Analog Modeling – Part 4

It’s time to dig a little deeper into the incandescent lamp behavior I introduced in Part 3 of this blog series. My goal is to select a set of equations that best describe the elements of the lamp’s behavior that I want to quantify during simulation. Recall my comment in Part 3 that a lamp has several characteristics worth analyzing including electrical properties, thermal properties, aging properties, and photometric properties. For this post I will focus on the lamp’s relationship between electrical and thermal power. If you have attended any of our VHDL-AMS Introduction workshops or training classes, you will no doubt recognize this discussion.

Electrically, an incandescent lamp behaves like a temperature dependent resistor. The filament’s resistance increases with temperature, which in turn affects the lamp’s electrical power characteristics. From a thermal perspective, as the filament heats up, it dissipates power through thermal conductance, thermal capacitance, and radiation. So the lamp consumes electrical power, and dissipate thermal power. Since the lamp must obey conservation of energy laws, we have:

      Electrical power = Thermal power

This is a simple, high-level, mathematical relationship. Let’s add some detail by deriving equations for each power type. Deriving an equation for the electrical power starts with the standard, textbook definition:

      Electrical power = Voltage x Current

But we need to account for the change in filament resistance. We can do so by considering Ohm’s Law:

      Voltage = Current x Resistance

We know that filament resistance varies with temperature. For our discussion, let’s assume resistance is related to temperature as follows:

      Filament resistance = Rcold x (1.0 + Alpha x (Tfil – Tcold))

Where Rcold is the filament’s cold resistance, Tcold is the filament’s cold temperature, Tfil is the filament’s heated temperature which increases over time as the lamp approaches full brightness, and Alpha is the filament’s resistive temperature coefficient. Given this equation for the filament resistance, Ohm’s Law for the lamp becomes:

      Voltage = Current x Filament resistance

Now let’s discuss the thermal power which is represented as a heat flow in the lamp. As I mentioned above, we will assume there are three elements to the lamp’s thermal power: thermal conductance, thermal capacitance, and radiation. The total thermal power, or total heat flow, is the sum of heat flows from each element. Let’s consider these heat flows in order. Heat flow due to thermal conductance can be characterized as:

      Hflow(conductive) = (Tfil – Tamb) / Rth

Where Tfil is the filament’s temperature, Tamb is the ambient temperature, and Rth is the filament’s thermal resistance. This equation tells us that, for a given thermal resistant, conductive heat flow increases with higher filament temperatures. Heat flow due to thermal capacitance can be characterized as:

      Hflow(capacitive) = Cth x d(Tfil) / dt

Where Cth is the thermal capacitance and Tfil is the filament’s temperature. Using this relationship, we set capacitive heat flow to increase proportionally with the filament temperature’s rate of change. Finally, radiated heat flow can be characterized as:

      Hflow(radiated) = Ke x (Tfil**4 – Tamb**4)

Where Ke is the radiated energy coefficient, Tfil is the filament’s temperature, and Tamb is the ambient temperature. Recalling that thermal power is simply the sum of all heat flows in the lamp, and using these three heat flow definitions, the lamp’s total heat flow is:

      Hflow(total) = Hflow(conductive) + Hflow(capacitive) + Hflow(radiated)

Now that we have derived equations representing the incandescent lamp’s electrical and thermal power relationships, we can move on to the third step in our modeling process (outlined in Analog Modeling – Part 2), which is:

  • Implement the equations and relationships using syntactically correct statements based on your modeling language of choice

Which I will do using my modeling language of choice, VHDL-AMS, in my next blog post: Analog Modeling – Part 5.

