Concept

Marching — where it appears

Solving a network forward in time by replacing each reactive element with a discrete companion and solving the resulting resistive network at every step. It answers questions no steady state contains, and its own error is a property of the step size that has to be measured rather than assumed.

Named by 28 essays across 9 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Three capacitances, all correct: 2.000 µF, 5.814 µF and 2.105 µF at 5 V. computed by solving, not by drawing. The charge is C∞·v + Q_s·tanh(v/V_k) — a linear backbone and a polarisation that saturates — with both parameters pinned by the capacitance at zero volts and at the rated voltage, so there is no third degree of freedom to tune the answer with. The three curves are three questions. The small-signal value is the slope at the bias, which is what a ripple sees. The charge-average is the total charge moved from zero divided by the voltage, which is what a reservoir or a hold capacitor obeys. What a bridge reads is neither: it is the fundamental of the charge waveform under a one-volt test, which is a measurement condition. At 5 V they are 2.000 µF, 5.814 µF and 2.105 µF — a factor of 2.91 between the extremes, and every one of them is the capacitance.

The capacitance that is not one number

A ten-microfarad ceramic at its rated five volts is 2.000 µF as a slope, 5.814 µF as a charge average and 2.105 µF as a bridge reads it — three answers to three different questions, all correct, all called the capacitance. At zero bias the standard one-volt test alone reads 5.2 per cent low. Marched in a circuit the same part distorts as the square of the drive with no bias and in proportion to it with a bias, because the bias is what puts a second harmonic there.

frequency · Real capacitor
Twenty nanoseconds of skew is 0.28% of duty, not 0.40. computed by solving, not by drawing. The duty cycle of a relaxation oscillator whose comparator takes longer to go one way than the other, marched, against the expression that lengthens each half cycle by its own delay. The two part company immediately and by a constant factor of about 1.42: during a delay the capacitor keeps charging past the threshold it already crossed, so the next half cycle starts further out and takes longer, and the two halves partly cancel. At 200 ns of skew on a 2585 ns period the duty is 52.805 per cent where the expression says 54.004. The open circles are the same quantity in closed form — the overshoot is V(1 − (1 − β)e^(−d/τ)) and the next half starts from it — which the march reproduces to parts in ten thousand.

The delay that is two delays

Modelling one comparator delay applied to both transitions makes the two half cycles equal by construction, and the fix is a change of one line. Made, the duty cycle moves by 0.28 per cent for twenty nanoseconds of skew rather than the 0.40 the obvious expression gives, more hysteresis improves the duty cycle and worsens the volt-seconds at the same time, and ten nanoseconds of skew saturates a hundred-turn core in 231 cycles.

applied · Hysteresis
The frequency at which a pulse train becomes an average. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same 5 watts of average dissipation at every frequency, delivered 2 per cent at a time. The flat line is the steady-state answer, which does not know about the frequency. The falling curve is the marched peak junction temperature, which does. They meet at 308 Hz, and that frequency is not a property of the converter: it is a fraction of one junction time constant per period — f·τ = 0.738 at this duty, with τ = 2.40 ms, and between 0.78 and 0.56 across the duties on the slider. A hundred-kilohertz converter fits 240 periods inside that time constant, and at the top of the sweep — 10.0 kHz — the steady state is already exact to 0.46 per cent, so the averaged-power fixed point is right and this is the measurement that says why. The march puts 48 steps inside each pulse, which is what the answer is sensitive to: at six it put the boundary 19 per cent too high.

The pulse the heatsink does not feel

A thermal resistance iterated to a fixed point with a diode or a switch is a statement about a power — so it assumes that a hundred and fifty watts for two per cent of the time is three watts. The die's own heat capacity decides whether that is true, and it decides it at a frequency: above 308 hertz the junction integrates, by a hundred kilohertz the fixed point is exact to five parts in ten thousand, and at one hertz the same average power on the same heatsink puts the junction three hundred kelvin hotter.

transients · Reverse recovery
The charge that comes back: a 0.2% dielectric, 10 s shorted, read at 900 s. computed by solving, not by drawing. The capacitor is charged to 10 V until every relaxation is complete, shorted for 10 seconds, then opened and watched. It climbs back to 20.00 millivolts — 0.2000 per cent of where it was — and the shape is the finding: it is a straight line on a logarithmic time axis, gaining 0.097 per cent of the charging voltage per decade. There is no time constant after which it is over, because there is no single time constant: one branch of the model comes to equilibrium per decade, for as many decades as the dielectric has. A decade before the reading it was at 0.1033 per cent.

