HI Dan,
Most of these models are taken from Andy_C's posts; I believe they are good, the others are public domain stuff I've picked up over the weeks. Here they are:
.MODEL mjl3281a_x npn IS=9.8145e-12 BF=438.0 NF=1.00 VAF=38 IKF=19.0 ISE=1.0e-12 NE=1.1237388682 BR=4.98985 NR=1.09511 VAR=4.32026 IKR=4.37516 ISC=3.25e-13 NC=3.96875 RB=3.997 RE=0.00 RC=0.06 XTB=0.115253 XTI=1.03146 EG=1.11986 CJE=1.144e-08 VJE=0.468574 MJE=0.34957 TF=2.6769e-9 XTF=7500 VTF=3.0 ITF=1000 CJC=1.093685e-9 VJC=0.623643 MJC=0.482111 XCJC=0.959922 FC=0.1 CJS=0 VJS=0.75 MJS=0.5 TR=1e-07 PTF=0 KF=0 AF=1 Vceo=200 Icrating=15 mfg=OnSemiconductor
.MODEL mjl1302a_x pnp IS=9.8145e-12 BF=122.925 NF=1.00 VAF=40 IKF=19 ISE=9.18577762370362E-07 NE=5.0 BR=4.98985 NR=1.09511 VAR=4.32026 IKR=4.37516 ISC=3.25e-13 NC=3.96875 RB=3.30 RE=0.00 RC=0.06 XTB=0.115253 XTI=1.03146 EG=1.11986 CJE=1.561e-08 VJE=0.781803 MJE=0.433868 TF=3.257e-9 XTF=1000 VTF=2.0 ITF=260 CJC=2.346838e-9 VJC=0.27876 MJC=0.411324 XCJC=0.959922 FC=0.1 CJS=0 VJS=0.75 MJS=0.5 TR=1e-07 PTF=0 KF=0 AF=1 Vceo=200 Icrating=15 mfg=OnSemiconductor
.MODEL Q2SA1837 PNP ( IS=2.39372559E-10 NF=1.304015937 BF=300 VAF=273 IKF=2.087725944 NK=0.94719458 ISE=1.46829699E-11 NE=1.526663542 BR=4 NR=1 VAR=20 IKR=1.05 RE=0 RB=1.8 RC=1.65 CJE=4.7407E-10 VJE=1.1 MJE=0.5 CJC=8.6700E-11 VJC=0.3 MJC=0.3 TF=1.642191E-09 FC=0.5 ITF=1.076260106 XTF=5.868994022 TR=1.38U)
.MODEL Q2SC4793 NPN ( IS=1.8E-09 NF=1.43 BF=146.38 VAF=273 IKF=2.6 NK=0.95 ISE=6.286997E-10 NE=2.223629 BR=4 NR=1 VAR=20 IKR=1.05 RE=0 RB=1.7 RC=1.25 CJE=5.96964E-10 VJE=1.1 MJE=0.5 CJC=5.78E-11 VJC=0.3 MJC=0.3 TF=1.22678E-09 FC=0.5 ITF=10 XTF=99.52253015 TR=983N)
.model BC547B NPN(IS=2.39E-14 NF=1.008 ISE=3.545E-15 NE=1.541 BF=294.3 IKF=0.1357 VAF=63.2 NR=1.004 ISC=6.272E-14 NC=1.243 BR=7.946 IKR=0.1144 VAR=25.9 RB=1 IRB=1.00E-06 RBM=1 RE=0.4683 RC=0.85 XTB=0 EG=1.11 XTI=3 CJE=1.358E-11 VJE=0.65 MJE=0.3279 TF=4.391E-10 XTF=120 VTF=2.643 ITF=0.7495 PTF=0 CJC=3.728E-12 VJC=0.3997 MJC=0.2955 XCJC=0.6193 TR=1.00E-32 CJS=0 VJS=0.75 MJS=0.333 FC=0.9579 Vceo=45 Icrating=100m mfg=Philips)
