Solid State Cmos Lidar Sensors

ISSCC 2023 Tutorial #6
Solid-State CMOS LiDAR Sensors
Seong-Jin Kim
Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology
kimsj@unist.ac.kr
Feb 19, 2023

S.-J. Kim T6: Solid-State CMOS LiDAR Sensors 1 of 95
© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

Self Introduction
 Education
 Ph.D. degree from KAIST, Korea, in 2008
 Work Experiences
 Samsung Advanced Institute of
Technology, Korea, 2008-2012
 Institute of Microelectronics, A*STAR,
Singapore, 2012-2015
 Associate Professor, UNIST, Korea, 2015-
Present
 Co-founder at SolidVue, Korea, in 2020
 Research Interests
 CMOS image sensors and LiDAR systems
 Brain and body interface circuits

Outline
 Introduction to LiDAR sensors
 Indirect Time-of-Fight (iToF) Technique
 Direct Time-of-Fight (dToF) Technique

 Fundamental Principles
 Single-Photon Avalanche Diodes
 Time-to-Digital Converters (TDC)
 On-chip Histogramming TDC
 Summary

Cameras in Our Life

CIS Market
6.1B units in 2019  11B units in 2024!

A. Theuwissen, ISSCC 2021

Emerging Applications: Ranging
Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR)


LiDAR Market Forecast
Ref: Yole

LiDAR Performances
Depth Range Depth Error
×
Dmin ×× ×
Dmax ×
×× ××
×
×
×
××
×
A few meters to Precise Precise Not precise
a few kilometers Accurate Not accurate Not accurate
Spatial Resolution Frame Rate

Wide FoV
High resolution
Narrow FoV Motion

Low resolution
Distance

Time-of-Flight for LiDAR
IR Emitter
Controller
R
Object
Detector Depth map
 To measure the round-trip time of emitted light for acquiring
the distance

Indirect Measurement
f
IR Emitter
Controller
Object
Δφ Sensor array
c ∆ϕ (Demodulation pixel)
D=
2 2πf
Detecting phase difference

Phase Delay Estimation
Emitted Light …
TTOF
Reflected Light …
TX0/2 TX1/3
TX0
…
TX1 …
TX2
…
TX3 …
 π
Simplified pixel w/
N 0 = niir ∫ (a sin (θ − TTOF ) + a )dθ = 2niir a cos TTOF + 
π
N − N3 sin TTOF
0
 2 ⇒ 2 = = tanTTOF two taps
N 0 − N 1 cos TTOF
 π
N 1 = niir ∫ (a sin (θ − TTOF ) + a )dθ = 2niir a − cos TTOF + 
2π
2  N − N3 
 ⇒ TTOF = arctan 2 
π

3π
 π
N 2 = niir ∫π 2 (a sin (θ − TTOF ) + a )dθ = 2niir a sin TTOF + 
 N 0 − N1 
 2  N − N3 
2
c c
π
 π ∴R = TTOF = arctan 2 

N 3 = niir ∫ 2π (a sin (θ − TTOF ) + a )dθ = 2niir a − sin TTOF +  4πf 4πf  N 0 − N1 
−
2  2

Direct Measurement
Time-to-Digital converter
∆t
IR Emitter
Controller
Δt
Object
c
D = ∆t Sensor array
2 (Sensitive diode)
Detecting direct time difference

Direct ToF (dToF)
 ToF is directly measured like a basic principle.

 Highly sensitive detectors are required to know the
time when photons arrive.
 Large avalanche photodiodes (APD) are traditionally
employed.
 Complex front-end electronics to handle APDs are also
necessary.
 It is suitable for a single-point range finder and 3D
scanner with a line sensor.

