Author Topic: J112 JFET I_DSS - datasheet inconsistent?  (Read 1286 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline aneevuserTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 252
  • Country: gb
J112 JFET I_DSS - datasheet inconsistent?
« on: January 24, 2020, 03:38:52 pm »
I bought some J112s from RS. The datasheet is here: https://docs.rs-online.com/1b2b/0900766b813d387a.pdf.

In the "On characteristics", it seems to suggest that  I_DSS will be a min. of 5 mA (or 2mA ?) so I have tried to measure it for a couple of pieces assuming that it won't be too far off this value. However, I got no constant current behaviour with I_DS all the way up to about 50 mA, with a V_DS of 5 V, when the device began noticeably hot to the touch - it's dissipating 250 mW of a quoted max. of 350 mW.

Having taken another look at the datasheet, I note that Note 2 on page 4 states that "The electrical characteristics table indicates that an J112
has an IDSS range of 25 to 75 mA". Well, that may explain my observations, but it seems to contradict the "On characteristics" info, even assuming say a x5 variation in I_DSS between parts.

So the question is: WTF is going on here? Is the datasheet contradictory, or am I misreading it and confused? And what value should I typically expect for the I_DSS of a J112?
 

Offline schmitt trigger

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2431
  • Country: mx
Re: J112 JFET I_DSS - datasheet inconsistent?
« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2020, 04:00:23 pm »
Well..... I checked a datasheet from another vendor (Vishay), and it has the same contradictory values  between the table of electrical characteristics and the Id vs Vds curves at different Vgs.
 

Offline exe

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2647
  • Country: nl
  • self-educated hobbyist
Re: J112 JFET I_DSS - datasheet inconsistent?
« Reply #2 on: January 24, 2020, 04:23:30 pm »
Well, 50mA is definetely more than 2mA or 5mA. So, I don't see a contradiction here since they only specify min value. They also don't provide typical value, so I wouldn't put any expectations based on "on characteristics".

J-fets are notorious for large parameter scattering :(. Even though modern production seems to be more consistent than datasheets often suggest.

What to trust? I'd say measurements. One can also put a hope that jfets from the same reel have close characteristic, but that's not guaranteed.
 

Offline schmitt trigger

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2431
  • Country: mx
Re: J112 JFET I_DSS - datasheet inconsistent?
« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2020, 04:32:13 pm »
You are correct. The datasheet only lists a minimum value. Maximum can be infinity and beyond.
 

Offline MasterT

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 851
  • Country: ca
Re: J112 JFET I_DSS - datasheet inconsistent?
« Reply #4 on: January 24, 2020, 04:46:15 pm »
The doc is edited version for J111, J112, J113. They missed to remove 2.0mA line, specification for J113.
And minimum 5.0 is o'k with "typical" 25-75.
 

Offline aneevuserTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 252
  • Country: gb
Re: J112 JFET I_DSS - datasheet inconsistent?
« Reply #5 on: January 25, 2020, 09:09:04 am »
Well, 50mA is definetely more than 2mA or 5mA. So, I don't see a contradiction here since they only specify min value. They also don't provide typical value, so I wouldn't put any expectations based on "on characteristics".

It's not a logical contradiction, that's true, but AoE quotes a typical I_DSS spread of x5, and these have a spread of x15, if we take the lower limit of 5 mA and the upper limit of 75 mA. Surely that's crazy, even by JFET standards?

Quote
J-fets are notorious for large parameter scattering :(. Even though modern production seems to be more consistent than datasheets often suggest.

What to trust? I'd say measurements. One can also put a hope that jfets from the same reel have close characteristic, but that's not guaranteed.

Yes, I guess that's all you can do.
 

Offline aneevuserTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 252
  • Country: gb
Re: J112 JFET I_DSS - datasheet inconsistent?
« Reply #6 on: January 25, 2020, 09:11:28 am »
The doc is edited version for J111, J112, J113. They missed to remove 2.0mA line, specification for J113.

Thanks. That clarifies that particular point.

Quote
And minimum 5.0 is o'k with "typical" 25-75.

Where are you getting this information from? I don't think the datasheet states explicitly that the 25-75 spread is typical?
 

Offline aneevuserTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 252
  • Country: gb
Re: J112 JFET I_DSS - datasheet inconsistent?
« Reply #7 on: January 25, 2020, 09:16:52 am »
You are correct. The datasheet only lists a minimum value. Maximum can be infinity and beyond.

Maybe they're aimed at the Buzz Lightyear toy repair market?
 

Offline exe

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2647
  • Country: nl
  • self-educated hobbyist
Re: J112 JFET I_DSS - datasheet inconsistent?
« Reply #8 on: January 25, 2020, 11:07:35 am »
It's not a logical contradiction, that's true, but AoE quotes a typical I_DSS spread of x5, and these have a spread of x15, if we take the lower limit of 5 mA and the upper limit of 75 mA. Surely that's crazy, even by JFET standards?

I think the is a slight confusion between typical values and min/max values. The real parameter scattering might be not that bad (though I have only one datapoint: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/metrology/building-your-own-voltage-reference-the-jvr/msg773359/#msg773359), but it is not guaranteed.

In my opinion, large min/max variation in datasheets is to avoid liability, make tests easier and have less rejections. Big variation certainly not helping with designing and mass-production. I'm not an experienced designer, but I don't see how I'd use jfets without manually characterizing and binning each one of them. I'd really prefer to pay extra to have tighter specs, but... I'm glad jfets are still around, I think they are extincting.

PS I use jfets as current sources and certainly there will be a trim-pot or something in final design to accommodate for such a large variation.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf