If Manufacturer spice model and Datasheet give different values which should I use? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InProblem with LED Matrix TestReference to understand LED data sheet specification, characteristic and way to use themControlling 10 high power LED with a Raspberry Pipspice virtual gnd simulationHow do I model an LED with SPICE WITHOUT access to a Manufacturer's Datasheetsemiconductor resistor vs resistor in SPICE modeling AltiumUsing optocoupler with MOSFET for dimming a LEDHow can I work out which pin is which in SPICE modelAn NPN BJT - from Spice to Ebers-MollModelling heat transfer from Power LED to metal bar
What spell level should this homebrew After-Image spell be?
How to answer pointed "are you quitting" questioning when I don't want them to suspect
Is "plugging out" electronic devices an American expression?
Pristine Bit Checking
Protecting Dualbooting Windows from dangerous code (like rm -rf)
Should I write numbers in words or as numerals when there are multiple next to each other?
How to manage monthly salary
How to create dashed lines/arrows in Illustrator
Is three citations per paragraph excessive for undergraduate research paper?
Extreme, unacceptable situation and I can't attend work tomorrow morning
Inflated grade on resume at previous job, might former employer tell new employer?
Could a US political party gain complete control over the government by removing checks & balances?
Why do some words that are not inflected have an umlaut?
Is flight data recorder erased after every flight?
What is the best strategy for white in this position?
Does a dangling wire really electrocute me if I'm standing in water?
How can I fix this gap between bookcases I made?
On the insanity of kings as an argument against monarchy
Is there a name of the flying bionic bird?
What can other administrators access on my machine?
Adding labels to a table: columns and rows
What do the Banks children have against barley water?
CiviEvent: Public link for events of a specific type
If the Wish spell is used to duplicate the effect of Simulacrum, are existing duplicates destroyed?
If Manufacturer spice model and Datasheet give different values which should I use?
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InProblem with LED Matrix TestReference to understand LED data sheet specification, characteristic and way to use themControlling 10 high power LED with a Raspberry Pipspice virtual gnd simulationHow do I model an LED with SPICE WITHOUT access to a Manufacturer's Datasheetsemiconductor resistor vs resistor in SPICE modeling AltiumUsing optocoupler with MOSFET for dimming a LEDHow can I work out which pin is which in SPICE modelAn NPN BJT - from Spice to Ebers-MollModelling heat transfer from Power LED to metal bar
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
I'm trying to simulate an LED circuit but I am getting a large difference in results from the simulation vs calculations done using the datasheet information. In this case both the spice model and the datasheet info are direct from the manufacturer. Given the large difference in results, I'm wondering which information I should base my design off of.
In this case the datasheet shows a typical Vf of 2.1v, the spice model seems to be using a Vf of 2.134v. I'm wiring 4 of these LEDs in series with a target of 18mA. Assuming a 9v source if I use a 33.3333ohm resistor (or resistor combination) based on the 2.1Vf of the datasheet I get a simulation result of 13.9mA instead of the expected 18mA.
Should I base the resistance off of the datasheet and ignore the simulation in this case, or should I base things more off of the simulation results? I'm asking since if I'm wrong either the LEDs will be too dim, or they will blow out.
I'm attaching the specific simulation and Datasheet in this example here as well. I'm using a SML-P12WTT86R model LED from ROHM Semiconductor.
The datasheet is here.
Here is what I got from the spice simulation using ROHM's spice model.
led datasheet spice pspice
edited 2 days ago
jusaca
1,023420
asked 2 days ago
CyFCyF
278
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm trying to simulate an LED circuit but I am getting a large difference in results from the simulation vs calculations done using the datasheet information. In this case both the spice model and the datasheet info are direct from the manufacturer. Given the large difference in results, I'm wondering which information I should base my design off of.
In this case the datasheet shows a typical Vf of 2.1v, the spice model seems to be using a Vf of 2.134v. I'm wiring 4 of these LEDs in series with a target of 18mA. Assuming a 9v source if I use a 33.3333ohm resistor (or resistor combination) based on the 2.1Vf of the datasheet I get a simulation result of 13.9mA instead of the expected 18mA.
