Other Parts Discussed in Thread: OPA695, , OPA698, TINA-TI
Hi,
http://e2e.ti.com/support/amplifiers/f/14/p/806538/2985972#2985972
This thread has been locked.
If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.
Hi,
Hi Hiroshi,
It is again hard to tell if the specs for OPA694 will apply to OPA695. You would need to actually test it to confirm. I believe that they should be similar in results but a test would have to be done to confirm.
If you look at the model macro for the OPA694 it mentions the following:
NOTES:
* 1- This macromodel predicts well: DC, small-signal AC,
* noise, and transient performance under a wide range
* of conditions
* 2- This macromodel does not predict well: distortion
* (harmonic, intermod, diff. gain & phase, ...),
* temperature effects, board parasitics, differences
* between package styles, and process changes
* 3- For Spice3F4 users they might need to un-comment the lines for the F
* function and comment out the Lines for PSpice F functions
* and subckts. First try the present netlist then comment out lines if
* errors appear.
* General form:
* FXXXXXXX N+ N- <POLY(ND)> VN1 <VN2 ...> P0 <P1 ...> <IC=...>
* Examples:
* F1 12 10 VCC 1MA 1.3M
* 4- For some simulators the subckt for the F statement need to be placed
* inside the ends statement followed by carriage return
But you mentioned you are modeling with TINA so there shouldn't be any problems. I tested the OPA694 myself in a gain of 1 and I didn't notice any problems. Can you provide me your TINA file? Did you download the model from the tools and software section of the product folder? This will make sure you have the newest model.
Thanks!
-Karan
Hi karan,
I understand about actual specs.
I downloaded the latest model from the product folder. This model worked fine.
Thank you.
Hiroshi