The capacitor that remembers

Charge a capacitor, short it for ten seconds, open it, and it climbs back to a fifth of a per cent of where it was. Nothing leaked and nothing was gained: some of the dielectric had not finished discharging. The same defect measured as an admittance says the part is 0.593 per cent more capacitance at a tenth of a millihertz than at a kilohertz, and measured in a sample-and-hold it says a millisecond of hold costs a hundred parts per million — thirteen bits, on a part specified at nothing.

transients · Dielectric absorption
One part, three saturation currents: 1.90 A, 2.40 A, 2.69 A. computed by solving, not by drawing. B(H) is μ₀H plus a saturating magnetisation, written as a flux linkage, and the inductance drawn here is dλ/di — the slope of that flux, which is what a small signal on a direct current actually meets. It is 18.92 µH at no current, 16.73 µH at two amps and 10.43 µH at three, and it never reaches zero: the vacuum is still there, so the part falls to its air-core 0.05 µH and stays. The three marks are the ten, twenty and thirty per cent drops different manufacturers print as the saturation current — 1.896, 2.395, 2.694 amps, a spread of 42 per cent on one part.

The inductance the current decides

The rung below bounded the flux and the boundary is exact: the volt-seconds decide the flux swing whatever the material does, and a cycle whose current ripple runs from 519 mA to 75 A has the same flux excursion to better than two per cent. What saturation breaks is the relationship between that flux and the current — so a ripple the design expression puts at 514 mA is 1,022 mA at 2.56 A of load, the peak reaches 3.57 A where the part is at a fifth of its nameplate inductance, and the same part has three saturation currents depending on which per cent it was quoted at.

magnetics · Saturation
A major hysteresis loop at 9.0 A/m of coercivity, and the anhysteretic curve it closes onto. computed by solving, not by drawing. The B–H loop of a core driven sinusoidally to ±400 A/m, marched through a superposition of twenty-four play operators and drawn over the single-valued magnetisation curve with no hysteresis in it. The loop encloses 12.481 joules per cubic metre per cycle, which is the core loss and which no single-valued model can produce, because a curve has no area. The coercivity is 8.96 amperes per metre and the remanence 22.3 millitesla; both are read off the marched descending branch rather than handed in. The slider takes the threshold spread down to zero, where the two branches become one, the area falls to 9.8e-15 J/m³, and the object is exactly the core the field already had.

The area a curve cannot have

Every magnetic model in this collection is a single-valued B(H), and a single-valued B(H) cannot dissipate: ∮H dB around a curve is zero, so the transformers and inductors here have all run cold. Giving the material a second branch costs one object — a play operator, which lags the field by a threshold and is otherwise nothing — and a superposition of twenty-four of them produces a loop with 12.481 joules per cubic metre in it, a coercivity of 8.958 amperes per metre and a remanence of 22.3 millitesla, none of which was handed in. At zero threshold the whole thing collapses onto the curve the field already had, to fifteen figures.

magnetics · Magnetic loss
Which limit binds is a property of the load, and they change places near 22 nF. computed by solving, not by drawing. Each limit measured on its own, as the departure of its march from the linear one, at a load step of half the output stage's rating. The input pair's departure falls with load capacitance — a bigger reservoir holds the node while the loop responds, which is the sixth rung's own result — and the output stage's does not fall nearly as fast, because what it has to supply is the charge the capacitor wants. Below about 22 nanofarads the thermal voltage decides the answer and above it the output stage does, and nothing about the amplifier changed.

The current above which there is no impedance

The sixth rung found the impedance leaving at 10.6 mA, where the input pair's own tanh takes over and the slew rate is twice the thermal voltage times the gain-bandwidth in radians, with no design choice in it. A real output stage has a second limit that is nothing but design choice, and the two do not bind at the same load: at 0.47 nF the input pair's departure is 19.4 per cent against the output stage's 4.2, at 22 nF it is 0.9 against 2.3, and above the output stage's rating the excursion does not come back at all — 2,254 Ω for a quantity that was 37.

feedback · Capacitive load
A switched-capacitor low-pass driven past half its own clock. computed by solving, not by drawing. The clock is 1.00 MHz and the corner the earlier essay fitted is 1.59 kHz. The falling dashed curve is that continuous model, which knows nothing about a clock and goes on falling. The circles are the marched circuit, read at the frequency the output actually appears at. They part company past half the clock and by 992 kHz the model is 42.1 decibels wrong — an input just below the clock arrives just above direct current, in the middle of the passband, with the passband's own gain. The third curve is the exact discrete transfer function evaluated at the folded frequency, and it agrees with the march to 0.26 decibels, which is what says the march is measuring the folding rather than an artefact of itself.

