Why is the battery jumpered to a resistor in this schematic?Why doesn't the relocation of this resistor...
Why don't modern jet engines use forced exhaust mixing?
Playing a fast but quiet Alberti bass
From France west coast to Portugal via ship?
What are these protruding elements from SU-27's tail?
Number of matrices with bounded products of rows and columns
Are unaudited server logs admissible in a court of law?
Do living authors still get paid royalties for their old work?
Align (multiline text)-nodes with tikzlibrary 'positioning'
Why should I pay for an SSL certificate?
Can the front glass be repaired of a broken lens?
Unbiased estimator of exponential of measure of a set?
Eric Andre had a dream
How to use source_location in a variadic template function?
How do we test and determine if a USB cable+connector is version 2, 3.0 or 3.1?
Where is this New York City Broadway location from Fall 1958?
Quick destruction of a helium filled airship?
Control GPIO pins from C
What causes burn marks on the air handler in the attic?
Why doesn't mathematics collapse down, even though humans quite often make mistakes in their proofs?
Earliest evidence of objects intended for future archaeologists?
Check disk usage of files returned with spaces
Do predators tend to have vertical slit pupils versus horizontal for prey animals?
Why do balloons get cold when they deflate?
Why is the name Bergson pronounced like Berksonne?
Why is the battery jumpered to a resistor in this schematic?
Why doesn't the relocation of this resistor affect the circuit's total resistance?Purposely draining a battery by a resistorWhat is the role of resistor in this schematic?Why this current sensing resistor called “Wirewound”?What does this denote in the schematic?Why doesn't this battery explode?TC symbol on battery schematic
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
$begingroup$
I am looking at a schematic for the wifi D1 mini data logger shield that I'm using right now. In this part of the schematic, a coin cell battery powers the RTC. I see R5 is jumpered across the positive and negative terminals of the battery. I identified R5 to be 2MΩ, so it obviously isn't shorting the circuit. But that leaves the question, what is its purpose?
Note: There is a sideways 1 above the battery symbol that looks like a minus sign. Don't be fooled!
batteries resistors
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am looking at a schematic for the wifi D1 mini data logger shield that I'm using right now. In this part of the schematic, a coin cell battery powers the RTC. I see R5 is jumpered across the positive and negative terminals of the battery. I identified R5 to be 2MΩ, so it obviously isn't shorting the circuit. But that leaves the question, what is its purpose?
Note: There is a sideways 1 above the battery symbol that looks like a minus sign. Don't be fooled!
batteries resistors
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Nobody answered "planned obsolescence"?
$endgroup$
– Thomas Weller
11 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am looking at a schematic for the wifi D1 mini data logger shield that I'm using right now. In this part of the schematic, a coin cell battery powers the RTC. I see R5 is jumpered across the positive and negative terminals of the battery. I identified R5 to be 2MΩ, so it obviously isn't shorting the circuit. But that leaves the question, what is its purpose?
Note: There is a sideways 1 above the battery symbol that looks like a minus sign. Don't be fooled!
batteries resistors
$endgroup$
I am looking at a schematic for the wifi D1 mini data logger shield that I'm using right now. In this part of the schematic, a coin cell battery powers the RTC. I see R5 is jumpered across the positive and negative terminals of the battery. I identified R5 to be 2MΩ, so it obviously isn't shorting the circuit. But that leaves the question, what is its purpose?
Note: There is a sideways 1 above the battery symbol that looks like a minus sign. Don't be fooled!
batteries resistors
batteries resistors
edited Aug 16 at 0:20
Ryan
asked Aug 15 at 23:40
RyanRyan
2261 gold badge4 silver badges13 bronze badges
2261 gold badge4 silver badges13 bronze badges
$begingroup$
Nobody answered "planned obsolescence"?
$endgroup$
– Thomas Weller
11 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Nobody answered "planned obsolescence"?
$endgroup$
– Thomas Weller
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Nobody answered "planned obsolescence"?
$endgroup$
– Thomas Weller
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Nobody answered "planned obsolescence"?
$endgroup$
– Thomas Weller
11 hours ago
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I don't know what this shield looks like, but I'm going to guess that the battery is removable/replaceable. Is that the case?
