2018
DOI: 10.1109/jestpe.2017.2782623
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Ultralow-Power On-Die PMU in a 28-nm CMOS SoC With Direct Li-Ion Battery-Attach Capability

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Indeed, in previous work 54 a bandgap reference in 28‐nm technology with 5‐V maximum supply is reported, but it exhibits a current consumption of 2.5 μ A and a TR of only 150°C. The 28‐nm PMU in 55 operates at 5 V, with a 1‐ μ A bandgap reference, but the TR and the TC are not provided. The 5‐V sub‐microampere bandgap reported in previous work, 56 designed in a 180‐nm technology node, exhibits a temperature range of 170°C, but it is not compatible with a voltage supply lower than 2 V. The 350‐nm voltage reference proposed in previous work 57 is compatible with Li‐Ion battery voltage range, but it exhibits a minimum supply voltage of 2.8 V and a temperature range of 80°C.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, in previous work 54 a bandgap reference in 28‐nm technology with 5‐V maximum supply is reported, but it exhibits a current consumption of 2.5 μ A and a TR of only 150°C. The 28‐nm PMU in 55 operates at 5 V, with a 1‐ μ A bandgap reference, but the TR and the TC are not provided. The 5‐V sub‐microampere bandgap reported in previous work, 56 designed in a 180‐nm technology node, exhibits a temperature range of 170°C, but it is not compatible with a voltage supply lower than 2 V. The 350‐nm voltage reference proposed in previous work 57 is compatible with Li‐Ion battery voltage range, but it exhibits a minimum supply voltage of 2.8 V and a temperature range of 80°C.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With the development of SoC modules, LDOs are being integrated with single-chip solutions to achieve on-chip power management. Compared to a DLDO, an ALDO offers fast load transient response, high PSR, and large bandwidth with low quiescent current [6]; it also alleviates the need for a clock signal, which is important as the issue of clock glitch presents additional design challenges [17]. When integrating an LDO into an SoC module, an OCL-LDO architecture is preferred, as the need for a bulky external capacitor is removed; this reduces the pin counts of the chip and eliminates the inherent parasitic related to the external capacitor, which can adversely impact the performance at high frequency [22].…”
Section: State-of-the-art Aldo Topologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Internet of Things (IoT) and Internet of Everything (IoE) represent the core of Industry 4.0 [1], [2] and are crucial to cater to the growing demand for technologies based on mobile and portable devices, such as radio frequency identification (RFID) [3], smart factories equipped with advanced technologies, machine-to-machine (M2M) and machine-to-human (M2H) communication [4], along with IoT edge sensors [5]. As these applications of IoTs are now becoming mainstream, system-on-chip (SoC) modules are a viable option [6] due to the wide variety of such applications. SoCs consist of multiple individual blocks, with dedicated voltage, power and current requirements, as shown in Fig.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%