Polifke Iit M

Technische Universitt Mnchen
Workshop on Advanced Instability Methods

Jan. 27th - 29th, 2009, IIT Madras, Chennai, India
Thermo-Acoustic
System Modelling and Stability Analysis:
Conventional Approaches
Wolfgang Polifke
Lehrstuhl fr Thermodynamik
TU Mnchen
thanks to ...
Jakob J. Keller, Oliver Paschereit, Bruno Schuermans
Stephanie Evesque, Christoph Hirsch, Thomas Sattelmayer
Alexander Genteman, Andreas Huber, Jan Kopitz, Robert
Leandro, Christian Pankiewitz
Raman Sujith
Outline of Talk
Combustion Instabilities
Stability Analysis
Unsteady Analysis
Eigenmodes and Eigenfrequencies
Nyquist Plots
Energy Balance
System Models
CFD
Computational Acoustics
Galerkin Methods
Network Models (Toy Models)
Physics of Combustion Instabilities

a flame is a source of volume
a fluctuating flame is a (monopole) source of sound
combustion noise & combustion instability
Rayleighs Criterion:
!
!
p Q dt > 0
" #$ %
!
Rayleigh Index
Thermodynamic interpretation of Rayleigh

Fluctuations produce acoustic energy, if Rayleigh Index > 0
p, u
t
2'
3'
2"
2'
3'
1
1
4'
3"
4"
4'
Q
1
4"
2"
3"
If production of energy > dissipation, instability occurs !
Thermo-Akustische Instabilitt
Flame dynamics and system acoustics

Eingeschlossene Flamme
(p, u)
(p, u)
Rckkopplung zwischen Fluktuationen !

! !
Premix flames are velocity sensitive: Q = Q (u )

der Strmung (p,u) und der Wrmefreisetzung Q
-> Selbsterregte Schwingungen !
p
System acoustics controls phase p - u: Z! = !
Stabilittskriterium nach Rayleigh:
Q!p! ud" > 0.
"#
W . Polifke / divide et imp era Ercoftac TecTag / 2
p Q dt > 0
!
Time / phase lag between heat release and velocity

controls the Rayleigh Index
p,p',uu'
QQ'
Q'
pp'Q
Feedback Loops
Turbulence
Flame
Heat Release
Fluctuations
Coherent
Structures
Burner
Pressure Loss
Volume
Flow
Velocity
Equivale nce Ratio
Fluctuations
Entropy
waves
Pressure
Air / Fuel
Supply
Acoustic
Waves
Combustion
Chamber
Stability Analysis needs a System Model

there are no unstable flames
Rayleigh criterion is necessary, but not sufficient.
The system controls
Impedance at the flame ( phase between velocity and pressure)
Losses of acoustic energy (dissipation and radiation).
Intensity, phase and dispersion of convective waves
(equivalence ratio, entropy).
Outline of Talk
Stability Analysis
Unsteady Analysis
Eigenfrequencies
Nyquist Plots
Energy Balance
System Models
CFD
Galerkin Methods
Network Models
Q = 385 7 W; vmean = 0.0218 0.0002 m/s
Instability in a Rijke tube
Experiment by Lumens, Kopitz 2006
Stability Analysis by Unsteady Simulation

1D CFD Model of Rijke tube
= u(t )
with source term for energy Q(t)
20
10
/s]
Velocity atv [mgauze
[m/s]
30
-10
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
t [s]
Time [s]
Polifke et al, JSV, 2001
0.5
0.6
0.7
Unsteady Simulation
+ Simulation of (turbulent, reacting), compressible flow
captures all relevant phenomena
- Computationally expensive
- Only the dominant mode is identified
- Numerical vs. physical instability
- Results can depend on initial perturbation
- Boundary conditions (acoustic impedance !) are a problem.
Stability Analysis with

Eigenmodes and Eigenfrequencies
Mode - a pattern of vibration
Eigen - German: own, peculiar, characteristic
Eigenmode / Eigenfrequency
- a mode / frequency that is easily excited in the system
- once established, an eigenmode will persist for some time
Typically, a system has many eigenmodes.