Did it come with a battery, or was it up to you to provide it?
The DS1307 has a little quirk in that it requires that Vbat be grounded when there is no backup battery connected. R5 is meant to pull Vbat down to ground in the absence of a backup battery. Without that resistor, the DS1307 would not function correctly if one were to try and use it without a battery installed and powered via the ESP mainboard/VCC.
From the DS1307's data sheet:
If a backup supply is not required, VBAT must be grounded.
Now, is it a good solution to this requirement? ...Not really. For a 48mAh 3V cell, this will reduce the best possible backup time to 3 years, and the drain will occur even when the DS1307 is running off VCC.
However, I can definitely understand their reasoning. It's a shield, it is aimed at a fairly wide audience and they probably just made the decision that it would be better if the DS1307 worked in every possible usage case rather than keep time for a decade.
That said, as long as you aren't planning on using it without a backup battery installed, you can simply remove it and eliminate that source of drain on the battery.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Would a better solution not be an SPDT actuated by the battery's presence?
$endgroup$
– Adam Barnes
2 days ago
6
$begingroup$
@AdamBarnes: I would think it would be practical and useful to construct a socket that would short the contacts when no battery is inserted; such a design could eliminate the need for reset buttons on many products which could otherwise get into a perma-gitched state on a battery swap where VBatt fell enough to land them in a near-zero-current-draw perma-glitched state but not enough that installing a fresh battery would trigger a power-on reset.
$endgroup$
– supercat
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
Yes, but what does a resistor cost compared to a special batter holder, even if you ignore the cost of the engineering and testing time involved? "Better Wednesday than perfect."
$endgroup$
– mickeyf
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think R2 is there to cover the following case:
When Vcc falls below Vbat, the device switches into a low-current battery-backup mode.
If no battery is present, Vbat can pick up EMC noise if not grounded. Should that noise generate a voltage above Vcc, the IC may erroneously switch to battery-backed mode, and since there is no battery, data loss could occur.
If the use case is such that the battery is almost always present, and battery life is important, I would consider omitting such resistor. That is, unless the probability of the EMC glitch while the battery is being replaced is so high that you're ready to trade 90+% of the battery lifespan for the extra safety.
However, if the device is expected to run without battery, the resistor should be there. Battery life will be less important in such a case because it can be removed when not needed, while the probability of an EMC glitch will become significant.
Also note that the typical operation circuit from the datasheet doesn't include such a resistor. I assume this is because the "typical operation" is considered to be the case where the battery is only removed to be replaced with a new one.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Wouldn't a small capacitor work just as well for EMC noise? If it was more than a few microfarads, it would also keep the circuit alive when you changed the battery. I've seen (a few) battery-powered clocks that do this.
$endgroup$
– Thor Lancaster
yesterday
$begingroup$
@ThorLancaster Yes, that is entirely possible. Given that the word "shield" is used, an extra capacitor could've been deemed too expensive.
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Actually there is a need for the resistor. The datasheet states on page 6 that if the device is being powered by VCC, Vbat pin must be grounded.
If a backup supply is not required, VBAT must be grounded.
The resistor is placed in order to ground the Vbat pin when the battery is not used.
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That's bizarre. There is nothing in the DS1307 datasheet which suggests that any such resistor is required.
While 2 MΩ is a large resistance, it's still low enough that the current through the resistor (~1.5 µA) will be orders of magnitude higher than the data-retention current of the DS1307 (10 - 100 nA). This may significantly reduce the life of the battery; I'd advise removing the resistor.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Re read page 6, specifically the description of pin 3. This states it must be grounded in the absence of a battery,
$endgroup$
– Warren Hill
2 days ago
3
$begingroup$
@WarrenHill No, the spec says that Vbat must be grounded If a backup supply is not required, which I read as "the battery will never be there", not "the battery may be missing"
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I suspect this increases the decay speed when the battery is removed that is required for some reason. Low power consuming logic FET switches tend to draw a bit more micro power in the linear region and this RTC chip is known to be a good power miser such that when voltage is removed, it uses a capacitor as a power source from a separate pin. (Have you read the data-sheet yet?)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
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%2f453158%2fwhy-is-the-battery-jumpered-to-a-resistor-in-this-schematic%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I don't know what this shield looks like, but I'm going to guess that the battery is removable/replaceable. Is that the case?