Block Diagram of dToF Sensor
High-speed ADC

Scanner-type Initial LiDAR
 Velodyne HDL-64e
 64 APDs aligned with 64
lasers
 1.3 Mpoints/sec
 360° horizontal FoV
 28.6° vertical FoV
 120m distance
 Up to 900rpm (15Hz)
 Class 1 eye safety
B. Schwartz, Nat. Photonics 2010


Demonstration of Initial LiDAR

Commercial Product
20.3 cm
28.3 cm
64-channel, 120 m range LiDAR sensor


3D Point Cloud from LiDAR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxWrWPpSE8I

Miniaturization of LiDAR
 Issues of LiDARs w/
discrete components
 Limited productivity
Discrete components
(high cost)
 Low durability
 Low scalability
 Low spatial
resolution

Miniaturization of LiDAR
Discrete components Sony
SOSLAB
Small-size Low-cost Solid-State LiDAR has emerged!


Single Photon Avalanche Diode (SPAD)
Pixel
Reflected IR Output
Rq Vop
p+ n+
p- p-
well well
Avalanche n-well
 Geiger mode operation (virtually infinite gain)

 Possible to detect a single photon

SPAD Bias Point
+
I
p
V
n
-
 Biasing above
breakdown
 Gain variation is
meaningless

SPAD Operation
1. Steady-state at Geiger region VSPAD – ID

2. Avalanche by photon I APD Geiger
3. Quenching PVDD
4. Recharging to 1
VSPAD
Vout
Rq
VSPAD
VBD VBD+VE

SPAD Operation

3. Quenching
4. Recharging to 1
PVDD Vout
ID Rq CD
VSPAD Avalanche
Vout
Rq
VD = IDRq Photon
Vout = VD(1-exp(-t/RqCD)) VSPAD

VBD VBD+VE

SPAD Operation

3. Quenching
4. Recharging to 1
PVDD Vout
Quench
0 Rq CD
VSPAD Avalanche
Vout
Rq
VD = 0 Photon
Vout ~ VE VSPAD
VBD VBD+VE

SPAD Operation

3. Quenching
4. Recharging to 1
PVDD Vout
Quench
Rq CD
VSPAD Avalanche
Vout
Rq
VD = 0 Recharge Photon
Vout = VEexp(-t/RqCD) VSPAD

VBD VBD+VE

Simple pn Junction for SPAD?
Cathode Anode Anode Cathode
n+ p+ n+
Vbd1 = 25 V
n-well
Vbd2 = 20 V
High E-field
p-sub
 High electric field is at the edges of the junction.

 Premature breakdown at the periphery.
 Guardring structure with circular shape is needed.

Desirable Active Region
Small active
region!
Active region
Premature breakdown
 Guardring prevents SPAD from premature breakdown at

the periphery and makes whole area as an active region.

Guardring Structures
n+ p+ n+
p-well Vbd1 = 25 V p-well
V = 30 V
deep n-well bd2
p-sub
 Low-doping layer is inserted at the periphery to remove abrupt

pn junction.
 It makes the breakdown voltage at the periphery higher than
active region.

Guardring Structures
n+ p+ n+
n-well
deep n-well
p-sub
n+ p+ n+
STI STI
n-well
p-sub

Today’s Typical SPAD for LiDAR
n+ p+ n+
STI STI STI STI
p-well
deep retrograde n-well
p-sub
 Suitable for deep-submicron technologies

 Compatible with any triple-well process
 Excellent performance in dark environment
J. Richardson, PTL 2009

TCAD Simulation
SPAD structure
Multiplication region

SPAD Pixel Evolution
Diffuser
Time
M.-J. Lee, JSTQE 2018 Technology

Photon Detection Probability (PDP)
FSI SPAD BSI SPAD
C. Veerappan, TED 2016 E. Charbon, ISSW 2020
PDP = (# of SPAD pulses - # of DCR) / # of photons

Sony’s State-of-the-Art SPAD
• 40nm CMOS
• Dead time ~5ns
• DCR (Dark count rate) < 2kcps@60°C
• PDE (PDP × Fill Factor) ~22%@905nm
O. Kumagai, ISSCC 2021

Even Smaller Pitch
OCL: On-Chip Lens

PSD: Pyramid Surface
for Diffraction
FTI: Full Trench
Isolation
S. Shimada, IEDM 2021


Performances

SPAD High Level Behavior
Photons Response
Deadtime
P1P2 P3 Missed
SPAD-
based
Pixel
t DCR t
Detected!
 Detected photons generate digital pulses.
 Not all the photons are detected.
 Pulses can also be generated in the dark.
 Jitter noise should be added.

