Benm
0
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2007
- Messages
- 7,896
- Points
- 113
A diode to protect against reverse polarity comes at signficant performance cost. The part itself is only a few cents, but it drops half a volt if it is a skottky diode, probably a full volt if it's an ordinary diode.
Half a volt may not sound that bad, but if your batteries run at 4 volts nominal it still wastes 15% of energy just for that protection.
There are considerably better ways to do this, like using mosfets to protect against reverse polarity. These are a bit more expensive and take up some more board space (at least 1 mosfet and 1 resistor), and still waste a few percent of power.
Another method is to use a fuse and 'crowbar' diode, which shorts reverse polarity so the fuse blows. This is only practical if your circuit already has a fuse for some other reason though, otherwise it's way too large for use in pointers.
So yes, there are good reasons to design drivers such that they get destroyed with reverse polarity, which have nothing to do with component cost.
Half a volt may not sound that bad, but if your batteries run at 4 volts nominal it still wastes 15% of energy just for that protection.
There are considerably better ways to do this, like using mosfets to protect against reverse polarity. These are a bit more expensive and take up some more board space (at least 1 mosfet and 1 resistor), and still waste a few percent of power.
Another method is to use a fuse and 'crowbar' diode, which shorts reverse polarity so the fuse blows. This is only practical if your circuit already has a fuse for some other reason though, otherwise it's way too large for use in pointers.
So yes, there are good reasons to design drivers such that they get destroyed with reverse polarity, which have nothing to do with component cost.