8 views

Uploaded by wielnig

Cross Correlation

- Power and Energy of a Signal
- price and return models
- Image Matching by Normalized Cross-Correlation
- Medical Electronics -1 syllabus for diploma in electronics engineering.
- A Mathematical Theory of Communication
- Autocorrelation
- My id
- Xbond2-Dynamic Panel Data Estimators
- SIPRO
- A Data Acquisition System for the NASA
- Course Outline MCTE 2311 Signal and System Analysis
- DSP for Explicit FEA AUC1999
- Exercise 19.1 - Signal Objects and IO Allocation V2-1.pdf
- Resume
- RV
- Monitoring Wastewater Treatment Systems.pdf
- rss-grad-diploma-module3-solutions-specimen-a.pdf
- Trend
- S344D55.pdf
- NIB ENGINR

You are on page 1of 6

2004

2004 35rk Annual IEEE Power Elecrronics Specialisls Conference

A Modified Cross-Correlation Method for System Identification

of Power Converters with Digital Control

Botao Miao, R.egan Zane, Dragan Maksimovic

Colorado Power Electronics Center

ECE Department

Univeristy 'of Colorado at Boulder, USA

Email: {botaomiao, regamzane, maksimov}@,colorado.edu

Abstract-For digitally controlled switching power

converters, on-line systemidentification can be used to assess

the systemdynamic responses and stability margins. This paper

presents a modified correlation method for system

identification of power converters with digital control. By

injecting a multi-period Pseudo RandomBinary Signal (PRBS)

to the control input ofa power converter, the systemfrequency

response can bederived by cross-correlation of the input signal

and the sensed output signal. Compared to the conventional

cross-correlation method, averaging the cross-correlation over

multiple periods of the injected PRBS can significantly improve

the identification results in the presence of PRBS-induced

artifacts, switching and quantization noises. An experimental

digitally controlled forward converter with an FPGA-based

controller is used to demonstrate accurate and effective

identification of the converter control-to-output response.

1. INTRODUCTION

Digital control of high-frequency switching power

converters offers many potential advantages, including

robustness to noise and parameter variations, reduction of

external components, real-time programmability and simple

integration with advanced features such as adaptive

calibration and health monitoring (diagnostics). In particular,

in power management and distribution (PMAD) systems,

which commonly include multiple power sources, loads,

power buses and converter modules, uncertainties of system

parameters may compromise static and dynamic performance

ofthe modules, while interactions among modules may cause

system instabilities. Thus it is desirable to develop intelligent

power modules capable of individually performing on-line

local system identification, communicating the results to

central or distributed controls, and responding with

corrective actions. While complex PMAD systems with

stringent robustness and diagnostics requirements are typical

for aerospace applications, it is clear that successful practical

system identification and diagnostics could also have

significant impact in design, testing, and deployment of

switching power supplies in a wide range of applications.

In general, system identification is divided into parametric

and nonparametric methods [ I , 41. In parametric methods, a

system model is assumed, and the identification amounts to

an estimation of the model parameters. In nonparametric

methods, no assumption is made about the system model, and

the identification is used to directly compute the system

Gequency responses. Nonparametric methods include:

correlation analysis [ 1,4,5], transient-response analysis [4,6],

and frequency response, Fourier, or spectrum analysis

[1,2,41.

This paper focuses on nonparametric identification, with

the objective of accomplishing on-line assessment of system

dynamic responses and stability margins. For switching

power converters with digital control, the requirements for

practical system identification include the following:

(a) signal injection should not disturb normal system

operation in terms of static and dynamic voltage regulation;

(b) the identification should be immune to switching and

quantization noise;

(c) memory and processing requirements should be

relatively low.

With these requirements in mind, we concentrate on the

cross-correlation analysis method [I]. This method has been

applied to empirical, simulation-based small-signal modeling

of switching converters [SI. In this paper we present a

modified cross-correlation approach for system identification

together with experimental results from an FPGA-based

digital controller realization. Modified cross-correlation is

achieved by first injecting multi-period Pseudo Random

Binary Signals (PRBS), then averaging the cross-correlation

of the input and the output over several PRBS periods. Thi s

approach rejects noise sources and results in accurate system

identification.