Did it come with a battery, or was it up to you to provide it?
The DS1307 has a little quirk in that it requires that Vbat be grounded when there is no backup battery connected. R5 is meant to pull Vbat down to ground in the absence of a backup battery. Without that resistor, the DS1307 would not function correctly if one were to try and use it without a battery installed and powered via the ESP mainboard/VCC.
From the DS1307's data sheet:
If a backup supply is not required, VBAT must be grounded.
Now, is it a good solution to this requirement? ...Not really. For a 48mAh 3V cell, this will reduce the best possible backup time to 3 years, and the drain will occur even when the DS1307 is running off VCC.
However, I can definitely understand their reasoning. It's a shield, it is aimed at a fairly wide audience and they probably just made the decision that it would be better if the DS1307 worked in every possible usage case rather than keep time for a decade.
That said, as long as you aren't planning on using it without a backup battery installed, you can simply remove it and eliminate that source of drain on the battery.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Would a better solution not be an SPDT actuated by the battery's presence?
$endgroup$
– Adam Barnes
2 days ago
6
$begingroup$
@AdamBarnes: I would think it would be practical and useful to construct a socket that would short the contacts when no battery is inserted; such a design could eliminate the need for reset buttons on many products which could otherwise get into a perma-gitched state on a battery swap where VBatt fell enough to land them in a near-zero-current-draw perma-glitched state but not enough that installing a fresh battery would trigger a power-on reset.
$endgroup$
– supercat
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
Yes, but what does a resistor cost compared to a special batter holder, even if you ignore the cost of the engineering and testing time involved? "Better Wednesday than perfect."
$endgroup$
– mickeyf
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I don't know what this shield looks like, but I'm going to guess that the battery is removable/replaceable. Is that the case?
Did it come with a battery, or was it up to you to provide it?
The DS1307 has a little quirk in that it requires that Vbat be grounded when there is no backup battery connected. R5 is meant to pull Vbat down to ground in the absence of a backup battery. Without that resistor, the DS1307 would not function correctly if one were to try and use it without a battery installed and powered via the ESP mainboard/VCC.
From the DS1307's data sheet:
If a backup supply is not required, VBAT must be grounded.
Now, is it a good solution to this requirement? ...Not really. For a 48mAh 3V cell, this will reduce the best possible backup time to 3 years, and the drain will occur even when the DS1307 is running off VCC.
However, I can definitely understand their reasoning. It's a shield, it is aimed at a fairly wide audience and they probably just made the decision that it would be better if the DS1307 worked in every possible usage case rather than keep time for a decade.
That said, as long as you aren't planning on using it without a backup battery installed, you can simply remove it and eliminate that source of drain on the battery.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Would a better solution not be an SPDT actuated by the battery's presence?
$endgroup$
– Adam Barnes
2 days ago
6
$begingroup$
@AdamBarnes: I would think it would be practical and useful to construct a socket that would short the contacts when no battery is inserted; such a design could eliminate the need for reset buttons on many products which could otherwise get into a perma-gitched state on a battery swap where VBatt fell enough to land them in a near-zero-current-draw perma-glitched state but not enough that installing a fresh battery would trigger a power-on reset.
$endgroup$
– supercat
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
Yes, but what does a resistor cost compared to a special batter holder, even if you ignore the cost of the engineering and testing time involved? "Better Wednesday than perfect."
$endgroup$
– mickeyf
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I don't know what this shield looks like, but I'm going to guess that the battery is removable/replaceable. Is that the case?
Did it come with a battery, or was it up to you to provide it?
The DS1307 has a little quirk in that it requires that Vbat be grounded when there is no backup battery connected. R5 is meant to pull Vbat down to ground in the absence of a backup battery. Without that resistor, the DS1307 would not function correctly if one were to try and use it without a battery installed and powered via the ESP mainboard/VCC.
From the DS1307's data sheet:
If a backup supply is not required, VBAT must be grounded.
Now, is it a good solution to this requirement? ...Not really. For a 48mAh 3V cell, this will reduce the best possible backup time to 3 years, and the drain will occur even when the DS1307 is running off VCC.