Time-Correlated Single Photon Counting
 Repeat and histogram

SPAD pulses.
 Finally, a peak value is
detected as the ToF.

Block Diagram of SPAD-Based LiDAR
SPAD Front-End Time-to-Digital Converter Histogram
Photon VSPAD
ToF = 0011(2)
Counts
SPAD Clock freq. x N M-bit Counter
SPAD
Pulse ToF x 2N
QCH start time
t
Detecting photons Converting arrival time of Extracting the peak
SPAD pulse to digital bit value (ToF)
Distance
𝒄𝒄
(𝑫𝑫𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 = 𝜟𝜟𝜟𝜟)
𝟐𝟐

Time-to-Digital Converter
 Velocity of light = 3 × 108 m/s

 1 ns time = 15 cm depth
 15 GHz clock is necessary for
1 cm resolution!
 Coarse-fine conversion is a
popular solution.
 Clk counting followed by sub-
phase

Column-level TDC Architecture
Coarse 2b Medium Fine 4b by
by 4b by DLL Delay line
Counter w/ 16 w/
w/ 40MHz phases registers
(25ns) (1.56ns) (97.6ps)
10b TDC
100ns range
97.6ps resolution
Large size
No histogram circuit
C. Niclass, ISSCC 2008

Pixel-level TDC: GRO
3-bit
Thermometer
Gated Ring Coder
Start
Oscillator
Stop (8-stages) 7-bit Ripple
SPAD Counter
440ps from coarse counter

55ps from fine phase coder
Small size
No histogram circuit C. Veerappan, ISSCC 2011

On-Chip Histogram DSP
1×16 ToF w/ 24 SiPM per pixel

64 12-b TDC and 768 kb SRAM (2048 bins)
Integrated histogram circuit
Large size DSP and SRAM C. Niclass, JSSC 2014

1-D Line LiDAR
Polygonal mirror 200×96 pixel (55°×9° FoV)
10 fps, 100-m distance

Background Light Suppression
 Multiple SPADs’
events in a
single pixel is
only counted
for histogram.
 It extracts
spatial
temporal
correlation of
photons!

Coincidence Detection Circuit
 Find out two

simultaneous
events.
 Carry or two
sums make
output high.
C. Niclass, JSSC 2013


OR Tree Compression & Counting
 Shorten pulse
width and
serialize pulses.
 Count pulses for
background
suppression.
L. Braga, ISSCC 2013


XOR Tree Edge Combining
 Odd numbers of
pulses  High
 Even numbers
of pulses  Low
 Count edges for
background
suppression.
N. Dutton, ISSCC 2015


Data Rate of Color CIS
1st frame 2nd frame nth frame
 Assumption
 Resolution: 160×120
 Frame rate: 30
 ADC: 10b
 Synchronous readout
 Data rate
=160×120×30fps×10-b
=5.76Mbps
33ms

Data Rate of Line dToF
1st line 2nd line nth line
 Assumption
 Frame rate: 30fps
 TDC: 10b
 Repetition: 1MHz
 Data rate
=160×30fps×10-b×1M
=48Gbps
1st frame
33ms
1µs

Data Rate of Flash dToF
1st frame 2nd frame nth frame
 Assumption
 Frame rate: 30fps
 TDC: 10b
 Repetition: 1MHz
 Data rate
=160×120×30fps×10b×
1M
=5.76Tbps!!
33ms
1µs

On-Chip Histogram
 Each time bin has

a corresponding
counter.
 TDC and
histogramming
are done at the
same time.
 Multi-echo can be
recorded.
N. Dutton, ISSCC 2015