several eigenmodes may be unstable
one mode will be most unstable (dominant mode)
Eigenmodes / frequencies of a Rijke tube

computed with a low-order model
.
Q
p=0
p=0
Acoustic waves travel between i and c, h and x:
fc
gc
"
eikl
0
eikl
! !
"
1 p
!
+u ,
f=
2 c
"!
"
, k= .
c
! !
"
1 p
!
g=
u .
2 c
fi
gi
Coupling relations at the heat source

.
Q
p=0
p=0
At the heat source:

!
!
p
=
p
no pressure drop, h
c
!
!
!
time-lagged heat release, uh (t) = uc (t) + nuc (t ).
h ch
(fh + gh ) = (fc + gc ),
c cc
!
"
i
fh gh = 1 + ne
(fc gc ),
Boundary conditions
.
Q
p=0
p=0
open / closed ends:

p!
u!
= 0 f + g = 0,
= 0 f g = 0,
Rijke tube system matrix

.
Q
u! p=0
=0
p=0
Matrix
of
Coefficients
0
fi
.. = .. .
. .
0
gx
Eigenfrequencies fulfill Det (S()) = 0, which yields:

!
"
i
cos kc lc cos kh lh sin kc lc sin kh lh 1 + n e
= 0,
Eigenfrequency vs. time lag (n = 0.1)
Re"w#
Im"w#
1.03
1.02
1.01
0.99
0.98
0.97
0.04
0.02
1
4 tau!Pi
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 tau!Pi

-0.02
exact solution (--------------) vs. weak coupling approximation (- - - -)
Eigenfrequency vs. time lag (n = 0.3)
Re"w#
Im"w#
0.1
1.1
1.05
0.95
0.9
0.05
1
4 tau!Pi
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 tau!Pi

-0.05
-0.1
exact solution (--------------) vs. weak coupling approximation (- - - -)
Stability map Rijke tube:

.
Q
p=0
u! =
0
p=0
Mode - #
cos kc lc cos kh lh sin kc lc sin kh lh
"
1 + neit = 0,
m=3
m=2
m=1
m=0
0
Remarks on dynamic stability analysis

+ Results as presented agree with Rayleigh - because losses
are neglected. Could be included easily!
+ Build system of equations in software network model
- Iterative search for eigenfrequencies in complex plane can
be tedious and incomplete !
- Matrix coefficients must be known for complex-valued
frequencies Problem for TFMs from experimental data
Stability Analysis in Control Theory

x1
x1
= G(s) (x0 x1 ), or
G(s)
=
x0 .
G(s) + 1
x0
G(s)
1
Roots of characteristic equation determine stability
G(s) + 1 = 0.
In control applications:
PN (s)
an sn + . . . + a0
G(s) =
=
.
m
PD (s)
bm s + . . . + b0
Routh-Hurwitz criterion based on polynomial coefficients !
x1
N; ! < 4 ?*) 5)9'% ); #$ #* -"' (#+"- ",9;=59,*'B: -"'* -"' %1%-'6 #% %-,
" < 47
Nyquist
N; ! % 4: -"'* -"' 5)#*- !F 9#'% #*%#2' -"' G1H0#%- $)*-)0( ,*2 -"'(' 6
#* -"' (#+"-=",9;
E#+0('
@7A #990%-(,-'% 5)%#-#.' ,*2 *'+,-#.' '*$#(
Criterion
in"=59,*'7
Control
Theory
ss
HG
N =1
N =0
Cauchys argument
principle:
N = Z );- P5)%#-#.' ,*2 *'+,-#.' '*$#($9'6'*-%
!"#$%&
'()( OP,659'%
G1H0#%$)*-)0(7encirclements of critical point (-1,i0)
N # of anticlock
clockwise
Z # of zeros of the open loop transfer function G(s)
P # of poles in the right half plane
K% , 3*,9 ('6,(J: !' *)-' -",- -"' 5)(-#)* ); -"' G1H0#%- 5,-" ;)( "
-"' #$=59,*'7 Q-"'(!#%': -"' #*#-#,9 .,90' -"')('6 +#.'% ;)( -"' ('%5)*%'
Stable if N = P !
' ?& < 4MB < 9#6 "#$ ( ?"B
Open loop transfer function of a network model

