Transconductance of a differential pair

  • Thread starter Thread starter bitrex
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Differential Pair
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the transconductance of a bipolar differential pair with specific tail current configurations. Participants explore the implications of using resistive and current mirror loads, emphasizing the relationship between input swing and transconductance. An elegant derivation involving hyperbolic tangent functions is presented, detailing the differential current ratio and its impact on output voltage. Additionally, there are comments on the assumptions made in the derivation, particularly regarding the constant emitter tail current and the use of different input-output configurations. The conversation highlights the complexity of analyzing differential amplifiers and the nuances of their design.
bitrex
Messages
190
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to figure out what the transconductance of a bipolar differential pair with a certain tail current would be, but I'm getting tangled up in thinking like "well the pair sees half the input swing, but the transconductance might be double if there are two transistors.."etc. Could someone explain to me the proper way to calculate the transconductance of such a circuit with both a resistive load and a current mirror load? Thanks!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Maybe this will help. If the first (assume npn) transistor has a zero resistance collector load, then it is an emitter follower. If the second transistor has the base resistor(s) bypassed with a capacitor, then the second transistor is a common base circuit. So the first transistor is driving a common base transistor in parallel with the "tail" resistor. These are nice low signal amplifiers.
 
By looking through some references I managed to find a really elegant derivation of the gain of a differential amplifier...I never thought the hyperbolic tangent function would show up here! I'll write it out since I need practice with LaTeX and it might help someone who is working through the same material. :biggrin:
I_e = e^\frac{Vbe}{V_t}

So

V_{be} = V_t ln I_e

V_{dif} = V_{be1} - V_{be2} = V_t ln I_{e1} - V_t ln I_{e2} = <br /> Vt ln \frac{I_e1}{I_e2}So

e^\frac{V_{dif}}{V_t} = \frac{I_e1}{I_e2}

\frac{I_{c1}}{I_{c2}} = \frac{\alpha I_{e1}}{\alpha I_{e2}} = \frac{I_{e1}}{I_{e2}}

The differential current ratio is:

\frac{I_{c1} - I_{c2}}{I_{c1} + I_{c2}} = \frac{e^\frac{V_{dif}}{V_t} - 1}{e^\frac{V_{dif}}{V_t} + 1} = tanh(\frac{V_{diff}}{2V_t}) :eek:

So by multiplying the differential current ratio top and bottom by the collector load resistance we can do this:

\frac{R_c(I_{c1} - I_{c2})}{Rc(I_{c1} + I_{c2})} = \frac{V_{o1} - V_{o2}}{Rc(I_{c1} + I_{c2})} = \frac{V_{od}}{R_c \alpha I_o}

Where Io is the current through both emitters of the differential pair and alpha is the common base current gain.

Setting the two equations equal we finally have:

\frac{V_{od}}{R_c \alpha I_o} = tanh(\frac{V_{dif}}{2V_t})

V_{od} = R_c \alpha I_o tanh(\frac{V_{dif}}{2V_t}).

For small signals, tanh(\frac{V_{dif}}{2V_t}) \approx \frac{V_{dif}}{2V_t} and alpha can be taken to be 1, so we get for small signal gain:

V_{od} = R_c\frac{I_o}{2V_t}.

For large signals, the transfer function of the amplifier behaves just like the hyperbolic tangent function: it's linear in a small region around the quiescent point, but goes asymptotic as the voltage increases or decreases beyond this linear region and the input transistor saturates or goes into cutoff.
 
hello bitrex-
This a nice derivation. I do have some comments. You are using Vt which is about 26 millivolts at room temperature. It is actually kBT/q (Boltzmanns constant, temperature, electron charge). Some of your subscripts are not subscripts. This derivation I think applies to differential inputs and outputs, which is not always the case. I usually use only one (base) input and one (collector) output, for example. The large common emitter tail resistance is more important in this case. It does not appear at all in your derivation because you assume that the emitter tail current is constant (current sink). I have sometimes actually used an npn transistor in the tail to make a constant current sink.
Bob S
 
I usually use only one (base) input and one (collector) output, for example.

It's quite common to use it like that Bob. BTW it can be considered as CC CB cascade in that case.
 
Very basic question. Consider a 3-terminal device with terminals say A,B,C. Kirchhoff Current Law (KCL) and Kirchhoff Voltage Law (KVL) establish two relationships between the 3 currents entering the terminals and the 3 terminal's voltage pairs respectively. So we have 2 equations in 6 unknowns. To proceed further we need two more (independent) equations in order to solve the circuit the 3-terminal device is connected to (basically one treats such a device as an unbalanced two-port...
suppose you have two capacitors with a 0.1 Farad value and 12 VDC rating. label these as A and B. label the terminals of each as 1 and 2. you also have a voltmeter with a 40 volt linear range for DC. you also have a 9 volt DC power supply fed by mains. you charge each capacitor to 9 volts with terminal 1 being - (negative) and terminal 2 being + (positive). you connect the voltmeter to terminal A2 and to terminal B1. does it read any voltage? can - of one capacitor discharge + of the...
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...
Back
Top