Flash Histogramming TDC
 1024 SPAD to single TDC channel

 264 counters (Memories)
 71ps resolution w/ 18.8ns
dynamic range (8b)
 Conversion rate = 11.7Gs

In-pixel Histogramming TDC
[R. Henderson, ISSCC 2019]
3D stacking process
• Front wafer: SPAD array
• Back wafer: Logic circuits for TDC and histogramming

3D Stacked LiDAR
 Tier 1 wafer: SPAD

 Tier 2 wafer: TDC and
Memory
 128 SPADs share a
TDC.
 256 × 256 pixel array
 Up to 430m range
A. Ximenes, ISSCC 2018


Shared TDC and Histogramming
 A shared single TDC w/ histogramming memory for 8 x 16 SPAD array

 Employing asynchronous readout to utilize the shared TDC effectively

Interference Suppression
Phase shift keying
(Pulse position modulation)
8-PSK example:
1. Applying -6, -4, -2, 0, 2, 4, 6, 8ns delays
2. Subtracting the same delays in TDC

Interference Filtering
Conceptual operation
H. Seo, VLSI 2020


In-pixel Multi-event Histogramming
Spatiotemporal
correlation
4-b time bin

Multi-
event TDC
R. Henderson, ISSCC 2019

TDC Architecture and Operation
Detect four
SPADs’ responses

Multi-event Clocked Flash TDC
TDC
SPAD PhotonEdges
+ + + + + + + +
STOPd
Count
TDCClk
TDC<3> TDC<2> TDC<1> TDC<0> t (ns)
0 1 0 1
CNT1 CNT2 CNT3 CNT4
t (ns)
ToF Histogram

Multi-event Clocked Flash TDC
TDC<0> TDC<1> TDC<15>
STOPd
PhotonEdges
Rst Rst Rst
Time info D Q D Q D Q
STOPd
TDCClk
TDC<3> TDC<2> TDC<1> TDC<0> t (ns)

PhotonEdges
D Q D Q D Q D Q
0 1 0 1
Rst Rst Rst Rst
Start
TDCClk
CNT1 CNT2 CNT3 CNT4
Histogram
Multiple bins are updated simultaneously!


Multi-event 4-bin TDC
TDC<0> TDC<1> TDC<2> TDC<3> TDC<0> TDC<1> TDC<2> TDC<3>
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
STOPd STOPd
Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst
D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
1st event
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
PhotonEdges PhotonEdges
D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q
Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst
Clk edge
Start Start
TDCClk TDCClk

Multi-event 4-bin TDC
TDC<0> TDC<1> TDC<2> TDC<3> TDC<0> TDC<1> TDC<2> TDC<3>
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
STOPd STOPd
Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst
D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q
0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
2nd event
1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
PhotonEdges PhotonEdges
D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q D Q
Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst Rst
Clk edge Clk edge
Start Start
TDCClk TDCClk

Two-Step Histogram
1st step: course range
photons
time
photons
2nd step: fine range
S. Hutchings, JSSC 2019 time


Histogram Scanning
1st scan
photons
2nd scan time

photons
3rd scan time

photons
time D. Stoppa, IISW 2021


SAR hTDC Architecture
Conventional TDC Proposed TDC

3-b 3-b
Counters: 2N Counters: 1
8 for 3-b 1 for n-b
Histogram Histogram
B. Kim, ISSCC 2021

Operating Principles [1/4]
IR 5.34
Start ToF=000
DN[2] UP[2] DN<UP  ToF=100
Zoom TDC
Coarse
d-ToF 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

IR 5.34
Start ToF=000
Zoom TDC
Coarse
DN[1] UP[1] DN>UP  ToF=100
d-ToF 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

IR 5.34
Start ToF=000
Zoom TDC
Coarse

d-ToF 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Coarse ToF = 5

IR 5.34
Start ToF=000
Zoom TDC
Coarse

d-ToF 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Coarse ToF = 5

In-ph=101100010
Zoom TDC
Out-ph=010110101
Fine
In Phase Out Phase
CNTPhase180 Fine ToF = 0.34

iToF = TON ×
CNTPhase0 + CNTPhase180
ToF = 5.34
Time

Two-Step Zoom hTDC
IR 5.34
DN[2] UP[2]
Zoom TDC
Coarse
DN[1] UP[1]
DN[0] UP[0] SAR coarse TDC
d-ToF 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+
Zoom TDC
iToF fine TDC