.model BC557B PNP(IS=3.83E-14 NF=1.008 ISE=1.22E-14 NE=1.528 BF=344.4 IKF=0.08039 VAF=21.11 NR=1.005 ISC=2.85E-13 NC=1.28 BR=14.84 IKR=0.047 VAR=32.02 RB=1 IRB=1.00E-06 RBM=1 RE=0.6202 RC=0.5713 XTB=0 EG=1.11 XTI=3 CJE=1.23E-11 VJE=0.6106 MJE=0.378 TF=5.60E-10 XTF=3.414 VTF=5.23 ITF=0.1483 PTF=0 CJC=1.08E-11 VJC=0.1022 MJC=0.3563 XCJC=0.6288 TR=1.00E-32 CJS=0 VJS=0.75 MJS=0.333 FC=0.8027 Vceo=45 Icrating=100m mfg=Philips)
.MODEL 2SC3423 NPN(IS=9.98627F BF=2K NF=967.67M VAF=100 IKF=49.6929M ISE=1.04163F NE=1.07574 BR=601.257M IKR=462.798U ISC=32.904P RC=899.97M CJE=2P MJE=500M CJC=6.42174P VJC=749.999M MJC=499.509M TF=713.346P XTF=500M VTF=10 ITF=9.9976M TR=10N)
.MODEL 2SA1360 PNP(IS=10F BF=134.853 VAF=100 IKF=109.96M ISE=221.874F NE=1.66575 BR=10 IKR=880.176M ISC=187.58P NC=1.90472 RE=1 RC=15.5104 CJE=2P MJE=500M CJC=6.24728P VJC=692.028M MJC=340.013M TF=1.08385N XTF=16.9293 VTF=9.36211 ITF=670.025M TR=10N)
.model 1N4148 D(Is=2.52n Rs=.568 N=1.752 Cjo=4p M=.4 tt=20n Iave=200m Vpk=75 mfg=Motorola type=silicon)
Hope this helps,
Cheers,
Hugh
Most of these models are taken from Andy_C's posts; I believe they are good, the others are public domain stuff I've picked up over the weeks. Here they are:
.MODEL mjl3281a_x npn IS=9.8145e-12 BF=438.0 NF=1.00 VAF=38 IKF=19.0 ISE=1.0e-12 NE=1.1237388682 BR=4.98985 NR=1.09511 VAR=4.32026 IKR=4.37516 ISC=3.25e-13 NC=3.96875 RB=3.997 RE=0.00 RC=0.06 XTB=0.115253 XTI=1.03146 EG=1.11986 CJE=1.144e-08 VJE=0.468574 MJE=0.34957 TF=2.6769e-9 XTF=7500 VTF=3.0 ITF=1000 CJC=1.093685e-9 VJC=0.623643 MJC=0.482111 XCJC=0.959922 FC=0.1 CJS=0 VJS=0.75 MJS=0.5 TR=1e-07 PTF=0 KF=0 AF=1 Vceo=200 Icrating=15 mfg=OnSemiconductor
.MODEL mjl1302a_x pnp IS=9.8145e-12 BF=122.925 NF=1.00 VAF=40 IKF=19 ISE=9.18577762370362E-07 NE=5.0 BR=4.98985 NR=1.09511 VAR=4.32026 IKR=4.37516 ISC=3.25e-13 NC=3.96875 RB=3.30 RE=0.00 RC=0.06 XTB=0.115253 XTI=1.03146 EG=1.11986 CJE=1.561e-08 VJE=0.781803 MJE=0.433868 TF=3.257e-9 XTF=1000 VTF=2.0 ITF=260 CJC=2.346838e-9 VJC=0.27876 MJC=0.411324 XCJC=0.959922 FC=0.1 CJS=0 VJS=0.75 MJS=0.5 TR=1e-07 PTF=0 KF=0 AF=1 Vceo=200 Icrating=15 mfg=OnSemiconductor
.MODEL Q2SA1837 PNP ( IS=2.39372559E-10 NF=1.304015937 BF=300 VAF=273 IKF=2.087725944 NK=0.94719458 ISE=1.46829699E-11 NE=1.526663542 BR=4 NR=1 VAR=20 IKR=1.05 RE=0 RB=1.8 RC=1.65 CJE=4.7407E-10 VJE=1.1 MJE=0.5 CJC=8.6700E-11 VJC=0.3 MJC=0.3 TF=1.642191E-09 FC=0.5 ITF=1.076260106 XTF=5.868994022 TR=1.38U)
