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 BJT common emitter amplifier equivalent circuit (π hybrid model)

Post

BJT common emitter amplifier equivalent circuit (π hybrid model) [closed]

+0
−5

Closed as unclear by Olin Lathrop‭ on Nov 8, 2022 at 20:50

This question cannot be answered in its current form, because critical information is missing.

This question was closed; new answers can no longer be added. Users with the reopen privilege may vote to reopen this question if it has been improved or closed incorrectly.

Im studying the equivalent model of a BJT common emitter amplifier at high frequencies.At university we tought that the BJT at high frequencies looks something like this:

However when designing a common emitter amplifier we have to take into account any base resistors .So I draw this diagram but I dont know if it is correct.Should the base resistor be before Rx or after?

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

You have been told this before. Your diagrams need to be neat and readable. Your first diagram is s... (3 comments)
You have been told this before. Your diagrams need to be neat and readable. Your first diagram is s...
Olin Lathrop‭ wrote about 2 years ago

You have been told this before. Your diagrams need to be neat and readable. Your first diagram is so out of focus that we can't even read some of the component designators. The others are so small that they are difficult to read. You could easily expand them to fill the 640 pixel width available for pictures.

You have been told all this before. We've even sometimes fixed it for you. At this point, you are being deliberately disrespectful. Closing without even reading the text.

Sloppiness and thumbing your nose at people has consequences.

LvW‭ wrote about 2 years ago · edited about 2 years ago

I am not sure if this comment is an appropriate answer to an unexperienced forum member...("deliberately disrespectful"..).

a concerned citizen‭ wrote about 2 years ago

LvW‭ Admittedly, seeing this for the first time without any prior knowledge might seem harsh but, if you would see all this user's history here (preferably in chronological order), you will get a better feeling of why Olin replied as he did (and why things evolved to this point). What I mean is, there are good reasons behind these actions. Of course, OP has but to modify the question, accordingly, and I'm sure the downvotes will be gone.