partity-time_symmetric_wpt
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| partity-time_symmetric_wpt [2025/07/07 14:00] – [Output power and efficiency] kl | partity-time_symmetric_wpt [2025/07/07 14:27] (current) – [Efficiency] kl | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
| \begin{bmatrix} | \begin{bmatrix} | ||
| 0 \\ 0 | 0 \\ 0 | ||
| - | \end{bmatrix}(1) | + | \end{bmatrix}~~~~~~\text{(eq. 1)} |
| $$ | $$ | ||
| Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
| $$R_1=R_2=0$$ | $$R_1=R_2=0$$ | ||
| $$R_N=R_L$$ | $$R_N=R_L$$ | ||
| - | Note in particulary that a PP topology is only exact PT-symmetric if no internal losses are present. In good WPT systems, the resistive losses should be small, resulting in a good approximate PT-symmetric PP system. | + | Note in particulary that a PP topology is only exact PT-symmetric if no internal losses are present. In well-designed |
| Whereas it is possible to obtain an exact PP-symmetric circuit for SS and PP compenation topologies, this is not the case for SP and PS topologies. However, approximations are possible: if the coupling factor is low, and the coil quality factors are large (i.e. the resistances $R_1$ and $R_2$ are small), then SP and PS are in a good approximation also PT-symmetric, | Whereas it is possible to obtain an exact PP-symmetric circuit for SS and PP compenation topologies, this is not the case for SP and PS topologies. However, approximations are possible: if the coupling factor is low, and the coil quality factors are large (i.e. the resistances $R_1$ and $R_2$ are small), then SP and PS are in a good approximation also PT-symmetric, | ||
| Line 89: | Line 89: | ||
| $$ | $$ | ||
| - | [-R_N+R_1+j(\omega L_1-\frac{1}{\omega C_1})].[R_L+R_2+j(\omega L_2-\frac{1}{\omega C_2})]+\omega^2L_{12}^2=0 | + | [-R_N+R_1+j(\omega L_1-\frac{1}{\omega C_1})].[R_L+R_2+j(\omega L_2-\frac{1}{\omega C_2})]+\omega^2L_{12}^2=0 |
| - | $$ | + | $$ |
| - | (2) | + | |
| ===Exact PT-symmetric state=== | ===Exact PT-symmetric state=== | ||
| Line 98: | Line 97: | ||
| $$L_1=L_2$$ | $$L_1=L_2$$ | ||
| $$C_1=C_2$$ | $$C_1=C_2$$ | ||
| - | $$-R_N+R_1=R_L+R_2$$ (3) | + | $$-R_N+R_1=R_L+R_2~~~~~~\text{(eq. 3)} $$ |
| Solving equation (2) with respect to $\omega$ results in two solutions: | Solving equation (2) with respect to $\omega$ results in two solutions: | ||
| Line 130: | Line 129: | ||
| From the real part of equation (2), we find that the solution $\omega_{o3}=\omega_0$ only holds when the value of the negative resistor is given by: | From the real part of equation (2), we find that the solution $\omega_{o3}=\omega_0$ only holds when the value of the negative resistor is given by: | ||
| - | $$R_N=R_1+\frac{\omega_0 k^2L_1L_2}{R_2+R_L}$$ (4) | + | $$R_N=R_1+\frac{\omega_0 k^2L_1L_2}{R_2+R_L}~~~~~~\text{(eq. 4)} $$ |
| - | ===Conclusion resonance frequency | + | ===Conclusion resonance frequency=== |
| When $k \geq k_c$, there are two resonance frequencies, | When $k \geq k_c$, there are two resonance frequencies, | ||
| Line 140: | Line 139: | ||
| For $k<k_c$, the self resonant frequency, $\omega_{o3}=\omega_0$, | For $k<k_c$, the self resonant frequency, $\omega_{o3}=\omega_0$, | ||
| - | FIGURE k vs frequency (e..g, FIG 3.5) HERE? | + | {{ : |
| + | |||
| The same conclusions can be drawn for the PP compensated circuit. | The same conclusions can be drawn for the PP compensated circuit. | ||
| Line 146: | Line 147: | ||
| ====Current and voltage ratio==== | ====Current and voltage ratio==== | ||