Post Author

Posted March 2nd, 2012, by

Post Tags

, , , , , , ,

Post Comments

No Comments

About Mike Jensen's Blog

Views, insights, and commentary on mechatronic system design and analysis. Mike Jensen's Blog

Comments

Add Your Comment

Archives

October 2014
  • Reliability vs Robustness
  • June 2014
  • Wow Factor
  • May 2014
  • SystemVision 5.10.3
  • March 2014
  • IESF 2014: Military & Aerospace
  • Engineering Oops!
  • Big Engineering
  • January 2014
  • SystemVision Model Wizard
  • December 2013
  • SystemVision 5.10.2
  • Modeling: An Engineer’s Dilemma
  • October 2013
  • What is Your Legacy?
  • September 2013
  • Automotive IESF 2013
  • July 2013
  • Simple Design Solutions
  • June 2013
  • SystemVision 5.10
  • May 2013
  • Engineering Muscle Memory
  • EDA vs. Windows 8
  • March 2013
  • VHDL-AMS Stress Modeling – Part 3
  • January 2013
  • VHDL-AMS Stress Modeling – Part 2
  • VHDL-AMS Stress Modeling – Part 1
  • December 2012
  • Practice! Practice!
  • November 2012
  • Sharing Tool Expertise
  • October 2012
  • Preserving Expertise
  • Virtual Prototyping — Really?
  • Innovations in Motion Control Design
  • September 2012
  • Game Changers
  • Do We Overdesign?
  • August 2012
  • Tsunami Remnants
  • July 2012
  • A New Look at Device Modeling
  • SystemVision 5.9
  • June 2012
  • Veyron Physics
  • May 2012
  • Rooster Tail Engineering
  • April 2012
  • Automotive IESF 2012
  • Teaching and Learning CAN Bus
  • March 2012
  • Analog Modeling – Part 6
  • Analog Modeling – Part 5
  • Analog Modeling – Part 4
  • February 2012
  • Analog Modeling – Part 3
  • Analog Modeling – Part 2
  • January 2012
  • Analog Modeling – Part 1
  • Connecting Tools and Processes
  • December 2011
  • Turning-Off and Tuning-In
  • Use vs. Experience
  • Analyzing the Big Picture
  • November 2011
  • Simulating for Reliability
  • October 2011
  • SystemVision 5.8
  • VHDL-AMS Model Portability — Fact or Fiction?
  • September 2011
  • IESF 2011 Moves to Frankfurt
  • Simulation Troubleshooting
  • August 2011
  • Qualities of VHDL-AMS Quantities
  • Military & Aerospace IESF 2011
  • Touring Johnson Space Center
  • July 2011
  • Engineering versus Science
  • June 2011
  • System Reengineering
  • May 2011
  • Integrating Hardware and Software Design
  • Engine Remote Start
  • Integrated System Design
  • Simulation Experiments (Part 3)
  • April 2011
  • Automotive IESF 2011
  • Pushbutton Cars
  • System Simulation with FEA-Base Motor Models
  • March 2011
  • Simulation Experiments (Part 2)
  • Simulation Experiments (Part 1)
  • Japan: Patience and Grace Amid Disaster
  • Top Gear = Driving Fun
  • February 2011
  • Buoyancy
  • Ideas in Motion
  • January 2011
  • The Mechanical Half of Mechatronics
  • Detroit Auto Show
  • Signal-flow vs Conserved System Modeling
  • SystemVision 5.7…Ready, Set, Go!
  • December 2010
  • SystemVision and Windows 7
  • Friction Vacation
  • Simulation Beyond Volts and Amps (Part 4)
  • November 2010
  • Simulation Beyond Volts and Amps (Part 3)
  • Simulation Beyond Volts and Amps (Part 2)
  • Simulation Beyond Volts and Amps (Part 1)
  • October 2010
  • SAE Convergence Recap (and an Unexpected Surprise)
  • VHDL-AMS Black Belt
  • Converging on SAE Convergence
  • System Design vs System Repair
  • September 2010
  • What’s the “AMS” in VHDL-AMS?
  • How Sensitive is Your System?
  • Do You Trust Your Simulator?
  • August 2010
  • What’s in a SPICE Model?
  • Cycling + Gravity = Pain
  • NI Week: Fun for Engineers
  • June 2010
  • Are You a Flexible Thinker?
  • VHDL-AMS and Switch Hysteresis
  • May 2010
  • VHDL-AMS Revisited
  • Segway to U3-X
  • Atomic Glue
  • March 2010
  • IESF Recap
  • February 2010
  • IESF is Coming…
  • System Level HDL-topia
  • January 2010
  • Mastering Design Abstraction
  • The Joy of Disassembly