Should I base the resistance off of the datasheet and ignore the simulation in this case, or should I base things more off of the simulation results? I'm asking since if I'm wrong either the LEDs will be too dim, or they will blow out.
I'm attaching the specific simulation and Datasheet in this example here as well. I'm using a SML-P12WTT86R model LED from ROHM Semiconductor.
The datasheet is here.
Here is what I got from the spice simulation using ROHM's spice model.
led datasheet spice pspice
edited 2 days ago
jusaca
1,023420
asked 2 days ago
CyFCyF
278
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
If a 1% parameter difference makes enough of a difference to care about, your design is probably not robust enough.
$endgroup$
– Scott Seidman
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm trying to simulate an LED circuit but I am getting a large difference in results from the simulation vs calculations done using the datasheet information. In this case both the spice model and the datasheet info are direct from the manufacturer. Given the large difference in results, I'm wondering which information I should base my design off of.
In this case the datasheet shows a typical Vf of 2.1v, the spice model seems to be using a Vf of 2.134v. I'm wiring 4 of these LEDs in series with a target of 18mA. Assuming a 9v source if I use a 33.3333ohm resistor (or resistor combination) based on the 2.1Vf of the datasheet I get a simulation result of 13.9mA instead of the expected 18mA.
Should I base the resistance off of the datasheet and ignore the simulation in this case, or should I base things more off of the simulation results? I'm asking since if I'm wrong either the LEDs will be too dim, or they will blow out.
I'm attaching the specific simulation and Datasheet in this example here as well. I'm using a SML-P12WTT86R model LED from ROHM Semiconductor.
The datasheet is here.
Here is what I got from the spice simulation using ROHM's spice model.
led datasheet spice pspice
edited 2 days ago
jusaca
1,023420
asked 2 days ago
CyFCyF
278
$endgroup$
I'm trying to simulate an LED circuit but I am getting a large difference in results from the simulation vs calculations done using the datasheet information. In this case both the spice model and the datasheet info are direct from the manufacturer. Given the large difference in results, I'm wondering which information I should base my design off of.
In this case the datasheet shows a typical Vf of 2.1v, the spice model seems to be using a Vf of 2.134v. I'm wiring 4 of these LEDs in series with a target of 18mA. Assuming a 9v source if I use a 33.3333ohm resistor (or resistor combination) based on the 2.1Vf of the datasheet I get a simulation result of 13.9mA instead of the expected 18mA.
Should I base the resistance off of the datasheet and ignore the simulation in this case, or should I base things more off of the simulation results? I'm asking since if I'm wrong either the LEDs will be too dim, or they will blow out.
I'm attaching the specific simulation and Datasheet in this example here as well. I'm using a SML-P12WTT86R model LED from ROHM Semiconductor.
The datasheet is here.
Here is what I got from the spice simulation using ROHM's spice model.
led datasheet spice pspice
led datasheet spice pspice
edited 2 days ago
jusaca
1,023420
asked 2 days ago
CyFCyF
278
edited 2 days ago
jusaca
1,023420
asked 2 days ago
CyFCyF
278
edited 2 days ago
jusaca
1,023420
edited 2 days ago
jusaca
1,023420
edited 2 days ago
jusaca
1,023420
1,023420
asked 2 days ago
CyFCyF
278
asked 2 days ago
CyFCyF
278
asked 2 days ago
CyFCyF
278
278
$begingroup$
If a 1% parameter difference makes enough of a difference to care about, your design is probably not robust enough.
$endgroup$
– Scott Seidman
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If a 1% parameter difference makes enough of a difference to care about, your design is probably not robust enough.
$endgroup$
– Scott Seidman
2 days ago
$begingroup$
If a 1% parameter difference makes enough of a difference to care about, your design is probably not robust enough.
$endgroup$
– Scott Seidman
2 days ago
$begingroup$
If a 1% parameter difference makes enough of a difference to care about, your design is probably not robust enough.