Fuel Supply
Air Supply
With
Burner
& Flame
Combustor
fu ()
,
G()
fd
eigenfrequencies are mapped to the critical point -1
OLTF G() as conformal mapping

Im(G())
Im()
G()
Re() + 2i
Re() + i
-1
Re()
Nyquist Criterion:
A mode is stable if the critical point -1 lies to the left of
the image curve of the real axis.
Re(G())
Stability analysis with Nyquist plot

- what is passage of the critical point !?
- no rigorous proof !
+ this is not the Barkhausen Criterion
The Barkhausen Stability Criterion is simple, intuitive, and wrong.
(http://web.mit.edu/klund)
+ it is sufficient to know transfer matrices / transfer functions

for real-valued frequencies |R.
+ no iterative searches for eigenmodes.
+ growth rate can be estimated from the OLTF
Eigenmodes of Rijke tube

o - Iterative search for eigenmodes
- Nyquist plot
10
8
Growth Rate [%]
6
4
2
0
-2
-4
-6
-8
-1 0
1000
2000
Frequency [Hz]
3000
Idea: get the OLTF / Nyquist Plot from CFD

(Kopitz and Polifke, 2008, Kaess et al, 2008)
!"#
-.'()*+,
$"#
450 Hz
625 Hz
!$"#
!!
915 Hz
!!"#
!!"#
!!
!$"#
$
$"#
%&'()*+,
!"#
Stability map of laminar, porous-plate burner

(Noiray et al, 2008, Kaess et al, 2008)
1000
Frequency [Hz]
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
0
0.1
0.2
isothermal / adiabatic walls
0.3
0.4
0.5
Length of plenum [m]
0.6
0.7
o unstable /
0.8
+ stable
Acoustic energy budget

(Ibrahim et al., 06, 07)
Density of acoustic energy:!
$
" ! #2
p
! !
e
+ ui ui
2
c
Conservation of energy:
!
e
1
u
i !
! !
+
(p! u!i ) +
(eui ) =
p
q
ij
2
t
xi
xi
c
xj
!
"#
$
Balance of acoustic energy in the system:

!
!
!
!
! !
!e"dV = !p ui "dAi !eui "dAi + !"dV.
t V
A
A
V
Stability criterion from energy budget

(Ibrahim et al., 06, 07)
An eigenmode is unstable, if amplification outweighs damping
+ intuitive
+ should be useful to identify dangerous frequency regimes
- so far, mostly overly simplistic configurations tested
- this is not a complete model:
needs a system model to predict losses,
needs a system model to predict impedance at the flame,
needs external information about the flame dynamics
Energy budget from Large Eddy Simulation

(Nicoud and Poinsot, 05; Giauque et al., 06, 07)
Idea: work out the acoustic energy balance from LES results !
+ with LES, its possible to analyze all terms in great detail
entropy fluctuations
non-linear terms
non-zero mean flow
variable material properties
- many terms, very complicated

- what is acoustic energy or fluctuation energy ?
Outline of Talk
Stability Analysis
Unsteady Analysis
Eigenfrequencies
Nyquist Plots
Energy Balance
System Models
CFD
Galerkin Methods
Network Models
System Modelling
Mode-Based
Finite Volume,
Finite Element
Time Domain
Frequency Domain
CFD
nonlinear PDEs Navier-Stokes
linearized PDEs often extended Helmholtz
Galerkin Methods
Network Models
ODE
algebraic equations
Nonlinear
Linearized Equations
Computational Fluid Dynamics

Idea: use LES (or URANS) for Unsteady Analysis
+ conceptually straightforward !
- high computational cost !
- acoustic boundary conditions !?
- only dominant mode is detected.
- insight does not come easy.
Nota bene:
CFD can also be used to determine transfer functions /
matrices or to compute the OLTF !
Starting point: equation for acoustic perturbations:
1 D p
2
2
c Dt
xi
2 !
1 p
xi
!
"
1 Dq!
=
.
2
c
Dt
Add a model for the heat release fluctuations:

q! (!x, t)
u!b (t (!x))
=n
.
q(!
x)
ub
Apply FE-Solver (time-marching) for Unsteady Analysis !

