Re: Current source design (tricky?)
From: Larry Brasfield (donotspam_larry_brasfield_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 03/12/05
- Next message: Fred Bloggs: "Re: Current source design (tricky?)"
- Previous message: Fred Bloggs: "Re: Current source design (tricky?)"
- In reply to: Fred Bloggs: "Re: Current source design (tricky?)"
- Next in thread: Fred Bloggs: "Re: Current source design (tricky?)"
- Reply: Fred Bloggs: "Re: Current source design (tricky?)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 14:26:57 -0800
"Fred Bloggs" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:4233667E.2030008@nospam.com...
>
[Content-free content cut.]
> Go back and read the LM8261 data***- it is in fact the Miller effect that is exploited to achieve the gain and phase margin with
> capacitive loading- and it works exactly the opposite of your bs explanation by moving the internal dominant pole to a higher
> frequency and not a lower frequency.
[Content-free content cut.]
> Here are your exact words where you state the LM8261 is an example of a class of OA's that drop their GBW- which is clearly wrong:
>
> "A number of op-amps on the market today are
> very tolerant of capacitive loading because they
> have a feature whereby that loading causes the
> gain-bandwidth of the part to drop, almost in
> proportion to the loading, such that the extra
> pole remains far enough above the unity gain
> crossover frequency that stability is preserved.
> The LM8261 suggested by Mr. Hill is a good
> example of this class.
I will agree that the LM8261 is not a good example
of the class I had in mind. When I wrote that, I had
assumed, incorrectly, that it used the same principle as
the LT1812 and like devices, which do operate as I
have described elsewhere in this thread.
> Adding a load isolation resistor to the output
> tends to defeat that feature, so I would not
> add it unless using an op-amp without that
> bandwidth reduction feature."
>
> As usual with NG trolls- you just want to talk and talk and talk and talk....you will never produce anything substantial- at
> least you're consistent with the rest of your life.
You know nothing about the rest of my life and
your pretense that you do confirms that you are a
sick individual. With a simple patent search, you
would quickly learn the falsity of your conjecture.
-- --Larry Brasfield email: donotspam_larry_brasfield@hotmail.com Above views may belong only to me.
- Next message: Fred Bloggs: "Re: Current source design (tricky?)"
- Previous message: Fred Bloggs: "Re: Current source design (tricky?)"
- In reply to: Fred Bloggs: "Re: Current source design (tricky?)"
- Next in thread: Fred Bloggs: "Re: Current source design (tricky?)"
- Reply: Fred Bloggs: "Re: Current source design (tricky?)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]