Continue to Site

Welcome to EDAboard.com

Welcome to our site! EDAboard.com is an international Electronics Discussion Forum focused on EDA software, circuits, schematics, books, theory, papers, asic, pld, 8051, DSP, Network, RF, Analog Design, PCB, Service Manuals... and a whole lot more! To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

Register Log in

Question regarding two SigmaDelta circuit difference

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

hyleeinhit

Member level 3
Joined
Aug 11, 2008
Messages
58
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,286
Location
U.S.
Activity points
1,696
HI , Guys,

I have a question regarding current mode SigmaDelta circuits. Two circuit structure are attached. Compared to "Circuit1", OTA is removed in "Circuit2". What is advantages and disadvantages of these two designs, respectively? To my knowledge, the first circuit is more popular that the second one. WHY?
Circuit1
Circuit1.JPG
Circuit2
Circuit2.JPG
 
Last edited:

At a quick glance I would say that in the second figure power consumption is lower :D and the input independences are different.

BR Jerry
 

What do you mean by "input dependence"? I know The second circuit input node voltage swings, which the first circuit input node voltage fixes at "virtual ground" of OTA.

The first circuit is more popular that the second one. WHY?

helpmejerry said:
At a quick glance I would say that in the second figure power consumption is lower :D and the input independences are different.

BR Jerry
Click to expand...
 


Hi,

I think the first of all the parasitics of the current dac or any other @ the input will have no effect due to the virtual ground effect of the integrator (ACtive integrator), which results in close to ideal integration, which in CTDSM is very important.
Secondly if you use the cap directly instead of the integrator then the voltage change at the input is very large which practically makes the DAC implementation very tuf, which is not the case due to the virtual ground effect of the active integrator. (And if the integrating voltage in the cap is very small the small signal error due to the parasitic cap of the integrator will cause a error of the form (1-Z-1), so may not be so severe if it exactly cancels out, but even small mismatch in the error will increase the noise floor in the band of interest)
 

Thank you a lot.
helpmejerry said:
Something to get you started https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input_impedance

BR Uroš
Click to expand...

- - - Updated - - -

You gave really good points. Thank you!

yuvan said:
Hi,

I think the first of all the parasitics of the current dac or any other @ the input will have no effect due to the virtual ground effect of the integrator (ACtive integrator), which results in close to ideal integration, which in CTDSM is very important.
Secondly if you use the cap directly instead of the integrator then the voltage change at the input is very large which practically makes the DAC implementation very tuf, which is not the case due to the virtual ground effect of the active integrator. (And if the integrating voltage in the cap is very small the small signal error due to the parasitic cap of the integrator will cause a error of the form (1-Z-1), so may not be so severe if it exactly cancels out, but even small mismatch in the error will increase the noise floor in the band of interest)
Click to expand...
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Part and Inventory Search

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top