$endgroup$
– Scott Seidman
2 days ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Always follow the datasheet. I strongly recommend looking up some of Mike Engelhardt's videos or attend one of his seminars (Arrow sponsors a lot of them). While you're not using LTSpice, Mike has a very deep understanding of Spice simulation, the good, the bad, and the ugly. The reality is most Spice models are made by people that don't really understand them (aka. interns) and can't be trusted a large percent of the time.
answered 2 days ago
Matt YoungMatt Young
12.4k42560
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Notice the datasheet value is also only a "typical", not a maximum or minimum.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@ThePhoton Didn't even look at the datasheet, I just know I've seen a lot of crappy Spice models over the years.
$endgroup$
– Matt Young
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
These days, SPICE models are more likely to be generated by specialized modeling consultants than by interns. The real problem isn't that the person making the model doesn't understand modeling, it's that they can't anticipate every use case that customers will try to apply the device to.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
It may also be that the samples of the part that were used to extract the SPICE model actually had a $V_f$ of 2.134 V at 18 mA, but on the datasheet they rounded this to 2.1 V because they know it will vary by more than a few 10's of mV due to process.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
@MattYoung. I had a chance to briefly speak with Mike Engelhardt. His main gripe with most Spice models is that they follow a Boyle model (analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/application-notes/…). The problem with this model is that it typically produces incorrect power draw numbers and hides higher order effects that the designer does not show. Mike told me for LT they focus on more detailed simulation that takes advantage of stronger modern processors and should provide better resutls.
$endgroup$
– Gonzik007
2 days ago
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
In this case the datasheet shows a typical Vf of 2.1v, the spice model seems to be using a Vf of 2.134v.
If your circuit works for $V_f$ of 2.1 V, but fails for 2.134 V, then you need to get a new circuit.
The forward voltage will vary due to manufacturing variations and junction temperature. And the variation will be more than 35 mV over realistic operating conditions.
Also, keep in mind that the datasheet value is for an ambient temperature of 25 C, while SPICE is probably (unless you've added an option to specify otherwise) simulating a junction temperature of 25 C. That means the datasheet value reflects a higher junction temperature than the SPICE model. And forward voltage does typically drop with increasing temperature so it's conceivable both models are correct.
Assuming a 9v source if I use a 33.3333ohm resistor (or resistor combination) based on the 2.1Vf of the datasheet I get a simulation result of 13.9mA instead of the expected 18mA. ... I'm asking since if I'm wrong either the LEDs will be too dim, or they will blow out.
If this application requires the brightness to be controlled so carefully that the difference between 13.9 and 18 mA makes a difference, you should use a constant current LED driver instead of a simple resistive current limiter.
But in most applications, users won't notice the difference in brightness due to this kind of current change. So you just live with some brightness variability to save cost. Modern LEDs are visibly lit even with 1 mA forward current so whether at 13.9 or 18 mA they will be quite bright.
You could also reduce the variability by designing your resistive limiting circuit with more voltage overhead. Either use a higher voltage source (12 V maybe) and a larger resistor, or place 2 strings of 2 LEDs in parallel, so you have roughly 5 V overhead instead of just 1. The trade-off here is of course more power wasted in the resistors.
answered 2 days ago
The PhotonThe Photon
87.2k398203
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Well when using small # of LEDs in the series the closer the results get to what I’d have expected from the data sheet. Thanks for all of the input. Here and below.
$endgroup$
– CyF
2 days ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("schematics", function ()
StackExchange.schematics.init();
);
, "cicuitlab");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "135"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f431255%2fif-manufacturer-spice-model-and-datasheet-give-different-values-which-should-i-u%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Always follow the datasheet. I strongly recommend looking up some of Mike Engelhardt's videos or attend one of his seminars (Arrow sponsors a lot of them). While you're not using LTSpice, Mike has a very deep understanding of Spice simulation, the good, the bad, and the ugly. The reality is most Spice models are made by people that don't really understand them (aka. interns) and can't be trusted a large percent of the time.
answered 2 days ago
Matt YoungMatt Young
12.4k42560
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Notice the datasheet value is also only a "typical", not a maximum or minimum.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@ThePhoton Didn't even look at the datasheet, I just know I've seen a lot of crappy Spice models over the years.
