* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download BJT Incremental Parameter Equivalent Circuit
Integrated circuit wikipedia , lookup
Wien bridge oscillator wikipedia , lookup
Nanofluidic circuitry wikipedia , lookup
Josephson voltage standard wikipedia , lookup
Index of electronics articles wikipedia , lookup
Transistor–transistor logic wikipedia , lookup
Power electronics wikipedia , lookup
Valve RF amplifier wikipedia , lookup
Regenerative circuit wikipedia , lookup
RLC circuit wikipedia , lookup
Voltage regulator wikipedia , lookup
Schmitt trigger wikipedia , lookup
Switched-mode power supply wikipedia , lookup
Surge protector wikipedia , lookup
Resistive opto-isolator wikipedia , lookup
Two-port network wikipedia , lookup
Wilson current mirror wikipedia , lookup
Power MOSFET wikipedia , lookup
Current source wikipedia , lookup
Operational amplifier wikipedia , lookup
Rectiverter wikipedia , lookup
Opto-isolator wikipedia , lookup
BJT Incremental Parameter Equivalent Circuit ObjectiveThe PWL linearized approximation to device characteristics is necessarily coarse in many respects, applying as it ordinarily does over a wide range of device operation. There are circumstances, however, in which only small (incremental) deviations are made from a steady-state operating point, and in these circumstances a model can be developed which is more finely representative of local device operation. The objective here is the description of the hybrid-π incremental parameter BJT model for operation in the normal mode. The initial discussion is for the static model; additional components to include BJT internal dynamics are presented later. Introduction The forward-bias portion of a semiconductor diode characteristic is sketched in the figure below (left). Previously, to simplify (hand) analysis of diode circuits the diode is replaced by a piecewise linear equivalent circuit. A point to note here is that the PWL diode model approximated diode behavior over both forward- and reverse-biased ranges of operation. For the present purpose interest is limited to a small range of forward-bias operation around a specific central operating point Q. This is suggested in the figure by enclosing the pertinent part of the characteristics within a circle. Because the operating range is limited the model we use for the diode within this limited range need not be particularly accurate outside this range. We can trade off inaccuracy of the model outside the specified range of operation for increased accuracy of representation within the range. Thus given I = f(V) expand I in a Taylor series about the Q point; the linear term is shown on the right of the figure. To the extent that the range of variation is small enough the series may be truncated at the linear term. This corresponds geometrically to approximating the actual characteristic by a tangent at the Q point (see figure). Use the theoretical diode volt-ampere relation I = Io (e qV/kT - 1), ≈ Io eqV/kT for forward-bias operation above the 'knee' to evaluate re = ∂ I/∂V at IQ and determine that re = kT/qIQ. The emission parameter N is omitted for simplicity; this parameter is roughly 1. Now go one step further. Since the actual diode is to be replaced by the linearized model (valid with a limited range of operation) then within the range of validity the circuit is linear. Hence superposition may be applied to separate a diode circuit analysis into two parts; a steady-state calculation to determine the Q point (IQ, VQ) and an incremental part relating the incremental changes i and v. Separation of the analysis in this fashion can be quite convenient. Note, for example, that it is not necessary that the same diode model be used for both parts of the analysis. Indeed the steady-state analysis need not use a linearized model at all. The only connection between the two in this separation is the appearance of the Q-point current in the incremental diode circuit parameter re. Bipolar Transistor Incremental Parameter Model A sophisticated model for incremental variations of transistor currents and voltages, rather more involved than the diode model, also can be derived. Here a widely used first-order model, the ‘hybrid π ‘ simply is asserted and discussed. The model terminal volt-ampere relations simply express the linearization of the incremental parameter analysis. What is less obvious is the relationship between the model coefficients Introductory Electronics Notes The University of Michigan-Dearborn 50-1 Copyright © M H Miller: 2000 revised and transistor physical phenomena. We do not derive the model here because doing so takes us too far afield of the purpose of these notes; the objective here is familiarization. The model as it is presented here actually is incomplete; for example it assumes that carrier transport delays in traveling across the transistor can be ignored. We will return to this matter latter, adding appropriate components to the model to take account of the delays. The hybrid-π model is drawn to the right. Keep in mind that lower case characters used for the