What is the impact of the beta dependence on a BJT with voltage divider bias?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion highlights the complexities of using voltage divider bias for BJTs without an emitter degeneration resistor, emphasizing the beta dependence on base current (Ib) and collector current (Ic). It notes that the current through the voltage divider should ideally be ten times the base current to ensure stability, but using a voltage divider in this context is generally discouraged. The logarithmic nature of Vbe is discussed, indicating that small changes in collector current can significantly affect Vbe, potentially leading to transistor failure. A single pull-up resistor is recommended for biasing to maintain a stable current source, rather than relying on a voltage divider which can introduce variability with temperature changes. Overall, the consensus is that a more stable biasing method is preferable for reliable BJT operation.
likephysics
Messages
638
Reaction score
4
For a BJT with voltage divider bias (but without emitter deneration resistor), what is the beta dependence?
Ib is (Vth-Vbe)/Rth [where, Vth and Rth are thevenin equivalent of the divider)

Ic = β * Ib

The above is almost same as just base bias, where a resistor from base is collected to supply.

The design guideline is usually, the current flowing thru the divider should be 10x the base current. How does that help in this case?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
It is not good to use voltage divider bias with emitter resistor.You cannot use Rth for calculation. The Vbe is a logarithmic device where

V_{BE}=V_T ln (\frac {I_C}{I_S})\;\Rightarrow\; Δ V_{BE}=V_T ln (\frac {I_{C_1}}{I_{C_2}})

where Vbe increase about 26mV every time you double the current. You'll burn the transistor before you get the Vbe to even 1V.

Base bias is very different concept. You use a very high value resistor as the base resistor Rb to V+. So the Ib≈ V+/Rb. Then you can get Ie=βIb.
 
yungman said:
It is not good to use voltage divider bias with emitter resistor.
ITYM "without".

You cannot use Rth for calculation.
He could still use Rth in the calculation. It might be impractical to use a really high value for RB, but feasible to use a potential divider with significant Rth. It may not be quite as stable as a single RB, but it's a poor design anyway so can't be made much worse. Just don't design for the pot divider to waste 10 times the base current, it serves no purpose here, and may still need to include a third resistor to the base.
 
agree with above but throwing my wording in...

For any typical BJT ckt, you almost certainly want a fairly constant bias current going in the base. It wouldn't do for that current to vary wildly with, for example, temperature. When you have a NPN (for example) BJT with grounded emitter, the only reasonable way to bias it is with a single pull-up resistor. This acts as a fairly good current source because we know the drop across that resistor will always be a little less than Vcc. You can also add a little negative DC feedback to help compensate for part variation by connecting that pull up to the bottom of the collector's load, but that's a different story. Anyway, we don't want a voltage divider biasing the base in this ckt because a voltage divider is used to produce more of a voltage source than a current source--that's its purpose-- and we don't want a voltage source we want a current source. Attempting to control the base current in this ckt by trying to manage a constant voltage on the base is bad design because the base-emitter junction voltage varies a lot with temperature. So a constant base voltage will cause base current that varies with temperature, and you have an extra unneeded component, to boot (namely the pull-down resistor).

In any case if you've been asked to solve that ckt, you'll have to know the base-emitter voltage drop for the current temperature quite accurately, especially if the voltage divider's unloaded output voltage is barely above the base-emitter drop voltage. If you've been told the base-emitter drop is a constant (it never is), then you know the voltages on the resistors so you know the current through those resistors so you know how much of the current in the pull-up resistor is going through the pull-down resistor, and whatever is left over is what's going through the base.
 
Last edited:
NascentOxygen said:
ITYM "without".

Opps! Finger is getting too old!
He could still use Rth in the calculation. It might be impractical to use a really high value for RB, but feasible to use a potential divider with significant Rth. It may not be quite as stable as a single RB, but it's a poor design anyway so can't be made much worse. Just don't design for the pot divider to waste 10 times the base current, it serves no purpose here, and may still need to include a third resistor to the base.

It's never a good practice to just grounded the emitter and try to bias the BJT anyway, You always want to have emitter resistor and voltage divider at the base to set up a stable bias, then use a capacitor to connect the emitter to the ground and get a AC ground.

It is not good practice to deal with Rth. Refer back to the formula I posted the Vbe change with the log of the current ratio. It is not linear. You can only calculate Rth at a set current.
 
Hi all I have some confusion about piezoelectrical sensors combination. If i have three acoustic piezoelectrical sensors (with same receive sensitivity in dB ref V/1uPa) placed at specific distance, these sensors receive acoustic signal from a sound source placed at far field distance (Plane Wave) and from broadside. I receive output of these sensors through individual preamplifiers, add them through hardware like summer circuit adder or in software after digitization and in this way got an...
While I was rolling out a shielded cable, a though came to my mind - what happens to the current flow in the cable if there came a short between the wire and the shield in both ends of the cable? For simplicity, lets assume a 1-wire copper wire wrapped in an aluminum shield. The wire and the shield has the same cross section area. There are insulating material between them, and in both ends there is a short between them. My first thought, the total resistance of the cable would be reduced...
I am not an electrical engineering student, but a lowly apprentice electrician. I learn both on the job and also take classes for my apprenticeship. I recently wired my first transformer and I understand that the neutral and ground are bonded together in the transformer or in the service. What I don't understand is, if the neutral is a current carrying conductor, which is then bonded to the ground conductor, why does current only flow back to its source and not on the ground path...
Back
Top