A 3‐mW concurrent 2.4/5.2‐GHz dual‐band low‐noise amplifier for WLAN applications in 0.18‐μm CMOS technology

Abstract

A concurrent 2.4/5.2‐GHz dual‐band monolithic low‐noise amplifier implemented with a 0.18‐μm mixed‐signal CMOS technology is reported for the first time. This LNA only consumed 3‐mW power, and achieved minimum noise figures of 3.3 and 3.26 dB and 2.4 and 5.2 GHz, respectively. Input and output return losses more than 10 dB were obtained at both 2.4 and 5.2 GHz. In addition, IIP3 of 17 and 5 dBm were achieved at 2.4 and 5.2 GHz, respectively. No off‐chip components were required for input and output matching. To our knowledge, this LNA exhibits a state‐of‐the‐art performance. Due to the careful selection of the size of the transistors and the passive elements in our proposed method power matching and noise matching can be achieved simultaneously at the dual‐band of interest. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Microwave Opt Technol Lett 42: 287–292, 2004; Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/mop.20280

A GPS LNA RFIC with voltage‐controlled noise and input matching

“…The gate voltage of a common-gate transistor is used to control the real part of optimum source impedance approximates to 50 X, which indicates that the LNA input does not require additional inductors and capacitors for simultaneously NF and input impedance matching. Planar monopole antennas are very suitable for UWB applications due to their simple structures, wide operating bandwidth, satisfactory radiation properties, easy fabrication and integration with printed circuit boards, low cost, and lightweight [3,[5][6][7][8][9]]. [2][3][4].…”

“…They are summarized to include the: (1) inductive degeneration technique [1][2][3][4][5][6]; (2) two-element matching technique [7,8]; (3) direct-coupled technique [9]. Many techniques have been reported to design an LNA with low NF and low return loss.…”

“…Many techniques have been reported to design an LNA with low NF and low return loss. They are summarized to include the: (1) inductive degeneration technique [1–6]; (2) two‐element matching technique [7, 8]; (3) direct‐coupled technique [9]. The inductive degeneration technique improves stability and reduces return loss, but at the cost of decreased gain.…”