.MODEL Q2SC4793 NPN ( IS=1.8E-09 NF=1.43 BF=146.38 VAF=273 IKF=2.6 NK=0.95 ISE=6.286997E-10 NE=2.223629 BR=4 NR=1 VAR=20 IKR=1.05 RE=0 RB=1.7 RC=1.25 CJE=5.96964E-10 VJE=1.1 MJE=0.5 CJC=5.78E-11 VJC=0.3 MJC=0.3 TF=1.22678E-09 FC=0.5 ITF=10 XTF=99.52253015 TR=983N)
.model BC547B NPN(IS=2.39E-14 NF=1.008 ISE=3.545E-15 NE=1.541 BF=294.3 IKF=0.1357 VAF=63.2 NR=1.004 ISC=6.272E-14 NC=1.243 BR=7.946 IKR=0.1144 VAR=25.9 RB=1 IRB=1.00E-06 RBM=1 RE=0.4683 RC=0.85 XTB=0 EG=1.11 XTI=3 CJE=1.358E-11 VJE=0.65 MJE=0.3279 TF=4.391E-10 XTF=120 VTF=2.643 ITF=0.7495 PTF=0 CJC=3.728E-12 VJC=0.3997 MJC=0.2955 XCJC=0.6193 TR=1.00E-32 CJS=0 VJS=0.75 MJS=0.333 FC=0.9579 Vceo=45 Icrating=100m mfg=Philips)
.model BC557B PNP(IS=3.83E-14 NF=1.008 ISE=1.22E-14 NE=1.528 BF=344.4 IKF=0.08039 VAF=21.11 NR=1.005 ISC=2.85E-13 NC=1.28 BR=14.84 IKR=0.047 VAR=32.02 RB=1 IRB=1.00E-06 RBM=1 RE=0.6202 RC=0.5713 XTB=0 EG=1.11 XTI=3 CJE=1.23E-11 VJE=0.6106 MJE=0.378 TF=5.60E-10 XTF=3.414 VTF=5.23 ITF=0.1483 PTF=0 CJC=1.08E-11 VJC=0.1022 MJC=0.3563 XCJC=0.6288 TR=1.00E-32 CJS=0 VJS=0.75 MJS=0.333 FC=0.8027 Vceo=45 Icrating=100m mfg=Philips)
.MODEL 2SC3423 NPN(IS=9.98627F BF=2K NF=967.67M VAF=100 IKF=49.6929M ISE=1.04163F NE=1.07574 BR=601.257M IKR=462.798U ISC=32.904P RC=899.97M CJE=2P MJE=500M CJC=6.42174P VJC=749.999M MJC=499.509M TF=713.346P XTF=500M VTF=10 ITF=9.9976M TR=10N)
.MODEL 2SA1360 PNP(IS=10F BF=134.853 VAF=100 IKF=109.96M ISE=221.874F NE=1.66575 BR=10 IKR=880.176M ISC=187.58P NC=1.90472 RE=1 RC=15.5104 CJE=2P MJE=500M CJC=6.24728P VJC=692.028M MJC=340.013M TF=1.08385N XTF=16.9293 VTF=9.36211 ITF=670.025M TR=10N)
.model 1N4148 D(Is=2.52n Rs=.568 N=1.752 Cjo=4p M=.4 tt=20n Iave=200m Vpk=75 mfg=Motorola type=silicon)
Hope this helps,
Cheers,
Hugh
well, i did made some simulations using theses transistors, for wich
i had no models, and it seems that the devices i first used are fairly
outdated...almost an order of magnitude less distorsion now,
although i have higher figures than the one that hugh did found...
here a graph of fourier spectrum at 10 Khz..
fundamental is at +26 dbU
i had no models, and it seems that the devices i first used are fairly
outdated...almost an order of magnitude less distorsion now,
although i have higher figures than the one that hugh did found...