The paper begins with a review of the basic correlation

method in Section 11, followed by a simulation example to

demonstrate performance of the conventional method using a

single period PRBS in Section 111. In Section IV a

modification is proposed to improve the performance of

identification by multi-period PRBS and a form ofaveraging.

Experimental results are then shown in Section V for a 90W

5OV to 15V forward converter with an undamped input filter.

An FPGA-based digital controller is used to demonstrate the

performance of the proposed identification method on the

experimental forward converter.

II. CROSS-CORRELATION METHOD

Here we review and study application of the cross

correlation method to digitally sampled and controlled

switching power converters. In steady state, for small-signal

disturbances, a power converter can be regarded as a linear

time-invariant discrete-time system, where the sampled

system can be described by

0-7803-8399-0/04/$20.00 02004 IEEE. 3728

2004 35th Annual IEEE Power Elecrronics Specialists Conference

~

y( n) =x h ( k ) u ( n - k ) +v(n) 3 ( 1 )

1 4

2 >: :

where f i n ) is the sampled output signal; u(k) is the input

digital control signal; h(k) is the discrete-time system impulse

response; and v(k) represents disturbances, including

switching noise, measurement error, quantization noise, etc.

The cross-correlation of the input control signal u(k) and

the output signal y(n) is:

where R,,,,(rn) is the auto-correlation of the input signal.

Now, if the input control signal u(k) is selected to be white

noise, then we benefit from the following characteristics:

In other words, the auto-correlation of the input R, , is an

ideal delta function and the cross correlation of the white

noise input with disturbances v(k) is ideally zero. Under the

conditions of (3), the cross-correlation of (2) can be reduced

to

Thus the cross correlation of the input and output sampled

signals give the discrete time system impulse response. The

control to output transfer function of the target power

converter in frequency domain can then be derived by

applying the Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT) to R,,dm):

W u ) . (5)

R,(m) +

OFT

This theoretical result requires the ability to generate

white noise as an input perturbation to the system. A simple

compromise in a digitally controlled power converter is to

approximate white noise through use of PRBS perturbations.

The PRBS can be easily generated but is periodic and

deterministic. The data length for one period of an n-bit

maximum length PRBS is given by A4 =2" - 1 , and the

signal itself has only two possible values:+e .

Figure 1 shows a comparison of samples ofwhite noise (a)

and a 9-bit single period PRBS (c) in a digital system. Figures

I (b) and (d) show the corresponding auto-correlation

functions, respectively. We can see that the auto-correlation

of a single period PRBS is very close to a delta function, but

now with a non-ideal component (or noise) around it. Recall

from (2) that the cross-correlation between the input and

output can be seen as time convolution between the

autocorrelation of the input (ideally a delta function) and the

system impulse response. The additional noise floor in the

PRBS autocorrelation will create errors in our identification

~

3129

Aochen. Germany. 2004

,-I I --

. d

I

=, - ,* ,b I _ I - -

( C ) ( d )

Fig.] White noise (a) and its aulo correlation (b);

single period PRES (c) and its auto correlation (d);

process.

ThePRBS perturbation signal can be easily generated in a

digital system using a shift register, as shown in Fig. 2 for a

9-bit PRBS. An n-bit shift register can generate several

different sequences, among which the maximum length

sequence has the best properties for this application. The

maximum length PRBS can be generated by performing an

XOR operation between the i-th bit and a specificj-th bit. For

a 9-bit shift register, the XOR operation should be performed

between the 1" and the 5th bits, as shown in Fig. 2, resulting

in a maximum sequence of 5 11. The following section

illustrates application ofthe basic correlation method through

a simulation example.

