mosfet gate charge
 User Name Stay logged in? Password
 Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Search

 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
 16th August 2002, 08:41 PM #1 Diogo diyAudio Member   Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Brazil mosfet gate charge I would like to know how do I calculate the gate charge current of the output mosfets?
 16th August 2002, 11:18 PM #2 cocolino   diyAudio Member     Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bavaria (south of veal sausage equator) Diogo: look at this site: http://www.irf.com/technical-info/appnotes.htm Likely Application Note AN-944 contains the information You`re searching for. __________________ Christoph STEAL the BEST - INVENT the REST
 16th August 2002, 11:20 PM #3 Nelson Pass   The one and only     Join Date: Mar 2001 You figure out what the capacitance is under any particular condition (it varies dynamically) and then use the relation: 1 amp * 1 second = 1 volt * 1 farad of course you will be scaling this to pico or nano farads The volt figure will be the Vgs difference you are charging that capacitance to. An example? I = 1 V * 1 nF / 10 uS I = 1 * 10^-9 * 10^5 I = 10^-4 I = .1 mA Somebody let me know if I make a math error here.
 17th August 2002, 12:21 AM #4 Diogo diyAudio Member   Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Brazil Thanks I think I understood that! The IRF540 has a 1450pf Ciss The max voltage applied is 35V For a 20KHz response: 35*1450p*20K=1.05mA Am I correct?
 17th August 2002, 03:17 PM #5 JonMarsh diyAudio Member   Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Livermore, CA You're headed in the right direction, but it's not quite that simple. Plus, the calculation is based on time, not frequency. There are two important capacitances for driving MOSFETs; Ciss and Crss. Ciss is the lumped input capacitance; Crss is the miller feedback capacitance. Ciss is the stated input capacitance; this is the combination of Cgs (capacitance gate to source) and Cgd (capacitance gate to drain), with the caveat that Cgd is measured at a fixed voltage per JEDEC specs, 25 volts VDS. Why is that important? While Cgs is essentially a fixed capacitance, Cgd is highly variable; it's a depletion capacitance dependent on the gate to drain voltage, and behaves much the same as a diode junction capacitance. It can vary over a wide ratio, between 10 and 20 to 1 depending on the device technology. It's generally fairly low at VDS=25 volts and up (though it does decrease further with increasing voltage), but as the drain voltage falls toward the gate voltage, it increases dramatically. This is a source of increased HF distortion if you use vertical DMOS transistors as amplifiying elements with signal swings on the drain close to the gate voltage. This is why running relatively high voltage circuits either single ended or complementary (say, with 30-50V rails), and staying away from anywhere near "clipping" these circuits produces much better results. In the case of a true class A linear amplifier, the MOSFET acts as more as an integrator; there isn't very much change in the gate voltage, and the gate behaves much the same as in the plateau region for switching current source loads (the classic gate charge test, also described in data sheets from most FET manufacturers, including IR and Infineon. In this case, the gate charge required is the Qgd for the voltage swing required acrosss the relatively low gate to drain capacitance; the Cgs component of the input capacitance isn't hardle exercised, because the gate voltage is nearly constant. You can get a rough estimate of this from the data sheet, because Qgd charge is usually presented for two values, 20% of rated Vgs and 80% of rated Vgs. However, this includes the high capacitance region- if you avoid that, you in the much more linear area. In this case, a good estimate comes from subtracting the 20% Qgd from the 80% Qgd, and multiplying this by two (you're not just turning on, your traversing a sine wave), then calculate the current for the time intervale for the highest frequency you want to be able to reproduce. So, if you have any of those pesky SACD's, you might want to size your driver to be comfortable with gate drive for frequencies up to 50 kHz at full output, perhaps a little higher. The headroom can't hurt, unless it forces you to compromise on a device selection or operating point somewhere else. Best regards, Jon
 17th August 2002, 10:34 PM #6 Nelson Pass   The one and only     Join Date: Mar 2001 In point of fact, it's usually easier to build the circuit up and overkill the available drive current than it is to precisely calculate it. Even if you do a precise calculation, you generally still have to provide serious overkill to keep the driver linear.
 18th August 2002, 03:12 AM #7 Diogo diyAudio Member   Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Brazil Ok I got it, but one question remains, talking about the driving circuit: What is the big diferrence betwen mosfets and bjts, I know that the driving current is much lower in mosfet and with the same rails the bjt delivers more power, but besides that, there is any other big difference? Excluding the gate stoppes, why not change directly a bjt for a mosfet considering thet the drive current would be more than needed. Sorry about these questions but I am only an student, and I am sure that I'm asking some stupid questions, but there is no one else to help me with that, and I have no access to a good book here in Brazil they are rather expensive.
 18th August 2002, 09:21 AM #8 mirlo   diyAudio Member   Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Diego FETs vs BJTs Biasing is rather different for FETs vs BJTs. For one thing, the voltage needed to get meaningful bias current flowing gets lower with increasing temperature for a BJT, but rises for a FET. For this reason, very high power amplifiers ( > 500 W ) often use FETs, because it is hard to track the temperature of the output devices well enough to make sure that they don't get too much bias, which would heat them up, decreasing the bias requirement, heating them more, and so on, until they self destruct. Although bipolar devices draw base current, the base current can be made less important by using Darlington connections or other sorts of buffering. Bipolar devices also have a capacitance that acts like Cgs of a FET; you can calculate it Cpi = (1/2piFt)*(Ic/Vt) where Ft is the transition frequency of the transistor (you might be able to find this in its data sheet), Ic is the collector current, and Vt is the thermal voltage, about 25 mV at room temp and increasing proportional to temperature. So an interesting result is, if you have a 50 MHz Ft bipolar device with 1 ampere of current flowing in it, at room temperature, the capacitance you have to control is about 127 nF. This is the equivalent of a lot of FETs. Again, by using darlingtons or other buffers you can make this less significant, but you can see that FETs probably have several advantages in terms of ease of drive circuits. That said, some designers favor BJTs, claiming they are more linear. They DO tend to have lower output impedance for the same current flow.
capslock
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Germany
Re: FETs vs BJTs