terminal currents and voltages represent changes in current and voltage from Q point values. The transistor is assumed to be operating in normal forward active mode, i.e., emitter junction forwardbiased and collector junction reverse-biased. Although sophisticated and conceptually helpful in a number of respects, the model is of limited use. Numerical calculations, even incremental-parameter calculations, generally are better done on a computer using a more accurate nonlinear model. Hand calculations are another matter. Linearized models generally are particularly helpful in two ways. They can for example, provide analytic relationships usefully describing the relative importance of various circuit parameters. However analysis of an involved circuit obscures such relations to a point where they are of little use. The resistance rbc, for example, corresponds to a second order effect which inevitably appears formally in complex algebraic expressions but rarely has a significant numerical consequence. A second way linearized circuits can be helpful is in enabling useful estimates of circuit performance, not particularly precise numerically but sufficiently accurate to lead to a preliminary circuit design that then can be analyzed numerically by computer. This helpfulness also is limited if complicated hand calculations need to be done. As we will see the model can be considerably simplified and its usefulness greatly enhanced as a consequence of this simplification. As part of the process of doing so we consider first the relationship of the various model elements to the physical operation of the transistor. Keep in mind the presumption that the Q-point operating point has the transistor biased for normal forward active mode operation. The equivalent circuit describes the incremental base current as The first term corresponds to the slope 1/rbe of the exponential current characteristic at the operating point (expressed in terms of base current rather than incremental emitter current). That slope is where ICQ is the operating point current. (It is convenient latter to use ib as a dependent variable. The transistor action makes ic ≈ ßib. Instead of writing veb = ie re as in the earlier discussion of the forwardbiased diode we have substituted ie ≈ ßib and rbe = ß re.) The base resistance term rbe describes the incremental emitter junction behavior; there is a small junction voltage change for a given current change which is ignored in the idealized diode model. There is some small influence of the collector junction on the base current, but in practice it is negligible. (For comparison estimate rbe ≈ 2.6 KΩ for a 1ma quiescent current, ß = 100, and T ≈ 300K; rbc typically is measured in megohms. Incidentally a useful value to have in mind is that kT/qe = 26 mv at T = 300K.) The collector current is described by the model as Introductory Electronics Notes The University of Michigan-Dearborn 50-2 Copyright © M H Miller: 2000 revised where gm = ß/rbe. The controlled current source, the first term, corresponds to the ‘transistor action’, i.e., the injection of carriers into the base and their capture by collector junction. The other two resistors are associated with the Early Effect. The resistance rce corresponds to an increase in collector current with increasing vce because of a decrease in base width; the collector current is modified by the Early component vce/rce. Associated with this is an increase in the efficiency of carrier transport across the narrower base; fewer carriers trapped mean a lower base current. The effect is to reduce the base current by an amount proportional to the voltage across the collector junction. By and large rbc simply can be neglected, as indicated above. It corresponds to a second-order effect and typically has a representative value greater than a megohm compared to representative values for rce of the order of kilohms. In a KCL equation at the base node the current in rbe will be orders of magnitude greater than the current through rbc. (Of course a nonlinear model used for a computer computation nevertheless will account, at least in principle, for the Early Effect.) One can imagine pedagogical circumstances where the neglect may be questionable, but even then transport delay effects (to be considered later) far overshadow any effect of rbc. Similarly, in practice, rce (typically 10-50 kilohms) generally may be omitted in using the model for making estimates. The operation of the transistor is generally designed specifically to accept base current, produce an amplified copy of the current at the collector and pass as much of this collector current to circuitry connected at the collector -emitter terminals. For an effective current transfer the input resistance presented by this circuitry should be small compared to rce. There is thus built into a circuit design an incentive to reduce the influence of rce. Another reason for the simplification of neglecting rce is the appropriate use of the transistor model. This circuit is not intended for precision calculations; circuit analysis