Fine
In Phase Out Phase
CNTPhase180
iToF = TON ×
CNTPhase0 + CNTPhase180
Time B. Kim, ISSCC 2021


Background Light Suppression
 Common background light is

cancelled by the up-down
counting.
 Only shot noise remains, which
is a sqrt(# of elec).
 The time duration is shrunk by
half in each step.
 Time-gating is inherently
applied to the fine hTDC.

Chip Photograph
Process 110-nm CIS CMOS

Pixel Array 48 × 40
Pixel Size 110 × 80 µm2
PWR
840 mW
Consumption
Chip Size 5900 × 5240 µm2
ZH-TDC 4000 µm2
TDC Depth Coarse 7-b / Fine 6-b
TDC resolution Coarse 5 ns / Fine 90 ps

Depth Image
Target objects
Zoomed short range Long range (0~9m)

(0~0.75cm)

Issues in Zoom SA-hTDC
 Synthesis of 9
sub-frames: low
frame rate,
motion artifact
 Low signal to
background
ratio (SBR)
 Slow SBR
improvement

Quaternary Search hTDC
 The whole range is divided by four.

 Both counters are compared to determine ToF[MSB-1].
 A sign of the winning counter determines ToF[MSB].
S. Park, ISSCC 2022

Δ-Intensity Phase Detection
 Four phase data is utilized to generate the fine ToF.

 The bin width is 2.5ns, which is 32 times smaller than the first
bin width, achieving high SBR.

Δ-Intensity Phase Detection
ToFFine
cTLSB −1
CNTB − CNTA
= � tan
2π CNTB + CNTA
Improving background light immunity!
Reducing motion artifact!
Achieving a high frame rate!

Pixel Architecture
 6 SPADs w/ AFE &

masking mem
 Coincidence
detection circuit
 Two 9-b UDC for
quaternary search
 Timing generator
for time bin
management
 Clock repeater
shared by four
neighbor pixels
S. Park, JSSC 2022

Fabricated Prototype
 110-nm BSI
process
 75-µm pixel
pitch
 6 SPADs per
pixel

Measurement Results
Coarse TDC
Success rate: Matched distance / 100 trials
Fine TDC
(3m ~ 4.5m)

Depth Image in a Short Range
Captured in 30fps w/ 30klux background light

Depth Image in a Long Range
Captured in 1.5fps at night

Demo Video

iToF vs dToF
Specification iToF dToF
Maximum range Few meter Few kilometers
Spatial resolution ~ Mpixel < QVGA
Depending on shot Depending on TDC
Depth precision
noise resolution
Several options
Common-mode Coincidence detection /
Background resilience
rejection circuit Common-mode rejection /
Time gating
Multi-event detection Difficult to achieve Possible by histogramming
Coded pulse /
Interference Phase shift keying /
Pseudo-random
cancellation Interference filtering
modulation

Line vs Flash LiDAR
1-D Line 2-D Flash
TDC Column-parallel Pixel-parallel
Emitter Beamforming for focusing Beam spreading
Range Long Short
Background
Good Bad
resilience
Frame rate Slow Fast
Spatial
High Low
resolution
Application Outdoor, self-driving cars Indoor, mobile devices
Scanner Motor MEMS Solid-State N/A
Cost/Size High Medium Low Low

Summary
 Basic principles, building blocks, and architectures of SPAD-
based CMOS LiDAR sensors have been presented.
 The direct ToF technique is the best candidate for LiDAR to
provide a long detectable range with strong background noise
resilience.
 No winning architecture for solid-state LiDAR sensors has been
decided yet, so we still have many research opportunities aiming
at high spatial resolution, large FoV, small size, high depth
accuracy, high frame rate, multi-echo detection, low power
consumption, etc.
 Emitters and depth image processing units are also crucial parts
of a LiDAR, although they are not covered in this tutorial.

