|
IV. CONCLUSION3 Y* c. v& u& } L7 h7 d1 Y) a5 r0 ~( H( X
The designs with 3-stage-inverter and 1-stage-inverter' ]: s9 f* N4 _5 r. R& n$ Q
controlling circuits have been studied to verify the optimal, _6 v+ j% `/ v5 G" h# g, L, A
design schemes in NMOS-based power-rail ESD clamp% w, c9 x% r7 D0 T W, a
circuits. In addition, two ESD clamp NMOS transistors,
( F$ p- B* @8 e$ ]) E+ i! n5 Fhaving snapback and no snapback operations, also were codesigned4 b" X4 e' B$ P. L6 N$ h% K
with different controlling circuits to realize the
" D9 c- O: J. i: Rimpact on their required performance. According to the
# ~, Q! D, ?4 fexperiments and analyses, the 3-stage inverters can slightly
! K- c a, D5 N4 Z/ yincrease the ESD robustness, but they also can dramatically
) m. m1 t w5 T, j) l9 h& J$ n' u3 O/ Psacrifice the mis-trigger and latch-on immunity. The 1-stage- U% z" t: `) c" V5 O7 A
inverter should be an appropriate and reliable candidate for the1 W/ }" J1 v( @; x9 t
power-rail ESD clamp circuits. |
|