The filter that samples

The rung below built a resistor out of a clock and measured two ways it is not one: a settling time, and a corner that is a capacitor ratio rather than an R–C product. Both are errors in a value and both get smaller as the design gets better. This is an error of a different kind — the arrangement is not a continuous system at all, and nothing below half the clock shows it. An input at 992 kilohertz arrives at 7.8 kilohertz with the passband's own gain, where the continuous model the rung below fitted says it is 56 decibels down.

filters · Switched-capacitor
A staircase costs one Nth, computed rather than quoted. computed by solving, not by drawing, marched, with the energies rebuilt from the element laws. The charge is broken into N equal risers, each held for 16 time constants so that it completes. The measured losses are 1.00000, 0.500001, 0.250000, 0.125000, 0.0625000, 0.0312500 of ½CV² — which is 1.000004, 1.000002, 1.000001, 1.000001, 1.000000, 1.000000 times 1/N, so the law is exact to four parts in a million at the worst rather than approximately true. The fitted exponent is -1.00000 and the energy account closes to 2.17e-6 at the worst.

The half a switch keeps

Charging a capacitor from a step loses half the delivered energy whatever the resistance, and a ramp takes the loss down as 2τ/T with no floor. A staircase of N settled risers costs one Nth of the step, exact to four parts in a million, and the law ends at a dwell of 5.272 time constants. A switch is the other half of the same product and buys nothing at all: with the supply held at five volts and the channel conductance ramped over a thousand time constants, the loss is 1.00000000 of ½CV².

transients · Switching energy
The reading is a count of decades: 1.0288 parts per thousand of them. computed by solving, not by drawing. 17 marched tests, three families of absolute time — a tenth of a second, one second and ten seconds of short — plotted against the number of decades between the short and the reading. The families lie on one another, which is the finding: the answer is not a property of the part alone and not a property of either duration, it is a count of the decades of relaxation time the test leaves in. The line is a least-squares fit through the origin at 1.0288e-3 per decade; the model's own capacitance per decade of relaxation time is α = 1.0343e-3, which nothing in the fit was told — the fit sits 0.53 per cent under it, because the charge that comes back is shared with the slow branches it came off. The worst residual is 4.80 per cent, at the narrowest ratio drawn, and 1.23 per cent over the 8 tests that are two decades wide and read before the slowest relaxation the model has; the 3 read after it fall away to 4.49 per cent, which is where the law ends. Families a hundred times apart in absolute time differ by at most 0.84 per cent, which is the whole of the collapse.

Ten seconds, and fifteen minutes

A data sheet's dielectric absorption is quoted as a property of the part. It is not: the same modelled capacitor reads 0.4050 per cent with a tenth-of-a-second short and 0.0305 per cent with a thousand-second one, and 0.0047 against 0.2948 depending on when the reading is taken. Seventeen marched tests collapse onto one line — the recovery is 1.0288 parts per thousand for every decade between the two durations — and four dielectrics the specified test declares identical read a factor of 3.31 apart one decade away from it.

transients · Dielectric absorption
Switched on at 0.95× resonance, a Q 50 capacitor reaches 1.550 times its settled voltage. computed by solving, not by drawing. The capacitor voltage of the series circuit, switched on from rest at the crest of the drive, drawn as the tip of its arrow in the frame that turns with the drive, so that the settled state is a fixed point — the arrow from the centre, 10.067 V long, with the circle of that radius around the centre. The path is the settled arrow plus a second one turning at the circuit's own frequency and shrinking, drawn until the second is a hundredth of its first length. The voltage reaches 15.603 V in cycle 9, 1.5499 times the settled amplitude, and the tip's farthest point is 1.5499 times it. The approximation 1 + exp(−π/2Q|δ|) gives 1.5335. Marched in time by the trapezoidal rule, the network agrees with the exact solution to 1.2e-3 of the settled amplitude over its first 11 cycles.

The arrow that goes past where it settles

A phasor is where a driven resonator ends up, and counting the cycles it takes to get there says nothing about the path. Switched on from rest a little away from resonance, the capacitor's arrow circles its settled tip instead of approaching it: a Q of 50 driven at 0.8 of resonance reaches 1.854 times its settled voltage, and a Q of 200 at 1.25 switched on through zero reaches 2.182. At resonance exactly, where the settled voltage is largest, the arrow never passes its mark. So a resonance read by the largest voltage after switch-on is 1.20 times wider than its phasor says.

frequency · Phasors
The winding current a hysteretic core asks for, and the current the same circuit's single-valued core asks for. computed by solving, not by drawing. One netlist — a 22.6 volt peak sinusoid at 5.00 kHz through 4 ohms into a sixty-turn winding — marched twice, once with the core as a superposition of play operators and once with the single-valued saturating curve every earlier figure in this field used. The two currents differ in shape and not only in size: the hysteretic one leads the flux by an angle that is not ninety degrees, which is the whole of the core loss, and its peak is 59.45 milliamperes against 50.12. The energy the source delivers over a complete cycle is 17.19 microjoules for the loop and 2.5e-5 for the curve, which is zero to the resolution of the march. The slider takes the flux the drive demands from a twentieth of the material's saturation to most of it.