Quote:
 [i] Bipolar devices also have a capacitance that acts like Cgs of a FET; you can calculate it Cpi = (1/2piFt)*(Ic/Vt) where Ft is the transition frequency of the transistor (you might be able to find this in its data sheet), Ic is the collector current, and Vt is the thermal voltage, about 25 mV at room temp and increasing proportional to temperature. So an interesting result is, if you have a 50 MHz Ft bipolar device with 1 ampere of current flowing in it, at room temperature, the capacitance you have to control is about 127 nF. This is the equivalent of a lot of FETs. [/B]
Now, that seems a little strange. Would Ic be the actual collector current or the Ic that Ft is specified at? To the best of my knowledge, C_CB is a function of V_CB, not I_C. It is also a function of the transistor chip design, so I doubt that one formula would be able to cover this for any transistor.

Just as an example, my favorite Sanken output transistors 2SA1303/2SC2837 have a C_CB of 110 resp. 60 pF at 80V, which is a lot lower than 127 nF! Admittedly, these Sanken parts have exceptionally low capacitance, but other power transistors are maybe an order of magnitude higher at the most.

Eric

 19th August 2002, 09:43 AM #10 mirlo   diyAudio Member   Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Diego I'm referring to the effective Cbe, not Cbc. Cbc is a lot smaller and is voltage dependent as you say. You may want to double-check the arithemetic, but I think 127 nF is correct. There are two parts of capacitance between the base and emitter. One part is directly voltage dependent, like Cbc, and its value at zero voltage is often referred to as Cje. I was referring to the other one, the small-signal diffusion capacitance. It is always there, in any bipolar transistor, (or in any forward biased PN junction, for that matter) and its size is essentially determined by the effective base width, and by how long it takes the carriers to cross the base region. It depends on the actual current flowing in the transistor, and on the effective base width with that current flow. The length of time it takes a carrier to traverse the base region is called the "transit time" Tf of the transistor. So if there is a collector current Ic flowing in the device there is an amount of charge Ic*Tf in the base. The capacitance is the derivative of this charge with respect to voltage. The current is related to the base-emitter voltage by a relationship Ic = Is*exp(Vbe/Vt) where Vt is the thermal voltage kT/q. The derivative of Ic vs Vbe works out as Ic/Vt. So the capacitance due to current flow in the transistor, is Tf*(Ic/Vt). Note that this is a really weird "capacitor", because it gets a lot smaller while you discharge it, and a lot bigger as you charge it. So it doesn't imply a charge storage of C*V, just that incremental changes in base-emitter voltage result in corresponding incremental changes in base charge. The actual base-emitter capacitance will be slightly higher, due to the extra voltage dependent term that is not due to charge storage effects.

 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 Forum Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Site     Site Announcements     Forum Problems Amplifiers     Solid State     Pass Labs     Tubes / Valves     Chip Amps     Class D     Power Supplies     Headphone Systems Source & Line     Analogue Source     Analog Line Level     Digital Source     Digital Line Level     PC Based Loudspeakers     Multi-Way     Full Range     Subwoofers     Planars & Exotics Live Sound     PA Systems     Instruments and Amps Design & Build     Parts     Equipment & Tools     Construction Tips     Software Tools General Interest     Car Audio     diyAudio.com Articles     Music     Everything Else Member Areas     Introductions     The Lounge     Clubs & Events     In Memoriam The Moving Image Commercial Sector     Swap Meet     Group Buys     The diyAudio Store     Vendor Forums         Vendor's Bazaar         Sonic Craft         Apex Jr         Audio Sector         Acoustic Fun         Chipamp         DIY HiFi Supply         Elekit         Elektor         Mains Cables R Us         Parts Connexion         Planet 10 hifi         Quanghao Audio Design         Siliconray Online Electronics Store         Tubelab     Manufacturers         AKSA         Audio Poutine         Musicaltech         Aussie Amplifiers         CSS         exaDevices         Feastrex         GedLee         Head 'n' HiFi - Walter         Heatsink USA         miniDSP         SITO Audio         Twin Audio         Twisted Pear         Wild Burro Audio

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post rtarbell Parts 1 22nd January 2007 05:11 PM xplod1236 Parts 17 4th December 2004 03:23 PM Tensop Parts 4 23rd July 2004 08:25 AM eeka chu Solid State 5 12th July 2004 07:25 AM naula Parts 0 21st January 2003 02:00 PM

 New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:28 PM.