Characterization of Electromagnetic Wave Coupling With a Twisted Bundle of Twisted Wire Pairs (TBTWPs) Above a Ground Plane

Self Cite

A multiconductor transmission line (MTL) model is developed for predicting electromagnetic wave coupling effects with multitwisted bundle of twisted‐wire pairs (MTB‐TWP) running above a ground plane. Such MTB‐TWP is described as a sequential repeated structure, where all its parameters are formulated in terms of sequences. In particular, the parametric equations of all the wires are derived and described by a set of generalized equations, where the unit tangent vector for each wire is also determined analytically. In addition, the averaged per‐unit‐length (p.u.l.) parameters are described by recurrence formulas. Further, the equivalent voltages for describing the field‐to‐wire coupling of MTB‐TWP are obtained and determined analytically. The modal domain decomposition is performed with special loading terminals to split out the common mode (CM) and differential mode (DM) signals, where the CM‐to‐DM conversions are further investigated in order to indicate the balanced property in such MTB‐TWP system. On the other hand, the effect of dielectric coatings of all the wires is also characterized, where the averaged modal p.u.l. capacitance matrix is obtained numerically. A comparison is performed with the other wiring structures to visualize the benefits of our MTB‐TWP model. An extended MTL model is also validated in comparison with the commercial software FEKO.

“…As performed in the previous studies, the p.u.l. inductances can be averaged over one period and

{\overset{true¯}{l}}_{n_{p}, n_{scriptp - 1}, \dots, n_{1}} = \frac{μ_{0}}{2 π} ([], ln ((), \frac{2 h}{r_{w}}) - \sum_{scriptk = 1}^{p} \frac{s_{scriptk}^{2}}{16 h^{2}})

{\overset{true¯}{l}}_{{normalM}_{1}} = \frac{μ_{0}}{2 π} ([], ln ((), \frac{2 h}{s_{1}}) + \sum_{scriptk = 1}^{p} \frac{s_{scriptk}^{2}}{16 h^{2}})

{\overset{true¯}{l}}_{{normalM}_{scriptk}} = \frac{μ_{0}}{4 π} ln ((), 1 + \frac{4 h^{2}}{s_{scriptk}^{2}}), 2 \leq scriptk \leq scriptp

…”

Section: Geometry Of Mtb‐twps and Its Per‐unit‐length Parametersmentioning

confidence: 69%

Section: Geometry Of Mtb‐twps and Its Per‐unit‐length Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, the wires in MTB‐TWP can be characterized by

x_{n_{p}, n_{scriptp - 1}, \dots, n_{1}} = h + \sum_{scriptk = 1}^{p} \frac{{(- 1)}^{n_{k} + 1} s_{k}}{2} cos ((), α_{k} ℓ_{k})

y_{n_{p}, n_{scriptp - 1}, \dots, n_{1}} = \sum_{scriptk = 1}^{p} \frac{{(- 1)}^{n_{k} + 1} s_{k}}{2} sin ((), α_{k} ℓ_{k})

z_{n_{p}, n_{scriptp - 1}, \dots, n_{1}} = \frac{\prod_{scriptk = 1}^{p} α_{k} p_{k}}{{((), 2 π)}^{scriptp}} ℓ_{1}

where

ℓ_{k}

is a bundle arc length at the 𝓀th level and

ℓ_{k} = \frac{\prod_{m = 1}^{scriptk - 1} α_{m} p_{m}}{{((), 2 π)}^{k - 1}} ℓ_{1}, scriptk > 1

…”