#b i t 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

PRBS

1 : +e

0 : -e

Fig.2 9-bit PRBS generated by a 9-bit shift register

111. SIMULATION EXAMPLE: FORWARD CONVERTER

IDENTIFICATION

Figure 3 shows a digitally controlled forward converter

with an undamped input filter. The converter parameters are:

V,=SOV, Y= I 5 V, C=330 WF, L = IO0 pH, and the load

current is 6 A. The turns-ratio of the transformer is 1 : 1 : 1, The

input filter is a simple L-C low-pass filter with L,= 1.9 mH,

C,= 66 pF. The switching frequency, the sampling frequency

and the PRBS frequency are all 100 kHz.

Note that the input filter is not properly damped.

Therefore, the converter control-to-output response exhibits

a fourth-order response with a pair of right-half plane zeros

2004 35rh Annual I EEE Power Elecrronics Specialists Conference

Fig.3 Forward converter with input filter and digital controller

block diagram

[3]. This example is chosen to represent a situation where a

fault in a power distribution system on the input side of the

converter may cause system instabilities. It is also an example

where both low-frequency and high-frequency dynamics of

the converter are of interest, and the system identification

problem is more challenging.

The converter model and the identification functions are

implemented in the MATLABISimulink envirorunent. A

single period maximum length IO-bit PRBS signal (data

length is 1023) is injected as a perturbation to the converter

digital duty cycle command. The steady-state duty cycle is

0.3. The magnitude of the PRBS signal should be small

enough in order not to disturb normal system operation. In

this simulation, the PRBS magnitude is e= 0.01. The

additional output voltage ripple caused by PRBS perturbation

is about k0.6 V, or about ?4% of the DC output voltage.

Figure 4 shows the simulation results: (a) the cross

correlation of the input and output signals, and (b) the

frequency responses obtained by DFT of the cross correlation

data in (a). The solid curves represent the magnitude and

phase responses o f the control to output transfer function

obtained for the converter ideal averaged model (excluding

losses) [3], while the dashed curves represent the responses

obtained by the basic cross correlation method. It can be

observed that the salient features of the converter responses

are well identified by the method. However, the high

frequency responses obtained by the identification method

are significantly corrupted by noise. In the next section, we

discuss selection of the identification parameters as well as

modifications to the basic method aimed at reducing the

effects of noise.

IV. MODIFIED CORRELATION METHOD: MULTI-PERIOD

AND AVERAGING APPROACH

Recall from Fig. I(d) that the non-zero noise floor in the

auto-correlation of a single-period PRBS was expected to

~

3730

Anclten, Germany, 2004

1

0 400 800 1200 1600 2000

-2 '

( a )

M

( h )

Fig.4 Simulation results of a forward converter with an undamped

input filter when input is one period IO-hit PRBS L =I, M =1023,

frequency of PRBS is 100 kHz. (a) cross-Correlation ofthe input and

output, and (h) frequency response fromcorrelation method (dashed)

and ideal averaged model (solid).

result in errors in the calculated system impulse response,

which can now be seen in Fig. 4. In this section we develop

options for improving the identification results through

processing multiple periods of the PRBS sequence.

Consider first the properties of an infinite period PRBS. A

maximum length PRBS repeated L times forms an L-period

PRBS. If L tends to infinity, it has following properties and

frequency spectrum [I ]:

=I - $, else

Equation (6) gives the mean value of an infinite period

PRBS, which tends to zero for large M. Interestingly, (7)

shows a key result: for an infinite period PRBS, the

autocorrelation is given by periodic delta functions with

2004 35rh Annual IEEE Power Elecrronics Speci al i sts Conference

Fig.5. Auto correlation (a) and frequency spectrum (b) of an

infinite period PRBS

magnitude e* at k equal to zero and multiples ofM, and equal

to / M for all the other k s, which is also shown in Fig. 5(a).

When M is large, e* / M + 0, resulting in a periodic sequence

of near ideal delta functions in the auto correlation. This is

also seen in the frequency domain, as shown in the frequency

spectrum of (8). Figure 5(b) shows a plot of (8), where it is

seen that the frequency content of an infinitely repeating

PRBS contains delta functions at kf dM for k = l,,..,M-l,

where& is the frequency of the PRBS. Thus the infinitely

repeating PRBS can be seen as equivalent to injecting signals

at M-l discrete frequencies kfdM, resulting in a clear

limitation to the frequency components that can be identified

in the power converter. In comparison, injection of white

noise results in a flat line in the frequency domain, or is

equivalent to signal injection at all frequencies for ideal

system identification. Thus, for large M, an infinitely

repeating PRBS injection would result in near ideal

identification.

