2
\$\begingroup\$

I was reading the BJT section of The Art of Electronics on page 77 Figure 2.10.B.

Shouldn't the divider voltage sit at 14.4β€―V rather than 11.6β€―V? the opposite what the author mentioned. Since if 𝑄3 is in saturation, the base voltage of 𝑄3 should be ~0.6β€―V lower than the collector which is 14.4β€―V.

The β€œdivider” formed by 𝑅2 𝑅3 may be confusing: 𝑅3’s job is to keep 𝑄3 off when 𝑄2 is off; and when 𝑄2 pulls its collector low, most of its collector current comes from 𝑄3’s base (because only ∼0.6β€―mA of the 4.4β€―mA collector current comes from 𝑅3 - make sure you understand why). That is, 𝑅3 does not have much effect on 𝑄3’s saturation. Another way to say it is that the divider would sit at about +11.6β€―V (rather than +14.4β€―V), were it not for 𝑄3’s base-emitter diode, which consequently gets most of 𝑄2’s collector current. In any case, the value of 𝑅3 is not critical and could be made larger; the tradeoff is slower turn-off of 𝑄3, owing to capacitive effects.12
Switching the high side of a load returned to ground.

Figure 2.10. Switching the high side of a load returned to ground.


12) But don’t make it too small: 𝑄3 would not switch at all if 𝑅3 were reduced to 100β€―Ξ© (why?). We were surprised to see this basic error in an instrument, the rest of which displayed circuit design of the highest sophistication.

\$\endgroup\$
5
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ The text says that the divider does sit at 14.4V. Without Q3's diode, it would go to 11.6V. Or am I the one misreading it? \$\endgroup\$ Jun 30, 2016 at 22:11
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SredniVashtar I guess I misread it. If that's the case then that makes sense now. Thank you! \$\endgroup\$
    – Rocky79
    Jun 30, 2016 at 22:14
  • \$\begingroup\$ Question about the footnote: Why would the transistor not switch? \$\endgroup\$
    – CL.
    Jul 1, 2016 at 8:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ @CL, if R3 was below about 140 R then the R3 and R2 potential divider would not put a voltage lower than 14.4 V on Q3's base and would not forward-bias Q3. I've said 'potential divider' but actually the circuit designer wants to stop R3 and R2 being able to be one - Q3's base-emitter diode should be clamping it out of dividerland. When I've used this circuit, I've used something like 47 K for R3 and R2 = (14.3V-0.3V)/5mA = 2800 R ~= 2700 R. (Obviously the 5 mA depends on the actual transistor and its load.) \$\endgroup\$
    – TonyM
    Jul 2, 2016 at 19:44
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @TonyM THANK you for explaining this! That makes perfect sense :) \$\endgroup\$ May 9, 2023 at 20:44

1 Answer 1

2
\$\begingroup\$

The text clearly states that the base-emitter junction of Q3 dominates the voltage across R3. If Vcc supply is +15 volts, this 'locks' the voltage at the base of Q3 at +15-.6, or about 14.4 volts.

The 0.6 volt B-E drop is an average, as bjt transistors (NPN and PNP) have a B-E drop of about .55volts to .65 volts, depending on its beta and the manufactures needs.

Notice the comment that R3 could be increased a great deal, to 10K perhaps. The only minor penalty would be a slower response due to transistor capacitance. R1, R2 and R3 could also be lower by 50%, increasing the response speed of the circuit, but at the small penalty of a higher 'ON' current.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thank you for your reply. I understood the concept I just misread the part where it says " the divider would sit at 11.6v without were it not for Q3 base-emitter diode" It's clear now. \$\endgroup\$
    – Rocky79
    Jul 1, 2016 at 22:19

Your Answer

By clicking β€œPost Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.