(Pankiewitz et al, 02 - 04)
Eigenmodes of annular combustor

(1,0,0)
0.8
(1,1,0)
(1,0,0)
cies and
agreeme
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
FE: triangles, low-order: circles

Figure
5. symbols.
FREQUENCIES AND
Unstable:
filled
1.8
2.2
2.4
CORRESPONDING MODE TYPES
FOR DIFFERENT DELAY TIMES. (!,") LOW ORDER MODEL, (,)
TIME DOMAIN SIMULATION. (!,) UNSTABLE MODE, (,") STABLE
CONCL
We
coustic
especial
simulati
bitrary g
the prop
indicate
and hav
REFER
[1] S. H
mix
FE / iterative subspace method for eigenmodes

Benoit and Nicoud 05, Sensiau et al. 2008
Discretize eqn. for pressure perturbation (with source term)
[A][P ] + [B][P ] + 2 [P ] = [D()][P ].
1
a) expand in thermo-acoustic coupling strength !
V
m
p!m
(0)
(1)
= m
+ "m
+ O("2 ),
!(1)
2
= p!(0)
+
"p
+
O("
).
m
m
b) solve iteratively for sequence (k)

!
"
[A] [D( (k1) )] [P ] + (k) [B][P ] + ( (k) )2 [P ] = 0.
n("x) dV.
Table I. E!ect of reference position value and the grid resolution for the "rst eigen
4
Technische Universitt
Mnchen! = 0:003, " = 10
frequency;
s. Cross X indicates unfeasible calculation.
x ref = 0:24 m
Results for Rijke Tube
x ref = 0:249 m
x ref = 0:25 m
Benoit
Coarseand
mesh Nicoud
(561 nodes)05
X
271:4 0:088i
271:6 0:088i
X
X
271:6 0:088i
270:4 0:087i
271:3 0:093i
271:5 0:098i
Re"ned mesh (5231 nodes)

Theoretical
using the weak-coupling expansion

=0.003
expansion
theoretical
0
-0.2
=1.6
200
expansion
theoretical
20
Growth rate
Growth rate
0.2
=0.33
40
expansion
theoretical
100
Growth rate
0.4
0
-20
0
-100
-200
-0.4
-40
500
1000
Frequency
1500
2000
500
1000
Frequency
1500
2000
-300
500
1000
Frequency
1500
2000
Figure 2. Representation in the complex plane of the theoretical and computed eigen frequencies.
available in Figure 2 and displayed in the complex plane. As expected, the computed
Computational acoustics
+ time domain: straightforward
+ fq domain: identify both stable and unstable eigenmodes
+ modest computational cost.
- acoustic boundary conditions, mean flow effects, losses !?
- needs input on flame dynamics.
Stay tuned !
System Modelling
Mode-Based
Finite Volume,
Finite Element
Time Domain
Frequency Domain
CFD
Galerkin Methods
Network Models
ODE
algebraic equations
Nonlinear
Galerkin method
2 m
2
+ km m = 0
1D Helmholtz-equation without sources:
2
x
Eigenmodes m (x) = sin(km x) are orthogonal

! L
m n dx = mn .
0
Project eigenmodes on PDE with source:

! L
2
d m
1
2
!
+
=
q
(x) m (x) dx.

m m
2
2
dt
Em 0
Galerkin
+ very efficient
+ can handle non-linearities
+ for complicated geometries, expansion functions can be
computed with FE
+ eigenmodes of full problem need not be close to the s of
the homogeneous problem
- non-normal modes for non-trival boundary conditions
- input on flame dynamics is needed, determination of source
term may be non-trivial.
Outline of Talk
Stability Analysis
Unsteady Analysis
Eigenfrequencies
Nyquist Plots
Energy Balance
System Models
CFD
Galerkin Methods
Network Models
Network models
Fuel Supply
Air Supply
Burner
Matrix
of
Coefficients
Flame
Combustor
0
f1
.. = .. .
. .
0
gN
Non-plane modes in thin annular duct
fd
gd
"
kx
eikx+ l
0
/c
=
M
2
1M
0
ikx l
"!
k
/c
%2
fu
gu
(1
"
M 2 ) ,
m
k .
R
Mixed mode in annular combustor
Transfer matrix of (compact) flame

