On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 15:20:30 -0700, you wrote:

>Good explanation. The other benefit from using an opamp is the low impedance 
>it provides to the ADC Sample&Hold circuit. As you know, when the circuit is 
>in sample mode, it is charging and internal capacitance which means the 
>current spikes for a short time and that will cause noise and measurement 
>inaccuracy if a simple resistor divider is used. The opamp on the other hand 
>is a low impedance source and can supply the current required by the ADC 
>Sample&Hold circuit. 

True, and if there's a buffer amplifier, this can possibly be set for
low or high impedance (can in the XMEGA... ARM? no idea).  Didn't
occur to me, and on second thought, if a beginner can understand that
one, perhaps they're not a beginner?

Nice comment, though.

Harvey

>
>Regards,
>John
>
>
>
>
>> On Jun 7, 2016, at 2:54 PM, Harvey White <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 13:03:29 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> chiming in here because I'm about to build my first circuit that uses ADCs 
>>> on BBB...
>>> 
>>>>  My standard advice 
>>>>>> would be to run the analog voltage through a non-inverting op amp 
>>>>>> configured as a gain stage.  You run the op-amp (and have to pick one 
>>>>>> that does rail to rail and also runs from 1.8 volts) from the 1.8 volt 
>>>>>> supply.   
>>>>>> 
>>>>> Yes, that's what I do.  There are quite a few very low power op-amps 
>>>>> suitable for running from the 1.8 volt rail on the BBB.  If OP is 
>>>>> interested I can look up the device, it's from TI if I remember. 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> In my somewhat amateurish approach to this I was planning to use a DC-DC 
>>> converter to provide 1.8 VCC for my sensors. I'm still learning about 
>>> op-amps and anything more advanced than a transistor, so I wonder whether 
>>> there are any advantages to using an op-amp compared to providing 1.8 V 
>>> from a switching DC-DC converter? 
>> 
>> Let's see.  Firstly, the goal is to make sure that the voltage to the
>> analog terminal does not go negative at all, and does not go more
>> positive than 1.8 volts, ever.
>> 
>> So firstly, let's feed all the sensors from 1.8 volts.  Now this
>> works, and can work well.  The question is how to get the 1.8 volts. A
>> switching converter, while efficient, generates noise, is relatively
>> complex, and is moderately large.  An easier way to get 1.8 volts is
>> to use a simple 3 terminal regulator.  There are some very small ones
>> available.  They generate little electrical noise.  A typical current
>> limit is about 100 ma, which should power a number of sensors.
>> 
>> Now, failing that we can (and often we cannot) power the sensors from
>> only 1.8 volts, we still need a method of reducing the input voltage.
>> 
>> Some will say to put a resistor in series, thinking that it's the
>> current you get with an overvoltage.  This is not necessarily true,
>> often it is simply the voltage itself, and the damage is done by the
>> way that the processor is constructed.
>> 
>> Others would say that the best way is to add two diodes (back biased)
>> to 1.8 volts and ground, and then add a protective resistor.  The
>> problem with this is that the diodes must conduct before they limit,
>> and that means that your voltage range is -.7 to 2.5 volts to the pin,
>> which violates the limits.  
>> 
>> Another approach would be a zener diode.  One problem is that the
>> zener needs roughly 0.001 amp to work, and that the sensor must supply
>> that voltage.  Another is that if you are trying to drop 12 volts down
>> to 1.8, you can, but by a fixed amount.  Go to 13 volts and you still
>> drop the 13 down to 2.8, and exceed the chip limits.  Zeners are
>> standard diodes in reverse, so you have no protection below -0.7 volts
>> at the input.
>> 
>> Yet another way would be to use a voltage divider.  This reduces the
>> input voltage by a fixed amount, and can be a decent solution IF and
>> ONLY IF the voltage does not go negative (and can NEVER go negative),
>> and the maximum voltage you can ever see is reduced down to 1.8
>> volts).  As a specific cure, it can work, but as a general cure, it
>> isn't recommended because you can still go over 1.8 volts and less
>> than 0.  For those who consider it important, the impedance of the
>> divider can also be an issue, too little and nothing drives it, too
>> high and the chip characteristics override the divider resistors.
>> 
>> Putting an op amp in allows several possibilities.  Op amps can be
>> inverting or non-inverting.  By running the op-amp from 1.8 volts and
>> ground, the maximum output voltage that the op-amp can put out is
>> limited to these values.  You will need a chip that outputs rail to
>> rail (ground to positive power supply voltage).
>> 
>> Inverting: the voltage has to be offset to keep the opamp from going
>> negative (and it will try, even when powered from 1.8 volts and
>> ground).  This also inverts the voltage so that as the voltage at the
>> input increases, the output decreases.
>> 
>> Non-inverting:  the voltage increases and the output increases.  Non
>> inverting unity gain (buffer) may have output voltage limits, so that
>> must be checked.  It will have an extremely high impedance, though. If
>> gain is needed, then the non-inverting configuration with gain can be
>> used.
>> 
>> I'd personally recommend the op-amp for the most general solution, and
>> the resistive divider ONLY if the application can be guaranteed to
>> never exceed the voltage limits of the chip under any reasonable
>> conditions.
>> 
>> Level converters are digital devices, and not suitable for use on
>> analog circuits.
>> 
>> Good design is frequently paranoid design.
>> 
>> Harvey
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> I would be very grateful if one of the electronically literate participants 
>>> to this discussion would share their insight with a newbie :)
>> 
>> -- 
>> For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss
>> --- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "BeagleBoard" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected].
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beagleboard/c4felb90298at6aj8j9fdgk8ub7cr8cs8p%404ax.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"BeagleBoard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beagleboard/ikmelbpmpmoefn4nocicouhd3hdo5rv7db%404ax.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to