Circuit Response
every model has an edge, and the figure carries it
Concept

Verification — where it appears

Checking a solved network against the laws it was built from, by rebuilding its branch quantities rather than by rereading what the solve returned. Two independent checks are made on every solve here: the current law rebuilt from the element relations, and the resistors' dissipation against the sources' real power.

Named by 53 essays across 12 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

A network solved, and checked: a bridge, which no series-parallel reduction reaches. Node potentials from modified nodal analysis. The branch currents are then recomputed from each element's own law and summed at every node; the residual is 2.7e-16 of the largest current in the circuit, which is floating-point rounding and nothing else.

What a network answers, and how the answer is checked

A circuit has exactly one answer and a matrix finds it. The part that matters is not that the answer exists but that it can be checked twice, by routes that share no arithmetic — and that a circuit with no answer is refused by name rather than returned as a large plausible number.

networks · Nodal analysis The equivalent of six elements, and the heat it does not account for. computed by solving, not by drawing at 73 loads. The network reduces to 8.56032 V behind 599.768 Ω, obtained twice and agreeing to twelve figures. Into every load on the axis the two put the same voltage to 2.2e-16 of it and deliver the same power to 7.8e-16 — there is no load that can tell them apart. Inside, at a load of 5.62 kΩ, the real network is dissipating 49.168 mW and the equivalent claims 1.1349 mW, a factor of 43.3. With the port open the equivalent says nothing at all is being burned and the network is burning 48.03 mW. The slider moves the resistor bridging the two sources, which joins two ideal sources and so cannot change anything the port can reach: the equivalent stays 8.56032 V behind 599.768 Ω to the last bit at every setting, while the heat inside moves by two and a half times.

Exact outside and wrong within

Six elements reduce to one source and one resistor that no load can distinguish from them: the same voltage into every load across six decades, to the last bit of a double. The reduction is wrong about the heat by a factor of forty-three, and with nothing connected it says the network is dissipating nothing while it burns 48 milliwatts.

networks · Equivalent circuit A network the solver will answer, and should not be asked, into 0.01 Ω. computed by solving, not by drawing at 61 spreads. A hundredth of an ohm either side of a wire whose resistance is made smaller and smaller, into 0.01 Ω — an element written where the right answer is no element at all. The solution stays exact: 0.499999998422607 at the last spread before the refusal, against 0.500000000000000. What grows is the current-law residual, as the 0.96 power of the spread. The solve is refused at a spread of 2.5e+8, where the smallest pivot falls under 1e-12; the residual tolerance of 1e-7 would have been reached at about 3.3e+9. Two guards written for unrelated reasons, arriving within a decade of one another.

The answer that is perfect and absurd

A network with a wire written into it as a small resistance returns the right node voltage to fifteen figures, passes both verifications with a residual of two parts in ten to the sixteenth, and reports two hundred thousand amperes. The solver refuses it one decade further on, and by then it has been answering for eight decades.

networks · Singular-network The millivolts in the wire, which are nobody's signal. computed by solving, not by drawing at 145 frequencies. A 10 mm run of one-ounce copper carries the return of a 100 mA load and the reference of a 10 mV sensor. Its 5.00 mΩ and 10.0 nH put 500.0 µV in series with the sensor at low frequency — 5.00% of the reading — rising a decade per decade above 79.6 kHz until at 1.59 MHz the error is the whole signal. The full solve and the interfering current times the shared impedance agree to 4.4e-7. The slider is the length of the shared run: both the resistance and the inductance are proportional to it, so every point on the curve moves down together and the corner stays at 79.6 kHz.

The millivolts in the wire

Ten millimetres of one-ounce copper is five milliohms and ten nanohenries, and if a hundred-milliamp load and a ten-millivolt sensor both return through it, half a millivolt of somebody else's current is added to the reading — five per cent of it, before anything has been amplified. Above 79.6 kilohertz the error rises a decade per decade with no ceiling, and shortening the shared run moves the whole curve down and the corner not at all.

instruments · Common-impedance A sum that is exact, and the bandwidth estimate that is not. computed by solving, not by drawing, at 28 spreads of the three capacitor values in a resistor chain. The sum of the open-circuit time constants — each capacitor's own value times the resistance seen at its terminals with the other two removed — is 600.00 µs here, and it equals the ratio of the first two coefficients of the denominator to 2.0e-9 and the sum of the negated reciprocal poles to 2.0e-9. That much is a theorem. What is an estimate is the bandwidth: one over 2πΣτ gives 265.3 Hz against a measured 309.2 Hz, low by 14.2%. It is low at every spread on the axis — the estimate is never optimistic — and comes within ten per cent only once one of the three time constants is 7.48 times the others.

A sum that is exact, and the estimate that is not

Add each capacitor's value times the resistance seen at its own terminals with the others removed, and the total is the ratio of the first two coefficients of the denominator polynomial — a theorem, holding to a part in a billion at every spread tested. Divide one by two pi times it and you have a bandwidth estimate that is 14 per cent low with three equal capacitors and never once optimistic. Two settings of the slider have the same three time constants and bandwidths two per cent apart, which is why the sum can never be more than an estimate.

transients · Open circuit time constants A 100 ms pulse through a 0.159 Hz corner, 9.52% shorter by the end of it. computed by solving, not by drawing. Marched. The dashed line is the pulse that was sent. The solid line is what a 1 MΩ input with 1 µF in front of it receives: the top decays as exp(−t/RC) for the whole 100 ms, ending 9.515% down, and the trailing edge undershoots by exactly the same amount. The closed form for the same two components gives 9.516%. The input's specification is a corner at 0.159 Hz; a top flat to one per cent needs a pulse shorter than 10.1 ms, which is a rate 625.2 times the corner — a constant with no component in it, and the reason a low-frequency specification says nothing useful about an edge.

The corner that says nothing about an edge

An AC-coupled input is sold on a low-frequency corner, and a corner is a statement about steady sinusoids. What an instrument is usually shown is a pulse, and for a pulse the number is a sag: a hundred-millisecond pulse through a 0.159 hertz corner comes out 9.5 per cent shorter than it went in. A one per cent flat top needs a pulse rate 625 times the corner, which is a constant with no component in it — and above fifty per cent duty an AC-coupled pulse never reaches half its own height at all.

instruments · Ac coupling Superposition holds for the solution and not for its square. computed by solving, not by drawing, at 81 settings of the second source. Two ten-volt sources reach one hundred-ohm load through a hundred ohms each. Every node voltage and every branch current is the sum of the two single-source solves to 3.8e-16 of itself — superposition, exactly. The power is not: the difference is 2·Re(I₁·conj(I₂))·R to 1.0e-15, and at 0° between the sources and equal size it is 444.4 mW against the 222.2 mW that adding gives. Adding the two powers is within one per cent of the truth only when one source is below 0.00505 of the other. The slider is the angle between them: at 90° the two curves coincide to the last bit, and at 180° the true power falls to zero while the sum does not.