programs using nonlinear equations tailored to describe specific devices provide numerical data faster and more precisely than manual calculations. The circuit model preferably should be used to provide approximate information with sufficient accuracy to be useful. The model can be used to suggest relationships between parameters and performance, and to provide rough design estimates of appropriate element values. For this purpose, and within reason, accuracy should be sacrificed in favor of ease of calculation. A computer computation can be used once element values are selected to obtain precise numerical data. Thus the simplified transistor equivalent circuit drawn to the right is quite adequate in almost all instances in which it is used primarily to provide useful design estimates and relationships rather than precise values. A representative calculation and an associated computer analysis serve to illustrate the matter. Representative Incremental Parameter Analysis The circuit drawn to the right is that of a single-stage CE amplifier. The '∞' symbol adjacent to a capacitor is used to indicate that the capacitative reactance has been deliberately made negligible compared to the resistance with which it is series by a using an appropriate combination of signal frequency and capacitance value. Later when we consider frequency response this simplification is not assumed. Although not pertinent to the immediate purpose note the use of the emitter capacitor (between node 8 and node 4) to change the emitter stabilization. At low signal frequencies the capacitor reactance is high enough so that the 100Ω branch can be neglected. As the signal frequency rises however the 100Ω branch begins to dominate. The emitter resistance is used to limit unwanted current changes; these tend to occur slowly, e.g., changes with temperature. On the other Introductory Electronics Notes The University of Michigan-Dearborn 50-3 Copyright © M H Miller: 2000 revised hand the current should change at frequencies higher than, say, a bass tone to enable amplification. In another place frequency response will be considered in some detail There really are two calculations to be made. First we determine the DC operation, in particular the collector current. In part this is to assure operation in the forward active mode; a not-so-uncommon design error may inadvertently place the transistor in saturation or cutoff, and for a careful design this should be checked. After the DC calculation we determine the incremental equivalent circuit (for which knowledge of ICQ is required) and calculate incremental performance. The capacitors form DC ‘blocks’, i.e., they do not pass DC current. Hence they effectively disconnect parts of the amplifier circuit from involvement in the DC biasing, as shown below, left. The value for ß is obtained from the 2N3904 manufacturer’s specifications. An exact value should not be critical because of the emitter stabilization; the effect of variations in the value of ß presumably has been reduced greatly by the feedback. In the circuit below the biasing resistors have been replaced by a Thevenin equivalent as described elsewhere, and a PWL model has replaced the transistor. The formal analysis of the model is left as an exercise; nothing particularly different from earlier discussion is involved. Instead, to suggest the sort of use for which the PWL model is intended we roughly estimate the emitter current as follows. Assume the circuit design is reasonably well done. Then in the calculation for IE the term involving ß has been made small compared to RE. That means the voltage drop across RB will be small compared to that across RE. Hence the base voltage is more or less equal to VBB. Subtract a nominal 0.7 volts to account for the emitter junction drop to obtain the emitter voltage, and divide this by RE to estimate the emitter current. The base voltage is about 12(10/(10+33) ≈ 3 volts. Then the emitter current is ≈ 2.3/2.2 ≈ 1ma. A more formal analysis of the PWL model calculates a current of 0.95 ma, and a PSpice nonlinear analysis (netlist given below) computes 0.94 ma. Incidentally the collector voltage is approximately 12 - 1*3.9 ≈ 8.1 volts, and we can conclude that transistor operation is indeed in the normal forward operating mode. For the incremental circuit analysis we assume as described before that a signal frequency has been chosen to make the reactance of the coupling capacitors negligible as described before. The incremental equivalent circuit is formed as follows. View, say, a node voltage as a superposition of a DC (quiescent point) value and an AC (incremental voltage difference from the quiescent point. We have considered the DC analysis separately above. Now consider the incremental (AC) part separately; to do this turn all independent DC sources off (source magnitude -> 0). Note that this is a mathematical and not a physical action. We will be considering only part of a node voltage (for example), using the mathematical concept of superposition to combine the DC and AC analyses to obtain the total