J
John B
"Rich Grise"
I have read every entry in this thread, since I am the OP. Elsewhere, I
stated that I have observed textbook information on the 2N3903 transistor,
specifically, graphical information yielding beta. BF=117, but BR= 0.9.
Another poster offered that V BC (in a common-emitter, inverted topology)
was not much different from V BE (in a common-emitter topology).
Another poster emphasized that the saturation voltage of an inverted
transistor was lower than the saturation voltage of an uninverted
transistor. Specifics were absent. I am not convinced.
I was hoping to see a very low V BC. I'll try this on a bench, at some
point in the next couple of weeks. I learned more from this thread, though.
Thanks for the reply.Granted.
I can't imagine a beta less than one, but I haven't really looked at
upside-down transistor circuits all that much.
This one, I don't know - why not slap one in the protoboard, and tell us?
Cheers!
Rich
I have read every entry in this thread, since I am the OP. Elsewhere, I
stated that I have observed textbook information on the 2N3903 transistor,
specifically, graphical information yielding beta. BF=117, but BR= 0.9.
Another poster offered that V BC (in a common-emitter, inverted topology)
was not much different from V BE (in a common-emitter topology).
Another poster emphasized that the saturation voltage of an inverted
transistor was lower than the saturation voltage of an uninverted
transistor. Specifics were absent. I am not convinced.
I was hoping to see a very low V BC. I'll try this on a bench, at some
point in the next couple of weeks. I learned more from this thread, though.