here a graph of fourier spectrum at 10 Khz..
fundamental is at +26 dbU
the model itself has not chenged, simply different transistors
have different parameter within the SAME MODEL...
the difference between the simulators lies in fact in the
approximations used to linearize the non linear differential equations
that describe the transistors behaviours...
schematic possible update..
hugh, really, those toshiba devices rocks...
it is possible to add a stage after vas without increasing the phase
shift significantly...i simulated, and it works..the greater change is in
THD..it decrease much, but its content change, the odd harmonics
become dominant, which was nt the case with the simplified circuit..
big dilemma : what is better, low distorsion witrh mainly second harmonic,
or very low THD but with odd frequencies dominating...
resurgence of the old clash between subjectivist and objectivists...
here the revised schematics along with a few graphs..
output level for THD measurement is 28 dbU...
hugh, really, those toshiba devices rocks...
it is possible to add a stage after vas without increasing the phase
shift significantly...i simulated, and it works..the greater change is in
THD..it decrease much, but its content change, the odd harmonics
become dominant, which was nt the case with the simplified circuit..
big dilemma : what is better, low distorsion witrh mainly second harmonic,
or very low THD but with odd frequencies dominating...
resurgence of the old clash between subjectivist and objectivists...
here the revised schematics along with a few graphs..
output level for THD measurement is 28 dbU...
Wahab,
Nice work! Yes, the Toshiba drivers and outputs are excellent; the 3423/1360 are even better, lovely devices. Speed and low parasitics make for outstanding phase response.
I always strive for monotonic decreasing, favoured years ago by Jean Hiraga. If it is true that the high, odd order harmonics are unmusical, and the low orders, H2-H4, are relatively benign, it is logical to assume that a steadily decreasing array of artefacts will be more pleasing to the ear than a long, same level array.
Opinions differ, however, and most good engineers seem to go for lowest possible THD.
I have been simulating your circuit with 2 x 30pF of lag compensation across collector/base of each VAS and even there the results are very good.
Cheers,
Hugh
Nice work! Yes, the Toshiba drivers and outputs are excellent; the 3423/1360 are even better, lovely devices. Speed and low parasitics make for outstanding phase response.
I always strive for monotonic decreasing, favoured years ago by Jean Hiraga. If it is true that the high, odd order harmonics are unmusical, and the low orders, H2-H4, are relatively benign, it is logical to assume that a steadily decreasing array of artefacts will be more pleasing to the ear than a long, same level array.
Opinions differ, however, and most good engineers seem to go for lowest possible THD.
I have been simulating your circuit with 2 x 30pF of lag compensation across collector/base of each VAS and even there the results are very good.
Cheers,
Hugh
hugh, i agree with both , starting with you :
low order monotonic lowest possible THD !!
all the best,
wahab
this reply is a nonsense.
Different transistors with different parameters demands that the model is not the same.
Last edited:
Andrew,
I suspect Wahab means that the algorithm within the program, and the structure of the transistor model, is the same regardless of the transistor. As you say, all the parameters change, but the interpretation of the word 'model' might be the issue here.
Perhaps Wahab could confirm this one way or the other?
Cheers,
Hugh
I suspect Wahab means that the algorithm within the program, and the structure of the transistor model, is the same regardless of the transistor. As you say, all the parameters change, but the interpretation of the word 'model' might be the issue here.
Perhaps Wahab could confirm this one way or the other?
Cheers,
Hugh
hugh, you got it right..
well i realized after posting that i didn t use the good words..
english is not my first language, so i hoped that andrew was
capable of interpreting my sayings..it seems that not..
the transistors have diffrents parameters values, i.e , using of course
the same parameters but those have differents ABSOLUTE values..
of course, there s a lot of parameters, and depending of the
manufacturer , all parameters are not implemented..this doesn t
make the model different, simply the simulator will not be
capable of high precision when describing the component behaviour
because of lack of some informations...the model stay the same,
mathematicaly, that s why it can be used in differents simulators..
basicaly, components fuctionning is describe by well known non linear
differential equations...the difference between softs is the algorithm
used to linearize those functions...trades off must be made, otherwise
we would wait the results for days if not months, even with our modern computers...