LiDAR / SPAD Papers at ISSCC 2023
 Unfortunately, no paper related to LiDAR or ToF sensors
will be presented at this year’s ISSCC, but a couple of other
things you might be interested in will appear.
 5.6: A 400x200 600fps 117.7dB-DR SPAD X-ray Detector with

Seamless Global Shutter and Time-Encoded Extrapolation
Counter
 Forum 2.6: Long-Range High-Resolution LiDAR Technology
 Forum 5.7: Extremely Compact Data Converters for Future 3D
Sensing

References
 J. A. Richardson, et al., “Low Dark Count Single-Photon Avalanche Diode Structure Compatible With
Standard Nanometer Scale CMOS Technology,” IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett., vol. 21, no. 14, pp. 1020–
1022, Jun. 2009.
 E. Charbon, “Single-photon imaging in complementary metal oxide semiconductor processes,” Phil.
Trans. R. Soc. A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, vol. 372, no. 2012, pp. 20130100–
20130100, Feb. 2014.
 C. Niclass, et al., “A 128×128 Single-Photon Image Sensor With Colum-Level 10-bit Time-to-Digital
Converter Array,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 43, no. 12, pp. 2977-2989, Dec. 2008.
 M.-J. Lee, et al., “High-Performance Back-Illuminated Three-Dimensional Stacked Single-Photon
Avalanche Diode Implemented in 45-nm CMOS Technology,” IEEE J. Select. Topics Quantum Electron.,
vol. 24, no. 6, p. 3801809, May 2018.
 C. Veerappan and E. Charbon, “A Low Dark Count p-i-n Diode Based SPAD in CMOS Technology,” IEEE
T. Electron Devices, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 65-71, Jan. 2016.
 E. Charbon, “Small and Smart SPAD Pixels,” in Proc. of Int. SPAD Sensors Workshop (ISSW), Jun.
2020.
 S. Shimida, et al., “A Back Illuminated 6 µm SPAD Pixel Array with High PDE and Timing Jitter
Performance,” in IEEE Int. Electron Devices Meeting (IEDM) Dig. Tech. Papers, Dec. 2021, pp. 445-449.
 C. Veerappan, et al., "A 160×128 single-photon image sensor with on-pixel 55ps 10b time-to-digital
converter," in IEEE Int. Solid-State Circuits Conf. (ISSCC) Dig. Tech. Papers, Feb. 2011, pp. 312–313.
 C. Niclass, M. Soga, H. Matsubara, S. Kato, and M. Kagami, “A 100-m Range 10-Frame/s 340×96-Pixel
Time-of-Flight Depth Sensor in 0.18-µm CMOS,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 559–
572, Feb. 2013.

References
 C. Niclass, M. Soga, H. Matsubara, M. Ogawa, and M. Kagami, “A 0.18-µm CMOS SoC for a 100-m-
Range 10-Frame/s 200×96-Pixel Time-of-Flight Depth Sensor,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 49, no.
1, pp. 315–330, Jan. 2014.
 A. R. Ximenes, P. Padmanabhan, M. Lee, Y. Yamashita, D. Yaung and E. Charbon, "A Modular, Direct
Time-of-Flight Depth Sensor in 45/65-nm 3-D-Stacked CMOS Technology," IEEE J. of Solid-State
Circuits, vol. 54, no. 11, pp. 3203–3214, Nov. 2019.
 L. Braga, et al., "An 8×16-pixel 92kSPAD Time-Resolved Sensor with On-Pixel 64ps 12b TDC and
100MS/s Real-Time Energy Histogramming in 0.13μm CIS Technology for PET/MRI Applications," in
IEEE Int. Solid-State Circuits Conf. (ISSCC) Dig. Tech. Papers, Feb. 2013, pp. 486–487.
 H. Seo, H. Yoon, D. Kim, S.-J. Kim, J.-H. Chun, and J. Choi, “A 36-channel SPAD-Integrated Scanning
LiDAR Sensor with Multi-Event Histogramming TDC and Embedded Interference Filter,” in Proc. of IEEE
Symp. VLSI Circuits, Jun. 2020.
 O. Kumagai, et al., "A 189×600 Back-Illuminated Stacked SPAD Direct Time-of-Flight Depth Sensor for
Automotive LiDAR Systems," in IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference (ISSCC) Dig. Tech.
Papers, Feb. 2021, pp. 110–111.
 N. Dutton, et al., “A Time-Correlated Single-Photon-Counting Sensor with 14GS/S Histogramming Time-
to-Digital Converter,” in IEEE Int. Solid-State Circuits Conf. (ISSCC) Dig. Tech. Papers, Feb. 2015, pp.
204–205.
 S. Shimada, et al., “A Back Illuminated 6 µm SPAD Pixel Array with High PDE and Timing Jitter
Performance,” in IEEE International Electron Device Meeting (IEDM) Dig. Tech. Papers, Dec. 2021, pp.
446-449.