Two solves that add, and the one that does not

Every node voltage and every branch current in a linear network is the sum of the per-source solves, here to the last bit of a double at eighty-one settings. The power is not, and the gap is not a correction: two equal sources in antiphase put nothing at all into a load while adding their powers gives 222 milliwatts, and the sum is within one per cent of the truth only when one source is two hundred times the other.

networks · Superposition Fourteen decades of imbalance, fourteen digits gone, and a matrix in perfect health. computed by solving, not by drawing. A Wheatstone bridge walked towards balance, with the relative error of the solved output against a closed form that cannot lose digits. The condition number of the nodal matrix is 505.0 at every imbalance and the smallest pivot is 2.0e-3 of the matrix norm — orders above the 1e-12 at which this solver refuses to answer at all. Neither number moves, and the answer still loses one digit per decade of imbalance, reaching 33% at δ = 1e-15. The bound drawn over it is the round-off divided by the imbalance, which the measurement stays under at every point. The third curve is the same closed form written as ½ − 1/(2+δ) — algebraically identical, and it loses its digits at the same rate, which is where the loss lives: in the subtraction of two nearly equal numbers, not in the matrix.

The matrix that is ill, and the answer that is not

Every other essay here treats the solve as exact, and it is not. A bridge walked towards balance loses one digit per decade of imbalance and has none left at a part in 10¹⁵ — on a matrix whose condition number never moves and whose smallest pivot stays four orders above the threshold this solver refuses at. A feedback amplifier does the opposite: the solver declines to answer at a gain of 10⁹, one decade after it returned an answer that was exact to the last bit.

networks · Conditioning A difference quotient is best at a step of 1e-5, and is 1e+6 times worse at 10⁻¹¹. computed by solving, not by drawing. The worst disagreement between the adjoint network's derivatives and a central difference quotient of the same quantities, against the fractional step the quotient is taken with, on a 7-element ladder at 1000 Hz. The curve has a minimum because two errors pull opposite ways: the curvature the quotient neglects falls as the square of the step, and the digits its subtraction destroys rise as one over the step. The best it reaches is 1.4e-9, against the 2.3e-11 that the two-thirds power of the machine epsilon predicts. The exact route costs 2 solves against 15, and has neither error term.

Every derivative, and the one that is zero

How much does this response move if that capacitor is one per cent out? A difference quotient answers it one component at a time, in two solves each, and its best possible accuracy is four parts in a hundred million. Transposing the matrix and solving once more answers it for every component at once, exactly. Pointed at a claim this collection has made since its ladder essay and never tested directly — that a doubly terminated ladder's response is stationary in every element at its passband maxima — it returns two parts in ten billion, where the cascade realising the identical response returns 0.72.

networks · Sensitivity Subtracting removes kT/C entirely and doubles the amplifier — worth 31× at a megahertz and a loss above 60 MHz. computed by solving, not by drawing. The noise on one sample of a switched-capacitor stage, and on the difference of two samples taken a settled interval apart, against clock frequency. The reset level is the same number in both samples and cancels exactly; the amplifier's own noise is two independent samples and its variance doubles, measured at 2.000 against the 2 the correlation predicts. At a megahertz that is 63.8 µV down to 11.53 — 31 times in power. The two curves cross at 60.2 MHz, which is where the amplifier's own noise equals kT/C, and above it the subtraction costs more than it removes.

The sample that is subtracted

Three rungs of this argument have measured floors that no gain moves and no filter reaches, because both arrive as numbers already sampled. One of them can be subtracted: the reset level a capacitor holds is the same number in two consecutive samples and cancels exactly. What it costs is that the amplifier's own noise is not — two samples of it are independent, so its variance doubles. That is thirty times better at a megahertz, a loss above sixty, and the crossing is the one the rung below computed for a different question.

noise · Kt over c Sixteen more digits move the boundary by sixteen decades and leave it exactly where it was. computed by solving, not by drawing. The rung below's bridge, walked towards balance and solved twice: once in double precision and once with a pair of doubles carrying about 31 decimal digits, against a closed form that cannot lose any. The 33 per cent error at an imbalance of 10⁻¹⁵ becomes 7.0e-18 — so that loss was the arithmetic's and not the network's, which is what the rung below could not say. Each arithmetic's error is its own round-off divided by the imbalance, drawn as the two straight lines, so the second boundary is the first one moved by exactly the extra digits. The condition number is 505 in both cases and at every point, which is the diagnostic being blind twice over.

The digits the arithmetic did not have

The rung below bounded this site's own arithmetic and found two boundaries it could not attribute: a bridge with no correct figures left at an imbalance of 10⁻¹⁵, and a filter synthesis that stalls at order 14. An ill-conditioned problem stays ill-conditioned however many digits are used, and a well-conditioned one computed badly gets better — so adding digits is the experiment that tells them apart. The bridge's loss is entirely the arithmetic's. The synthesis's is mostly the data's, and doubling the digits makes it worse.

networks · Conditioning Two loops on one heatsink give out at 135 kHz, and it is the switch that goes. computed by solving, not by drawing. The junction temperatures of the diode and the switch against switching frequency, with each device's own thermal resistance to a case they share. Each has a positive temperature loop and they are different loops — the diode's runs through its carrier lifetime and its recovery, the switch's through its on-resistance and its conduction — and the electrical coupling goes one way, since the charge the switch has to take at full supply is the diode's. The pair has no settled temperature above 135 kHz and the component that gives out is the switch, which has no exponential in it and is taking 84 per cent of the heat. The same two devices with the same total thermal resistance and no case in common survive to 485 kHz; the diode on its own to 1.28 MHz.

Two loops, and one heatsink

The rung below this one found that nine tenths of a reverse recovery's energy is dissipated in the transistor and not in the diode, and then computed the diode's junction temperature with all of that energy in it. Repaired, the diode alone survives to 1.28 megahertz instead of 128 kilohertz — a factor of exactly the ninety per cent. What replaces the number is the arrangement that exists: two devices with two different positive temperature loops on one piece of aluminium, giving out at 135 kilohertz, and it is the switch that goes.

transients · Reverse-recovery A bridge's reading turns over at 1.885 V, where the test level stops mattering. computed by solving, not by drawing. What a bridge reads is the fundamental of the charge waveform over the fundamental of the voltage, so it is a function of the bias AND of the amplitude, and a data sheet names one point of it: zero bias, one volt. The four curves are four test levels on one part. At zero bias they run from 9.999 µF down to 8.312 µF — the harder the drive the lower the reading, because the capacitance is at its maximum there and a sinusoid spends most of its time off the peak. At the rated 5 volts they run the other way, 2.000 µF up to 2.426 µF, because the curve is convex. Between them is one bias where the two effects cancel: at 1.8848 V a tenfold change of test level moves the reading by nothing at all, and that voltage is 0.6645 of the polarisation's own characteristic voltage.

The reading a data sheet does not take

A class II ceramic's temperature envelope leaves its working capacitance 29 points wide at one end and 79 across, because one printed number cannot pin a two-parameter model. One further bridge reading recovers almost all of it — and where the reading is taken decides everything. Turning the test level down to a fiftieth separates five parts a data sheet cannot tell apart by 17.76 per cent; moving the bias to half the rated voltage separates them by 176.02, and pins the working capacitance to ±0.512 per cent from a reading known to one.

frequency · Real capacitor A fit to the held curve reads the series resistance falling to nothing at 532 K/W. computed by solving, not by drawing. Each point is a three-parameter fit — a constant, an ideality factor and a series resistance — to the held forward curve between 10 and 100 mA, for a junction built with 0.6 Ω and no temperature coefficient on it, mounted at the thermal resistance on the axis. With no thermal resistance the fit returns 0.580 Ω with a residual of 43.9 µV. At 350 K/W it returns 0.184 Ω, an ideality of 1.086 and a residual of 34.0 µV. The resistance it reports reaches zero at 531.7 K/W and is negative beyond.

