Yes - your graph`s show the expected behaviour. Any question?
For evaluation of the results you need to say where the mentioned resistor and the diodes are located.
You can normally do a number of runs on most simulators by stepping a selected value between two limits. These results can then be overlay-ed for comparison. See example.
Yes - that`s what I have expected.
Nominal design: 20k (gain of 3)
Practical value: 21k or 22k (gain of 3.1 or 3.2).
In case of both practical values (necessary for a safe start-up of oscillations) the gain is larger than required by the classical Barkhausen condition.
As a consequence, the amplitude is rising until clipping occurs (voltage rail). This results in a bad signal form.
It is a normal and expected behaviour that the time for the amploitude to reach the final value is inversely proportional to the gain excess (3+0.1 or 3+0.2).
This is because the real part of the pole in the RHP is prop. to this gain excess.
Two anti-parallel diodes across this resistor provide amplitude-controlled "soft-limiting" to the gain of 3 with a rather good sinusoidal form (good THD).
A low distortion Wien Bridge oscillator has a thermistor (incandescent light bulb) or a Jfet in the negative feedback loop to provide an output level a little less than clipping level.
Actually the Op Amps clip the sine wave from linear feedback in 1&2
In 3, the diodes increase the feedback and thus reduce the gain to soften the limiting and prevent clipping which is preferred.
Hello all of you,
I have observed that if I remove the parallel capacitor of the Wien Bridge Oscillator I have a nice astable mutivibrator.
All the best
ERIK
[email address deleted by moderator]