References
 C. Zhang, et al., “A 30-frames/s, 252×144 SPAD Flash LiDAR With 1728 Dual-Clock 48.8-ps TDCs, and
Pixel-Wise Integrated Histogramming,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 1137–1151, Apr.
2019.
 S. W. Hutchings, et al., “A Reconfigurable 3-D-Stacked SPAD Imager With In-Pixel Histogramming for
Flash LIDAR or High-Speed Time-of-Flight Imaging,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 54, no. 11, pp.
2947–2956, Oct. 2019.
 D. Stoppa, et al., “A reconfigurable QVGA/Q3VGA Direct Time-of-Flight 3D Imaging System with On-
chip Depth-map Computation in 45/40 nm 3D-Stacked BSI SPAD CMOS,” in Proc. Int. Image Sensor
Workshop (IISW), 2021.
 B. Kim, S. Park, J.-H. Chun, J. Choi, and S.-J. Kim, “A 48×40 13.5mm Depth Resolution Flash LiDAR
Sensor with In-Pixel Zoom Histogramming Time-to-Digital Converter,” in IEEE International Solid-State
Circuits Conference (ISSCC) Dig. Tech. Papers, Feb. 2021, pp. 108–109.
 S. Park, B. Kim, J. Cho, J.-H. Chun, J. Choi, and S.-J. Kim, “An 80×60 Flash LiDAR Sensor with In-Pixel
Histogramming TDC Based on Quaternary Search and Time-Gated Δ-Intensity Phase Detection for 45m
Detectable Range and Background Light Cancellation,” in IEEE International Solid-State Circuits
Conference (ISSCC) Dig. Tech. Papers, Feb. 2022, pp. 98–99.
 Seonghyeok Park, Bum-Jun Kim, Su-Hyun Han, Junhee Cho, Jung-Hoon Chun, Jaehyuk Choi,
and Seong-Jin Kim, “An 80×60 Flash LiDAR Sensor with In-Pixel Delta-Intensity Quaternary Search
Histogramming TDC,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 57, no. 11, pp. 3200-3211, Nov. 2022.