However, I can definitely understand their reasoning. It's a shield, it is aimed at a fairly wide audience and they probably just made the decision that it would be better if the DS1307 worked in every possible usage case rather than keep time for a decade.
That said, as long as you aren't planning on using it without a backup battery installed, you can simply remove it and eliminate that source of drain on the battery.
$endgroup$
I don't know what this shield looks like, but I'm going to guess that the battery is removable/replaceable. Is that the case?
Did it come with a battery, or was it up to you to provide it?
The DS1307 has a little quirk in that it requires that Vbat be grounded when there is no backup battery connected. R5 is meant to pull Vbat down to ground in the absence of a backup battery. Without that resistor, the DS1307 would not function correctly if one were to try and use it without a battery installed and powered via the ESP mainboard/VCC.
From the DS1307's data sheet:
If a backup supply is not required, VBAT must be grounded.
Now, is it a good solution to this requirement? ...Not really. For a 48mAh 3V cell, this will reduce the best possible backup time to 3 years, and the drain will occur even when the DS1307 is running off VCC.
However, I can definitely understand their reasoning. It's a shield, it is aimed at a fairly wide audience and they probably just made the decision that it would be better if the DS1307 worked in every possible usage case rather than keep time for a decade.
That said, as long as you aren't planning on using it without a backup battery installed, you can simply remove it and eliminate that source of drain on the battery.
answered Aug 16 at 0:20
metacollinmetacollin
16.8k3 gold badges39 silver badges71 bronze badges
16.8k3 gold badges39 silver badges71 bronze badges
2
$begingroup$
Would a better solution not be an SPDT actuated by the battery's presence?
$endgroup$
– Adam Barnes
2 days ago
6
$begingroup$
@AdamBarnes: I would think it would be practical and useful to construct a socket that would short the contacts when no battery is inserted; such a design could eliminate the need for reset buttons on many products which could otherwise get into a perma-gitched state on a battery swap where VBatt fell enough to land them in a near-zero-current-draw perma-glitched state but not enough that installing a fresh battery would trigger a power-on reset.
$endgroup$
– supercat
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
Yes, but what does a resistor cost compared to a special batter holder, even if you ignore the cost of the engineering and testing time involved? "Better Wednesday than perfect."
$endgroup$
– mickeyf
2 days ago
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
Would a better solution not be an SPDT actuated by the battery's presence?
$endgroup$
– Adam Barnes
2 days ago
6
$begingroup$
@AdamBarnes: I would think it would be practical and useful to construct a socket that would short the contacts when no battery is inserted; such a design could eliminate the need for reset buttons on many products which could otherwise get into a perma-gitched state on a battery swap where VBatt fell enough to land them in a near-zero-current-draw perma-glitched state but not enough that installing a fresh battery would trigger a power-on reset.
$endgroup$
– supercat
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
Yes, but what does a resistor cost compared to a special batter holder, even if you ignore the cost of the engineering and testing time involved? "Better Wednesday than perfect."
$endgroup$
– mickeyf
2 days ago
2
2
$begingroup$
Would a better solution not be an SPDT actuated by the battery's presence?
$endgroup$
– Adam Barnes
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Would a better solution not be an SPDT actuated by the battery's presence?
$endgroup$
– Adam Barnes
2 days ago
6
6
$begingroup$
@AdamBarnes: I would think it would be practical and useful to construct a socket that would short the contacts when no battery is inserted; such a design could eliminate the need for reset buttons on many products which could otherwise get into a perma-gitched state on a battery swap where VBatt fell enough to land them in a near-zero-current-draw perma-glitched state but not enough that installing a fresh battery would trigger a power-on reset.
$endgroup$
– supercat
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@AdamBarnes: I would think it would be practical and useful to construct a socket that would short the contacts when no battery is inserted; such a design could eliminate the need for reset buttons on many products which could otherwise get into a perma-gitched state on a battery swap where VBatt fell enough to land them in a near-zero-current-draw perma-glitched state but not enough that installing a fresh battery would trigger a power-on reset.
$endgroup$
– supercat
2 days ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Yes, but what does a resistor cost compared to a special batter holder, even if you ignore the cost of the engineering and testing time involved? "Better Wednesday than perfect."