Linearize Rankine-Hugoniot relations
(conservation of mass, momentum, energy across discontinuity)
"
!
p
c
u!h
#
"
p
TH
u!c
=
1 u c Mc
+
c c
TC
uc
$
!
" # !
!
T
Q
p
H
c
!
= uc +
1 uc
.
TC
pc
Q
!
"
!
closure with flame frequency response,
Q !
u!
= F ()
u
Q
Q !
Q
Example network calculations

Acoustics in duct system with low-Mach-# flow
x
L
open end - duct - area change - duct - open end
% Universitt Mnchen
Technische
:;G
:;E
%;5
:;C
M*2
%;5
M*2
K,(#-+*#
K,(#-+*#
%;C
:;5
:;C
:;5
:;G
:
Eigenfrequencies
I6J
with reflectionI6J coefficient r = -1
:;E
:;% :;5
:
:;8
:;%
:;C
:;5
:;D
:;8
:;E
:;C
:;F
:;D
:;G
:;E
:;H
:;F
%
:;G
:;H
:
:;5
:
:;%
:;8
:;%
:;C
:;5
:;8
:;%
:;C
:;5
:;D
:;8
:;E
:;C
:;D
:;8
:;E
:;C
I6J
:;F
:;D
:;G
:;E
:;H
:;F
%
:;G
:;H
:;F
:;D
:;G
:;E
:;H
:;F
%
:;G
:;H
I6J
5;5
5;5
%;E
%;C
%;5
%
:;G
:;E
%;G
%;G
%;G
%;E
%;C
%;5
%
M*2N$")*'$#
%;G
M*2N$")*'$#
K,(#-+*#L0#-1,#=)+6+:
K,(#-+*#L0#-1,#=)+6+:
*#+,-./01$.'*#'1"'-(#./01$.*#+20$3)4564%783)97:;%3)<2==.+'1$7:
*#+,-./01$.'*#'1"'-(#./01$.*#+20$3)4564%783)97:;%3)<2==.+'1$7:
%;E
%;C
%;5
:;E
:;% :;5
:
:;8
:;%
:;C
:;5
:;D
:;8
I6J
:;E
:;C
:;F
:;D
I6J
:;G
:;E
:;H
:;F
%
:;G
%
:;H
%;C
%;5
:;G
:
%;E
:;%
%
:;5
:
I6J
I6J
,-9'1">2**./01$.'*#'1"'-(#./01$.20$9'1">2**3)4564%783)97:;%3)<2==.+'1$7?%@4564%AB
,-9'1">2**./01$.'*#'1"'-(#./01$.20$9'1">2**3)4564%783)97:;%3)<2==.+'1$7?%@4564%AB
5;5
%;C
:;HD
%;G
%;E
%;C
:;H
:;GD
*2N$")*'$#
%;E
:;HD
*2N$")*'$#
%;G
How
5 is instability possible in a system without energy source?
*#L0#-1,#=)+6+:
+*#L0#-1,#=)+6+:
5;5
:;H
% Universitt Mnchen
Technische
:;G
:;E
%;5
M*2
%;5
M*2
K,(#-+*#
K,(#-+*#
%;C
%;C
%;5
:;C
:;5
:;G
:
Eigenfrequencies
I6J
I6J
I6J
I6J
with energy-conserving
boundary conditions
:;E
:;% :;5
:
:;8
:;%
:;C
:;5
:;D
:;8
:;E
:;C
:;F
:;D
:;G
:;E
:;H
:;F
%
:;G
:;H
:;%
:
:;5
:
:;8
:;%
:;C
:;5
:;D
:;8
:;E
:;C
:;F
:;D
:;G
:;E
:;H
:;F
%
:;G
:;H
%
:;% ::;5 :;%
:;8 :;5
:;C :;8
:;D :;C
:;E :;D
:;F :;E
:;G :;F
:;H
%
:;G
:;H
%;C
%;5
%
%;E
%;C
%;5
%
:;G
:;G
:;E
:;E
:;% :;5
:
:;HD
%;G
:;H
:;GD
:;G
:;8
:;%
:;C
:;5
:;D
:;8
I6J
:;E
:;C
:;F
:;D
I6J
:;G
:;E
:;H
:;F
%
:;G
:;FD
:;H
%;E
%;C
%;5
I6J
I6J
1
,-9'1">2**./01$.'*#'1"'-(#./01$.20$9'1">2**3)4564%783)97:;%3)<2==.+'1$7?%@4564%AB
p + 2 = p ,
2
5;5
%
p!
5
!
+
M
= :;HD0,
%;G
c
%;E
:;H
(1 + M) + g(1 M) = 0.
%;C
*2N$")*'$#
%;E
%;G
M*2N$")*'$#
%;G
M*2N$")*'$#
5;5
K,(#-+*#L0#-1,#=)+6+:
5;5
*#L0#-1,#=)+6+:
K,(#-+*#L0#-1,#=)+6+:
,-9'1">2**./01$.'*#'1"'-(#./01$.20$9'1">2**3)4564%783)97:;%3)<2==.+'1$7?%@4564%AB
*#+,-./01$.'*#'1"'-(#./01$.*#+20$3)4564%783)97:;%3)<2==.+'1$7:
Riemann Twist
The Riemann Twist
!$
!"
#%
!%
&'
#$
&"
Messung von Transfermatrixen (3)

