A positive peak detector circuit

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the design and performance of a positive peak detector circuit utilizing AD829 opamps. Participants explore various aspects of the circuit's behavior, including issues related to capacitor discharge, frequency response, and the impact of component choices on circuit performance. The conversation includes theoretical considerations and practical challenges faced during the implementation of the circuit.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes a "superdiode" configuration intended to prevent capacitor discharge during the falling edge of the input signal, questioning why the capacitor discharges at low frequencies despite the diode being in reverse bias.
  • Another participant suggests that leakage currents from the diode or opamp input bias current may be causing the observed discharge behavior.
  • Concerns are raised about slew rate limitations of the AD829 opamp, with calculations indicating potential issues at high frequencies.
  • A suggestion is made to use an emitter follower circuit to improve current gain, although this may complicate high-frequency performance.
  • Participants discuss the need for proper gate voltage levels for the MOSFET to function correctly, with one noting that the observed capacitor droop could be related to the MOSFET's characteristics.
  • There are multiple suggestions regarding circuit modifications, including the use of a Darlington configuration and the addition of a series element to prevent shorting the opamp output to ground during reset.
  • One participant expresses frustration with the circuit's inability to meet specified performance criteria across a range of input voltages and frequencies, indicating a potential fundamental limitation of the current design.
  • Discussions also touch on the need for monitoring diode current during reset and the implications of using an emitter follower in the circuit design.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the causes of the circuit's issues, with no consensus reached on the best solutions or modifications. Disagreements persist regarding the effectiveness of proposed changes and the underlying reasons for observed behaviors.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include unresolved mathematical steps related to slew rate calculations, assumptions about component behavior, and the dependence on specific configurations that may not generalize across all scenarios. The discussion reflects a range of experimental results and theoretical considerations that have not yet converged on a definitive solution.

Who May Find This Useful

Electronics enthusiasts, engineers working on signal processing circuits, and students studying opamp applications may find this discussion relevant for understanding the complexities involved in designing peak detector circuits.

  • #31
For anyone interested, the attached circuit performs to spec, uses both an AD829 and LM318 with the same basic config as discussed.

Any one have any possible improvements?

(The main drawback I was not considering was compensation caps for the op amps, which I got from the data sheets)
 

Attachments

  • project.png
    project.png
    40.3 KB · Views: 736
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #32
Looks pretty cool. Post some waveforms.

Are you saying the 829 compensation solved the slew rate problems?
I have questions (curiosity).
Why the resistor in series with the main storage capacitor?
What does R5 do? (looks like it is just across the supply)?
What does C6 do? How did you choose that?
 
  • #33
Ill take some pictures of the oscilloscope I have made the circuit it works, pretty decently. Perfectly in the simulator but, yeah.
Yeah there is absolutely no slew rate problems with this circuit what so ever. but notice it is being driven at unity gain. The 829 is one of the fewer than 5% of op amps without unity gain compensation. As such it requires external capacitors to ensure it doesn't go unstable. (the stair-casing we saw earlier at unity gain). Usually the compensation capacitor is placed from pin 5 to ground but it worked really good here.. I am still trying to find out why by looking at ad's blog this helped a lot http://www.analog.com/library/analogdialogue/archives/38-06/capacitive_loading.html

R5 is actually a resistor on the output of the 829 which shifts the pole of the op amp due to the internal capacitor. It allows for higher bandwidth

R5 just keeps the simulator happy. adds no real effect when breadboarded. Just something I picked up from using multisim
 
  • #34
(also R5 is not connected to the positive rail, it's from the pins to the negative rail I know it looks like it is though)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
39
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K