$endgroup$
– mickeyf
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Yes, but what does a resistor cost compared to a special batter holder, even if you ignore the cost of the engineering and testing time involved? "Better Wednesday than perfect."
$endgroup$
– mickeyf
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think R2 is there to cover the following case:
When Vcc falls below Vbat, the device switches into a low-current battery-backup mode.
If no battery is present, Vbat can pick up EMC noise if not grounded. Should that noise generate a voltage above Vcc, the IC may erroneously switch to battery-backed mode, and since there is no battery, data loss could occur.
If the use case is such that the battery is almost always present, and battery life is important, I would consider omitting such resistor. That is, unless the probability of the EMC glitch while the battery is being replaced is so high that you're ready to trade 90+% of the battery lifespan for the extra safety.
However, if the device is expected to run without battery, the resistor should be there. Battery life will be less important in such a case because it can be removed when not needed, while the probability of an EMC glitch will become significant.
Also note that the typical operation circuit from the datasheet doesn't include such a resistor. I assume this is because the "typical operation" is considered to be the case where the battery is only removed to be replaced with a new one.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Wouldn't a small capacitor work just as well for EMC noise? If it was more than a few microfarads, it would also keep the circuit alive when you changed the battery. I've seen (a few) battery-powered clocks that do this.
$endgroup$
– Thor Lancaster
yesterday
$begingroup$
@ThorLancaster Yes, that is entirely possible. Given that the word "shield" is used, an extra capacitor could've been deemed too expensive.
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think R2 is there to cover the following case:
When Vcc falls below Vbat, the device switches into a low-current battery-backup mode.
If no battery is present, Vbat can pick up EMC noise if not grounded. Should that noise generate a voltage above Vcc, the IC may erroneously switch to battery-backed mode, and since there is no battery, data loss could occur.
If the use case is such that the battery is almost always present, and battery life is important, I would consider omitting such resistor. That is, unless the probability of the EMC glitch while the battery is being replaced is so high that you're ready to trade 90+% of the battery lifespan for the extra safety.
However, if the device is expected to run without battery, the resistor should be there. Battery life will be less important in such a case because it can be removed when not needed, while the probability of an EMC glitch will become significant.
Also note that the typical operation circuit from the datasheet doesn't include such a resistor. I assume this is because the "typical operation" is considered to be the case where the battery is only removed to be replaced with a new one.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Wouldn't a small capacitor work just as well for EMC noise? If it was more than a few microfarads, it would also keep the circuit alive when you changed the battery. I've seen (a few) battery-powered clocks that do this.
$endgroup$
– Thor Lancaster
yesterday
$begingroup$
@ThorLancaster Yes, that is entirely possible. Given that the word "shield" is used, an extra capacitor could've been deemed too expensive.
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think R2 is there to cover the following case:
When Vcc falls below Vbat, the device switches into a low-current battery-backup mode.
If no battery is present, Vbat can pick up EMC noise if not grounded. Should that noise generate a voltage above Vcc, the IC may erroneously switch to battery-backed mode, and since there is no battery, data loss could occur.
If the use case is such that the battery is almost always present, and battery life is important, I would consider omitting such resistor. That is, unless the probability of the EMC glitch while the battery is being replaced is so high that you're ready to trade 90+% of the battery lifespan for the extra safety.
However, if the device is expected to run without battery, the resistor should be there. Battery life will be less important in such a case because it can be removed when not needed, while the probability of an EMC glitch will become significant.
Also note that the typical operation circuit from the datasheet doesn't include such a resistor. I assume this is because the "typical operation" is considered to be the case where the battery is only removed to be replaced with a new one.
$endgroup$
I think R2 is there to cover the following case:
When Vcc falls below Vbat, the device switches into a low-current battery-backup mode.
If no battery is present, Vbat can pick up EMC noise if not grounded. Should that noise generate a voltage above Vcc, the IC may erroneously switch to battery-backed mode, and since there is no battery, data loss could occur.
If the use case is such that the battery is almost always present, and battery life is important, I would consider omitting such resistor. That is, unless the probability of the EMC glitch while the battery is being replaced is so high that you're ready to trade 90+% of the battery lifespan for the extra safety.