In practice, due to limitations in memory and computation

capability, only finite length data can be used. However, we

still see significant improvements in performance through

use of finite but multi-period PRBS over single-period. This

is partially explained by improvement in the autocorrelation

function, as shown in Fig. 6, which compares a single period

IO-bit PRBS to a 4-period 8-bit PRBS. The total data length

is N =L.M. For single period IO-bit PRBS, N =M =1023.

For 4-period 8-bit PRBS, N =L.M =4x255 =1020. Thus

while the two have essentially the same data length, the

4-period signal has a significantly lower relative noise floor

when compared to the single period version. This

characteristic isfurther explored in Fig. 7, which shows the

relationship between noise variance and N, M, L. The

horizontal axis is the data length N and the vertical axis is the

noise variance on a log scale. When N is fixed, smaller M

(that is larger L) gives lower noise variance. Thus, if the

effective noise floor in the input auto-correlation were the

only consideration, it would be best to use the largest possible

L (multiple periods) for a given allowable data length.

~

3711

Anchen. Germnny, 2004

( a ) ( b )

Fig.6. The auto correlation af a single period IO-bit

PRES (a) and a 4-period &bit PRBS (b)

However, there are additional constraints on the selection

of M in the context of identification of a digitally controlled

switching power converter. The primary consideration in

selecting M is based on achieving desired frequency

sampling and resolution, as shown in Fig. 5(b). In (loosely

defined) comparison to network or spectrum analyzer terms,

the start and stop frequencies of the effective frequency

sweep are given byfdM and fd2 (after DFT), respectively,

where& is the PRBS frequency. In addition, the equivalent

resolution bandwidth or spacing between frequency

samples isfdM. Thus,fo must be sufticiently high to capture

the desired high frequency content, while f dM must be

sufficiently small to capture low frequency content and

achieve the desired frequency resolution. Another way to

visualize the low frequency requirement is that the sampling

window of a single PRES period in the time domain (given

by Mi ) must be sufficiently longer than the system settling

time.

Based on the above constraints, suitablef, and minimum M

can be selected based on desired frequency sampling,

followed by maximum L based on allowed total data length.

Also, note that L must be an integer value to maintain the

desired auto-correlation characteristics. The concept of

trading M for L is demonstrated in Fig. 8, where simulation

results for a 2-period, 9-bit sequence at 5OkHz PRBS can be

compared with the single period, IO-bit, IOOkHz PRBS of

Fig. 4. The forward converter switching frequency is IOOkHz

for both cases. An improved system identification is achieved

in Fig. 8 (2-period), while Fig.4 (I-period) has a higher

maximumfrequency (2x). Both approaches have essentially

the same total data length.

Up to this point, our discussion has focused on the quality

I

256612 I024 2048 40%

lO*l

data hgh N=LM

Fig.7 The noise variance vs data length N

withM=(8,9, IO, 11,12)-bit

2004 35f h Annul IEEE Power Elecrronics Speciolisrs Conference

(3)

HI

Fig.8Simulation resuk ofa l00kHz fonvard wnverter with an

undamped input filter when the input istwo period 9-bit PRBS

L =2, M =511, frequency of PRBS is 50 kHc. Frequency

response fromwrrelation method (dashed) and ideal averaged

model (solid). Compare to Fig.5for single-period (L=l ).

Performcross correlation to the input

and output disturbances

of the PRBS input signal. With the emphasis now on

injecting multiple PRBS periods, an additional consideration

is how to handle the multi-period data sampled at the

switching converter output. As suggested in [ I] , one

possibility is to average the sampled output voltages and

work only with one period of input and output data in the

cross-correlation for reduced computational complexity. This

approach achieves a l / L reduction of external noise sources,

v(k), from averaging but no additional reduction fromthe

non-ideal behavior of the input PRBS auto-correlation.

