Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...

Articles Figures Tables About

Computer-generated state matrices

The effort variables of the mechanical section represent the forces and the effort variables of the piezoelectric transformation represent the relation between the forces, which the sensor is subjected to and the voltage produced because of the piezoelectric effect. These variables in the electrical section represent the distinct voltages at any node in the circuit. Respectively, the flow variables represent the velocities and the currents involved. This approach considers the system as a whole so that the state matrix involves all three sections of the sensor, a mechanical section, a piezoelectric, and an electrical, a complete mechatronics system. CAMPG can obtain the desired transfer functions using the computer-generated state matrices derived in symbolic form. The Laplace transform is applied to the state space form and the transfer functions are obtained in symbolic and also in numeric form for... [Pg.414]

Use of unitary group algebra to choose the model space CSFs as Gel fand states and compute the various matrix elements of the generators between them. [Pg.30]

In FDE-ET we seek a method capable of computing the Hamiltonian matrix in the basis of charge-localized states generated with FDE. First, we have to define the needed matrix elements. As diabatic states are not the eigenfunctions of the molecular Hamiltonian, the off-diagonal elements of such Hamiltonian are not zero and can be approximated by the following formula [114, 115] if and y/ are slater determinants representing the donor and acceptor diabats ... [Pg.108]

State space system matrix A obtained from bond graph method and computer generated from CAMPG using (11.14), (11.15), (11.16), and (11.17). [Pg.405]

For example, a Bode plot can be generated using the computer-generated transfer function or the A, B, C, D matrices in order to do a frequency response analysis. Root locus, pole placement, and other operations such as controllability and observability using the state space form are possible also using the model produced by the approach presented in this chapter. The result of the above matrix operations can be... [Pg.415]

We developed a prototypical tool in Java that takes an AADL model as input, and then computes the effect matrix (see Definition 3 and Algorithm 1) as result. Inside the tool, it uses our AADL-to-Promela translator [10] to have the SPIN model checker [9] generate the transitions system. This transition system, in explicit-state representation, is dumped to disk as a file. All computations are then performed on that state space. [Pg.247]

TMB (42) was first generated by Roth el al. by photochemical decarbonyla-tion of the ketone 44 in a low-temperature matrix. This preparation was intensely colored, with a main transition at 490 nm and several subsidiary absorptions. Earlier ti-CI quantum chemical computations had predicted ultraviolet-visible (UV-vis) is transitions for the singlet and triplet states of TMB, and the bands observed by the Roth group were in better agreement with the predictions for the triplet. The preparation also showed a narrow ESR spectrum interpreted by the authors as that of a triplet species with D = 0.0042 cm and E = 0.0009 cm, which gave a linear Curie plot. The authors assumed that the carriers of the UV-vis and ESR spectra were the same species, namely, triplet TMB. They concluded that TMB is a ground-state triplet, contrary to the disjoint theory and to the computational results described above. [Pg.186]

Direct detection of DPC is made by time-resolved EPR spectroscopy. In this method, DPC is first generated by photolysis of 30 in a hydrocarbon matrix at 16 K and is excited by a 465-nm laser, which corresponds to a T-T absorption of the To state of DPC. The transient triplet spectrum of the species having a decay rate of 160 ns at 16 K is assigned to the EPR spectrum of DPC. The ZFS parameters are determined by computer simulation to be D = 0.201 m and E = 0.0085 cm The D values observed by different methods are essentially identical. [Pg.437]


See other pages where Computer-generated state matrices is mentioned: [Pg.261]    [Pg.21]    [Pg.467]    [Pg.644]    [Pg.457]    [Pg.139]    [Pg.261]    [Pg.486]    [Pg.517]    [Pg.197]    [Pg.231]    [Pg.348]    [Pg.31]    [Pg.530]    [Pg.250]    [Pg.360]    [Pg.301]    [Pg.343]    [Pg.234]    [Pg.64]    [Pg.107]    [Pg.134]    [Pg.11]    [Pg.238]    [Pg.27]    [Pg.40]    [Pg.406]    [Pg.333]    [Pg.62]    [Pg.301]    [Pg.18]    [Pg.29]    [Pg.21]    [Pg.589]    [Pg.236]    [Pg.974]    [Pg.10]    [Pg.215]    [Pg.1]    [Pg.437]    [Pg.203]    [Pg.154]   
See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.414 ]




SEARCH



Computer generated

Computer generation

Generator matrices

Matrix computations

Matrix generation

© 2024 chempedia.info