- #1
iScience
- 466
- 5
i understand this graph
the ordering of the regions make sense to me;
cutoff: little/no base current ----> no current anywhere
active: base current moderately past V_be -----> linear current amplification
saturation: etc
but here..
http://[URL='http://i.imgur.com/JpGqXUQ.png]']http://i.imgur.com/JpGqXUQ.png[/URL] [Broken]
what is going on?? the base current is a third dimension where if i increase it further, eventually it should lead to saturation. but this graph says saturation is inversely proportional to (basically) V_cc .
i thought active region meant that the number of electrons being combined with holes at the base is linearly proportional to the electrons passing to the collector; and saturation was where the number electrons combining at the base was non-linearly proportional to that passing onto the collector.
so why is saturation at the region where V_ce is small and active where V_ce is large, shouldn't it be backwards??
clarification please!
thanks
the ordering of the regions make sense to me;
cutoff: little/no base current ----> no current anywhere
active: base current moderately past V_be -----> linear current amplification
saturation: etc
but here..
http://[URL='http://i.imgur.com/JpGqXUQ.png]']http://i.imgur.com/JpGqXUQ.png[/URL] [Broken]
what is going on?? the base current is a third dimension where if i increase it further, eventually it should lead to saturation. but this graph says saturation is inversely proportional to (basically) V_cc .
i thought active region meant that the number of electrons being combined with holes at the base is linearly proportional to the electrons passing to the collector; and saturation was where the number electrons combining at the base was non-linearly proportional to that passing onto the collector.
so why is saturation at the region where V_ce is small and active where V_ce is large, shouldn't it be backwards??
clarification please!
thanks
Last edited by a moderator: