Skip to main content
Commonmark migration
Source Link

I want to create an adjustable µA Constant Current source using a LM317. It is typically stated to have a 5mA to 10mA minimum current for proper regulation. The On-Semi version linked above shows a graph where this actually depends on the Vin-Vout differential. Even then, I'm looking at 2mA minimum, which is higher than the 0.1mA I am looking for. While looking at circuits of a typical regulator constant current source, I came up with an idea, and am not sure if it will work properly or not.

enter image description here

Since the circuit depends on Iout being shared in a series circuit, and only cares that voltage drop across R1 equals Vref (1.25V), wouldn't a second circuit, parallel to R1, allow for a greater total current draw, but still allow for voltage regulation dependent on R1? My idea (Note: RRef would be an adjustable trim pot, 12.5k just a reference value for now):

schematic

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

Since total Vout should be VRef + Vload, then Vout / RDummy = IDummy (For VOut 3~9 Volts, that's 10~27mA). The Led Load part should still only get 0.1mA (plus another 0.1mA from IAdj, this is okay) as desired.

##Is there any reason this would not work?##

Is there any reason this would not work?

I'm assuming if it will, then by paralleling the R2 and Led on a third circuit, that I can avoid the IAdj current as well?

I want to create an adjustable µA Constant Current source using a LM317. It is typically stated to have a 5mA to 10mA minimum current for proper regulation. The On-Semi version linked above shows a graph where this actually depends on the Vin-Vout differential. Even then, I'm looking at 2mA minimum, which is higher than the 0.1mA I am looking for. While looking at circuits of a typical regulator constant current source, I came up with an idea, and am not sure if it will work properly or not.

enter image description here

Since the circuit depends on Iout being shared in a series circuit, and only cares that voltage drop across R1 equals Vref (1.25V), wouldn't a second circuit, parallel to R1, allow for a greater total current draw, but still allow for voltage regulation dependent on R1? My idea (Note: RRef would be an adjustable trim pot, 12.5k just a reference value for now):

schematic

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

Since total Vout should be VRef + Vload, then Vout / RDummy = IDummy (For VOut 3~9 Volts, that's 10~27mA). The Led Load part should still only get 0.1mA (plus another 0.1mA from IAdj, this is okay) as desired.

##Is there any reason this would not work?##

I'm assuming if it will, then by paralleling the R2 and Led on a third circuit, that I can avoid the IAdj current as well?

I want to create an adjustable µA Constant Current source using a LM317. It is typically stated to have a 5mA to 10mA minimum current for proper regulation. The On-Semi version linked above shows a graph where this actually depends on the Vin-Vout differential. Even then, I'm looking at 2mA minimum, which is higher than the 0.1mA I am looking for. While looking at circuits of a typical regulator constant current source, I came up with an idea, and am not sure if it will work properly or not.

enter image description here

Since the circuit depends on Iout being shared in a series circuit, and only cares that voltage drop across R1 equals Vref (1.25V), wouldn't a second circuit, parallel to R1, allow for a greater total current draw, but still allow for voltage regulation dependent on R1? My idea (Note: RRef would be an adjustable trim pot, 12.5k just a reference value for now):

schematic

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

Since total Vout should be VRef + Vload, then Vout / RDummy = IDummy (For VOut 3~9 Volts, that's 10~27mA). The Led Load part should still only get 0.1mA (plus another 0.1mA from IAdj, this is okay) as desired.

Is there any reason this would not work?

I'm assuming if it will, then by paralleling the R2 and Led on a third circuit, that I can avoid the IAdj current as well?

Notice removed Reward existing answer by Passerby
Bounty Ended with Spehro 'speff' Pefhany's answer chosen by Passerby
Notice added Reward existing answer by Passerby
Bounty Started worth 100 reputation by Passerby
Notice removed Reward existing answer by Warren Young
Bounty Ended with Spehro 'speff' Pefhany's answer chosen by Warren Young
Tweeted twitter.com/StackElectronix/status/688499628325629952
deleted 266 characters in body
Source Link
Passerby
  • 74k
  • 7
  • 97
  • 214

I want to create an adjustable µA Constant Current source using a LM317. It is typically stated to have a 5mA to 10mA minimum current for proper regulation. The On-Semi version linked above shows a graph where this actually depends on the Vin-Vout differential. Even then, I'm looking at 2mA minimum, which is higher than the 0.1mA I am looking for. While looking at circuits of a typical regulator constant current source, I came up with an idea, and am not sure if it will work properly or not.

enter image description here

Since the circuit depends on Iout being shared in a series circuit, and only cares that voltage drop across R1 equals Vref (1.25V), wouldn't a second circuit, parallel to R1, allow for a greater total current draw, but still allow for voltage regulation dependent on R1? My idea (Note: RRef would be an adjustable trim pot, 12.5k just a reference value for now):

schematic

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

Since total Vout should be VRef + Vload, then Vout / RDummy = IDummy (For VOut 3~9 Volts, that's 10~27mA). The Led Load part should still only get 0.1mA (plus another 0.1mA from IAdj, this is okay) as desired.

##Is there any reason this would not work?##

I'm assuming if it will, then by paralleling the R2 and Led on a third circuit, that I can avoid the IAdj current as well?

schematic

simulate this circuit

I want to create an adjustable µA Constant Current source using a LM317. It is typically stated to have a 5mA to 10mA minimum current for proper regulation. The On-Semi version linked above shows a graph where this actually depends on the Vin-Vout differential. Even then, I'm looking at 2mA minimum, which is higher than the 0.1mA I am looking for. While looking at circuits of a typical regulator constant current source, I came up with an idea, and am not sure if it will work properly or not.

enter image description here

Since the circuit depends on Iout being shared in a series circuit, and only cares that voltage drop across R1 equals Vref (1.25V), wouldn't a second circuit, parallel to R1, allow for a greater total current draw, but still allow for voltage regulation dependent on R1? My idea (Note: RRef would be an adjustable trim pot, 12.5k just a reference value for now):

schematic

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

Since total Vout should be VRef + Vload, then Vout / RDummy = IDummy (For VOut 3~9 Volts, that's 10~27mA). The Led Load part should still only get 0.1mA (plus another 0.1mA from IAdj, this is okay) as desired.

