is inherent to any multiplexer device with some being designed to have less charge injection than others (this is actually one of the lowest ones we have). Unfortunately, we do not make a 1:1x1 channel version that is similar to the TMUX6112.

    Thanks,

    Bryan

  • Hi Bryan

    Any effective way of reducing the spikes at the outputs, for example, using filter?

    Thanks

    Faisal 

  • Hi Faisal,

    The only real external way to do this would be to add extra capacitance on the output. However, this would in turn reduce the overall bandwidth that the application can support.

    Thanks,

    Bryan

  • Hi Bryan

    Regarding single channel 1:1spst switch, how is TMUX1101?  I want to avoid  the spikes getting added to all outputs whenever switching occurs so thinking of using 4 single channel ICs instead of using a single 4-channel one.

    Thanks

    Faisal

  • You cannot get rid of this charge injection. It is inherent to any mux device regardless of channel count. The charge injection is a function of the mismatch internally of the NMOS and PMOS MOSFETS inside the device which make up the channel.

    Thanks,

    Bryan

  • Hello Bryan

    I am planning to feed a summing amplifier/ fanin circuit with the outputs of the switch. At the moment, I can see spikes at the output of every channel whenever any one of the SEL inputs makes any transition. So for example, if one channel outputs 50mVpp spike then the total for 4channels would be 200mVpp which is huge. So I am thinking of using 4 single channel Switches like TMUX1101  to isolate switches and keep the total spike upto like 50mVpp. Can it be done using TMUX1101? Please let me know.

    Thanks 

    Faisal

  • No, the TMUX1101 will still have charge injected into the output upon switching.