Section: Geometry Of Mtb‐twps and Its Per‐unit‐length Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

h \geq 3 s_{p}

, the p.u.l. self and mutual inductances are given by

l_{n_{p}, n_{scriptp - 1}, \dots, n_{1}} = \frac{μ_{0}}{2 π} ([], ln ((), \frac{2 h}{r_{w}}) + ln ((), \frac{{x_{A}}_{n_{scriptp}, n_{p - 1}, \dots, n_{1}}}{h}))

l_{{normalM}_{1}} = \frac{μ_{0}}{4 π} ([], ln ((), \frac{4 h^{2}}{s_{1}^{2}}) + ln ((), 1 + \frac{s_{1}^{2}}{4 h^{2}} {sin}^{2} φ_{n_{p}, n_{scriptp - 1}, \dots, n_{2}} + \frac{2 normalΣ}{h} + \frac{{normalΣ}^{2}}{h^{2}}))

l_{{normalM}_{scriptk}} = \frac{μ_{0}}{4 π} ln ((), \frac{d_{scriptk}^{2} + 4 {x_{A}}_{n_{scriptp}, n_{p - 1}, \dots, 1_{scriptk}, \dots, n_{1}} \times {x_{A}}_{n_{scriptp}, n_{p - 1}, \dots, 2_{scriptk}, \dots, n_{1}}}{d_{k}^{2}})

…”

Section: Geometry Of Mtb‐twps and Its Per‐unit‐length Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The incident plane wave on the MTB‐TWP located above the ground is described by

{\overset{true\to}{E}}^{inc} = E_{x}^{inc} {\overset{true\to}{a}}_{x} + E_{y}^{inc} {\overset{true\to}{a}}_{y} + E_{z}^{inc} {\overset{true\to}{a}}_{z}

E_{x}^{inc} = 2 E_{0}^{inc} e_{x} cos ((), k_{x} x) e^{- normalj ((), k_{y} y + k_{z} z)}

E_{y}^{inc} = - 2 {normalj E}_{0}^{inc} e_{y} sin ((), k_{x} x) e^{- normalj ((), k_{y} y + k_{z} z)}

E_{z}^{inc} = - 2 {normalj E}_{0}^{inc} e_{z} sin ((), k_{x} x) e^{- normalj ((), k_{y} y + k_{z} z)}

and the definitions of variables can be referred in the previous studies …”

Section: Geometry Of Mtb‐twps and Its Per‐unit‐length Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Modeling electromagnetic wave coupling and mode conversion effects in multitwisted bundle of twisted‐wire pairs (MTB‐TWP) above ground plane

Gassab

Zhou

Wang

et al. 2018

Self Cite

Crosstalk analysis of twisted bundle of twisted wire pairs (TBTWPs) and star‐quad cables under the effect of inner and outer excitations

Su,

Gassab,

Zhang

et al. 2023

Self Cite

In this article, deep neural network (DNN) and chain parameter methods are used to analyze the crosstalk coupling of a star‐quad and a twisted bundle of twisted wire pairs (TBTWP) cables for different excitations, respectively. A DNN is used to extract the per‐unit‐length (p.u.l) resistance, inductance, capacitance, and conductance (RLCG) parameters at any position for the star‐quad and TBTWP cables. The induced common mode (CM) and differential mode (DM) currents due to crosstalk are calculated by combining the obtained RLCG parameters with the chain parameter method. The obtained results show good agreement with that of FEKO software. Moreover, it is found that the star‐quad cable can reduce the external coupling more effectively than that of the TBTWP cable. Finally, measurements are performed to further validate the accuracy of our proposed algorithm.

Common‐mode current reduction in EMP coupling with the star‐quad cable having a reference conductor

Lodhi,

Zhu,

Gassab

2024

Self Cite

The coupling of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) with the star‐quad cable having reference conductor is analyzed by using the proposed model, which is based upon multi‐conductor transmission line theory. Expressions for common‐mode (CM) and differential‐mode (DM) currents are developed. Two cases are mainly discussed: the first case is the star‐quad cable with a central reference conductor, and the second case with the outside reference conductor. A rigorous comparison between these two cases shows that when the reference conductor is placed at the center, the magnitude of CM current is reduced dramatically, which is beneficial for electromagnetic compatibility (EMC). The CM current magnitude of the outside reference conductor is relatively very high due to the large CM current loop area, which is the least possible for the central reference conductor. There is no significant change in the DM current magnitude for both cases because the DM current has no direct dependence on the CM current loop area. A commercial software, FEKO, which utilizes the method of momentum (MoM), is used to compare the results of our proposed method, which are in good agreement.