However, if the device is expected to run without battery, the resistor should be there. Battery life will be less important in such a case because it can be removed when not needed, while the probability of an EMC glitch will become significant.
Also note that the typical operation circuit from the datasheet doesn't include such a resistor. I assume this is because the "typical operation" is considered to be the case where the battery is only removed to be replaced with a new one.
answered 2 days ago
Dmitry GrigoryevDmitry Grigoryev
19.5k2 gold badges30 silver badges78 bronze badges
19.5k2 gold badges30 silver badges78 bronze badges
2
$begingroup$
Wouldn't a small capacitor work just as well for EMC noise? If it was more than a few microfarads, it would also keep the circuit alive when you changed the battery. I've seen (a few) battery-powered clocks that do this.
$endgroup$
– Thor Lancaster
yesterday
$begingroup$
@ThorLancaster Yes, that is entirely possible. Given that the word "shield" is used, an extra capacitor could've been deemed too expensive.
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
4 hours ago
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
Wouldn't a small capacitor work just as well for EMC noise? If it was more than a few microfarads, it would also keep the circuit alive when you changed the battery. I've seen (a few) battery-powered clocks that do this.
$endgroup$
– Thor Lancaster
yesterday
$begingroup$
@ThorLancaster Yes, that is entirely possible. Given that the word "shield" is used, an extra capacitor could've been deemed too expensive.
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
4 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
Wouldn't a small capacitor work just as well for EMC noise? If it was more than a few microfarads, it would also keep the circuit alive when you changed the battery. I've seen (a few) battery-powered clocks that do this.
$endgroup$
– Thor Lancaster
yesterday
$begingroup$
Wouldn't a small capacitor work just as well for EMC noise? If it was more than a few microfarads, it would also keep the circuit alive when you changed the battery. I've seen (a few) battery-powered clocks that do this.
$endgroup$
– Thor Lancaster
yesterday
$begingroup$
@ThorLancaster Yes, that is entirely possible. Given that the word "shield" is used, an extra capacitor could've been deemed too expensive.
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ThorLancaster Yes, that is entirely possible. Given that the word "shield" is used, an extra capacitor could've been deemed too expensive.
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Actually there is a need for the resistor. The datasheet states on page 6 that if the device is being powered by VCC, Vbat pin must be grounded.
If a backup supply is not required, VBAT must be grounded.
The resistor is placed in order to ground the Vbat pin when the battery is not used.
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Actually there is a need for the resistor. The datasheet states on page 6 that if the device is being powered by VCC, Vbat pin must be grounded.
If a backup supply is not required, VBAT must be grounded.
The resistor is placed in order to ground the Vbat pin when the battery is not used.
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Actually there is a need for the resistor. The datasheet states on page 6 that if the device is being powered by VCC, Vbat pin must be grounded.
If a backup supply is not required, VBAT must be grounded.
The resistor is placed in order to ground the Vbat pin when the battery is not used.
New contributor
$endgroup$
Actually there is a need for the resistor. The datasheet states on page 6 that if the device is being powered by VCC, Vbat pin must be grounded.
If a backup supply is not required, VBAT must be grounded.
The resistor is placed in order to ground the Vbat pin when the battery is not used.
New contributor
New contributor
answered Aug 16 at 0:06
Marco Tulio SouzaMarco Tulio Souza
491 bronze badge
491 bronze badge
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That's bizarre. There is nothing in the DS1307 datasheet which suggests that any such resistor is required.
While 2 MΩ is a large resistance, it's still low enough that the current through the resistor (~1.5 µA) will be orders of magnitude higher than the data-retention current of the DS1307 (10 - 100 nA). This may significantly reduce the life of the battery; I'd advise removing the resistor.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Re read page 6, specifically the description of pin 3. This states it must be grounded in the absence of a battery,
$endgroup$
– Warren Hill
2 days ago
3
$begingroup$
@WarrenHill No, the spec says that Vbat must be grounded If a backup supply is not required, which I read as "the battery will never be there", not "the battery may be missing"
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That's bizarre. There is nothing in the DS1307 datasheet which suggests that any such resistor is required.
