Is the CFB topology superior, and why? - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Solid State

Solid State Talk all about solid state amplification.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 28th August 2012, 05:20 PM   #1
Elvee is online now Elvee  Belgium
diyAudio Member
 
Elvee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Default Is the CFB topology superior, and why?

Hi,

I would like to investigate about the actual/perceived/imagined superiority of current feedback, and possibly to pinpoint what exactly makes it superior (if indeed it actually is).

As a study subject, I propose to use a very simple, quasi-canonical form of a CFB amplifier, the CFP with gain.

The two first pics show the linearity and frequency performances of the circuit.

The interesting thing with the sim is that it allows the transformation of this ideal CFB amp into an identical ideal VFB stage.
That can be done with an arbitrary voltage source (the next two pics).

As could be expected, the linearity has improved thanks to to the increased loop gain, but somewhat more surprisingly the bandwidth also increases.
Attached Images
File Type: png CFB1.png (136.2 KB, 1417 views)
File Type: png CFB2.png (83.8 KB, 1345 views)
File Type: png CFB3.png (129.4 KB, 1292 views)
File Type: png CFB4.png (81.5 KB, 1271 views)
__________________
. .Circlophone your life !!!! . .
♫♪ My little cheap Circlophoneİ ♫♪
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2012, 06:55 PM   #2
Elvee is online now Elvee  Belgium
diyAudio Member
 
Elvee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Now that we have noticed the differences, we can begin to try to even them out, to try and see where the two versions diverge.

Let's see the effect of the loading on the feedback point, by adding an equivalent circuit, while retaining the VFB configuration: it begins to look more like the CFB incarnation, but do not be fooled by the graph: LTspice has automatically scaled it, and the 1GHz intercept is at -4dB instead of -25dB.
Attached Images
File Type: png CFB5.png (83.9 KB, 1253 views)
__________________
. .Circlophone your life !!!! . .
♫♪ My little cheap Circlophoneİ ♫♪
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2012, 07:23 PM   #3
Did it Himself
diyAudio Member
 
richie00boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Gloucestershire, England, UK
Isn't R2 in the wrong place?
__________________
www.readresearch.co.uk my website for UK diy audio people - designs, PCBs, kits and more.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2012, 07:46 PM   #4
Elvee is online now Elvee  Belgium
diyAudio Member
 
Elvee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by richie00boy View Post
Isn't R2 in the wrong place?
I don't think so. This rather crude first tentative does have issues, but normally R2 is not part of them. I could be mistaken of course. This is an exploration trip, and I do not know where it will lead us
__________________
. .Circlophone your life !!!! . .
♫♪ My little cheap Circlophoneİ ♫♪
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2012, 08:08 PM   #5
Elvee is online now Elvee  Belgium
diyAudio Member
 
Elvee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by richie00boy View Post
Isn't R2 in the wrong place?
OK, I should have explained more clearly what I did exactly.
I thought the diagrams were sufficient, but that is not necessarily the case for people unfamiliar with spice.

I started with a classical CFB circuit; I then buffered the feedback point using a spice ideal buffer: a voltage source that simply copies its input, without loading or delay.
I then attempted to reproduce the behavior of the initial CFB circuit by loading again the feedback point with a (not so!) similar load.
That's where we currently are
__________________
. .Circlophone your life !!!! . .
♫♪ My little cheap Circlophoneİ ♫♪
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2012, 05:10 PM   #6
Elvee is online now Elvee  Belgium
diyAudio Member
 
Elvee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
The first attempt to revert to the CFB characteristic by loading the feedback divider has failed.

The reason is simple: in the real CFB, the impedance is in fact different, because Q1's base is not at a fixed potential: it follows the signal, and thus bootstraps the emitter's impedance.

This in itself is quite interesting: it means the so called CFB is not really a pure CFB: it also displays attributes of VFB.
In order to have a really pure CFB, we would need to sufficiently reduce R1 to make R3 unnecessary.

So, back to our CFB-like VFB, all we need to do is to equalize the base potentials of Q1 and Q3.
And this time, it works:
Attached Images
File Type: png CFB6.png (81.4 KB, 496 views)
__________________
. .Circlophone your life !!!! . .
♫♪ My little cheap Circlophoneİ ♫♪
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2012, 06:15 PM   #7
Elvee is online now Elvee  Belgium
diyAudio Member
 
Elvee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
We can now try to confirm what we discovered: the canonical CFB is in fact a closet VFB circuit.
We just have to compare the magnitude of the currents in the sensor transistor, Q1 and the output divider: (the current into Q1 is 72µApp)

Yet, this very light loading is sufficient to cause significant errors, as we have seen earlier.
__________________
. .Circlophone your life !!!! . .
♫♪ My little cheap Circlophoneİ ♫♪
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2012, 07:52 PM   #8
Elvee is online now Elvee  Belgium
diyAudio Member
 
Elvee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
It looks like I have forgotten to post the pic, here it is:
Attached Images
File Type: png CFB7.png (74.4 KB, 357 views)
__________________
. .Circlophone your life !!!! . .
♫♪ My little cheap Circlophoneİ ♫♪
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2012, 08:01 PM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
Nico Ras's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: East Coast of South Africa
Elvee, I am sorry to see that you are a little lonley, to some it is clear but maybe some of audience don't quite understand what you are proving or disproving.

I also think that newer folk is afraid to even ask what is being discussed not understanding the difference or what CFB actually tries to accomplish.
__________________
Kindest regards
Nico

Last edited by Nico Ras; 29th August 2012 at 08:05 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2012, 08:34 PM   #10
Jay is offline Jay  Indonesia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Jakarta
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico Ras View Post
maybe some of audience don't quite understand what you are proving or disproving..
Yes. Right now I see it like Elvee is comparing apple to an orange. Not sure whether he is trying to prove which one is more spherical than the other, or more yellowish... But I'm waiting... for the conclusion
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Superior Instruments tv11 restore question? djmike Tubes / Valves 2 2nd June 2013 06:09 AM
Is there a superior NPN TO3? grhughes Parts 2 28th September 2012 12:55 PM
Why are mesh plates supposed to be superior? kavermei Tubes / Valves 1 29th August 2009 05:04 PM
heco superior presto 750 mschwilson Multi-Way 0 6th December 2006 06:34 PM
Superior Electric Variable Transformer CCOZGO40 Swap Meet 1 28th October 2002 02:41 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:08 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright İ1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2