Why does my transistor desaturate so slowly

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ebola0001
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Transistor
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the slow desaturation of a transistor when generating an inverted pulse signal. Participants explore the causes of this phenomenon, including the effects of circuit components and configurations, as well as potential solutions to improve performance. The scope includes technical explanations and proposed modifications to the circuit.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the transistor saturates quickly but takes time to cut off, suggesting that the ground connection may need checking.
  • Another participant proposes adding a 10K resistor and a diode (1N4148) in parallel to improve performance.
  • A participant explains the concept of saturation recovery time and suggests using a Schottky diode to reduce recovery time significantly.
  • Measurements indicate that adding an anti-saturation diode and a speed-up capacitor improves recovery time.
  • There is a discussion about the effectiveness of using a Schottky diode compared to a standard diode, with some arguing that the Schottky diode provides a much greater improvement.
  • One participant discusses the impact of driving the transistor with too much current and the importance of managing charge carriers in the base region to improve turn-off speed.
  • Suggestions include adjusting the base current, using a Schottky diode, and employing a series RC circuit to enhance turn-off speed.
  • A participant reports success in reducing fall time from 300ns to 55ns by increasing collector current and references a datasheet for guidance.
  • There is mention of potential issues with negative base-emitter voltage during turn-off and the need for a resistor to prevent excessive negative voltage.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the best methods to address the slow desaturation issue, with no consensus reached on a single solution. Multiple competing approaches are discussed, including the use of different diodes and circuit modifications.

Contextual Notes

Some participants reference specific components and configurations, but there are unresolved details regarding the optimal setup and the impact of different component choices on performance.

Who May Find This Useful

Electronics enthusiasts, engineers working with transistors, and individuals interested in pulse signal generation and circuit optimization may find this discussion relevant.

Ebola0001
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hey guys I am playing with my new oscilloscope i got myself with income tax, and ran into a puzzling question.
I am trying to generate an inverted pulse signal, and while my transistor is saturating quickly (driving the output to ground), when i turn the input signal off, it takes its sweet time before it cuts off the ground, and the voltage is allowed to build up from the pull up resistor.

Someone on a different board suggested "check your ground", but I don't know what else to check. it is a 22g wire from the ground pin the IC is using, and plugged into the breadboard next to the transistor.

The closest thing I can find searching on here is that the solderless breadboards mess with higher frequencies, but i don't know if that is what is happening here.

What do you guys think? I can take a picture of the breadboard if that would help but it is as simple as it gets. :)

transistor_slow.jpg
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
EDIT
Try to add a resistor 10K between and GND and diode 1N4148 parallel to 1K resistor, diode anode toward the base.
 
Last edited:
This is called saturation recovery time. When the BJT collect/base diode turn on, it takes time to remove the charge to recover. This is the reason they came out with schottky TTL in the 70s. If you connect the cathode of the schottky diode to the base, anode to the collector. When the collector try to swing over 0.3V below the base, the schottky turn on and drag the base along so the collect/base diode never turn on. With this the recovery time is a lot faster. Try put a schottky diode like what I describe and you'll see it recover a lot faster.
 
I also do some measurements of this circuit

attachment.php?attachmentid=43908&stc=1&d=1329242474.png


And I get almost the same recovery time.
And the only think that helps was to add anti-saturation diode.
attachment.php?attachmentid=43910&stc=1&d=1329243049.png
And speed-up capacitor help as well.
attachment.php?attachmentid=43911&stc=1&d=1329244349.png


And the full diagram
38_1329244506_thumb.png
 

Attachments

  • New1.PNG
    New1.PNG
    5.9 KB · Views: 2,275
  • New2.PNG
    New2.PNG
    5.9 KB · Views: 2,856
  • new3.PNG
    new3.PNG
    4.2 KB · Views: 2,907
Last edited:
But the key is still the schottky. You put a 1N4148, that is a normal diode, it help a little, but nothing like the schottky. The cap is only secondary. You should get delay down to few nS, not close to 100nS.
 
Learning the causes and work-abouts of transistor behavior can be a fun past time.

When it comes to speed, you can really slow it down by either driving it with too much current, or by turning the transistor completely off and starving it for current when it attempts to come on.

The most common issue is the one you're seeing. Just like Yungman said, you have extra charge carriers loafing around in the base region. Using you general transistor, you can help with the turn off in these ways:

1 - Turn down the turn-on drive so you don't have as many extra carriers.
2 - Turn your generic transistor into a schottcky transistor by adding a high speed schottky diode.
3 - Pull the extra charge out during turn off with a speed-up cap.

For case 1, take note that there is a comprimise between too little base current and too much. Granted the transistor is saturated when your driving with the collector current. However, unless it's got a really low Hfe, it's probably well saturated at 1/20th the collector current or even less. Some people stick to the rule 10x the minimum you'd need over the range of Hfe. Unless you're preparing it to be neutron hard, I think 5x is good.

For case 2, the schottky diode between collector and base is good, but remember that it needs to be a schottky signal diode. The ones used for power supplies have a HUGE capacitance, especially near zero volts.

Case 3 is my favorite. In this one, you place a series RC in parallel with the driving resistor such that during the instant of turn on, there is excessive current momentarily. Then, the RC allows the drive circuit to yank charge carriers away - thus speeding the turn-off operation.

There is a drawback in that you can actually make the base emitter voltage go negative during the turn off. If it should go too far negative, say below about 4 volts, than the base-emitter junction will begin to behave as a zener. Continual use of the base emitter junction as a zener is okay for use as a zener, but it's detrimental to the long term Hfe of the transistor.

The answer is to place a resistor between the base and emitter that prevents the turn off pulse from going below about -2 volts. This resistor also helps diverting drive current to ground and pulling charge out of the base-emitter during turn off.
 
Well after working with it and suggestions from here and elsewhere. This is where I ended up.

I have the frequency back up to 750 kHz which is where I wanted it to begin with (I had slowed it down by 4x earlier)

The key that I found to decreasing the fall time was from the 2N2222A datasheet, one of the graphs buried in the datasheet talked about collector current vs. turn off time. So I put more current through the transistor when it was on, and when I turned it off it was a MUCH faster fall time. It went from 300ns fall time to 55ns fall time. So I’m happy with that so far. I will try the shottky diodes when they get here (I just hope I ordered the right kind now, I ordered "1N5819-TPCT-ND" from digikey)

Here is the print and waveform I ended up with (this waveform is at the slower frequency)
 

Attachments

  • signal1.jpg
    signal1.jpg
    20.6 KB · Views: 1,142

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
9K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K