$endgroup$
– Matt Young
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
These days, SPICE models are more likely to be generated by specialized modeling consultants than by interns. The real problem isn't that the person making the model doesn't understand modeling, it's that they can't anticipate every use case that customers will try to apply the device to.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
It may also be that the samples of the part that were used to extract the SPICE model actually had a $V_f$ of 2.134 V at 18 mA, but on the datasheet they rounded this to 2.1 V because they know it will vary by more than a few 10's of mV due to process.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
@MattYoung. I had a chance to briefly speak with Mike Engelhardt. His main gripe with most Spice models is that they follow a Boyle model (analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/application-notes/…). The problem with this model is that it typically produces incorrect power draw numbers and hides higher order effects that the designer does not show. Mike told me for LT they focus on more detailed simulation that takes advantage of stronger modern processors and should provide better resutls.
$endgroup$
– Gonzik007
2 days ago
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
Always follow the datasheet. I strongly recommend looking up some of Mike Engelhardt's videos or attend one of his seminars (Arrow sponsors a lot of them). While you're not using LTSpice, Mike has a very deep understanding of Spice simulation, the good, the bad, and the ugly. The reality is most Spice models are made by people that don't really understand them (aka. interns) and can't be trusted a large percent of the time.
answered 2 days ago
Matt YoungMatt Young
12.4k42560
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Notice the datasheet value is also only a "typical", not a maximum or minimum.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@ThePhoton Didn't even look at the datasheet, I just know I've seen a lot of crappy Spice models over the years.
$endgroup$
– Matt Young
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
These days, SPICE models are more likely to be generated by specialized modeling consultants than by interns. The real problem isn't that the person making the model doesn't understand modeling, it's that they can't anticipate every use case that customers will try to apply the device to.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
It may also be that the samples of the part that were used to extract the SPICE model actually had a $V_f$ of 2.134 V at 18 mA, but on the datasheet they rounded this to 2.1 V because they know it will vary by more than a few 10's of mV due to process.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
@MattYoung. I had a chance to briefly speak with Mike Engelhardt. His main gripe with most Spice models is that they follow a Boyle model (analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/application-notes/…). The problem with this model is that it typically produces incorrect power draw numbers and hides higher order effects that the designer does not show. Mike told me for LT they focus on more detailed simulation that takes advantage of stronger modern processors and should provide better resutls.
$endgroup$
– Gonzik007
2 days ago
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
Always follow the datasheet. I strongly recommend looking up some of Mike Engelhardt's videos or attend one of his seminars (Arrow sponsors a lot of them). While you're not using LTSpice, Mike has a very deep understanding of Spice simulation, the good, the bad, and the ugly. The reality is most Spice models are made by people that don't really understand them (aka. interns) and can't be trusted a large percent of the time.
answered 2 days ago
Matt YoungMatt Young
12.4k42560
$endgroup$
Always follow the datasheet. I strongly recommend looking up some of Mike Engelhardt's videos or attend one of his seminars (Arrow sponsors a lot of them). While you're not using LTSpice, Mike has a very deep understanding of Spice simulation, the good, the bad, and the ugly. The reality is most Spice models are made by people that don't really understand them (aka. interns) and can't be trusted a large percent of the time.
answered 2 days ago
Matt YoungMatt Young
12.4k42560
answered 2 days ago
Matt YoungMatt Young
12.4k42560
answered 2 days ago
Matt YoungMatt Young
12.4k42560
answered 2 days ago
Matt YoungMatt Young
12.4k42560
12.4k42560
$begingroup$
Notice the datasheet value is also only a "typical", not a maximum or minimum.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@ThePhoton Didn't even look at the datasheet, I just know I've seen a lot of crappy Spice models over the years.