Prof. Wolfgang Polifke
#"
&$
&
Network Models
+ Fast & Flexible, low computational effort
+ Great for qualitative / exploratory studies
- Not suitable for many geometries of applied interest
- Only in frequency domain
- Non-linear / non-normal phenomena !?
taX network model

(next AETHER Workshop in Munich)
Summary
Mode-Based
Finite Volume,
Finite Element
Time Domain
Frequency Domain
CFD
Galerkin Methods
Network Models
ODE
algebraic equations
Nonlinear
My questions on non-normality ...

Real-world configurations:
how typical / important are n-n effects?
which methods / tools are adequate for the study of n-n effects?
How to adopt exisiting modelling approaches:

how to detect n-n effects in frequency-domain network models ?
what is a proper norm for frequency-domain network models ?
how to formulate appropriate time-domain network models?
consequences for iterative subspace methods?
How to describe / identify the flame dynamics ?

Polifke Iit M

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Polifke Iit M

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Workshop on Advanced Instability Methods

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Network Models (Toy Models)

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Physics of Combustion Instabilities

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Thermodynamic interpretation of Rayleigh

If production of energy > dissipation, instability occurs !

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Flame dynamics and system acoustics

Rckkopplung zwischen Fluktuationen !

Premix flames are velocity sensitive: Q = Q (u )

-> Selbsterregte Schwingungen !

W . Polifke / divide et imp era Ercoftac TecTag / 2

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Time / phase lag between heat release and velocity

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Stability Analysis needs a System Model

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Q = 385 7 W; vmean = 0.0218 0.0002 m/s

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Instability in a Rijke tube

Experiment by Lumens, Kopitz 2006

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Stability Analysis by Unsteady Simulation

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Stability Analysis with

Typically, a system has many eigenmodes.

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Eigenmodes / frequencies of a Rijke tube

Acoustic waves travel between i and c, h and x:

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Coupling relations at the heat source

At the heat source:

Technische Universitt Mnchen

open / closed ends:

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Rijke tube system matrix

Eigenfrequencies fulfill Det (S()) = 0, which yields:

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Eigenfrequency vs. time lag (n = 0.1)

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 tau!Pi

exact solution (--------------) vs. weak coupling approximation (- - - -)

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Eigenfrequency vs. time lag (n = 0.3)

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 tau!Pi

exact solution (--------------) vs. weak coupling approximation (- - - -)

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Stability map Rijke tube:

cos kc lc cos kh lh sin kc lc sin kh lh

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Remarks on dynamic stability analysis

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Stability Analysis in Control Theory

Routh-Hurwitz criterion based on polynomial coefficients !

' ?& < 4MB < 9#6 "#$ ( ?"B

Technische Universitt Mnchen

Open loop transfer function of a network model