The resistance a slow curve cannot see

A diode's series resistance is read off the top of its forward curve, and a bench curve is a slow one: each point is held until the junction has warmed to it. Through 350 kelvin per watt the held curve sits 39.7 millivolts below the pulsed one at 100 milliamps, and the three-parameter fit that reads 0.580 ohms from the pulsed curve reads 0.184 from the held one — with a smaller residual. The fitted resistance reaches zero at 531.7 kelvin per watt, and the resistance it hid is what keeps the junction from folding back: with 0.05 ohms instead of 0.6 the held curve turns over at 87.6 milliamps.

limits · Diode model Which resistor the noise of a Chebyshev 5 actually comes from. computed by solving, not by drawing, one solve per resistor. Each bar is that resistor's share of the noise power at the output, found by splitting its node, putting a source of √(4kTR) in series with it and re-solving the whole network — so what is drawn is not how much noise each resistor makes but how much of it arrives. The largest contributor is F2R at 64.1 per cent, the smallest F0R at 9.0, and the shares add to 1.000000000000 because noise powers add. A resistor's share of the noise is not its share of the resistance: the largest departure between the two is 3.9 percentage points.

The resistor the noise comes from

Two identical 1.59 kΩ resistors in one third-order filter contribute 60.0 and 40.0 per cent of its output noise, because a resistor's noise is filtered by everything after it and by nothing before it. Solved one resistor at a time, the rule everybody carries — the resistance in the noise bandwidth — comes out 1.551 times the truth on a seventh-order Chebyshev and 0.791 times on a sixth-order Bessel. It is wrong in both directions on the same axis, so no factor repairs it.

noise · Johnson noise 5 sections, equal ripple, and the band that is 134% rather than 97. computed by solving, not by drawing. The repaired five-section equal-ripple design over the band it was designed for. The horizontal rule is the 0.1 the specification allows and the 4 interior peaks sit on it, level to 8.5e-4 per cent — which is the condition for a minimax solution and is now checked rather than assumed. The dots are the eighty-one frequencies the objective used to be evaluated at: the worst of them is 0.09999998 and the worst of the design over the whole band is 0.10013858, so an optimiser shown only the dots drove them down to the specification and left the true peaks 13.9 parts in ten thousand above it. That is nothing until something downstream is a threshold, and the band measurement was one: it reported 97.34 per cent for a design that holds 134.04.

The number that was wrong

The rung below printed 97.3 per cent of band for a five-section transformer where the answer is 134, said in its own text that the figure was wrong, and blamed a search that had converged to eight digits. The search was fine. The objective was the worst of a grid rather than the worst of a band, the band was then measured by bisecting a function that crosses its threshold five times, and the assertion guarding all of it passed — because 97.3 is still more than 92.6.

lines · Matching A coil of 500 nF and a capacitor of 100 µH give the loop three features, not one. computed by solving, not by drawing. The current round the loop for a volt across it, with the coil carrying 500 nanofarads of its own capacitance and the capacitor 100 microhenries of its own inductance. Three features rather than one: the resonance the two nameplate values set, at 4.02 kHz; the coil's own self-resonance at 7.12 kHz, which is a parallel tank and so a null in a series loop, 5.67e+3 times below the peak beside it; and a second series resonance at 28.2 kHz that belongs to neither component. Above the null the coil is a capacitance, that capacitance is in series with the tuning capacitor, and the capacitor's own inductance resonates with the pair — which is why removing either parasitic removes this peak and neither alone can produce it.

Two parasitics, and the resonance neither of them has

A resonator's quality factor is supposed to sit below the worst of its components, because reciprocals add. Give the capacitor half a millihenry of its own inductance and the loop measures 92.21 against a coil that allows 64.55 and a reciprocal sum that predicts 62.47 — the ceiling passed exactly where ESL/L crosses ESR/DCR, at 5.00 per cent. Add the coil's own capacitance beside it and the loop grows a second resonance at 28.2 kHz that neither part has alone, taller than the first by 40.4, and the half-power level is then crossed four times.

frequency · Resonance The noise bandwidth of four families at 8 orders, and the one that has none. computed by solving, not by drawing. Every one of the 32 entries is an integral of the realised network's own squared magnitude, divided by that network's own measured −3 dB point. At order one the four families are the same filter and return 1.5706, which is π/2 — the calibration the rest of the table is quoted against. Only Butterworth then does what the ratio is usually said to do: it falls at every order, to 1.0065 at 8. Bessel is least at order 5 (1.0385) and rises to 1.0441; Chebyshev alternates with parity, 0.9637 at five against 1.0686 at six; and an even-order elliptic has no noise bandwidth at all, because its stopband comes back up to a constant — its magnitude at the top of the range moves by 0.00 decades per decade of frequency, so the integral grows with whatever limit it is stopped at.

The ratio that does not walk to one

A single pole passes π/2 times as much noise as a brick wall at its corner, and every account of it says the ratio falls towards one as the skirt steepens. Over thirty-two realised filters only Butterworth does that. Bessel is least at order five, 1.0385, and rises again; Chebyshev alternates with parity and the two branches separate only above 0.1968 decibels of ripple; and an even-order elliptic has no noise bandwidth at all, its integral returning 380 or 38,005 depending on where it was stopped.

noise · Noise bandwidth The bank reaches 1.500 mΩ and the load sees 141.5 mΩ at that same frequency. computed by solving, not by drawing. One bulk part and 20 ceramics, with a nanohenry of mounting loop each and two nanohenries of plane between the bank and the load, solved once per frequency and read at both nodes. The dashed curve is the bank's own node — what a probe on the parts measures. The solid one is the load. The bank's least impedance is 1.500 mΩ at 11.3 MHz, and at that frequency the load sees 141.5 mΩ, which is 94.3 times more, against 141.5 mΩ of plane reactance at that frequency. Whatever the parts do, the load's reading cannot fall below the reactance of the copper in front of them, and the parts reach their best by moving up the frequency axis into it.

The floor and the ceiling move apart

A decoupling bank is judged by two numbers — the lowest impedance it reaches and the highest frequency at which it still meets its target — and with no copper between the parts and the load both improve together as capacitors are added, 5.000 milliohms down to 1.500 and 19.8 megahertz up to 162. Three nanohenries of ordinary board separate them. The bank's own floor still falls 3.33 times while the load's falls 1.49, and the ceiling read at the parts climbs to 82.4 megahertz while the load's peaks at 8.06 and falls to 5.05. At twenty parts the two nodes disagree by a factor of 94 about the same solve.

power · Decoupling What one temperature costs the loop gain of a part that has a gradient. computed by solving, not by drawing. The thermal loop gain of a 30 mm core, solved as a body with its own internal temperature profile and again as a single lump at that profile's mean, against the Biot number. Both are negative, so the core is a stabilising feedback either way — but the body's loop is the more negative of the two at every point, by 3.0 per cent at a Biot number of 0.108 and 38 per cent at 10.8. A lumped calculation therefore understates how stable a wound part is, and the amount it understates by is not a property of the material but of how well the surface is cooled relative to how well the inside conducts. Below a Biot number of about a tenth it is worth under two per cent and the lump is the right model; at the cooled end the part has 7 kelvin inside it and half the feedback is invisible to a single temperature.

