Automatic DC operating point computation and design plan generation for analog IPs

  • Ramy Iskander
  • Marie-Minerve Louërat
  • Andreas Kaiser


DC operating point computation is inescapable for both knowledge-based and simulation-based analog synthesis. In this perspective, this article presents the automatic computation of DC operating point and the␣generation of suitable design plans for analog IPs. The analog IP is built as a hierarchy of subcircuits inside our dedicated framework CAIRO+. Leaf subcircuits are known as devices and higher-level subcircuits are known as modules. Each subcircuit is represented by a dependency graph. The␣dependency graph expresses electrical dependencies of circuit parameters on a selected set of design parameters. The dependency graph of the analog IP is constructed, in a hierarchical bottom-up approach, by merging graphs of children devices and modules. The graph is converted to a directed acyclic graph (DAG) by detecting and removing existing directed cycles. The resulting DAG is the design plan for the analog IP. Upon construction, the DAG is executed, in a top-down approach, to compute the DC operating point and the dimensions of the transistors. The computed DC operating point is compared to a DC simulation to ensure its correctness. The proposed methodology has been successfully applied to size and bias two analog IPs: a single-ended two-stage operational amplifier and a␣differential cascode current-mode integrator. The results prove the efficiency and accuracy of the proposed methodology.


Analog EDA Hierarchical knowledge-based synthesis Design reuse DC analysis Dependency analysis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



The authors would like to thank Prof. Jacky Porte and Dr. Dimitri Galayko for valuable discussions.


  1. 1.
    Krasnicki, M., Phelps, R., Rutenbar, R. A., & Carley, L. R. (1999). MAELSTROM: Efficient simulation-based synthesis for custom analog cells. Proceeding of Design Automation Conference, pp. 945–950, June, 1999.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Harjani, R., Rutenbar, R. A., & Carley, L. R. (1989). OASYS: A framework for analog circuit synthesis. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design, 8(12), 1247–1266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pillage, L. T., Rohrer, R. A., & Visweswariah, C. (1995). Electronic circuit and system simulation methods. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ho, C. W., Ruehli, A. E., & Brennan, P. A. (1983). The modified nodal approach to network analysis. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems, 22(6), 504–509.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maulik, P. C., Carley, L. R., & Allstot, D. J. (1993). Sizing of cell-level analog circuits using constrained optimization techniques. IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, 28(3), 233–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    der Plas, G. V., Debyser, G., Leyn, F., Lampaert, K., Vandenbussche, J., Gielen, G., Sansen, W., Veselinovic, P., & Leenaerts, D. (2001). AMGIE-a synthesis environment for CMOS analog integrated circuits. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems, 20(9), 1037–1058.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Leyn, F., Gielen, G., & Sansen, W. (1998). An efficient DC root solving algorithm with guaranteed convergence for analog integrated CMOS circuits. Proceedings of ACM/IEEE International Conference on Computer-Aided Design, pp. 304–307, November, 1998.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gielen, G., Wambacq, P., & Sansen, W. (1994). Symbolic analysis methods and applications for analog circuits: A tutorial overview. Proceedings of the IEEE, 82(2), 287–304.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cheng, Y., & Hu, C. (1999). MOSFET Modeling and BSIM3 user’s guide. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Silveira, F., Flandre, D., & Jespers, P. G. A. (1996). A gm/ID based methodology for the design of CMOS analog circuits and its application to the synthesis of a silicon-on-insulator micropower OTA. IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, 31(9), 1314–1319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
    Tuong, P. N., Louërat, M. M., & Greiner A. (2004). Managing the shape function of analog devices in a slicing tree floorplan. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference Mixed Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, pp. 226–229, June, 2004.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Iskander, R., de Lamarre, L., Kaiser, A., & Louërat, M. M. (2004). Design space exploration for analog IPs using CAIRO+. IEEE International Conference on Electrical Electronic and Computer Engineering, pp. 473–476, September, 2004.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bourguet, V., de Lamarre, L., & Louërat, M. M. (2004). A layout-educated analog design flow. The 47th IEEE Midwest Symposium on Circuits and Systems, 1(I), 485–488.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Castro-Lopez, R., Fernandez, F. V., & Vazquez, A. R. (2005). A reuse-based framework for the design of analog and mixed-signal ICs. Proceedings of SPIE, 5837(3), 25–36.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Graeb, H., Zizala, S., Eckmueller, J., & Antreich, K. (2001). The sizing rules method for analog integrated circuit design. IEEE International Conference on Computer-Aided Design, pp. 343–349, November, 2001.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Smith, S., & Sanchez-Sinencio, E. (1996). Low voltage integrators for high-frequency CMOS filters using current mode techniques. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems, 43(1), 39–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Aboushady, H., Louërat, M. M. (2001). Low-power design of low-voltage current-mode integrators for continuous-time ΣΔ modulators. IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems, pp. 276–279, May.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ramy Iskander
    • 1
  • Marie-Minerve Louërat
    • 1
  • Andreas Kaiser
    • 2
  1. 1.Université Pierre et Marie Curie, LIP6ParisFrance
  2. 2.IEMN-ISENLille CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations