Leakage/bias current cancelation techniques

  • Thread starter Thread starter DragonPetter
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Current
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around techniques for leakage and bias current cancellation in electrometers, particularly focusing on achieving extremely low bias currents in the femtoamp range. Participants explore both theoretical and practical aspects, including circuit design, operational amplifiers, and material processes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about the mechanisms that allow electrometers to achieve bias currents as low as 1-3 femtoamps and whether similar techniques can be applied to other components.
  • Another participant mentions the LMC6041IN operational amplifier, which has a typical bias current of 0.002 picoamps, suggesting it as a low-cost option.
  • A different participant shares a link to a paper discussing dielectrically isolated integrated circuits, noting that the DIFET process contributes to radiation tolerance and may be relevant to the discussion.
  • One participant argues that while DIFETs are significant, other factors such as special FET geometry and advanced processing techniques also play a role in achieving low leakage currents.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the effectiveness of using current sources for bias current cancellation at such low levels, suggesting that material and process selection may be more critical.
  • One participant questions whether there are active circuitry or signal processing techniques for canceling bias currents, as opposed to relying solely on passive methods.
  • A participant mentions a dated paper titled "Modern electrometer techniques" and expresses a desire for more recent information on the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether active cancellation techniques exist for bias currents in electrometers, with some advocating for material and process approaches while others seek clarification on potential circuit designs.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various operational amplifiers and techniques, but the discussion reveals uncertainty regarding the effectiveness and applicability of different methods for achieving low bias currents.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in low-noise electronics, electrometer design, and advanced semiconductor technologies may find this discussion relevant.

DragonPetter
Messages
831
Reaction score
1
I became curious as to how this is possible after seeing this thread:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=562370

How are these electrometers able to have bias currents of 1-3 femtoamps? What kind of active leakage cancelation circuits are capable of this? Can this be used on other components (diodes, capacitors, Vds channels, etc.)?

I tried to see if it was possible, so I did a simulation experiment. The simulations are attached below. I reverse biased a diode into a capacitor to collect the charge, and I see that in my simulation that there is a reverse bias of 2.5nA. I try to cancel the leakage current with a KCL at the diode node, and I do this with a current mirror with a leakage reference current using another diode. I had to adjust the biasing just right to eliminate the leakage current. I admit that this circuit is impractical and I just made it to see if the idea would work.

Does anyone have any insight as to how this is done in these electrometers? Am I in the right direction?
 

Attachments

  • diodeleakage.jpg
    diodeleakage.jpg
    10.1 KB · Views: 486
  • leakagecancelation.jpg
    leakagecancelation.jpg
    9.9 KB · Views: 495
Engineering news on Phys.org
Some operational amplifiers have extremely small bias current.
You may want to research the LMC6041IN. It has only 0.002 picoamp bias current typical and is low cost.
0.002 picoamp = 2 femtoamp=0.000,000,000,000,002 amp.
There are operational amplifiers with lower bias current that cost more.
 
maybe this will help..


http://www2.cambr.uidaho.edu/papers/dielectrically_isolated.pdf

hmmm apparently the DIFET process make them radiation tolerant, they're talking about 200KRAD devices...

a google on : dielectrically isolated integrated circuit

led to several IEEE articles i can't access...

and TI OPA128 folder has a link to spice model.

but I'm getting in over my head. maybe you'll educate me on this one.

Have fun!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Looks like they did a little more than use DIFETs, but I am sure that is a big part of it.

http://www.ti.com/lit/an/sboa061/sboa061.pdf
"Replacing the reverse-biased gate-to-substrate isolation diode structure of BlFETs with dielectric isolation removes this large leakage current component which, together with a noise-free cascode circuit, special FET geometry, and advanced wafer processing, allows far higher Difet ® performance compared to BIFETs."

I don't think using a current source to cancel input bias leakage would work at this range as it would need to hold to fA accuracy over voltage and temp. I suspect process would be the only way to go.
 
I'm sorry, but all of those documents including the difet isolation technique are what i'd call passive techniques. Basically they are reducing leakage current by the materials and process rather than canceling existing leakage currents.

From the original thread, I was under the impression that there is some kind of circuitry, signal processing, or mathematical cancelation of the bias current. Is there such a thing, or is it only possible through process and material selection?

I still am not sure how electrometer opamps can have input bias currents within a couple femto amps or less. The most interesting paper I've read is called "Modern electrometer techniques" but it is dated to 1979, and I'm sure there must be more information on it since then.

p.s. that TI appnote was interesting still, and I was surprised that a larger resistance reduces noise.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
9K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
Replies
7
Views
3K