The loop gain one temperature understates

Every thermal loop gain this collection has computed was computed at a single temperature, because a lumped fixed point has only one — and the essay that measured the gradient inside a core recorded, without measuring it, that this makes each of those numbers a lower bound. It is a lower bound by three per cent where a ferrite usually sits and by thirty-eight per cent at the well-cooled end, always in the direction that makes the part safer than the calculation said. The obvious candidate for what decides it is refused: three geometries at one Biot number are 3.3 times apart.

power · Thermal feedback Correcting a 20 Ω, 50 mH load to unity, and what it stores. computed by solving, not by drawing. A capacitor across a 230 V, 50 Hz supply is swept from nothing to 300 µF against a load drawing 1636 W and 1285 var. The reactive power falls through zero at 77.31 µF and keeps going; the energy stored in the installation rises from 2044.9 mJ to 4089.7 mJ at that point — exactly twice, because unity power factor means the two stores are equal — and goes on rising afterwards. Only the cable current has a least value, 7.113 A against 9.044 A.

The energy a unity power factor doubles

Reactive power was computed three ways on this site and the agreement was called a verification. Two of the three are one theorem written twice and cannot disagree about anything; only the third is independent, and what it computes is a difference. Correcting a 20 Ω, 50 mH load to a power factor of 1.000000 takes its reactive power from 1,285 var to nothing and takes the energy stored in the installation from 2,044.9 mJ to 4,089.7 mJ — exactly twice, at every load and every frequency.

power · Reactive power 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

The rung below found that charging a capacitor from a step loses half the delivered energy whatever the resistance, and that 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 Four wires against a 10 MΩ voltmeter. computed by solving, not by drawing at 81 resistances, twice each, with a voltmeter of 10 MΩ and 50 mΩ in every lead. The four-wire error is not zero: it is the voltmeter's own divider, −(R + 2R_lead)/(R + 2R_lead + R_m), which grows with the resistance being measured rather than shrinking. The two-wire error is that same quantity plus the leads, so it passes through zero at 1000 Ω — where the reading is right to 1.8e-12 while the four-wire reading is 0.0100% low — and above 707 Ω the two-wire arrangement is the more accurate of the two at every resistance.

The voltmeter four wires do not remove

A four-terminal measurement is described everywhere as removing the leads from the answer. It moves them. What is left is the voltmeter's own input resistance, and it grows with the resistance being measured rather than shrinking: with a ten-megohm voltmeter and fifty milliohms of lead, the four-wire reading is 0.0100 per cent low at a kilohm, where the two-wire reading is exactly right — 1.8 × 10⁻¹² — because its lead error and its loading error cancel. Above 707 Ω the two-wire arrangement is the more accurate of the two at every resistance.

instruments · Four-terminal Inside the passband the matrix is worst at the edge, and at no ripple peak. computed by solving, not by drawing. The condition number of a 5th-order Chebyshev filter's nodal matrix at every frequency from a hundredth of its cutoff to ten times it. It is 4.004e+3 at direct current, rises to 1.5868e+7 at 964.0 Hz — located by golden section rather than read off the sweep — falls to 4.970e+6 at 1520 Hz and rises again through the stopband. The maximum is above every ripple peak (the highest is at 897.9 Hz) and within 3.6 per cent of the half-power frequency: the worst-conditioned place in the passband is where the filter stops passing and starts blocking, which is a place the response curve has no feature at. It is a local maximum: above the band κ climbs again, reaching 2.702e+7 at ten times the cutoff, because the susceptances in the matrix grow with the frequency and κ counts them. Nothing about any of these numbers says whether a digit is actually lost anywhere.

Where the matrix is worst, and where the answer is not

When a solve stops being exact has been answered with two networks at direct current. Swept along the frequency axis, a resistive chain's nodal matrix has a condition number of 4.00×10³ at direct current and 1.59×10⁷ at 964 Hz — a maximum at the band edge, at no ripple peak and at no feature the response has. It predicts nothing. The solution vector is right to three units of round-off everywhere, the response taken out of it loses four decades into the stopband, and the same filter written at 400 kΩ instead of 10 Ω has a condition number 1.4×10⁹ times larger and returns the same twelve digits.

networks · Conditioning 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 return under a track gathers from 26.3 kHz to 1.42 MHz, not at one frequency. computed by solving, not by drawing, on a cross-section of a 50 mm plane cut into 120 strips, each with its resistance and its partial inductance to every other strip and to the track. The solid curve is the share of the return current inside one track-height of the point beneath the track; the second is the share inside ten heights. At direct current the return spreads evenly — 0.8 per cent within one height — and far above the band it is the image-current distribution, 48.7 per cent, which the closed form gives as 48.7. Between them it gathers across three decades: a tenth of the way by 26.3 kHz, half by 283 kHz, nine tenths by 1.42 MHz, shaded. The resistance of the path equals its reactance at 1.59 kHz, where the return has not yet moved. The single corner estimated from a path three track-widths wide and a parallel-plate inductance is 106 kHz, 28 per cent of the way through the band.

The corner that is three decades wide

Where the current comes back put the change in a return current's path at 106 kilohertz, from a low-frequency path assumed three track-widths wide and an inductance taken from a parallel-plate formula. Solved across a plane cut into a hundred and twenty strips, the loop's resistance equals its reactance at 1.59 kilohertz, where the current has not moved at all, and the return then gathers beneath the track over three decades — half of the way by 283 kilohertz, nine tenths by 1.42 megahertz. The single corner is a point about a quarter of the way through a band.

lines · Return path The two sequences a neutral current says nothing about. computed by solving, not by drawing at 61 imbalances. Three 20 Ω loads on a 230 V, 50 Hz star supply, one of them raised by a fraction of itself, with the neutral in place. The zero-sequence current is the one the neutral carries three times and is the only one this collection has read; the negative sequence is a balanced set of three phasors rotating the other way. At 30.0 per cent imbalance it is 0.8846 A against 10.6154 A of positive sequence, 8.333 per cent, against 8.333 per cent from x/(3 + 2x). Two per cent arrives at 6.250 per cent imbalance, bisected on the network.

The half the neutral does not carry

A star load unbalanced in one phase produces two things, not one. The neutral carries three times the zero-sequence current, which is the half this collection has read; the other half is a negative-sequence set of exactly the same size, rotating backwards, that the neutral never sees. With 0.5 Ω of line in front of 20 Ω loads, losing a phase entirely puts 50.00 per cent negative sequence in the current and 0.8265 per cent in the voltage a switchboard meter reads.

power · Three-phase Against its own shaping the error is 17.4× tonal, not 51×. computed by solving, not by drawing. The share of an order-1 loop's in-band error sitting in its five largest lines, from 0.02 to 0.9 of full scale, with both nulls drawn. The lower level is 1.953 per cent — five lines of a FLAT error over 256 — and it is what this measurement has always been quoted against. The upper level is 5.74 per cent, which is what five lines of the loop's OWN shaping hold with no tone anywhere in them. Measured against the first the error is 51 times tonal at 0.02 of full scale and 26 at 0.9; against the second, 17.4 and 8.9. The direction survives the correction and the size does not.