Alternatively, we propose to perform the cross-correlation

operation on the entire set of multi-period input and output

data, followed by an effective averaging of the result to

estimate the system impulse response. To estimate the effect

on external noise sources, consider again ( I ) through (4),

where for white noise input the cross-correlation operation

eliminates uncorrelated noise. Based on the above selection

criteria, we achieve a close approximation to white noise and

expect a significant improvement in noise reductiori through

cross-correlation as compared to straight output data

averaging. Additionally, depending on how we deal with the

output of the cross-correlation data, it is possible to achieve

further cancellation of non-ideal components in the PRBS

auto-correlation as described below.

From (2), we how the cross-correlation is equal to the

convolution of input sequence auto-correlation and system

impulse response. When the input signal is multi-period, the

cross-correlation result is a multi-period impulse response, as

shown in Fig. 9. The reduced amplitude side-bands are due to

the finite periods in the input sequence. There are two options

to deal with the multi-period correlation result. One is to take

the center impulse response directly, because its signal to

noise ratio isthe best among these impulse responses. The

other is to average these impulse responses over 2L. periods.

The second option achieves averaging of the correlation

results, but due to the reduced amplitude side-bands this

would not appear to benefit the result. However,

improvement is achieved through the second optiori due to a

key property of the PRBS, where the same position points in

~

3732

Aochen. Germany. 2004

t R"y

-(M-1) 0 M-I k

Fig.9The cross correlation result when input isa multi-period

PRBS signal. Note reduced amplitude sidebands due to finite

periods in the input PRBS.

each segment of the auto-correlation have following relation

[I]:

R ,,,, (m) +R,,,(M t m) =-Cler / M , (9)

where C is a constant. This shows that by summing each of

the resulting impulse responses (rather than taking just the

center response) and dividing by L, the noise in the input

sequence auto-correlation sums to a small constant noise

floor similar to the infinitely repeating case of(7).

Based on the above discussions, our proposed procedure

for system identification is summarized in the signal flow

graph of Fig. I O. First, identification should be performed

when the system is operating in steady state. To start, an

L-period n-bit PRBS is generated and injected to the control

input. At the same time, output of the system is sampled and

stored. After the injection and output data collection are

finished, the cross-correlation is computed over the entire

data sequence. The 2L impulse responses output from the

cross-correlation operation are summed, then divided by L.

Finally, the DFT is applied to the averaged cross-correlation

result to visualize the system frequency response.

( System operating in steady state )

1

Inject multi-period PRBS

1

Collect output disturbance

(4) Average the crms correlation results

to derive the impulse reponse

(5) x System frequency response

Fig. 10 Signal flow graph of theproposed systemidentification

approach in digitally controlled switching power converten.

2004 35t h A n n u l l EEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference Aachen, German): 2004

V. EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION

The digitally controlled forward converter of Fig. 3 was

constructed and used to experimentally verify the proposed

system identification method. The converter parameters are

the same as in the simulation example of Section Ill: the input

voltage isV, =50 V and the output voltage is V =15 V. The

output filter inductor Li s 100 pH, and the output filter

capacitor is C=330pF. The converter operates at the

nominal load of 6 A. The switching frequency is

5 =100 kHz. The turns-ratio of the transformer is 1 :I : 1. The

input filter parameters are L, =1.9 mH and C, =66 pF.

The digital controller was implemented using a Xilinx

Virtex-11 FPGA. The FPGA-based controller includes a

IO-bit digital pulse-width modular, a PRBS generator and a

data collection unit. The converter output voltage, scaled by a

1O: l resistive voltage divider, is sampled by an A 0

converter (TI-THS1230). The sampling rate equals the

switching frequency. Although the FPGA also includes a

discrete-time compensator to implement closed-loop output

voltage regulation, in the experiments reported in this section

the converter is operated open loop. The PRBS and ND data

collected by the FPGA is transmitted to a PC for off-line

processing in the MATLABISimulink environment.