hope that it helped..
regards,
wahab
well i realized after posting that i didn t use the good words..
english is not my first language, so i hoped that andrew was
capable of interpreting my sayings..it seems that not..
the transistors have diffrents parameters values, i.e , using of course
the same parameters but those have differents ABSOLUTE values..
of course, there s a lot of parameters, and depending of the
manufacturer , all parameters are not implemented..this doesn t
make the model different, simply the simulator will not be
capable of high precision when describing the component behaviour
because of lack of some informations...the model stay the same,
mathematicaly, that s why it can be used in differents simulators..
basicaly, components fuctionning is describe by well known non linear
differential equations...the difference between softs is the algorithm
used to linearize those functions...trades off must be made, otherwise
we would wait the results for days if not months, even with our modern computers...
hope that it helped..
regards,
wahab
a few numbers
here the main simulation of the amp..
all simulated with output at +29 dbU,8 ohm load,
wich is 50 w RMS ,close to clipping..
1KHZ THD is 0.03 %
10 KHZ THD is 0.05 %
400HZ /7 KHZ 4/1 ratio IMD is at 0.03 %
2 to 200 KHZ bandwith, almost flat..
1.5 uS rise and decay time, slew rate is 25V/uS
also a 10KHZ sine wave on 8 OHM + 1 uF LOAD....
this seems encouraging, and i m going to build
on again for verifications purposes, using the
new transistors councelled by hugh dean..
next post when the thing is assembled..
regards,
wahab
here the main simulation of the amp..
all simulated with output at +29 dbU,8 ohm load,
wich is 50 w RMS ,close to clipping..
1KHZ THD is 0.03 %
10 KHZ THD is 0.05 %
400HZ /7 KHZ 4/1 ratio IMD is at 0.03 %
2 to 200 KHZ bandwith, almost flat..
1.5 uS rise and decay time, slew rate is 25V/uS
also a 10KHZ sine wave on 8 OHM + 1 uF LOAD....
this seems encouraging, and i m going to build
on again for verifications purposes, using the
new transistors councelled by hugh dean..
next post when the thing is assembled..
regards,
wahab
thanks, hugh
i m building one to test the 2SA1302/2SC3281 toshiba , since i ve some left.
will also try the mp1620/MN2488 sanken darlingtons, so i ll remove the
drivers..
at the time i didn t have such fast devices, i originally used BDW51C/52C ; which
have a 4 mhz Ft...
once i finish the built i ll publish the mosfet version which is running for
15 years or so, although, i ll update the schematics as i used the hitachi
TO3 case devices 2SJ48/2SK133 which are obsolete...
the 2S162/2SK1058 seems to have the same electrical caracteristics, although
in my simulator they have different threshold voltage...could it be the models?
regards,
wahab
i m building one to test the 2SA1302/2SC3281 toshiba , since i ve some left.
will also try the mp1620/MN2488 sanken darlingtons, so i ll remove the
drivers..
at the time i didn t have such fast devices, i originally used BDW51C/52C ; which
have a 4 mhz Ft...
once i finish the built i ll publish the mosfet version which is running for
15 years or so, although, i ll update the schematics as i used the hitachi
TO3 case devices 2SJ48/2SK133 which are obsolete...
the 2S162/2SK1058 seems to have the same electrical caracteristics, although
in my simulator they have different threshold voltage...could it be the models?
regards,
wahab
hi, hugh,
seems you are right...
just rechecked the datasheet...they are the SAME devices, apart from
the casing...electrical caracteristics , static or dynamic are stricto sensu
exactly the same, including the threshold voltage...
the models are the cause...dilemma, which one are the good ones?..
i m going to make a live test to check which one i ll get rid off...
wahab
seems you are right...
just rechecked the datasheet...they are the SAME devices, apart from
the casing...electrical caracteristics , static or dynamic are stricto sensu
exactly the same, including the threshold voltage...
the models are the cause...dilemma, which one are the good ones?..
i m going to make a live test to check which one i ll get rid off...
wahab
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.