The core the solver has to remember

A saturating inductor's state is one number, because the current is a function of the flux linkage. A hysteretic core's is not: half an amp is one flux on the way up and a different flux on the way down, and there is no function of the current that returns the flux. So the march's state vector gains twenty-four more numbers, one per play operator, and the Newton loop is forbidden to touch them. The circuit and the bench then agree on the loss to three parts in ten million — one integral taken at two wires, the other inside the material.

magnetics · Magnetic loss
The thermal network's step response, and the sum of its own stages — 0.95 per cent apart at worst. computed by solving, not by drawing. A step of power into a three-stage thermal ladder, and the junction's rise divided by it. The solid curve is exact: the impedance is a continued fraction in s, its denominator has 3 real negative roots, and the partial-fraction expansion of Z(s)/s is a sum of that many ordinary exponentials — no march, no step size. The dashed curve is the sum every account of a thermal path writes, each stage's own resistance times 1 − exp(−t/RC) with its own local time constant, and it is an approximation because the stages load each other. What that costs is 0.950 per cent, once, at 12.9 ms — between the fastest stage's 2.4 ms and the next one's 200 ms, which is the only place two stages are moving together. It is one-sided: the sum never reads low.

Two ladders the terminals cannot tell apart

A thermal path drawn as a ladder and the same path drawn as a sum of exponentials are called different models of one object, and the difference between them has never been priced because pricing it needs an exact answer. Solved in closed form, the sum is 0.950 per cent high at worst and never low; the marched netlist is right to a part in 21,169; and the largest disagreement in the picture was 2.919 per cent that has nothing to do with heat at all, which reading the curve one sample differently removes.

transients · Reverse recovery
Two large-signal limits, each alone and then both, at 20 mA and half of it. computed by solving, not by drawing. Four marches of one netlist at each load: neither limit, the input pair's tanh alone, the output stage's 20 mA alone, and both, driven by a 10 mA step. The three curves are each limit's departure from the linear march and the departure with both present; the faint line is the two singles added. Both lies on the sum and a little above it — 1.112 times it at 0.47 nF and 1.022 at 47 nF — so the limits are present together rather than taking turns. Where the two singles cross, near 10 nanofarads, the pair costs 1.88 times what the worse of them costs alone.

The load that neither limit owns

Nine rungs of this argument asked which of an amplifier's two large-signal limits binds, and drew the load capacitance where the answer changes hands. Both are present at every load: the excursion with both in the netlist is the two departures added and between 2 and 12 per cent more, never the larger of them. So the crossing is not a handover but a maximum — at 12 nanofarads the pair costs 2.084 times what the worse of them costs alone, against 1.35 at 2.2 nanofarads and 1.07 at 47 — and the same peak sits on the resistance axis at 20 ohms and the gain-bandwidth axis at 50 megahertz.

feedback · Capacitive load
Stepped at 20 of its time constant, a 1 µs pole rings between 1.818 and 0.331 V, and needs 23 steps to settle. Marched with the trapezoidal rule at a step of 20.0 µs. A 1 µs pole (1 kΩ, 1 nF) drives, through a unity buffer, a 1 ms pole (1 kΩ, 1 µF). The fast node's exact response reaches its final volt within a few microseconds; the march's first values are 1.8182, 0.3306, 1.5477, 0.5519, 1.3666 V. Its distance from its final volt is multiplied by (1 − h/2τ)/(1 + h/2τ) = −0.8182 every step, measured and checked against that form, so it changes sign every step and takes 23 steps to fall below 1% — 460 µs. The slow node it drives is 1.23e-5 V from exact at 1 ms, because a 1 ms pole averages an alternation at half the stepping rate to nothing.