A floor, or five tones

The field's sharpest statement about a one-bit loop is that three quarters of its in-band error sits in five lines, against the 1.953 per cent a white error would put in any five — a factor of thirty-eight. The comparison is to a white error, and a shaping loop exists to make its error anything but white. Measured against the loop's own transfer function, which the loop reproduces line by line to a part in five hundred when it is dithered, the same error is 17.4 times tonal at a fiftieth of full scale and 8.9 times at nine tenths. And 99.5 per cent of it at the quiet end is two harmonics of the input.

digital · Noise shaping The period's spread is 1.20 times what counting two crossings gives. computed by solving, not by drawing. 19999 periods of a relaxation oscillator with 5 mV rms of noise on its thresholds, computed from the exact flip instants rather than marched, at β = 0.5. The measured standard deviation is 3.4 ns and the closed form — three partial derivatives of the period with respect to the three draws it depends on — gives 3.4 ns. The estimate that counts two threshold crossings and divides the noise by the slope at each gives 2.83 ns, which is 17 per cent low. The curve is the closed form's Gaussian, drawn on the measured histogram rather than fitted to it.

The decision taken where the ramp is slowest

A relaxation oscillator decides at its thresholds, and a threshold is the one place on a charging exponential where the slope is smallest. Noise there costs 3.399 units of period against the 2.828 that counting two crossings gives, because a draw moves the crossing it is armed for and the level the next ramp starts from. Consecutive periods share that draw, so they are positively correlated and the jitter accumulates at 3.771 per root period rather than at 3.399. And at a fixed frequency there is a best hysteresis: β = 0.648, where β·ln((1+β)/(1−β)) = 1.

applied · Hysteresis Two networks of one magnitude deliver the same energy, and the minimum-phase one delivers half of it 5.61 times sooner. computed by solving, not by drawing. A low-pass with poles at 1.00 kHz and 10.0 kHz and a zero at 3.00 kHz, and the same network with an all-pass behind it that moves the zero into the right half-plane. Their magnitudes agree at every frequency sampled to 4.4e-16. The energy of each impulse response, from the residues in closed form, is 6029.319 for both, and the integral of |H|² over frequency gives 6029.305. What differs is when it arrives: the minimum-phase network has delivered half its energy by 11.27 µs and its mirror by 63.23 µs; by 20 µs the fractions are 0.658 and 0.352, by 100 µs 0.918 and 0.676; and at no instant has the mirror delivered more.

The energy that arrives first

Two networks with the same magnitude at every frequency have the same impulse-response energy, and Parseval's theorem says so before either is solved. They do not deliver it on the same schedule. A low-pass with poles at one and ten kilohertz and a zero at three delivers half its energy by 11.27 microseconds; the same network with its zero mirrored into the right half-plane, which changes no magnitude anywhere, takes 63.23, and at no instant has it delivered more. Its step response starts the wrong way, to −0.170 of the final value, before it turns round. Minimum phase is minimum delay, and the delay is in the energy rather than in any one number a frequency plot shows.

frequency · Minimum-phase A capacitor across the upper divider resistor removes the output capacitor's resistance floor. computed by solving, not by drawing. Two series resistances against the capacitance across the upper divider resistor: the smallest the loop tolerates at 45° of margin (lower curve), and the one that gives the smallest droop after a 100 mA load step (upper). With no capacitor they are 939 mΩ and 885 mΩ — the second BELOW the first, which is the conflict this design has: the best transient is one the loop refuses. The floor falls as the capacitor grows and between 500 and 836.5 pF it leaves the sweep altogether, so every series resistance down to a milliohm is stable. Past about 5000 pF the floor climbs back and overtakes the optimum again. The shaded band is where the design a transient wants is one the loop allows.

The floor a second capacitor removes

Two requirements pulling one capacitor found a regulator whose best transient is one it must not be built with: below 939 milliohms of output-capacitor series resistance the loop has under 45 degrees of margin, and the droop is smallest at 885. The capacitor across the upper divider resistor, added for the reference's sake, dissolves that conflict. At 836.5 picofarads the 45-degree floor leaves the sweep entirely — every series resistance down to a milliohm is stable — and the droop falls 40 per cent at the same time. The band of capacitances that do it runs from 100 picofarads to 5 nanofarads, and above it the conflict returns.

applied · Regulator Loop gain of a two-pole amplifier closed for a gain of 100. Unity loop gain at 5.73 kHz, where 35.0° of phase remains before −180°. The phase never reaches −180° at any frequency, so there is no gain margin to quote: 2 poles contribute at most 180° and the last of it arrives only at infinity.

The loop that never crosses

Every loop this field draws carries two margins, and one of them is not always a number. Take the third pole out of the standard loop and its crossover moves by 2.45 parts per million and its phase margin by 0.164 degrees — the third pole's own arctangent there, to five decimal places — while its gain margin goes from 46.06 decibels to no number at all. The phase reaches −180° only where the magnitude has already reached −62 decibels, and the two instruments that are supposed to notice report 3.19 × 10⁻⁶ either way.

feedback · Loop gain One gain takes the equivalent resistance from 5 kΩ through infinity to negative. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 5 V source drives a node through 10 kΩ; the node also reaches 10 kΩ whose far end is held at A times the node's own voltage. The Thévenin resistance looking into that node is r1 in parallel with r2/(1 − A), which the solve returns to a part in a billion without being told: 5 kΩ at no gain, 10 kΩ at unity where r2 takes no current at all, and unbounded at A = 2.00 where the two conductances cancel. Above that it is negative. The open-circuit voltage follows it, because the short-circuit current is 500.0 µA at every gain — a short across the controlling node leaves the dependent source nothing to be controlled by — so the open-circuit voltage is simply the short-circuit current times whatever the resistance is, and reaches 150.0 volts from a five-volt source inside the range drawn.

The resistor that is not made of the resistors

Exact outside and wrong within reduced six elements to one source and one resistor and found the resistor two ways that agreed to the last bit. Put a dependent source in the network and one of those routes stops working, because setting the sources dead kills the independent ones and leaves the dependent one where it is. On a bootstrap of two ten-kilohm resistors the Thévenin resistance runs from five kilohms through infinity to minus ten, the open-circuit voltage of a five-volt source reaches 225, and above one gain the equivalent's resistor is negative — which the netlist refuses to stamp, correctly, because a negative resistance is a controlled source and not a resistor.

networks · Equivalent circuit The guard leaves a negative resistance, and it reaches −1.59 kΩ. computed by solving, not by drawing. The magnitude of the conductance a source sees looking into the input, guarded and not, with 100 pF of cable and a 1.00 MHz amplifier. The unguarded input's conductance is positive everywhere — a capacitance to ground and a leakage to a rail are both losses. The guarded one is negative above 0.0404 Hz, and its magnitude rises as the square of frequency: −15.9 MΩ at 10 kHz, −161 kΩ at 100 kHz, −3.18 kΩ at a megahertz. Above the amplifier's gain-bandwidth product it flattens at ωₜ·C, which is −1.59 kΩ. That is the same input the guard raises to 10¹⁸ Ω at direct current, and nothing about the leakage the guard was installed for appears in it: the negative resistance is a product of the amplifier's bandwidth and the cable it is driving.

