Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Comments on Driving ADC with opamp with large rails

Parent

Driving ADC with opamp with large rails

+2
−0

In the image below is an opamp buffer with +/- 15v rails connected to a 3.3v ADC. The input to the opamp is limited to 0-3v. There is no protection circuitry for the ADC.

Opamp buffer high rails to ADC

Is the risk of the opamp overdriving the ADC too great for no input protection to be used?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

General comments (4 comments)
Post
+2
−0

Is the risk too great?

That depends on parameters you haven't told us. How cost-sensitive is this product? What is the reliability expectation of the users? How mission-critical is its usage?

For example, if this were a toy, I'd say screw it and look for a way to not even buffer the signal in the first place. If this is sensing the temperature to control cooling pumps in a nuclear power plant, I'd not only follow every datasheet spec to the letter, but also add some margin, and then add redundant units anyway.

Let's say this is an industrial product where a few cents extra cost doesn't matter much, and you want reasonable robustness to protect your reputation. As others have said, put a resistor between the opamp output and the A/D input. Then take the feedback from the A/D side of the resistor. That makes the opamp produce whatever voltage is necessary on its end so that you get the desired voltage on the A/D end.

However, there is more to it than that. Just adding the resistor can lead to instability. To address that, add a feedback capacitor directly around the opamp:

Image

The value of R1 was chosen to limit the A/D input current to 5 mA. The worst case is when the opamp drives its output all the way to -15 V. (15 V)/(5 mA) = 3 kΩ.

I picked the 47 pF value out of the air. This is hard to predict. Perhaps no additional capacitance is needed at all. I would put the pads on the board, then find the appropriate value by experimentation. I'd probably use twice whatever the largest value was at which I saw oscillation.

The drawback of making C1 too large is that the response slows down. If you don't need particularly fast response, you can be more aggressive with C1 to err on the side of stability.


1. why may the modest resistor inside the loop lead to instability? and 2. (probably related) could you explain how the cap solve this problem

The resistor together with whatever load may be on its right end can cause a phase shift. Even a little parasitic capacitance is enough to cause a measurable phase lag. That extra phase lag in the feedback path can cause the system to oscillate, depending on how close to the stability limit the opamp was trimmed for in the first place.

C1 adds feedback at high frequencies without any additional phase shift. It therefore increases stability at the expense of overall step response time. Another way to think about it is that since it directly feeds back high frequencies, it reduces the overall loop gain at those high frequencies. With less gain, the feedback, with its lag, matters less.

C1 is sometimes referred to as a compensation capacitor. This comes from compensating the overall feedback loop, which is one of the terms used in control theory to achieve stable systems.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (1 comment)
General comments
coquelicot‭ wrote about 4 years ago · edited about 4 years ago

@Olin. Your answer is again fascinating: 1. why may the modest resistor inside the loop lead to instability? and 2. (probably related) could you explain how the cap solve this problem (I've never seen this technique). If the cap were connected after the resistor, I would say it improves the high frequency response, but here, I don't know.