simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

During this lockdown I had some time in hand and decided to learn more about impedance. So I gave myself a project, trying to create a impedance graph in excel base on a the schematic seen above. The passive components will be a variable.

To do that, I first need to derive the impedance equation for the schematic seen above. When I cross check it with a simulation tool and a proven graph, I could not get the graph to match. Hence, I believe I must have done something wrong. I had doubled, tripled checked and corrected all the mistakes.

I do not know where I went wrong. I am hoping if I can get a 2nd or 3rd eye to look to see where I might have gone wrong.

This is my first post here, I had done the search but to no avail of information I can obtain anymore. Do let me know if I did violate any rules by posting this.

Edit: I have removed my derivation, as it is wrong and not working. This is to not confuse other readers as User Verbal Kint has provided a really good solution.

  • \$\begingroup\$ That's a cranky way of doing things. \$\endgroup\$ – Andy aka Apr 28 at 14:25
  • \$\begingroup\$ This would all be easier for you if you worked with a numerical analysis tool that can handle complex numbers instead of using Excel and having to do all that algebra yourself. For example: Matlab, Octave, Numpy, Maple, Mathematica, ... \$\endgroup\$ – The Photon Apr 28 at 14:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ I am not sure you can obtain a tractable result using this approach. I would highly recommend the FACTs to get there. You have a 3rd-order denominator and a 2nd-order numerator as a first observation. \$\endgroup\$ – Verbal Kint Apr 28 at 14:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ Or use an algebraic tools like Maple, Maxima, ... \$\endgroup\$ – Huisman Apr 28 at 14:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ Z1 (first half page) seems right to me. Why do conjugate this afterwards? \$\endgroup\$ – Stefan Wyss Apr 28 at 15:56

There are several ways to look at this type of 3rd-order transfer function: brute-force analysis - which often leads to algebraic paralysis - and the fast analytical techniques or FACTs.

The brute-force expression is not that complicated to write but good luck to develop it and express the result as a meaningful transfer function. Fortunately, it is easy to plot it with a mathematical solver like Mathcad:

enter image description here

With the FACTs (or any other approach), you determine this transfer function (yes, an impedance is a transfer function) by installing a test generator \$I_T\$ - the stimulus - across the connecting terminals and determine the response \$V_T\$ that it generates. To determine the denominator, you turn the excitation off (the current source is zeroed or open-circuited) and you "look" through the connecting terminals of the 3 energy-storing elements to determine the resistance \$R\$ that drives them. They are temporarily removed during this exercise. This is to write the denominator \$D(s)=1+sb_1+s^2b_2+s^3b_3\$.

For the zeroes, you null the response across the current source \$I_T\$ meaning that you replace it by a short circuit (this is a degenerate case). Again, you "look" through the connecting terminals of the 3 energy-storing elements to determine the resistance \$R\$ that drives them. This is to write the numerator \$N(s)=1+sb_1+s^2b_2\$. There is no third-order coefficient as \$C_3\$ is shorted in this exercise.

If you draw intermediate sketches and write carefully all the time constants, without a single line of algebra, then you assemble the transfer function at the end:

enter image description here

Finally, you can plot this expression and compare its response versus that of the brute-force formula used a reference here:

enter image description here

If you now want to extract the magnitude and phase expressions, I let you replace \$s\$ by \$j\omega\$ and collect real and imaginary terms. I'm done for tonight : )


If you want the phase and the magnitude of this transfer function, below are the expressions to compute them:

enter image description here

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.