0
\$\begingroup\$

I have met a emitter follower design example in the Horowitz-Hill's book (scheme is below):

enter image description here

And I don't understand why the resulting steps is correct:

Step 1. Choose \$V_E\$. For the largest possible symmetrical swing without clipping, \$V_E = 0.5V_{CC}\$, or \$+7.5\$ volts.

Step 2. Choose \$R_E\$. For a quiescent current of \$1 mA\$, \$R_E = 7.5k\$.

Step 3. Choose \$R_1\$ and \$R_2\$. \$V_B\$ is \$V_E+0.6V\$, or \$8.1V\$. This determines the ratio of \$R_1\$ to \$R_2\$ as \$1:1.17\$. The preceding loading criterion requires that the parallel resistance of \$R_1\$ and \$R_2\$ be about \$75k\$ or less (one-tenth of \$7.5k×\beta\$ ). Suitable standard values are \$R_1 = 130k\$, \$R_2 = 150k\$.

So, once again all known values: $$ V_{BE} = 0.6 V \\ R_1 = 130K \\ R_2 = 150K \\ R_E = 7.5K \\ \beta = 100 $$

My question is about values for \$R_1\$ and \$R_2\$. The maximum current through the divider without connected load is: $$ I_{div} = \frac{V_cc}{R_1 + R_2} = \frac{15}{280 \cdot 10^3} \approx 54 \mu A $$

When we connect emitter follower to the divider, there must be a base current \$I_B\$ that is: $$ I_B = \frac{I_E}{\beta + 1} = \frac{1ma}{100 + 1} \approx 9.9 \mu A $$

Hence we could calculate output voltage of the divider after connection of emitter follower: $$ I_{R_2} = I_{div} - I_{B} = 54 - 9.9 = 44.1 \mu A $$

Hence, we'd get a output voltage from the divider: $$ V_{div} = V_{R_2} = I_{R_2} \cdot R_2 = 44.1 \cdot 10^{-6} \cdot 150 \cdot 10^3 \approx 6.62 V $$

So, we would get a \$6 V\$ output from the emitter follower instead of expected \$7.5 V\$.

Could you tell me where I'm mistaken?

P.S.: There is also a screenshot from simulator:

enter image description here

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Step 4 - if you are dissatisfied with the output not being 7.5 volts, adjust one of the bias resistors. \$\endgroup\$ – Andy aka Feb 12 '17 at 11:01
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thank you. It's the obvious step. =) But am I right with my statements? \$\endgroup\$ – vpetrigo Feb 12 '17 at 11:03
  • \$\begingroup\$ Yes you are indeed. \$\endgroup\$ – Andy aka Feb 12 '17 at 11:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ I don't understand why they point out that we should meet the condition \$R_source = R_1 || R_2 \ll (\beta + 1) R_E\$, but do not mentioned that it also should be \$I_{B} \ll I_{div}\$ \$\endgroup\$ – vpetrigo Feb 12 '17 at 11:11
  • \$\begingroup\$ I think it's about input impedance/resistance (ie not to decrease it by choosing smaller bias resistors). \$\endgroup\$ – Rohat Kılıç Feb 12 '17 at 11:30
2
\$\begingroup\$

The book's approach is an estimation, on the assumption that the base current is negligible - which turns out to be not so great of an assumption here, as you found out.

your approach is more precise, but made the same mistake right here:

The maximum current through the divider without connected load is: Idiv=VccR1+R2=15280⋅103≈54μA

you didn't factor in the equivalent resistance on the base side: at 8.1v @ 10ua, that's equivalent to a 810K resistor (approximately Re * beta - see note below).

So the lower resistor R2 is paralleled by a 810K resistor. Once you factor that in your calculation, it will be alright.

Most people don't take that approach. for example, I typically set the current through R1/R2 to be 10x of the base current. That yielded R1 + R2 = 15v / 100ua = 150K. and go from there for R1/R2 individually. the 10x is picked to make sure that the base current is indeed negligible.

what it shows you is that 1) don't put too much stock in any book; and 2) don't take estimation too seriously. many times, good enough is indeed good enough.

edit:

note: for better approximation, some people would assume that the lower resistor is by-passed by a equivalent resistance of beta * Re -> 750K in this case, vs. 810K the real one calculated earlier. This approach works fairly well as an approximation.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thank you for pointing me out! I've forgotten to take into account the load impedance of emitter follower. \$\endgroup\$ – vpetrigo Feb 12 '17 at 18:48
2
\$\begingroup\$

Quote dannyf: "the 10x is picked to make sure that the base current is indeed negligibe."

Yes - of course, correct. However, for a better understanding I like to give some additional explanation.

The background of the commonly applied design criterion (divider current >> base current) is the fact that the ratio Ic/Ib=beta has very large tolerances. That means: For a selected collector current Ic we do not know the actual base current. Hence, we select a design in which the base current (and its large tolerances) play a minor role only.

As a consequence, we have a "relatively" low-resistive voltage divider (if compared with the input resistance at the base node) providing a "stiff" voltage at the base (as "stiff" as reasonable) - nearly independent on beta uncertainties.

(By the way: This works because the collector current is detrmined by the base-emitter voltage and not by the current Ib).

\$\endgroup\$

Your Answer

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

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