node voltage. Introductory Electronics Notes The University of Michigan-Dearborn 50-4 Copyright © M H Miller: 2000 revised The AC equivalent circuit is shown to the right. The value of rbe @ 300K = (121*26)/0.95 = 3.3 KΩ. For the incremental circuit R1 and R2 are in parallel, and the resistance of the parallel combination is 7.67 KΩ. A representative calculation is that of the voltage gain, i.e., the ratio of the output voltage to the input voltage. Since the ratio does not depend on the actual input voltage magnitude we choose that to be 1 volt for convenience. Any method of linear circuit analysis, e.g., mesh or node equation methods, may be used to calculate the gain. However circuits of the type illustrated have a ‘ladder’ form which is conducive to a step-by-step calculation (particularly using a calculator). The following circuit transformation also is often useful. The current through the emitter resistor is (ß+1)ib. A current ib produces the same voltage drop across a resistor ß+1 times larger. Hence the circuits shown are equivalent, i.e., the corresponding terminal voltampere relations are the same. Note that for node 5 it is sufficient to show just the current source. Make the transformation as shown and verify the following step-by-step calculations (assuming Vin = 1v). *CE Amplifier Incremental Parameter Analysis VS 1 RS 1 CIN 2 R1 6 R2 3 Q1 5 RE 4 CE 4 RE2 8 RC 6 COUT 5 0 2 3 3 0 3 0 8 0 5 7 AC 4 1 1K 100UF 33K 10 Q2N3904 2.2K 100UF 100 3.9K 100UF Introductory Electronics Notes The University of Michigan-Dearborn RL 7 0 3.9K VCC 6 0 DC 12 * Calculate gain at 1KHz .AC LIN 1 1K 1.1K * Used to plot IC(Q1) .DC TEMP -50 50 2 .OP .PLOT AC V(7) .PROBE .END 50-5 Copyright © M H Miller: 2000 revised Node Voltages (1) 0.0000 (2) 0.0000 (5) 8.3127 (6) 12.0000 NAME MODEL IB IC VBE VCE (3) 2.7416 (7) 0.0000 (4) 2.0941 (8) 0.0000 Q1 Q2N3904 6.40E-06 9.45E-04 6.47E-01 6.22E+00 Voltage Gain (magnitude) = 13.05 As a matter of general interest the variation of quiescent collector current with temperature was computed. Another Representative Incremental P arameter Analysis (RIPA) The two-stage amplifier shown below employs DC but not AC feedback. The DC analysis follows that of previous illustrations; neglect the Q2 base current relative to the Q1 collector current (verify this subsequently) and write a KVL equation for VCC following nodes 7->4->5->3->0. The calculation is summarized below; details are left as an exercise. The incremental equivalent circuit is as shown below; details of its derivation are left for an exercise. Normalizing the input to 1 volt for simplicity calculate the output voltage (= voltage gain). Any linear circuit analysis technique may be used but the ladder development shown below the circuit diagram probably is simplest. Introductory Electronics Notes The University of Michigan-Dearborn 50-6 Copyright © M H Miller: 2000 revised The first factor is the source current. Multiply by the current divider fraction to obtain the incremental base current, and by the current amplification ß to obtain the Q2 incremental collector current. Continue like this to calculate Vout = 7646. The computed voltage gain (see below) is 8865. The calculated value is sufficiently close to the computed value to suggest usefulness of the approximate calculation in evaluating the relative importance of various circuit elements in establishing the circuit performance. Node Voltages 1) 0.0000 2) 0.0000 5) 1.3565 6) 6.00500 NAME MODEL IB IC VBE VCE Q1 Q2N3904 1.43E-05 2.10E-03 6.85E-01 2.03E+00 3) .6850 7) 9.0000 4) 2.0290 Q2 Q2N3904 9.43E-06 1.36E-03 6.73E-01 4.65E+00 Voltage Gain = 8865 Yet Another RIPA In this illustrative circuit a PNP transistor substitutes for the collector load resistor of Q1. Since the bias voltages are fixed Q2 acts very nearly as a current source. Not quite of course because of the Early Effect, but the slope of the Q2 collector characteristics corresponds to tens of kilohms. Note however that the DC voltage drop across Q2 is considerably less than what it would be for a standard resistor of equivalent size. The PWL calculation of the emitter current of the PNP device (2N3906) is isolated from that for the NPN (2N3904) device. The current calculations then are done separately, as shown to the right of the circuit diagram. The PSpice computation gives very similar results. Actually this should be expected, since the terms involving the uncertainties in junction voltage and ß make relatively small contributions to the expressions. Ignoring the numerical difference between emitter and collector currents provides an estimate for the load current of 0.91 - 0.57 - 0.34ma, and a DC load voltage of 2.79 volts; the computed voltage is 2.87 volts. Introductory Electronics Notes The University of Michigan-Dearborn 50-7 Copyright © M H Miller: 2000 revised PSpice Computation Result NODE VOLTAGE (1) 2.0000 (2) 2.0000 (5) 2.8704 (6) 7.2303 NAME MODEL IB IC VBE VCE Q1 Q2N3904 5.62E-06 5.87E-04 6.40E-01 1.57E+00 (3) 1.3036 (7) 7.9293 (4) 1.9438 (8) 10.0000 Q2 Q2N3906 -4.25E-06 -9.37E-04 -6.99E-01 -5.06E+00 The