The modified cross correlation method described in

Section IV is used to identify the control to output transfer

function of the experimental forward converter. A 3-period

12-bit PRBS was generated by the FPGA and injected to the

digital duty cycle command. The total data length is

N =3.(2 - 1) =12285. The PRBS frequency A, equals the

switching frequency A, which means that the process of

collecting the data takes N/&= 123 ms. A single PRBS

sequence lasts M& =4 I ms, which is sufficiently long to

capture the complete impulse response of the converter. The

corresponding frequency resolution i s5l M =24 Hz, which

can be compared to the resolution bandwidth setting in a

standard analog measurement of converter transfer timctions

using a network analyzer.

Figure I 1 compares the magnitude and phase responses

obtained by the modified correlation method (dotted line) and

by the network analyzer measurement (solid line) under the

same operating conditions. I t can be observed that the

matching between the responses is quite good in a wide range

of frequencies. The results obtained by the identification

method show a relatively low level of noise even at high

frequencies.

VI. CONCLUSION

A modified cross-correlation method for system

identification is presented for switching power converters

with digital control. Multiple periods of a Pseudo Random

Binary Signal (PRBS) are injected to a control input (such as

the duty cycle) of a power converter, and the output is

sampled over multiple PRBS periods. The computed

cross-correlation is averaged over multiple periods to get the

system impulse response, which is then used to compute the

system frequency response. Simulations and experimental

results show that the proposed method can give reliable

identification results in the presence of PRBS artifacts,

switching and quantization noise (in digital systems). The

.mL.> , \

10 1 Oa

Hz

Fig.1 I Experimental frequency response of 100kHz. 90W

forward converter based on the proposed system identification

method. Dashed result is based on measured data from the digital

identification system with a 3-period, 12-bit PRBS, data length N =

12285, and a PRBS frequency of 100kHz. The solid line is measured

by a network analyzer.

method is well suited for implementation in digitally

controlled switching power converters. As an example of

such anapplication, adigitally controlled 50-to-I5 V forward

converter operating at 100 kHz is constructed and the

identification method is demonstrated using an FPGA-based

digital controller. The experimental results show successhl

control-to-output response identification.

The proposed identification approach can be used for

off-line system analysis, digital controller design, and even

design validation in the presence of non-idealities such as

losses, delays and switching and quantization noise. In

addition, the concepts can be extended for use in on-line

applications, such as PMAD systems where static and

dynamic performance of individual power modules and

interactions between modules can he monitored and actively

compensated locally to achieve global system stability.

REFERENCES

L. Ljung, Syslem rdentiJkacorion: theory for the mer, 2d Edition,

Prentice- Hall, N.J., 1999.

G. F. Franklin, J. D. Powell and M. Workman, Digilol Control of

DynomicSyslems, 3* Edition, Addison-Wesley, 1997.

R. W. Erickson and D. Maksimovic, Fundamentals of Power

Electronics, 2 Edition, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.

B. Johansson and M. Lenells, Possibilities of obtaining small-signal

models of E-lo-D power converters by means of system

identification, Telecommunicarions EnergV Conference, INTELEC

2000, pp. 65-75.

P. Huynh and B. H. Cho, Empirical small-signal modeling of

switching conveners using PSpice, in Proc. IEEE PESC95, 1995,

D. Maksimavic, Computer-aided small-signal analysis based on

impulse response of DCDC switching Power Converters, lEEE

Trammlions on Power Elecrronics, Vol. 15, No. 6, Nov. 2000,

pp. 1183-1191.

pp. 801-808.