The ringing that belongs to the rule

The trapezoidal rule is stable for every stable circuit and every step size, and it is not damping. March a one-microsecond pole with twenty-microsecond steps and its node reads 1.818, 0.331, 1.548, 0.552 volts — an oscillation at half the stepping rate, its distance from the final volt multiplied by exactly −0.8182 every step, taking twenty-three steps to fall below one per cent. The slow node that pole drives is right to 1.2 × 10⁻⁵ V at a millisecond. One backward-Euler step at the discontinuity cuts the first swing from 0.818 V to 0.048 and two to 0.0023, because backward Euler multiplies the same error by 1/(1 + h/τ) and the trapezoidal rule by (1 − h/2τ)/(1 + h/2τ), which approaches −1.

transients · Step response
At 20 steps a cycle, ten cycles of an undamped LC: the trapezoidal rule keeps the amplitude and falls 29.2° behind; backward Euler keeps 0.0082% of it. Marched, both rules, against 1 − cos ωt for a 1 kHz inductor–capacitor pair stepped with no resistance at all. At 20 steps a cycle the trapezoidal march's amplitude stays at 1.00000 a cycle and its frequency is slow: it loses 2.918° a cycle, measured from the march's own recurrence, against 2π − 2N·atan(π/N) = 2.918°, so after ten cycles it is 29.2° behind. Backward Euler keeps 0.3901 of its amplitude a cycle, against (1 + (2π/N)²)^(−N/2) = 0.3901, so 0.0082% is left after ten, and it loses 11.19° a cycle. No resistance is in the circuit; every loss is the rule's.

The phase the rule loses

An inductor and a capacitor with no resistance ring for ever, and two ways of marching them disagree about how. The trapezoidal rule keeps the amplitude exactly — its factor per step has a magnitude of one — and loses phase instead: 2π − 2N·atan(π/N) a cycle, 2.918° at twenty steps a cycle, so ten cycles later it is 29.2° behind the circuit. Backward Euler keeps 0.3901 of the amplitude a cycle at the same step, and after ten cycles 0.0082 per cent of the ringing is left, in a circuit that has no loss. The two errors fall at different rates: the trapezoidal rule's phase as the square of the steps a cycle, backward Euler's amplitude as the first power. A hundred cycles to within one per cent needs 182 steps a cycle of one and 196,404 of the other.

transients · Step response
BDF2 loses amplitude as N⁻³ and phase as N⁻², four times the trapezoidal rule's: a hundred cycles to 1% needs 363 steps a cycle, against 182 and 196,404. Each rule's error a cycle on an undamped inductor–capacitor pair, against the steps a cycle, measured from BDF2 marches and drawn with the trapezoidal rule's and backward Euler's closed forms. BDF2 loses amplitude a cycle as the −2.91 power of N and phase as the −1.95 power, its phase loss 3.988 times the trapezoidal rule's at 128 steps a cycle. To keep 99% of the amplitude over a hundred cycles it needs 157 steps a cycle, and to stay within 1% of a cycle in phase 363; the trapezoidal rule needs 182 for the phase and loses no amplitude, and backward Euler needs 196,404 for the amplitude.

The rule between the two

The trapezoidal rule keeps an undamped ringing's amplitude and loses its phase, and it preserves a stiff pole's error with its sign alternating. Backward Euler damps the stiff error at once and damps the ringing too, keeping 0.0082 per cent after ten cycles at twenty steps a cycle. The second-order backward difference sits between them in a precise sense. It damps the stiff error by 1/√(3 + 2h/τ), 0.152 a step at twenty time constants, and settles in three steps where the trapezoidal rule needs twenty-three. It loses a ringing's amplitude only as the cube of the steps a cycle, and its phase as the square with a constant four times the trapezoidal rule's. A hundred cycles to one per cent costs 363 steps a cycle, against 182 and 196,404.

transients · Step response
The temperature a part cannot come back from, and how long it takes to leave. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same fixed-point equation as the rung below, marched in time with a thermal capacitance rather than solved for its steady states: C dT/dt = P(T) − (T − T_a)/R_th, stepped adaptively on the temperature change because dT/dt goes through zero at each fixed point. Every trajectory starting below 191.1 °C returns to 88.8, however far above the operating point it began; every one starting above it leaves the material's range entirely, the closest in 0.2 minutes. The two nearest starts are 3.0 kelvin apart. The ignition temperature is a boundary in the STARTING CONDITION, and no steady-state analysis contains one.

The boundary that is a starting point

A wound part with a stable operating point at 88.8 degrees and an ignition temperature at 191.1 will never reach the second, because nothing takes it there. Marched in time rather than solved for its steady states, the same equation says what does: a trajectory starting at 189.6 degrees settles back and one starting at 192.6 leaves the material's range in twelve seconds — two starts three kelvin apart. And an overload of four times the normal loss is survivable for ever, while seven times is survivable for seventeen minutes.

magnetics · Thermal feedback
Driven through 1kΩ, the absorbing capacitor's tail is 2.6e-5 of the step, not 1%. computed by solving, not by drawing. The error at a capacitor's terminal after a step applied through 1k ohms, where the capacitor is 1 nF with eight absorption branches spread over two decades from 0.1 ms, together holding one per cent of its capacitance. The poles are found by bisection and the residues in closed form, and a trapezoidal march of the same netlist agrees. The tail the branches leave is 2.58e-5 of the step — the source resistance over the branch resistances in parallel — and settling to 1e-5 takes 173µs against 11.5µs with no branches; the model that weights each branch by its share of the capacitance says 48.4ms.