While 2 MΩ is a large resistance, it's still low enough that the current through the resistor (~1.5 µA) will be orders of magnitude higher than the data-retention current of the DS1307 (10 - 100 nA). This may significantly reduce the life of the battery; I'd advise removing the resistor.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Re read page 6, specifically the description of pin 3. This states it must be grounded in the absence of a battery,
$endgroup$
– Warren Hill
2 days ago
3
$begingroup$
@WarrenHill No, the spec says that Vbat must be grounded If a backup supply is not required, which I read as "the battery will never be there", not "the battery may be missing"
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That's bizarre. There is nothing in the DS1307 datasheet which suggests that any such resistor is required.
While 2 MΩ is a large resistance, it's still low enough that the current through the resistor (~1.5 µA) will be orders of magnitude higher than the data-retention current of the DS1307 (10 - 100 nA). This may significantly reduce the life of the battery; I'd advise removing the resistor.
$endgroup$
That's bizarre. There is nothing in the DS1307 datasheet which suggests that any such resistor is required.
While 2 MΩ is a large resistance, it's still low enough that the current through the resistor (~1.5 µA) will be orders of magnitude higher than the data-retention current of the DS1307 (10 - 100 nA). This may significantly reduce the life of the battery; I'd advise removing the resistor.
answered Aug 15 at 23:55
duskwuffduskwuff
20k3 gold badges31 silver badges59 bronze badges
20k3 gold badges31 silver badges59 bronze badges
$begingroup$
Re read page 6, specifically the description of pin 3. This states it must be grounded in the absence of a battery,
$endgroup$
– Warren Hill
2 days ago
3
$begingroup$
@WarrenHill No, the spec says that Vbat must be grounded If a backup supply is not required, which I read as "the battery will never be there", not "the battery may be missing"
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Re read page 6, specifically the description of pin 3. This states it must be grounded in the absence of a battery,
$endgroup$
– Warren Hill
2 days ago
3
$begingroup$
@WarrenHill No, the spec says that Vbat must be grounded If a backup supply is not required, which I read as "the battery will never be there", not "the battery may be missing"
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Re read page 6, specifically the description of pin 3. This states it must be grounded in the absence of a battery,
$endgroup$
– Warren Hill
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Re read page 6, specifically the description of pin 3. This states it must be grounded in the absence of a battery,
$endgroup$
– Warren Hill
2 days ago
3
3
$begingroup$
@WarrenHill No, the spec says that Vbat must be grounded If a backup supply is not required, which I read as "the battery will never be there", not "the battery may be missing"
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@WarrenHill No, the spec says that Vbat must be grounded If a backup supply is not required, which I read as "the battery will never be there", not "the battery may be missing"
$endgroup$
– Dmitry Grigoryev
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I suspect this increases the decay speed when the battery is removed that is required for some reason. Low power consuming logic FET switches tend to draw a bit more micro power in the linear region and this RTC chip is known to be a good power miser such that when voltage is removed, it uses a capacitor as a power source from a separate pin. (Have you read the data-sheet yet?)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I suspect this increases the decay speed when the battery is removed that is required for some reason. Low power consuming logic FET switches tend to draw a bit more micro power in the linear region and this RTC chip is known to be a good power miser such that when voltage is removed, it uses a capacitor as a power source from a separate pin. (Have you read the data-sheet yet?)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I suspect this increases the decay speed when the battery is removed that is required for some reason. Low power consuming logic FET switches tend to draw a bit more micro power in the linear region and this RTC chip is known to be a good power miser such that when voltage is removed, it uses a capacitor as a power source from a separate pin. (Have you read the data-sheet yet?)
$endgroup$
I suspect this increases the decay speed when the battery is removed that is required for some reason. Low power consuming logic FET switches tend to draw a bit more micro power in the linear region and this RTC chip is known to be a good power miser such that when voltage is removed, it uses a capacitor as a power source from a separate pin. (Have you read the data-sheet yet?)
answered 2 days ago
Sunnyskyguy EE75Sunnyskyguy EE75
80.1k2 gold badges30 silver badges116 bronze badges
80.1k2 gold badges30 silver badges116 bronze badges
add a comment |
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%2f453158%2fwhy-is-the-battery-jumpered-to-a-resistor-in-this-schematic%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
$begingroup$
Nobody answered "planned obsolescence"?
$endgroup$
– Thomas Weller
11 hours ago