The sign of what the guard gives back

A guard ring is sold on two numbers and they are both about magnitudes: a teraohm of leakage multiplied to 10¹⁸ ohms, and a hundred picofarads of cable bootstrapped out of the way. The guard is also driving that capacitance with a copy of the input that lags it, and a capacitance driven by a lagging copy of its own voltage takes current out of phase with the voltage across it. What the guarded input presents is a negative conductance rising as the square of frequency — −15.9 megohms at ten kilohertz, −3.18 kilohms at a megahertz, flattening at the gain-bandwidth product times the capacitance — and a faster amplifier makes it worse.

instruments · Guarding The ladder'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 A track needs about three heights of copper beside it, and it is the resistance that says so. computed by solving, not by drawing at 100 MHz, each point a strip solve of its own on a 50 mm plane of the same area, moved sideways. The horizontal axis is where the track's centre sits relative to the plane's edge, in units of the track's height above it; negative is a track hanging past the edge with no copper beneath it. With the centre directly over the edge the loop's inductance is 1.161 times its centred value and its resistance 2.90 times, because the return has to crowd into the last few hundred micrometres of copper. Three heights in, the inductance is 1.006 times and the resistance 1.09; ten heights in, both are within 0.7 per cent. Three heights past the edge the inductance is 1.82 times. At direct current every point on this axis is exactly one, because the copper has been moved and not removed.

Where the plane runs out

The corner that is three decades wide solved a return current over a plane that extends well past the track on both sides. Where it does not, the two costs arrive at opposite ends of the band: at direct current a plane that ends under the track costs 27 per cent of inductance and not one part in a million of resistance, and above the band it costs 16 per cent of inductance and 199 per cent of resistance. Three track-heights of copper beside the track removes almost all of both, and the number three has no millimetres in it — sixteen times the whole cross-section gives the same ratios to a part in a billion.

lines · Return path What is warm in a capacitor, by its two loss models. computed by solving, not by drawing. One 100 nF capacitor of loss tangent 0.02, written as a 3.183 Ω resistance in series with it and as a 7.958 kΩ resistance across it — the pair that converts exactly at 10.0 kHz and nowhere else. The noise at the terminals is 4kT times the real part of the impedance, so the two models give the same density at 10.0 kHz and are 33.0 dB apart at 100 Hz and 40.0 dB apart at a megahertz. The dots are the same quantity computed the other way — the resistor split out of the netlist, a source put in its place and the network re-solved — agreeing to 3.3e-16. The reactance itself contributes nothing at either end: a lossless capacitor has no real part and is not warm.

Only the real part is warm

Johnson's 4kTR is the special case of a statement about impedances: the noise across any passive two-terminal in equilibrium is 4kT·Re{Z}, so a reactance contributes nothing however large it is. That turns a modelling convenience into a noise figure. A 100 nF capacitor of loss tangent 0.02 written as 3.183 Ω in series and as 7.958 kΩ across it — the pair that converts exactly at 10 kHz — gives 0.226 and 10.10 nV/√Hz at 100 Hz, 33 dB apart, and 40 dB apart the other way at a megahertz.

noise · Johnson noise The lower corner, estimated from short-circuit time constants. computed by solving, not by drawing, on three coupling capacitors and three shunt resistors at 28 spreads of the capacitor values. Each capacitor's short-circuit time constant is its own value times the resistance between its terminals with the other two shorted; the sum of the RECIPROCALS is 60000 s⁻¹ here, and it equals the ratio of the denominator's two highest coefficients to 1.4e-12 and the negated sum of the poles to 1.4e-12. That much is the same theorem as the other end. What is an estimate is the corner: 9549 Hz against a measured 8192 Hz, high by 16.6%. It is high at every spread drawn — the error reverses direction with the construction, so both ends of a band are estimated inwards.

Shorted instead of opened, and the error changes sign

The same construction with the other capacitors shorted rather than removed sums the reciprocals of the products, and that sum is the ratio of the denominator's two HIGHEST coefficients — the negated sum of the poles, exact to a part in 10¹². Divided by 2π it estimates the lower corner of a band, and it is 16.6 per cent HIGH with three coupling capacitors and never once low. Two settings of the slider give the same three time constants in a different order, the same sum, and corners two per cent apart.

transients · Open circuit time constants 1 pF across a 50 Ω line: a dip of 0.320 V and an area of 25 ps. computed by solving, not by drawing as a cascade of two-ports, with a raised-cosine edge of 59 ps sent into it. The incident edge is the faint curve; what comes back is the shaded dip and what goes on is the third. The dip reaches -0.3202 V and its area is 25 ps, which is Z₀C/2 to a part in ten thousand. Driven by an edge fifty times faster the same cascade returns the single exponential the closed form gives, to 9.3e-6 of a volt. The transmitted edge leaves at 81.1 ps, against 59 ps arriving.

The dip whose area is fixed

A picofarad across a 50 Ω line makes a dip in what comes back. Its depth is 0.833 volts to a six-picosecond edge and 0.0196 volts to a nanosecond one, forty-two times less; its area is 25 picoseconds to both, to six parts in a hundred thousand, because the area is Z₀C/2 and contains nothing about the edge. Two half-picofarad discontinuities too close to tell apart read as exactly one picofarad, and so do two far enough apart to be separate — the area is additive where the depth is not. And what a reflectometer calls the capacitance of an impedance step is the step's real excess capacitance times 1 + Z/Z₀.

lines · Reflections The circuit does not care which node is called zero, and the matrix does. computed by solving, not by drawing. The condition number of the nodal matrix for a 12-section chain, against which of its nodes was taken as the reference. The network, its elements and its physics are identical in every case — only a label has moved — and every branch voltage and branch current comes back the same to 1.1e-13. The condition number runs from 5.25e+4 at "n6" to 1.72e+5 at "n12", a factor of 3.28, which is 0.52 decimal digits of the arithmetic's own margin.

The node that is not in the circuit

Nodal analysis needs a node to call zero and no circuit contains one. Moving it changes every node voltage by the same amount and no branch voltage or branch current at all — to a part in ten to the fourteenth on a well-behaved chain. What it does change is the matrix: the condition number of a twelve-section chain moves by a factor of 3.3 with the reference, and on a star whose resistances span nine decades by 8.0. Measured against the same matrix solved in twice the precision, the worst reference costs four decimal digits of the answer, and it is the reference the condition number named before the error was looked at.

networks · Nodal analysis The images a zero-order hold leaves, at 0.222 of the sample rate. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 10.67 kHz tone held at 48 kHz, with every line read out of a transform of the staircase itself. The sampled spectrum repeats at every multiple of the clock and the hold multiplies all of it by one sinc, so each image survives scaled by the sinc at its own frequency: the fundamental at -0.72 dB, the largest image (1fs−f, 37.3 kHz) at -11.60 dB, which is 10.88 dB of rejection. The sinc's nulls are exactly at the multiples of the clock and the two first-order images straddle the first of them without touching it — so the hold's rejection is 25.6 dB for a tone at 0.05 fs and 1.74 dB for one at 0.45, falling to nothing at half the clock. Measured and closed form agree to 0.026%.