The tail the source decides

A capacitor with one per cent of dielectric absorption does not leave a one-per-cent tail in the circuit it is in. Driven through a kilohm, the eight slow branches that model the absorption leave 2.58×10⁻⁵ of the step at its terminals — the source resistance over the branch resistances in parallel — and settling to 10⁻⁴ takes 9.49 µs against 9.21 with no absorption at all. The share of the capacitance is not the amplitude; it is a ceiling the circuit reaches only when the source's own time constant falls inside the spread of the branches, and there the cost is 2.2 times the settling at 10⁻⁴ and 16 times at 10⁻⁵.

transients · Doublet
Swept at η = 1, a resonance reads 93.6% of its height, 0.45 bandwidths late and 1.26 bandwidths wide. computed by solving, not by drawing. The envelope of a series resonator's capacitor voltage, Q 50 at 1591.5 Hz, while its drive sweeps linearly upwards through resonance, plotted against the frequency the drive has reached, for sweep rates η = r/B² of 0.1, 0.3, 1 and 3; dashed, the steady-state response the sweep is chasing. At η = 1 — 1013 Hz a second, Q cycles for every bandwidth crossed when η is one — the reading peaks at 93.6 per cent of the true height, 0.445 bandwidths above resonance, and is 1.263 bandwidths wide. Swept at η = 0.03 it is the steady curve to 0.2 per cent.

A sweep that never stops

Sweep a drive continuously through a resonance and read the envelope against the frequency the drive has reached, and the reading depends on one number: the rate in hertz a second divided by the square of the bandwidth. At that rate equal to one — Q cycles for every bandwidth crossed, the dwell a stepped sweep needed — a Q-50 resonance reads 93.6 per cent of its height, 0.445 bandwidths late and 1.263 bandwidths wide, and at Q 10 or 200 the same within a per cent. A tenth of that rate gets within 0.3 per cent of the height and costs ten times the time. The peak always lands beyond resonance in the direction of travel, so an upward and a downward sweep together find it to 0.0075 bandwidths where either alone is off by nearly half.

frequency · Phasors
At 20 steps a cycle backward Euler cannot show a quality factor above 3.27 and BDF2 none above 77.9; the trapezoidal rule shows every Q, 1.6% high. computed by solving, not by drawing: a series resistor–inductor–capacitor resonance at 1 kHz, its quality factor set by the resistor, marched at 20 steps per undamped cycle with each rule; the quality factor the march shows — its decay per radian of its own ringing — against the circuit's, from 1 to 500. Lines are each rule's factor per step in closed form; dots are marched and measured from the record at Q = 3, 30, 300, agreeing to 0.3%. Backward Euler's shown Q flattens at 3.272 and BDF2's at 77.9, whatever the circuit's; the trapezoidal rule's sits 1.64% above the diagonal at every Q. Q 3: trapezoidal 3.05, BDF2 3.06, backward Euler 1.62; Q 30: trapezoidal 30.5, BDF2 22.5, backward Euler 2.97; Q 300: trapezoidal 305, BDF2 62.6, backward Euler 3.24.

The Q a rule can show

A resonance marched forward in time decays at the circuit's rate plus whatever the marching rule adds, and the rule's share has a ceiling built into it. At twenty steps a cycle backward Euler cannot show a quality factor above 3.27 and BDF2 none above 77.9, whatever resistor the circuit has; the ceilings rise as N/2π and N³/4π³. The trapezoidal rule has no ceiling at all — it shows every Q 1.64 per cent high at twenty steps a cycle, a ratio fixed by the step alone. So the steps a cycle needed to read a resonance's Q to one per cent are about 26 for the trapezoidal rule at any Q, 99 for BDF2 at Q = 100 and 62,202 for backward Euler. Marched at Q = 50, the circuit has 0.533 V of ringing left after ten cycles, the trapezoidal rule 0.536 and BDF2 0.346.

transients · Step response
A 230 V transformer's primary switched on at 0° of the mains, secondary open. computed by solving, not by drawing, marched with the core's saturating flux law and checked at the voltage zero against the netlist march. Settled, the primary draws a magnetising current of 111 mA peak. Switched on at 0° it draws 87.6 A in the first three cycles — 791 times the settled peak. At the voltage zero the first peak is 87.6 A, 791 times; at the voltage peak there is no inrush at all.