##Is there any reason this would not work?##

I'm assuming if it will, then by paralleling the R2 and Led on a third circuit, that I can avoid the IAdj current as well?

schematic

simulate this circuit

I want to create an adjustable µA Constant Current source using a LM317. It is typically stated to have a 5mA to 10mA minimum current for proper regulation. The On-Semi version linked above shows a graph where this actually depends on the Vin-Vout differential. Even then, I'm looking at 2mA minimum, which is higher than the 0.1mA I am looking for. While looking at circuits of a typical regulator constant current source, I came up with an idea, and am not sure if it will work properly or not.

enter image description here

Since the circuit depends on Iout being shared in a series circuit, and only cares that voltage drop across R1 equals Vref (1.25V), wouldn't a second circuit, parallel to R1, allow for a greater total current draw, but still allow for voltage regulation dependent on R1? My idea (Note: RRef would be an adjustable trim pot, 12.5k just a reference value for now):

schematic

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

Since total Vout should be VRef + Vload, then Vout / RDummy = IDummy (For VOut 3~9 Volts, that's 10~27mA). The Led Load part should still only get 0.1mA (plus another 0.1mA from IAdj, this is okay) as desired.

##Is there any reason this would not work?##

I'm assuming if it will, then by paralleling the R2 and Led on a third circuit, that I can avoid the IAdj current as well?

Notice added Reward existing answer by Warren Young
Bounty Started worth 50 reputation by Warren Young
added 103 characters in body
Source Link
Passerby
  • 74k
  • 7
  • 97
  • 214

I want to create aan adjustable µA Constant Current source using a LM317. It is typically stated to have a 5mA to 10mA minimum current for proper regulation. The On-Semi version linked above shows a graph where this actually depends on the Vin-Vout differential. Even then, I'm looking at 2mA minimum, which is higher than the 0.1mA I am looking for. While looking at circuits of a typical regulator constant current source, I came up with an idea, and am not sure if it will work properly or not.

enter image description here

Since the circuit depends on Iout being shared in a series circuit, and only cares that voltage drop across R1 equals Vref (1.25V), wouldn't a second circuit, parallel to R1, allow for a greater total current draw, but still allow for voltage regulation dependent on R1? My idea (Note: RRef would be an adjustable trim pot, 12.5k just a reference value for now):

schematicschematic

simulate this circuitsimulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

Since total Vout should be VRef + Vload, then Vout / RDummy = IDummy (For VOut 3~9 Volts, that's 10~27mA). The Led Load part should still only get 0.1mA (plus another 0.1mA from IAdj, this is okay) as desired.

##Is there any reason this would not work?##

I'm assuming if it will, then by paralleling the R2 and Led on a third circuit, that I can avoid the IAdj current as well?

schematic

simulate this circuit

I want to create a µA Constant Current source using a LM317. It is typically stated to have a 5mA to 10mA minimum current for proper regulation. The On-Semi version linked above shows a graph where this actually depends on the Vin-Vout differential. Even then, I'm looking at 2mA minimum, which is higher than the 0.1mA I am looking for. While looking at circuits of a typical regulator constant current source, I came up with an idea, and am not sure if it will work properly or not.

enter image description here

Since the circuit depends on Iout being shared in a series circuit, and only cares that voltage drop across R1 equals Vref (1.25V), wouldn't a second circuit, parallel to R1, allow for a greater total current draw, but still allow for voltage regulation dependent on R1? My idea:

schematic

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

Since total Vout should be VRef + Vload, then Vout / RDummy = IDummy (For VOut 3~9 Volts, that's 10~27mA). The Led Load part should still only get 0.1mA (plus another 0.1mA from IAdj, this is okay) as desired.

##Is there any reason this would not work?##

I'm assuming if it will, then by paralleling the R2 and Led on a third circuit, that I can avoid the IAdj current as well?

schematic

simulate this circuit

I want to create an adjustable µA Constant Current source using a LM317. It is typically stated to have a 5mA to 10mA minimum current for proper regulation. The On-Semi version linked above shows a graph where this actually depends on the Vin-Vout differential. Even then, I'm looking at 2mA minimum, which is higher than the 0.1mA I am looking for. While looking at circuits of a typical regulator constant current source, I came up with an idea, and am not sure if it will work properly or not.

enter image description here

Since the circuit depends on Iout being shared in a series circuit, and only cares that voltage drop across R1 equals Vref (1.25V), wouldn't a second circuit, parallel to R1, allow for a greater total current draw, but still allow for voltage regulation dependent on R1? My idea (Note: RRef would be an adjustable trim pot, 12.5k just a reference value for now):

schematic

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

Since total Vout should be VRef + Vload, then Vout / RDummy = IDummy (For VOut 3~9 Volts, that's 10~27mA). The Led Load part should still only get 0.1mA (plus another 0.1mA from IAdj, this is okay) as desired.

##Is there any reason this would not work?##

I'm assuming if it will, then by paralleling the R2 and Led on a third circuit, that I can avoid the IAdj current as well?

schematic

simulate this circuit

added 221 characters in body
Source Link
Passerby
  • 74k
  • 7
  • 97
  • 214
Loading
Source Link
Passerby
  • 74k
  • 7
  • 97
  • 214
Loading