| - | From equation (1), both the current ratio $I_1/I_2$ and the voltage ratio $U_{in}/U_L$ can be determined, with $U_{in}$ the voltage over the negative resistor, and $U_L$ the voltage over the load. | + | From equation (1), both the current ratio $I_1/I_2$ and the voltage ratio $V_1/V_2$ can be determined, with $V_{1}$ the voltage over the negative resistor, and $V_2$ the voltage over the load. |
| - | + | ||
| - | MOETEN DIE WAARDEN IN DE FIGUUR KOMEN? | + | |
| ===Exact PT-symmetric state=== | ===Exact PT-symmetric state=== | ||
| Line 155: | Line 154: | ||
| $$ \frac{I_1}{I_2}=1$$ | $$ \frac{I_1}{I_2}=1$$ | ||
| - | $$ \frac{U_{in}}{U_{L}}=\frac{R_1+R_2+R_L}{R_L}$$ | + | $$ \frac{V_{1}}{V_{2}}=\frac{R_1+R_2+R_L}{R_L}$$ |
| We notice that, in the exact PT-symmetric region, the current and voltage ratios are constant: they do NOT depend on the value of the coupling factor $k$. | We notice that, in the exact PT-symmetric region, the current and voltage ratios are constant: they do NOT depend on the value of the coupling factor $k$. | ||
| Line 175: | Line 174: | ||
| Analogously, | Analogously, | ||
| - | $$ \eta=\frac{L_1R_L}{L_2R_1+L_1(R_2+R_L} $$ | + | $$ \eta=\frac{L_1R_L}{L_2R_1+L_1(R_2+R_L)} $$ |
| These two equations indicitate the important aspect of parity-time symmetric WPT: both the output power and efficiency are constant, i.e., independent on the coupling factor $k$, in the exact symmetric PT-region ($k \geq k_c$). | These two equations indicitate the important aspect of parity-time symmetric WPT: both the output power and efficiency are constant, i.e., independent on the coupling factor $k$, in the exact symmetric PT-region ($k \geq k_c$). | ||
| + | |||
| + | The underlying explanation is that in a PT-symmetric region, the eigenvalues of the system are pure imaginary. As a result, even when losses are present, there is no change in the eigenstates of the system. | ||
| ===Broken PT-symmetric state=== | ===Broken PT-symmetric state=== | ||
| Line 183: | Line 184: | ||
| This is not the case in the broken PT-symmetric region, when $k<k_c$. Taken into account the value for the negative resistor in the broken PT-symmetric region, equation (4), and the self-resonance frequency $\omega_{o3}=\omega_0$, | This is not the case in the broken PT-symmetric region, when $k<k_c$. Taken into account the value for the negative resistor in the broken PT-symmetric region, equation (4), and the self-resonance frequency $\omega_{o3}=\omega_0$, | ||
| - | $$ P_L=\frac{\omega_0^2k^2L_1L_2R_LU_{in}^2}{[\omega_0^2k^2L_1L_2+R_1(R_2+R_L)]^2}$$ | + | $$ P_L=\frac{\omega_0^2k^2L_1L_2R_LV_{1}^2}{[\omega_0^2k^2L_1L_2+R_1(R_2+R_L)]^2}$$ |
| $$ \eta=\frac{\omega_0^2k^2L_1L_2R_L}{R_1(R_2+R_L)^2+\omega_0^2k^2L_1L_2(R_2+R_L)}$$ | $$ \eta=\frac{\omega_0^2k^2L_1L_2R_L}{R_1(R_2+R_L)^2+\omega_0^2k^2L_1L_2(R_2+R_L)}$$ | ||
| Line 189: | Line 190: | ||
| We can see that now both the output power and efficiency are NOT constant; they change with varying coupling factor $k$. | We can see that now both the output power and efficiency are NOT constant; they change with varying coupling factor $k$. | ||
| - | FIGUUR 3.6 HIER? | + | In the broken |
| - | + | ||
| - | PT-symmetric: eigenvalues are pure imaginary => even when there are losses present, no change in the eigenstates in time + energy distribution of the mode on both transmitting and receiving sides is mirror-symmetrical. | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | Broken PT-symmetric: | + | |
| + | {{ : | ||
| - | ====Efficiency==== | ||
partity-time_symmetric_wpt.1751896839.txt.gz · Last modified: by kl · Currently locked by: 216.73.216.38