The instant a transformer is worst at

A capacitor-input rectifier draws its worst inrush when it is switched on at the peak of the mains. A transformer's own magnetising branch is the other way round: switched on at the voltage zero, a 230 V primary worked at 1.4 T draws 87.6 A in its first half-cycle, 791 times its settled magnetising current, and at the voltage peak it draws nothing extra at all. The core's flux has to start from zero, the voltage does not, and how close the working flux sits to half of saturation decides the size.

power · Inrush
The supply's mean output against its load, with no leakage inductance, 0.3 mH and 1 mH in the winding. computed by solving, not by drawing, marched with the diodes in the netlist: 17 V peak into 1000 µF, 50 mΩ of winding throughout. Without inductance the output falls 1.69 V from 200 Ω to 25 Ω, an average slope of 3.43 Ω. With 0.3 mH it falls 0.62 V, 1.14 Ω, from a higher start; with 1 mH, 0.42 V, 0.77 Ω. An element that carries the load's current and drops no mean voltage makes the regulation better, not worse.

The inductance that flattens the supply

An unregulated supply's output resistance counts each resistance by the mean current it carries, and an inductance in the winding carries the whole mean current and drops no mean voltage — so by that rule it should count for nothing. Marched, it counts for less than nothing: 0.3 mH of leakage takes the output resistance at 100 Ω from 3.88 Ω to 0.67, and the mean output falls 0.62 V from 200 Ω to 25 Ω instead of 1.69. The effect has an interior optimum — 0.03 mH makes it slightly worse, 0.3 mH best, 3 mH back to 2.86 Ω — because the inductance first rings the reservoir up and then turns the rectifier toward choke input.

applied · Unregulated supply
An integrator of 100 kΩ and 1 µF with its input grounded: what its own input currents do to it. computed by solving, not by drawing, marched for ten seconds from rest. With 50 nA flowing out of each input and the + input grounded, the output ramps at 50.0 mV/s — the bias current over the capacitance, to six figures — and reaches 0.500 V. With 100 kΩ in the + input to balance the resistances, only the 5 nA of offset current is left and the ramp is 5.00 mV/s. Neither stops: an integrator has no gain to quote, because its gain is time.

The current a capacitor adds up

An amplifier's input current in a resistor is an offset; in a capacitor it is a rate, and time is the gain. An integrator of 100 kΩ and 1 µF with its input grounded ramps at 50.0 mV/s from 50 nA, and balancing the inputs leaves the 5.00 mV/s of the offset current, still unbounded. A leak resistor bounds it at the current times the leak and costs the lowest frequency the circuit integrates. A hold capacitor's droop times its acquisition time is fixed, so 50 nA through a 100 Ω switch needs 655 nF and 0.77 ms for half a 16-bit step. A charge amplifier's offset times its low corner is Ib/2πCf, whatever its bleed.

instruments · Input bias current
The second harmonic in each cycle of a transformer's inrush, as a share of the fundamental. computed by solving, not by drawing, the harmonics taken per cycle of the marched current. The first cycle carries 79% second harmonic and the second 93%. The share falls below the 15% a differential relay is commonly set to restrain at only in cycle 30, when the peak is 205 mA against a first peak of 88 A — the harmonic outlasts the inrush it identifies.

The harmonic that names an inrush

A transformer's differential relay sees an inrush as current going in and nothing coming out, which is what an internal fault looks like, and it tells them apart by the second harmonic. Marched cycle by cycle, an inrush starts at 79% second harmonic and stays above the usual 15% restraint for thirty cycles — long after its current has fallen from 88 A to 205 mA, because the current unwinds in a few cycles and the flux offset under it takes seconds. A fault's offset is a smooth exponential and peaks at 14.6% only when X/R is as low as three.

power · Inrush
A 1 MHz sine of 1 V into an emitter follower with 1 nF on its emitter and a 2 mA sink: the input falls at up to 6.28 V/µs, the output can fall at only 2.0, and the transistor switches off. Marched, the base driven by a stiff source and the emitter current Is·exp((vᵢₙ − vₒᵤₜ)/Vₜ). The input (dashed) and the output (solid) over the last of four cycles. The input's steepest fall is 2πfA = 6.28 V/µs; the load can be discharged no faster than the sink allows, I/C = 2.00 V/µs. On every falling stretch the base–emitter junction reverse-biases, the emitter current drops below a hundredth of the sink's (dots), and the output falls as a straight line of slope −2.000 V/µs until the input comes back up to meet it. On the rising half the transistor pushes whatever current the capacitor needs and the output follows a Vbe below the input.

