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.

INA105: Non more accurate instrumentation amplifier by using non balanced dual supply

Part Number: INA105
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: INA106, INA131,

Hello,

becomes an instrumentation amplifier (e.g. INA105, INA106, INA131) less accurate, if its dual supply voltage is not balanced (e.g., + - 5V; but e.g. with + 8V and -5V)?

Best regards,

SB

  • Hi Soenke,

    unless the datasheet tells something different, this is no issue usually. Provided, of course, the circuit is designed properly.

    You can easily estimate the additional error by looking at the DC values of CMRR and PSRR specified in the datasheet.

    Kai
  • Hi Soenke,

    To add to Kai's response regarding PSRR and CMRR affecting the instrumentation amp, unbalanced supplies will affect output swing (including the swing of amplifiers inside the instrumentation amplifier) which may affect your application. We offer a calculator, available here, which will plot the available output swing of a number of our instrumentation amplifiers under various supply voltages, gains, and common mode voltages.

  • Agree with Kai. As long as you are operating inside of the datasheet parameters relative to the powers supplies, asymmetrical power supplies do not matter. For op amp (much is similar for INA) material to make you an op amp expert consider:
    training.ti.com/ti-precision-labs-op-amps
    In addition anytime you use an instrumentation amplifier there are several design considerations base don internal op amp node limitations. To get the design right the first time consider using the Instrumentation Amplifier Common Mode Voltage calculator downloadable at this link:
    www.ti.com/.../INA-CMV-CALC
  • Soenke

    We haven't heard back from you so we assume this answered your question. If you need additional help just post another reply below.

    Thanks
    Dennis