$endgroup$
– Matt Young
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
These days, SPICE models are more likely to be generated by specialized modeling consultants than by interns. The real problem isn't that the person making the model doesn't understand modeling, it's that they can't anticipate every use case that customers will try to apply the device to.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
It may also be that the samples of the part that were used to extract the SPICE model actually had a $V_f$ of 2.134 V at 18 mA, but on the datasheet they rounded this to 2.1 V because they know it will vary by more than a few 10's of mV due to process.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
@MattYoung. I had a chance to briefly speak with Mike Engelhardt. His main gripe with most Spice models is that they follow a Boyle model (analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/application-notes/…). The problem with this model is that it typically produces incorrect power draw numbers and hides higher order effects that the designer does not show. Mike told me for LT they focus on more detailed simulation that takes advantage of stronger modern processors and should provide better resutls.
$endgroup$
– Gonzik007
2 days ago
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
Notice the datasheet value is also only a "typical", not a maximum or minimum.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@ThePhoton Didn't even look at the datasheet, I just know I've seen a lot of crappy Spice models over the years.
$endgroup$
– Matt Young
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
These days, SPICE models are more likely to be generated by specialized modeling consultants than by interns. The real problem isn't that the person making the model doesn't understand modeling, it's that they can't anticipate every use case that customers will try to apply the device to.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
It may also be that the samples of the part that were used to extract the SPICE model actually had a $V_f$ of 2.134 V at 18 mA, but on the datasheet they rounded this to 2.1 V because they know it will vary by more than a few 10's of mV due to process.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
@MattYoung. I had a chance to briefly speak with Mike Engelhardt. His main gripe with most Spice models is that they follow a Boyle model (analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/application-notes/…). The problem with this model is that it typically produces incorrect power draw numbers and hides higher order effects that the designer does not show. Mike told me for LT they focus on more detailed simulation that takes advantage of stronger modern processors and should provide better resutls.
$endgroup$
– Gonzik007
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Notice the datasheet value is also only a "typical", not a maximum or minimum.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Notice the datasheet value is also only a "typical", not a maximum or minimum.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@ThePhoton Didn't even look at the datasheet, I just know I've seen a lot of crappy Spice models over the years.
$endgroup$
– Matt Young
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@ThePhoton Didn't even look at the datasheet, I just know I've seen a lot of crappy Spice models over the years.
$endgroup$
– Matt Young
2 days ago
1
1
$begingroup$
These days, SPICE models are more likely to be generated by specialized modeling consultants than by interns. The real problem isn't that the person making the model doesn't understand modeling, it's that they can't anticipate every use case that customers will try to apply the device to.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
$begingroup$
These days, SPICE models are more likely to be generated by specialized modeling consultants than by interns. The real problem isn't that the person making the model doesn't understand modeling, it's that they can't anticipate every use case that customers will try to apply the device to.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
1
1
$begingroup$
It may also be that the samples of the part that were used to extract the SPICE model actually had a $V_f$ of 2.134 V at 18 mA, but on the datasheet they rounded this to 2.1 V because they know it will vary by more than a few 10's of mV due to process.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
$begingroup$
It may also be that the samples of the part that were used to extract the SPICE model actually had a $V_f$ of 2.134 V at 18 mA, but on the datasheet they rounded this to 2.1 V because they know it will vary by more than a few 10's of mV due to process.
$endgroup$
– The Photon
2 days ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@MattYoung. I had a chance to briefly speak with Mike Engelhardt. His main gripe with most Spice models is that they follow a Boyle model (analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/application-notes/…). The problem with this model is that it typically produces incorrect power draw numbers and hides higher order effects that the designer does not show. Mike told me for LT they focus on more detailed simulation that takes advantage of stronger modern processors and should provide better resutls.
$endgroup$
– Gonzik007
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@MattYoung. I had a chance to briefly speak with Mike Engelhardt. His main gripe with most Spice models is that they follow a Boyle model (analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/application-notes/…). The problem with this model is that it typically produces incorrect power draw numbers and hides higher order effects that the designer does not show. Mike told me for LT they focus on more detailed simulation that takes advantage of stronger modern processors and should provide better resutls.
$endgroup$
– Gonzik007
2 days ago
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
In this case the datasheet shows a typical Vf of 2.1v, the spice model seems to be using a Vf of 2.134v.
If your circuit works for $V_f$ of 2.1 V, but fails for 2.134 V, then you need to get a new circuit.
