0
\$\begingroup\$

Happy New Year! I've recently completed a metal detector project (see my recent questions) and I've been going back over some of the parts I didn't fully understand first time around.

This question relates to the differential peak detector section and my simplified spice model equivalent. I was trying to compute the small signal gain according to some standard equations (i.e., Rc/2Re) and comparing them to the spice output, but was confused by what I saw. I was expecting a very large gain (>600 according to the standard formula), but instead spice was reporting a rather disappointing Ad of < 90.

enter image description here enter image description here

It took me a while to figure out that Q1 (see spice image) is saturated and I'm guessing the typical formulas don't apply. Unless I've made a stupid error, I think I know "why" Q1 is saturated: the output impedance of the DC reference is (by my calculation) around 260k; this high impedance coupled with a high value collector resistor is starving the transistor of current and forcing it into saturation. The transistor wants to draw 700uA/2, but it can't.

So, assuming my analysis about the arrangement is correct, why would the author deliberately saturate Q1? Is this a common pattern and what are the advantages of doing this? Also, given that the standard formulas no longer work it seems, is there any "pencil and paper" way to calculate the AC gain at the output? (by this I mean, what heuristics might the author have had in his head when putting the arrangement together) Many thanks!

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ The first rule of simulation is: make the model accurate. Why have you left off the bias network, and why have you not AC-coupled your source? \$\endgroup\$ – WhatRoughBeast Jan 1 '17 at 16:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ These 2 schemas are quite different. What author? which schematic? AC gain ratio only works with assumption of correct dc Q point, or with negative feedback. Lots of missing info, but I can see how to improve Gain on 1st schema to ~2000 with 15k on TR7e. \$\endgroup\$ – Sunnyskyguy EE75 Jan 1 '17 at 16:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ I originally had a slightly different arrangement: DC bias as separate voltage source (Zo=260k) and a 10nF coupled signal, both combined at the base. The DC operating point still showed the arrangement in saturation. With the arrangement shown, I have a 2V DC bias with a 10mV signal riding on it. \$\endgroup\$ – Buck8pe Jan 1 '17 at 16:13
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Tony I could sum my question as this: it seems like a really strange differential amp setup, Q1 seems to be sat for some (most?) likely inputs (I may be wrong). Why was it designed this way? \$\endgroup\$ – Buck8pe Jan 1 '17 at 16:18
  • \$\begingroup\$ Also, click the metal detector link in the question to see the complete document. My simplified spice model may very well be incorrect, it was my attempt to boil the arrangement down a bit. \$\endgroup\$ – Buck8pe Jan 1 '17 at 16:22

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.