The follower that lets go on the way down

An emitter follower can push current into its load without limit and pull it out only through whatever sinks the emitter. Marched as a large-signal circuit — a 2 mA sink, 1 nF on the emitter — a 1 V, 1 MHz sine asks the output to fall at up to 6.28 V/µs, the sink allows 2.00, and on every falling stretch the junction reverse-biases, the emitter current drops below a hundredth of its quiescent value for 57% of the cycle, and the output falls as a straight line of exactly −I/C. The boundary is a slope, 2πfA ≤ I/C: 2.87 V at 100 kHz, 0.309 V at 1 MHz, creeping above the line only as the period approaches the junction's own 12.9 ns. Past it the follower rectifies — its output's average rises 415 mV at 1 V of drive and 1.30 V at 2 V — and with a resistor in place of the sink the fall slows as the output descends, from 2.41 V/µs to 1.99. None of it is visible to the small-signal model the earlier essays used.

semiconductors · Emitter follower
Asked for 105% of the nose power, a tap changer that blocks on a wrong-signed step stops at 9.759 V and holds it; one that does not keeps raising, and the voltage keeps falling. Marched. The 10 V source behind 1 Ω of the regulator essays, its load drawing 105% of the line's 25 W nose power at the 10 V setpoint, regulated by a tap changer that raises the ratio by 1.25% every 5 s while the load is more than 20 mV low. With no blocking rule (dashed) it climbs past the nose ratio √(Rₗ/R) = 1.9518 and keeps going, to n = 3.250 and 8.61 V by 900 s, still falling; the integrating regulator of the earlier essay (dotted) collapses the same way, faster. With the rule (solid) the tap at n = 1.9625 is the first to lower the voltage, the regulator stops at 385 s, and the load holds 9.759 V — within a tap of the most this line can give it, 9.759 V. The setpoint is out of reach either way; the rule converts a collapse into a stall.

The rule that reads the sign of the gain

A regulator that raises a ratio whenever its load is low collapses the voltage once the load asks for more than the line's nose power, because past the nose raising the ratio lowers the voltage. The standard protection is a rule: after each tap, compare the voltage with the one before, and if it fell, stop. On a 10 V line asked for 105% of its 25 W, a 1.25% tap changer with the rule stops at n = 1.9625, the first tap past the nose, and holds 9.759 V — the most the line can give — where without it the ratio climbs to 3.25 and the voltage is 8.61 V and still falling. The rule is exact without noise and fragile with it, because it reads a difference that vanishes at the nose: with 3 mV of measurement noise it wrongly stops a raise that could have reached the setpoint 0.3% of the time at 98% of the nose and 15% at 99.5%. Trusting it to 1% costs margin — 97.9% of the nose at 3 mV, 79.9% at 10 mV — or coarser taps.

power · Voltage regulation
A 0.2% part sampling 0 V after long at 10 V, holding 1 ms: the first reading is 109 ppm of the step, and the hundredth still 4.5 ppm, every one of them made from the same branches. computed by solving, not by drawing: the reading at each sample, as a fraction of the step, when a sample-and-hold with a 1 µF part of 0.2% absorption samples 0 V after a long time at 10 V, acquiring for 100 µs and holding for 1 ms. The first reading agrees with a march of the netlist. It is 109 ppm, the tenth 46.7 ppm, the hundredth 4.5 ppm and the four-hundredth 0.904 ppm. The earlier samples are still being read, and for far longer than an acquisition suggests, because each acquisition can reach a branch only in proportion to the fraction of its time constant it lasts.

The sample before the sample

A sample-and-hold whose capacitor has 0.2 per cent of dielectric absorption reads a 10 V step 109 parts per million wrong on the first sample after it, 46.7 on the tenth, and 4.5 on the hundredth, because every earlier sample is still in the dielectric. That error has been described as distortion, since it grows with the signal. It is not. The state is linear and one period is a single matrix, so the reading is a fixed weighted sum of earlier samples, a filter with a very long tail: a sine reads 28.1 parts per million low and its largest harmonic is 1.5 × 10⁻¹² of the fundamental. A filter can be undone. Subtracting fifty earlier samples takes a stepped signal from 51.6 parts per million to 1.61, and with the absorption known to 20 per cent it stops at 5.47.

transients · Dielectric absorption

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Model rangeDesign tradeoffSaturationDielectric absorptionLarge-signalTrapezoidal ruleNumerical errorSample-and-holdSettling timeTransient responseVerificationCapacitive load

All concepts