incremental equivalent circuit is drawn below. Note that Q2 does not affect (to first order) the signal amplification since the incremental base current for this stage is zero. The Q2 stage serves as a fixed DC current source. The calculation of the voltage gain is straightforward; voltage gain = -3.52. The computed voltage gain is -3.34. Details of the analysis are left as an exercise. Still Another RIPA The incremental parameter equivalent circuit for this circuit configuration corresponds to a CE stage (Q1) whose collector current drives a CB stage (Q2). This combination offers certain advantages in high frequency amplification, something considered elsewhere. Note however that the DC biasing circuit directly couples the two stages. Perhaps the simplest estimate of the DC bias voltages follows on the assumption, subject to verification, that the transistor base currents may be neglected compared to the main current in the bias resistors, i.e., consider the bias resistors to form a simple voltage divider. The current in the resistors then is 10/(68 + 15 + 18) = 99µa. Estimate the Q 1 base voltage to be 18x99 ->1.78 v, subtract a nominal 0.7 volt junction voltage, and thus estimate the Q1 emitter current to be 1.08 ma. The base current would be approximately 1.08/121 -> 9 µa. The assumption of neglecting base current appears to be reasonable. (Iteration, using the estimated base current rather than simply neglecting the current, provides a better estimate. Indeed Introductory Electronics Notes The University of Michigan-Dearborn 50-8 Copyright © M H Miller: 2000 revised repeated iteration will converge rapidly to the result for an exact calculation (PWL model). After all the circuit includes feedback to stabilize the current against perturbations. One may consider the difference between an exact value and the estimated value as a perturbation, and the feedback diminishes the effect of that perturbation! As a practical matter rarely if ever is an iteration necessary, i.e., the initial estimate is close enough for design purposes. A refined value may then be obtained by a computer computation. In this case, for example, the computed emitter current for Q1 is 0.90 ma. The base resistance is estimated to be 121(26/1.08) = 2.9 KΩ. Because of the high ß both transistors operate at essentially the same emitter current. The incremental parameter equivalent circuit is drawn above, to the right of the circuit diagram. Again note the reconfiguration of the AC circuit because of the bypass action of the capacitors. The gain calculation is straightforward; the calculated gain is 28.2. This is to be compared to the computed gain of 24. Providing details is left as an exercise. PSpice Computation Results Voltage Gain = 24 NAME MODEL IB IC VBE VCE Q1 Q2N3904 8.68E-06 9.01E-04 6.51E-01 1.43E+00 Q2 Q2N3904 7.64E-06 8.93E-04 6.48E-01 4.17E+00 A Final RIPA The single-ended differential circuit configuration illustrates one use of symmetry in circuit design. Using the simplified PWL model, calculate the Q3 collector current (nominal ß = 120, VBE = 0.7v) to be 9.4 ma. Note that the influence of ß and VBE in the calculation is mitigated by the feedback. Assuming matched Q1 and Q2 transistors the Q3 collector current splits equally so that the emitter current (and closely the collector current) of Q1 and Q2 is 4.7 ma. Then r be @ 300K ≈ 121(26/4.7) = 669Ω. The incremental equivalent circuit is drawn ion the right of the figure. KCL dictates the relative currents as shown , and ib = 1( 10 + .669 + 10 + .669) and Vout = 5.6 v; this is also the calculated voltage gain. PSpice Computation Results NAME Q1 Q2 MODEL Q2N3904 Q2N3904 IC 4.70E-03 4.70E-03 VBE 7.06E-01 7.06E-01 VCE 5.29E+00 5.29E+00 Q3 Q2N3904 9.45E-03 7.25E-01 5.92E+00 Voltage Gain = 7.54 Introductory Electronics Notes The University of Michigan-Dearborn 50-9 Copyright © M H Miller: 2000 revised PROBLEMS For each of the following problems assume that the transistors are 2N3904 (NPN) and 2N3906 (PNP) respectively as appropriate. Use a nominal ß of 120 and VBE = 0.7v. In each case calculate the DC operating conditions using the PWL transistor model, and apply the simplified incremental parameter model to calculate the voltage gain for a 1KHz sinusoidal signal input. Compare calculated values to those obtained from a computer simulation. Introductory Electronics Notes The University of Michigan-Dearborn 50-10 Copyright © M H Miller: 2000 revised 6) Calculate the voltage gain of the amplifier circuit drawn on the right, omitting the 22 KΩ resistor connected with dashed lines. Then assume, as an approximation, that this non-inverting amplifier can be considered to be an idealized opamp, i.e., the voltage gain is ‘high’, the input resistance is ‘high’, etc.. Apply feedback as shown, and compare the computed voltage gain with the idealized opamp expectation of a voltage gain of 11. Note: The capacitor is used to block involvement of the feedback resistor in the DC biasing. Introductory Electronics Notes The University of Michigan-Dearborn 50-11 Copyright © M H Miller: 2000 revised