In Reply to: Some preliminary results posted by mfc on July 19, 2003 at 10:19:55:
Hi,
Here are some results for the single MLJ3281:Square Wave = 1050 Hz. Using 1,3,5,...25,27 harmonic values only.
27th = 28350Hz. Amptitude = 8v peak.
Gibbs phenomena (although present)was very small.
Sine Wave = 5KHz. Amptitude = 1v peak.B+ = 40v, ILoad = 1.9129 amps, RLoad = 10 ohms
Vbase = 20v.Simulation settings: Step = 100nS, Window = .1second
Driven with a 1V peak sine wave only and measured output(1st column)
Driven with the sine/square wave 8v and measured output (2nd column)
Driven with the sine/square wave 4v and measured output (3rdcolumn)The noise floor on input was about .3nV which represents a
very low noise level.Here are the results:
Harmonic VRef Vout VoutFndmntl(dB)0.00 0.00 0.00
2nd -55.10 -55.94 -55.14
3rd -97.72 -83.75 -96.14
4th -126.46 -102.08 -129.67
5th -125.88 -116.77 -120.50
6th -125.08 -129.37 -144.69
7th -136.01 -127.90 -127.65
8th -123.33 -140.55 -129.02
9th -114.95 -133.65 -139.45
10th -124.32 -142.36 -142.97
11th -127.69 -142.36 -129.74
12th -125.58 -145.44 -132.02
13th -116.10 -137.13 -141.73This indicates that driving the single emitter follower a little
harder (increase square wave from 4v to 8v peak) does show the
effects of TIM somewhat. It isn't much effect however. This indicates
(to me) that the single Emitter follower is not very susceptible
to TIM.Compare (for example) the difference in effects between this and
the Sziklai, and the Sziklai is more susceptible (in both compensated
and uncompensated cases).
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Single EF Results - mfc 07/22/0318:13:40 07/22/03 (0)