More References
 M. Perenzoni, D. Perenzoni, and D. Stoppa, “A 64×64-pixels Digital Silicon Photomultiplier Direct TOF
sensor with 100-MPhotons/s/pixel Background Rejection and Imaging/Altimeter Mode with 0.14%
Precision up to 6 km for Spacecraft Navigation and Landing,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 52, no. 1,
pp. 151–160, Jan. 2017.
 C. Zhang, et al., “A 240×160 3D Stacked SPAD dToF Image Sensor with Rolling Shutter and In-Pixel
Histogram for mobile devices,” IEEE Open J. Solid-State Circuits Soc., vol. 2, pp. 3-11, 2022.
 K. Yoshioka et al., “A 20-ch TDC/ADC Hybrid Architecture LiDAR SoC for 240 x 96 Pixel 200-m Range
Imaging With Smart Accumulation Technique and Residue Quantizing SAR ADC,” IEEE J. Solid-State
Circuits, vol. 53, no. 11, pp. 3026–3038, Nov. 2018.
 S. Kondo, et al., “An Automotive LiDAR SoC for 240 × 192-Pixel 225-m-Range Imaging With a 40-
Channel 0.0036-mm2 Voltage/Time Dual-Data-Converter-Based AFE,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol.
55, no. 11, pp. 2866–2877, Nov. 2020.
 I. Gyongy, N. A. W. Dutton, and R. K. Henderson, “Direct Time-of-Flight Single-Photon Imaging,” IEEE
Trans. Electron Dev, vol. 69, no. 6, pp. 2794–2805, 2022.
 P. Padmanabhan, et al., “A 256×128 3D-stacked (45 nm) SPAD FLASH LiDAR with 7-Level Coincidence
Detection and Progressive Gating for 100 m Range and 10 klux Background Light,” in IEEE Int. Solid-
State Circuits Conf. (ISSCC) Dig. Tech. Papers, Feb. 2021, pp. 111–112.
 E. Manuzzato, et al., “A 64×64-Pixel Flash LiDAR SPAD Imager with Distributed Pixel-to-Pixel
Correlation for Background Rejection, Tunable Automatic Pixel Sensitivity and First-Last Event Detection
Strategies for Space Applications,” in IEEE Int. Solid-State Circuits Conf. (ISSCC) Dig. Tech. Papers,
Feb. 2022, pp. 96–97.

Acknowledgment
 Contributions from a LiDAR research team

 Bumjun Kim
 Su-Hyun Han
 Seonghyeok Park
 Special thanks to
 Leonardo Gasparini
 Naveen Verma

Solid State Cmos Lidar Sensors

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Solid State Cmos Lidar Sensors

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Solid State Cmos Lidar Sensors

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ISSCC 2023 Tutorial #6

Solid-State CMOS LiDAR Sensors

Feb 19, 2023

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

 Indirect Time-of-Fight (iToF) Technique

 Direct Time-of-Fight (dToF) Technique

S.-J. Kim T6: Solid-State CMOS LiDAR Sensors 3 of 95

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

S.-J. Kim T6: Solid-State CMOS LiDAR Sensors 4 of 95

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

6.1B units in 2019  11B units in 2024!

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR)

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

Spatial Resolution Frame Rate

Narrow FoV Motion

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

S.-J. Kim T6: Solid-State CMOS LiDAR Sensors 11 of 95

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

 ToF is directly measured like a basic principle.

S.-J. Kim T6: Solid-State CMOS LiDAR Sensors 13 of 95

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

S.-J. Kim T6: Solid-State CMOS LiDAR Sensors 14 of 95

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

B. Schwartz, Nat. Photonics 2010

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

S.-J. Kim T6: Solid-State CMOS LiDAR Sensors 16 of 95

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

64-channel, 120 m range LiDAR sensor

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

S.-J. Kim T6: Solid-State CMOS LiDAR Sensors 19 of 95

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

Discrete components Sony

Small-size Low-cost Solid-State LiDAR has emerged!

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

 Geiger mode operation (virtually infinite gain)

S.-J. Kim T6: Solid-State CMOS LiDAR Sensors 21 of 95

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

S.-J. Kim T6: Solid-State CMOS LiDAR Sensors 22 of 95

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

1. Steady-state at Geiger region VSPAD – ID

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

1. Steady-state at Geiger region VSPAD – ID

Vout = VD(1-exp(-t/RqCD)) VSPAD

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

1. Steady-state at Geiger region VSPAD – ID

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

1. Steady-state at Geiger region VSPAD – ID

Vout = VEexp(-t/RqCD) VSPAD

© 2023 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

Cathode Anode Anode Cathode

 High electric field is at the edges of the junction.

S.-J. Kim T6: Solid-State CMOS LiDAR Sensors 27 of 95