The nulls are where nothing is

A zero-order hold multiplies the whole repeated spectrum by one sinc, so it attenuates every image at the image's own frequency and its nulls land exactly on the multiples of the clock. Nothing is ever at a null: the two first-order images straddle it, and the closer the signal comes to half the clock the closer they come to each other. The hold gives 25.6 dB of image rejection to a tone at a twentieth of the clock, 1.74 dB at 0.45 of it, and nothing at all at half — which is the frequency the band most needs it at.

digital · Reconstruction Three amplitudes, all of them "one per cent wrong". computed by solving, not by drawing. An exponential driven by a sinusoid has I₀(a) as its mean, 2I₁(a) as its fundamental and 2Iₙ(a) as its harmonics, all checked here against a numerical transform of the waveform itself, agreeing to 9.0e-11. Each gives a different one-per-cent boundary at 27 °C: 1.03 mV for the second harmonic, 5.17 mV for the shift in the operating point the model was linearised about, and 7.30 mV for the gain — which is 1 : 5 : 5√2 at this criterion, and the largest of them is the one usually quoted. The spacing is not a property of the device: the second harmonic is first order in the amplitude and the other two are second, so tightening the criterion to a part in ten thousand spreads the same three to 1 : 50.0 : 70.71. At a drive of one thermal voltage the bias current is 26.6% above quiescent, which is the boundary nobody counts because it moves the thing the model was built at rather than what the model predicts.

Three amplitudes, all of them one per cent

The amplitude at which linearising an exponential is one per cent wrong is 7.30 mV, and that is a statement about the gain. Two other quantities are also one per cent wrong somewhere: the second harmonic reaches one per cent at 1.03 mV and the shift in the operating point the model was linearised about reaches it at 5.17 — which is √2 below the gain boundary exactly, because the mean goes as a²/4 and the fundamental as a²/8. And the spacing is not a property of the device: tighten the criterion to a part in ten thousand and the same three spread to 1 : 50 : 70.7.

limits · Small-signal A permittivity quoted as one number falls 0.645 across five decades. computed by solving, not by drawing. The real part of the relative permittivity against frequency for FR-4 (ε′ = 4.4 at 1 GHz, tanδ = 0.02), from a continuum of relaxations spread uniformly in log-frequency — the arrangement that makes the loss tangent flat. The dashed line is the single number a datasheet quotes. FR-4: 4.787 at 1 MHz and 4.142 at 100 GHz, a fall of 14.7 per cent. Nothing here is fitted: the slope is what a flat loss tangent forces.

The permittivity a loss forbids

A datasheet quotes a relative permittivity and a loss tangent as two independent numbers, and they are not two numbers. A material that dissipates has a permittivity that falls logarithmically with frequency at a rate its own loss fixes — 0.129 of permittivity a decade for FR-4, so the 4.4 quoted at a gigahertz is 4.79 at a megahertz and 4.14 at a hundred. Three hundred millimetres of track loses 62.9 picoseconds of delay between 100 MHz and 10 GHz, which a constant permittivity puts at 1.3; and the constant-permittivity model smears an edge backwards, taking 180 picoseconds to reach half height and 133 more to reach nine tenths.

lines · Dispersion What a pair does to the three boundaries: removes two, moves one. computed by solving, not by drawing, with every harmonic taken from a transform of the waveform rather than from a series. A differential pair's transfer is an odd function, so the mean and every even harmonic are zero — -3.2e-17 and 9.1e-17 at a drive of two thermal voltages, which is absent rather than small. Two of the three one-per-cent boundaries therefore do not exist for a pair at all. The third, the loss of gain, moves by √2 in the limit of a tight criterion and by 1.42610 at the one per cent quoted here — 10.42 mV against 7.304 mV at 27 °C, against √2 = 1.41421 and 1.41433 at a criterion a hundred times tighter. So a pair reached for as headroom has bought forty per cent of it and a pair reached for as linearity has bought something else entirely. Twenty millivolts of imbalance brings the even orders straight back, which is what says the cancellation belongs to the symmetry rather than to the topology.

Two boundaries removed, and one moved

A differential pair's transfer is odd, so its mean and every even harmonic are zero — −3.2×10⁻¹⁷ and 9.1×10⁻¹⁷ at a drive of two thermal voltages, absent rather than small. Two of the three one-per-cent boundaries therefore do not exist for a pair at all. The third, the loss of gain, moves by √2 in the limit and by 1.42610 at the one per cent usually quoted: 10.42 mV against 7.304. So a pair reached for as headroom has bought forty per cent of it, and twenty millivolts of imbalance brings the even orders straight back.

limits · Small-signal Where the bandwidth estimate stops being conservative. computed by solving, not by drawing. A Sallen–Key low-pass at unity gain, its quality factor swept by the ratio of its two capacitors. The sum of its open-circuit time constants is 2RC₂ and nothing else — the feedback capacitor sees zero resistance — so the estimate is 7957.7 Hz at every setting while the measured corner walks down past it. Below a quality factor of √2 the estimate is low, as it is on every network with real poles; above it the estimate is HIGH, by 6.45 times at a Q of ten. The crossing, bisected on the solved response, is at 1.414213032 against √2 = 1.414213562, and the estimate is at its worst at the Butterworth value 1/√2 where it is low by exactly 1 − 1/√2 = 29.29%.

Where the estimate stops being a bound

The sum of open-circuit time constants is never optimistic on a network with real poles, and the claim is about the network rather than about the theorem. On a second-order section the ratio of the estimate to the truth is Q/√(k + √(k²+1)) with k = 1 − 1/2Q², which is exactly 1/√2 at the Butterworth quality factor — its worst point, 29.29 per cent low — and exactly 1 at a quality factor of √2. Above that the estimate is high, by 6.45 times at a Q of ten, and the crossing bisected on the solved response is 1.414213 against 1.414214.

transients · Open circuit time constants The winding window solved in two dimensions, copper filling 100% of it. computed by solving, not by drawing. The grey frame is iron of infinite permeability, which in this formulation is a Neumann boundary — flux enters it at right angles and pays nothing. The thin curves are flux lines, which are contours of the vector potential, so equal spacing is equal flux. The copper is shaded by its own share of the loss. At 100 per cent fill the solved ratio is 16.280 against Dowell's 16.382, and the difference is entirely the flux that curls round the ends of the foils — which the one-dimensional model has no way to hold.