The forward voltage will vary due to manufacturing variations and junction temperature. And the variation will be more than 35 mV over realistic operating conditions.
Also, keep in mind that the datasheet value is for an ambient temperature of 25 C, while SPICE is probably (unless you've added an option to specify otherwise) simulating a junction temperature of 25 C. That means the datasheet value reflects a higher junction temperature than the SPICE model. And forward voltage does typically drop with increasing temperature so it's conceivable both models are correct.
Assuming a 9v source if I use a 33.3333ohm resistor (or resistor combination) based on the 2.1Vf of the datasheet I get a simulation result of 13.9mA instead of the expected 18mA. ... I'm asking since if I'm wrong either the LEDs will be too dim, or they will blow out.
If this application requires the brightness to be controlled so carefully that the difference between 13.9 and 18 mA makes a difference, you should use a constant current LED driver instead of a simple resistive current limiter.
But in most applications, users won't notice the difference in brightness due to this kind of current change. So you just live with some brightness variability to save cost. Modern LEDs are visibly lit even with 1 mA forward current so whether at 13.9 or 18 mA they will be quite bright.
You could also reduce the variability by designing your resistive limiting circuit with more voltage overhead. Either use a higher voltage source (12 V maybe) and a larger resistor, or place 2 strings of 2 LEDs in parallel, so you have roughly 5 V overhead instead of just 1. The trade-off here is of course more power wasted in the resistors.
answered 2 days ago
The PhotonThe Photon
87.2k398203
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Well when using small # of LEDs in the series the closer the results get to what I’d have expected from the data sheet. Thanks for all of the input. Here and below.
$endgroup$
– CyF
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In this case the datasheet shows a typical Vf of 2.1v, the spice model seems to be using a Vf of 2.134v.
If your circuit works for $V_f$ of 2.1 V, but fails for 2.134 V, then you need to get a new circuit.
The forward voltage will vary due to manufacturing variations and junction temperature. And the variation will be more than 35 mV over realistic operating conditions.
Also, keep in mind that the datasheet value is for an ambient temperature of 25 C, while SPICE is probably (unless you've added an option to specify otherwise) simulating a junction temperature of 25 C. That means the datasheet value reflects a higher junction temperature than the SPICE model. And forward voltage does typically drop with increasing temperature so it's conceivable both models are correct.
Assuming a 9v source if I use a 33.3333ohm resistor (or resistor combination) based on the 2.1Vf of the datasheet I get a simulation result of 13.9mA instead of the expected 18mA. ... I'm asking since if I'm wrong either the LEDs will be too dim, or they will blow out.
If this application requires the brightness to be controlled so carefully that the difference between 13.9 and 18 mA makes a difference, you should use a constant current LED driver instead of a simple resistive current limiter.
But in most applications, users won't notice the difference in brightness due to this kind of current change. So you just live with some brightness variability to save cost. Modern LEDs are visibly lit even with 1 mA forward current so whether at 13.9 or 18 mA they will be quite bright.
You could also reduce the variability by designing your resistive limiting circuit with more voltage overhead. Either use a higher voltage source (12 V maybe) and a larger resistor, or place 2 strings of 2 LEDs in parallel, so you have roughly 5 V overhead instead of just 1. The trade-off here is of course more power wasted in the resistors.
answered 2 days ago
The PhotonThe Photon
87.2k398203
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Well when using small # of LEDs in the series the closer the results get to what I’d have expected from the data sheet. Thanks for all of the input. Here and below.
$endgroup$
– CyF
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In this case the datasheet shows a typical Vf of 2.1v, the spice model seems to be using a Vf of 2.134v.
If your circuit works for $V_f$ of 2.1 V, but fails for 2.134 V, then you need to get a new circuit.
The forward voltage will vary due to manufacturing variations and junction temperature. And the variation will be more than 35 mV over realistic operating conditions.
Also, keep in mind that the datasheet value is for an ambient temperature of 25 C, while SPICE is probably (unless you've added an option to specify otherwise) simulating a junction temperature of 25 C. That means the datasheet value reflects a higher junction temperature than the SPICE model. And forward voltage does typically drop with increasing temperature so it's conceivable both models are correct.
