volume | PIER Journals

Abstract

In recent years, the non-embedded uncertainty analysis method has been widely used in the field of Electromagnetic Compatibility due to its wide application range. In this paper, from the perspective of the practical application of uncertainty analysis methods, four non-embedded uncertainty analysis methods are applied to the worst-case estimation of Electromagnetic Compatibility, which are the Monte Carlo Method, Stochastic Collocation Method, Stochastic Reduced-Order Models, and Kriging surrogate model method. The performances of four uncertainty analysis methods in terms of computational accuracy, computational efficiency, and ability to deal with complex problems are compared in detail by using the parallel cable crosstalk prediction example in the existing literature and the uncertainty analysis example of self-constructed optimization test function, which provides a theoretical basis for uncertainty analysis method to guide the actual Electromagnetic Compatibility design.

1. Manfredi, P., D. V. Ginste, I. S. Stievano, D. D. Zutter, and F. Canavero, "Stochastic transmission line analysis via polynomial chaos methods: An overview," IEEE Electromagnetic Compatibility Magazine, Vol. 6, No. 3, 77-84, 2017.
doi:10.1109/MEMC.0.8093844 Google Scholar

2. Manfredi, P., D. V. Ginste, D. D. Zutter, and F. Canavero, "Generalized decoupled polynomial chaos for nonlinear circuits with many random parameters," IEEE Microwave & Wireless Components Letters, Vol. 25, No. 8, 505-507, Aug. 2015.
doi:10.1109/LMWC.2015.2440779 Google Scholar

3. Spindelberger, C. and H. Arthaber, "Improving the performance of direct-conversion SDRs for radiated precompliance measurements," IEEE Letters on Electromagnetic Compatibility Practice and Applications, Vol. 5, No. 1, 22-26, 2023.
doi:10.1109/LEMCPA.2022.3227409 Google Scholar

4. Chen, J., S. Portillo, G. Heileman, G. Hadi, R. Bilalic, M. Martinez-Ramon, S. Hemmady, and E. Schamiloglu, "Time-varying radiation impedance of microcontroller GPIO ports and their dependence on software instructions," IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility, Vol. 64, No. 4, 1147-1159, 2022.
doi:10.1109/TEMC.2022.3162492 Google Scholar

5. Pignari, S. A., G. Spadacini, and F. Grassi, "Modeling field-to-wire coupling in random bundles of wires," IEEE Electromagnetic Compatibility Magazine, Vol. 6, No. 3, 85-90, 2017.
doi:10.1109/MEMC.0.8093845 Google Scholar

6. Xie, H., J. F. Dawson, J. Yan, A. Marvin, and M. Robinson, "Numerical and analytical analysis of stochastic electromagnetic fields coupling to a printed circuit board trace," IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility, Vol. 62, No. 4, 1128-1135, 2020.
doi:10.1109/TEMC.2019.2954303 Google Scholar

7. Manfredi, P., "A hierarchical approach to dimensionality reduction and nonparametric problems in the polynomial chaos simulation of transmission lines," IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility, Vol. 62, No. 3, 736-745, 2019.
doi:10.1109/TEMC.2019.2918724 Google Scholar

8. Cui, C. F. and Z. Zhang, "High-dimensional uncertainty quantification of electronic and photonic IC with non-Gaussian correlated process variations," IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, Vol. 39, No. 8, 1649-1661, 2019.
doi:10.1109/TCAD.2019.2925340 Google Scholar

9. Bai, J., G. Zhang, A. Duffy, and L. Wang, "Dimension-reduced sparse grid strategy for a stochastic collocation method in EMC software," IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility, Vol. 60, No. 1, 218-224, 2018.
doi:10.1109/TEMC.2017.2699691 Google Scholar

10. Fei, Z., H. Yi, J. Zhou, and X. Qian, "Uncertainty quantication of crosstalk using stochastic reduced order models," IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility, Vol. 59, No. 1, 228-239, 2016.
doi:10.1109/TEMC.2016.2604361 Google Scholar

11. Ren, Z., J. Ma, Y. Qi, D. Zhang, and C.-S. Koh, "Managing uncertainties of permanent magnet synchronous machine by adaptive kriging assisted weight index monte carlo simulation method," IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. 35, No. 4, 2162-2169, 2020.
doi:10.1109/TEC.2020.3009249 Google Scholar

12. Bai, J., J. C. Sun, and N. Wang, "Convergence determination of EMC uncertainty simulation based on the improved mean equivalent area method," The Applied Computational Electromagnetics Society Journal, Vol. 36, No. 11, 1446-1452, 2021. Google Scholar

13. Bai, J., G. Zhang, D. Wang, A. P. Duffy, and L. Wang, "Performance comparison of the SGM and the SCM in EMC simulation," IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility, Vol. 58, No. 6, 1739-1746, 2016.
doi:10.1109/TEMC.2016.2588580 Google Scholar

14. Duffy, A. P., A. Orlandi, and G. Zhang, "Review of the feature selective validation method (FSV). Part I --- Theory," IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility, Vol. 60, No. 4, 814-821, 2018.
doi:10.1109/TEMC.2017.2776406 Google Scholar

15. Orlandi, A., A. P. Duffy, and G. Zhang, "Review of the feature selective validation method (FSV). Part II --- Performance analysis and research fronts," IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility, Vol. 60, No. 4, 1029-1035, 2018.
doi:10.1109/TEMC.2018.2796080 Google Scholar

Dr. Jinjun Bai

Mr. Xintao Geng

Mr. Xiaobing Niu