3713

- Power and Energy of a SignalUploaded byShariful Azam
- price and return modelsUploaded bynoir_weizz
- Image Matching by Normalized Cross-CorrelationUploaded bySneha Madhuri
- Medical Electronics -1 syllabus for diploma in electronics engineering.Uploaded byEr Sarbesh
- A Mathematical Theory of CommunicationUploaded byjared_davis_9
- AutocorrelationUploaded byShraddha Bahirat
- My idUploaded byDavid raj
- Xbond2-Dynamic Panel Data EstimatorsUploaded byzvika.de
- SIPROUploaded byCS & IT
- A Data Acquisition System for the NASAUploaded bySyafiq Badrul Hisham
- Course Outline MCTE 2311 Signal and System AnalysisUploaded bynewasam
- DSP for Explicit FEA AUC1999Uploaded byjamelcharfi
- Exercise 19.1 - Signal Objects and IO Allocation V2-1.pdfUploaded byRodrigoBurgos
- ResumeUploaded bymanasmohan06
- RVUploaded byHnoon Mtfahem
- Monitoring Wastewater Treatment Systems.pdfUploaded byNermeen Elmeleegae
- rss-grad-diploma-module3-solutions-specimen-a.pdfUploaded byA Pirzada
- TrendUploaded byHouIn Cheong
- S344D55.pdfUploaded bynadeem_sk
- NIB ENGINRUploaded byidjey
- White Paper - FAM - Fernando ChavezUploaded byfchavez141991
- ARMA-Chap 3Uploaded bygiangp
- SIGI-2015Uploaded byCS & IT
- 02.Remote Monitoring of Power Frequency Electrical Signal Employing GSM NetworkUploaded bySiva Ranjani
- Dhoom 3 StoryUploaded bysachin b
- Chapter 2Uploaded byAbeer Haddad
- co relation.docxUploaded byAnonymous Hx7MTi
- Mach Man 1702010 Mak Hut OvUploaded byDreznikov
- Final Time SerirsUploaded byKabir Agarwal
- 13-AnilMaharjanUploaded byMoh Taraman

- CMOS Analog Circuit Design Allen Holberg 3Uploaded bysubhasankarpanda
- BacklashUploaded bywielnig
- 33 a Tutorial on Linear and Bilinear Matrix InequalitiesUploaded bywielnig
- A Manual for System IdentificationUploaded byJulián Salazar
- 2003tnnaic-Uploaded bywielnig
- FPE6e Rltool TutorialUploaded bywielnig
- electromechanicalDynamicsUploaded bywielnig

- Measurement of Impulse Responses Using Alternative MethodsUploaded byMudit Arya
- From Oxymoron to Mainstream the Evolution and Future of RF CMOSUploaded byMagnanil Goswami
- Lab 3 Report_dspUploaded byTrần Ngọc Lâm
- Impulse ResponseUploaded byvikrant99
- Linear System Theory and Design (3rd Ed) - Chi-Tsang ChenUploaded byabnaod5363
- dspbook-Chap2Uploaded byyash
- 03 01 Laplace Transforms Slides HandoutUploaded byXavimVXS
- immersive audio signal processingUploaded byderghal
- BPHS4090 NotesUploaded byNidhi Vats
- Making Post Pro IR'sUploaded byMiquel Kustner
- QuizUploaded byAli Raza
- MatLab Tutorial 5Uploaded byFabricetoussaint
- 06885709Uploaded byVeronika Abarca
- Hw8 Solution - MAE150AUploaded byVincent Vuong
- Signal ProcessingUploaded byBruno Martins
- Simple Modeling and Identification Procedures for “ Black-Box ” Behavioral Modeling of Power Converters Based on Transient Response Analysis_2009Uploaded bydsafh
- Discrete Time Signals and SystemsUploaded byNafi Ahmad
- Electrical Engineering- Frame workUploaded byMocharu Art
- LAB 3 HandoutUploaded byManuGear
- r05221902-signals-and-systemsUploaded bySRINIVASA RAO GANTA
- Linear, Circular, DiffenceUploaded byMayank Sardana
- Documento para imprimirUploaded byGabriel Andrés
- Dynare ExamplesUploaded bygvencho
- 201.ev1.12.Lec18.pdfUploaded bySanthosh Mamidala
- SVA+Non integerUploaded byarnoldmoya
- Earthquake Geotechnical EngineeringUploaded bycivil2016
- GATE BY RK Kanodia signals and systemsUploaded byPratesh Kumar Reddy
- nProblemSet3Uploaded byDiMayer
- Ece-IV-signals & Systems [10ec44]-Notes (1)Uploaded bySameer Yusuf
- Telecom. Eng. digestUploaded bysakibsultan_308