Assuming a 9v source if I use a 33.3333ohm resistor (or resistor combination) based on the 2.1Vf of the datasheet I get a simulation result of 13.9mA instead of the expected 18mA. ... I'm asking since if I'm wrong either the LEDs will be too dim, or they will blow out.
If this application requires the brightness to be controlled so carefully that the difference between 13.9 and 18 mA makes a difference, you should use a constant current LED driver instead of a simple resistive current limiter.
But in most applications, users won't notice the difference in brightness due to this kind of current change. So you just live with some brightness variability to save cost. Modern LEDs are visibly lit even with 1 mA forward current so whether at 13.9 or 18 mA they will be quite bright.
You could also reduce the variability by designing your resistive limiting circuit with more voltage overhead. Either use a higher voltage source (12 V maybe) and a larger resistor, or place 2 strings of 2 LEDs in parallel, so you have roughly 5 V overhead instead of just 1. The trade-off here is of course more power wasted in the resistors.
answered 2 days ago
The PhotonThe Photon
87.2k398203
$endgroup$
In this case the datasheet shows a typical Vf of 2.1v, the spice model seems to be using a Vf of 2.134v.
If your circuit works for $V_f$ of 2.1 V, but fails for 2.134 V, then you need to get a new circuit.
The forward voltage will vary due to manufacturing variations and junction temperature. And the variation will be more than 35 mV over realistic operating conditions.
Also, keep in mind that the datasheet value is for an ambient temperature of 25 C, while SPICE is probably (unless you've added an option to specify otherwise) simulating a junction temperature of 25 C. That means the datasheet value reflects a higher junction temperature than the SPICE model. And forward voltage does typically drop with increasing temperature so it's conceivable both models are correct.
Assuming a 9v source if I use a 33.3333ohm resistor (or resistor combination) based on the 2.1Vf of the datasheet I get a simulation result of 13.9mA instead of the expected 18mA. ... I'm asking since if I'm wrong either the LEDs will be too dim, or they will blow out.
If this application requires the brightness to be controlled so carefully that the difference between 13.9 and 18 mA makes a difference, you should use a constant current LED driver instead of a simple resistive current limiter.
But in most applications, users won't notice the difference in brightness due to this kind of current change. So you just live with some brightness variability to save cost. Modern LEDs are visibly lit even with 1 mA forward current so whether at 13.9 or 18 mA they will be quite bright.
You could also reduce the variability by designing your resistive limiting circuit with more voltage overhead. Either use a higher voltage source (12 V maybe) and a larger resistor, or place 2 strings of 2 LEDs in parallel, so you have roughly 5 V overhead instead of just 1. The trade-off here is of course more power wasted in the resistors.
answered 2 days ago
The PhotonThe Photon
87.2k398203
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
The PhotonThe Photon
87.2k398203
answered 2 days ago
The PhotonThe Photon
87.2k398203
answered 2 days ago
The PhotonThe Photon
87.2k398203
87.2k398203
$begingroup$
Well when using small # of LEDs in the series the closer the results get to what I’d have expected from the data sheet. Thanks for all of the input. Here and below.
$endgroup$
– CyF
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Well when using small # of LEDs in the series the closer the results get to what I’d have expected from the data sheet. Thanks for all of the input. Here and below.
$endgroup$
– CyF
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Well when using small # of LEDs in the series the closer the results get to what I’d have expected from the data sheet. Thanks for all of the input. Here and below.
$endgroup$
– CyF
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Well when using small # of LEDs in the series the closer the results get to what I’d have expected from the data sheet. Thanks for all of the input. Here and below.
$endgroup$
– CyF
2 days ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Electrical Engineering Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f431255%2fif-manufacturer-spice-model-and-datasheet-give-different-values-which-should-i-u%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
-datasheet, led, pspice, spice
$begingroup$
If a 1% parameter difference makes enough of a difference to care about, your design is probably not robust enough.
$endgroup$
– Scott Seidman
2 days ago