The assumption that is a geometry

Every alternating-resistance number this collection has computed for a winding rests on one sentence — the field is parallel to the layers everywhere — and the sentence has never been tested, because testing it needs a field. Solved as one, a portion of foils that fills its window returns Dowell's expression to 0.155 per cent; the same copper filling a quarter of it returns 9.00 against the expression's 16.38, and dissipates 0.528 watts a metre against 0.232. The ratio falls by 45 per cent and the loss more than doubles.

magnetics · Winding field A via's area changes sign at 44.7 Ω, and two impedances give its 0.5 pF and 1 nH back. computed by solving, not by drawing, as a cascade of two-ports: a via of 0.25 pF, 1 nH and 0.25 pF, met by an edge of 59 ps from reference lines of 20 to 150 Ω. The area under the reflection is −Z₀C/2 + L/2Z₀ at every impedance: a bump below 44.7 Ω, where the inductance's term is the larger, nothing at it, and a dip above. From 50 Ω the area is 2.5 ps of dip, which a single-capacitance reading calls 0.100 pF. From 50 and 75 Ω together the two areas give 0.5000 pF and 1.0000 nH. An error of 50 fs on each area moves them by up to 0.8% and 1.5%.

The via two lines can weigh

The area under a reflection is a property of the discontinuity rather than of the edge, and for a via it is one number made of two: −Z₀C/2 from its pads and +L/2Z₀ from its barrel, with opposite signs. A via of half a picofarad and a nanohenry, seen from fifty ohms, leaves 2.5 picoseconds of dip — which a reading that assumes a capacitor calls 0.100 pF, a fifth of what is there. From fifty and seventy-five ohms together the two areas give 0.5000 pF and 1.0000 nH back, and fifty femtoseconds of error on each costs 0.8 per cent of the capacitance and 1.5 of the inductance. A second line at fifty-five ohms costs five times as much.

lines · Reflections The net noise power between two resistors at two temperatures. computed by solving, not by drawing. A 1 kΩ resistor at 400 K joined to a second one at 290 K, whose resistance runs over six decades. Each delivers 4kTR₁R₂/(R₁+R₂)² per hertz to the other; the net is 1.5187 zW/Hz at the match, which is exactly kΔT and contains no resistance — a gigohm pair at the same two temperatures exchanges the same. Away from the match the exchange falls, to 0.0596 zW/Hz at a ratio of a hundred, so the maximum-power argument applies to noise as it does to a signal. At one temperature the net is zero at every ratio, to 7.5e-37 W/Hz, which is the statement a wrong noise model would break.

Which way the noise goes

Two warm resistors joined together each drive the other, and the net flow is 4kΔT·R₁R₂/(R₁+R₂)² per hertz. At the match that is kΔT exactly — 1.5187 zeptowatts per hertz between 400 K and 290 K — and a kilohm pair and a gigohm pair at the same two temperatures exchange the same, which is why noise is quoted as a temperature. At one temperature the net is zero at every ratio to a part in 10³⁷, and that zero is the second law rather than a tolerance.

noise · Johnson noise A porosity of 0.50, with the field the substitution smooths away. computed by solving, not by drawing. The flux lines between the conductors are the whole difference. The porosity substitution replaces this layer with a foil of the same direct-current resistance spread over the full breadth, in which the field is parallel to the layers by construction; here it is not, and it crowds between the turns. The solved ratio is 5.816 against the substitution's 6.212, 6.4 per cent apart. The copper is shaded by its own loss, which is what says the turns inside a layer are not alike either.

The wire that is not a foil

Almost no winding is made of foil, and the closed form for a winding's alternating-current resistance is about foils. The bridge between them is a substitution — squeeze the layer's conductors together, spread the result back across the breadth, divide the conductivity by the porosity — and it replaces a two-dimensional geometry with a one-dimensional one. Solved as a field it is exact where it must be, at a porosity of one, and 7.2 per cent high at a porosity of 0.40. It errs on the safe side, which is the half of the answer nobody could have assumed.

magnetics · Winding field The one number the window does not move. computed by solving, not by drawing. Loss against foil thickness, at three window fills, with each curve's minimum located by a parabola through its three lowest points rather than read off the grid. The optimum sits at 0.654 skin depths at full fill, 0.708 at forty per cent, against the closed form's 0.663 — a drift of 8.3 per cent while the ratio the same winding carries moves by eighty. The alternating-current resistance at the optimum is 1.340, 1.351, 1.406, against four thirds. What did move is the loss it costs: 0.0555 watts a metre at full fill and 0.1383 at forty per cent, for the same current in the same number of layers.

The optimum that does not move

A foil winding has a best thickness — past it, more copper is more resistance — and at that thickness the alternating-current resistance is four thirds of the direct-current resistance, whatever the layer count. Both of those are one-dimensional results, and this ladder has spent three rungs finding that the one-dimensional picture is 82 per cent wrong about the resistance ratio. Solved as a field, the optimum drifts by 8.3 per cent between a full window and a quarter-full one, and four thirds becomes 1.34, 1.35, 1.41. The trade barely moves while everything it is made of moves a great deal.

magnetics · Winding The winding window solved electrostatically, in two portions. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same cross-section the loss solve reads, read with ∇·(ε∇φ) = 0 instead. Two things are the opposite way round from the magnetic problem and both are the whole difference. The iron is now a Dirichlet boundary rather than a Neumann one — an earthed core is an equipotential, so the field meets it at right angles instead of running along it — and a conductor carries a prescribed potential rather than a prescribed current. The thin curves are equipotentials, which are contours of φ, so equal spacing is equal potential step and crowded curves are a strong field. The copper is shaded by the potential each foil sits at, which rises along the winding rather than being one number. Winding to winding this window is 926.9 picofarads a metre, and 89 per cent of the energy is inside insulation that occupies a fraction of the window.

The other half of the same window

The two-dimensional solve that settled what a winding's alternating-current resistance really is computed one of the window's two parameters and never mentioned the other. Read with Laplace instead of the vector potential, the same cross-section returns 926.9 picofarads a metre — and 89 per cent of that energy sits inside films that occupy 14.1 per cent of the window. The instrument agrees with a layered slab to three parts in ten thousand billion and converges on a real winding at order 1.34, and the reason for the shortfall is not the arithmetic but the corner of a conductor.

magnetics · Winding capacitance The best foil thickness for 4 layers, for three currents with the same fundamental. computed by solving, not by drawing. The loss of a portion of 4 layers against foil thickness, with the loss weighted by the current in each harmonic rather than computed for one frequency. A sinusoid wants 0.6631 skin depths and lands at 1.3368 times the direct-current resistance — four thirds, the rung below's constant, reproduced. A triangular ripple wants 0.6432, which is the same answer to within 3.0 per cent, so a winding carrying one needs none of this. A square current of the same fundamental wants 0.3838 — thinner by a factor of 1.728 — and lands at 1.8313, which is not four thirds and is not any constant the geometry knows. Building to the sinusoid's answer costs 16.8 per cent more loss.

The optimum a spectrum moves

The best foil thickness for a winding is derived for one sinusoid and quoted as a property of the geometry: a minimum at four thirds of the direct-current resistance, whatever the layer count. Weight the loss by the current in each harmonic instead and a square current of the same fundamental wants foil 1.728 times thinner and lands at 1.83, and a narrow pulse wants it 3.68 times thinner. Four thirds is a property of the current. The constant that replaces it for an ideal square edge is exactly two, and a real winding sits between them at a place its edge rate decides.

magnetics · Winding

Named alongside it

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

Model rangeDesign tradeoffMeasurement conditionNumerical errorClosed formParasiticsModified nodal analysisSingular matrixSkin effectLoop gainModel refusalComponent tolerance

All concepts