Pulse-width Modulation - Principle

Principle

Pulse-width modulation uses a rectangular pulse wave whose pulse width is modulated resulting in the variation of the average value of the waveform. If we consider a pulse waveform with a low value, a high value and a duty cycle D (see figure 1), the average value of the waveform is given by:

\bar y=\frac{1}{T}\int^T_0f(t)\,dt.

As is a pulse wave, its value is for and for . The above expression then becomes:

\begin{align} \bar y &=\frac{1}{T}\left(\int_0^{DT}y_{max}\,dt+\int_{DT}^T y_{min}\,dt\right)\\ &= \frac{D\cdot T\cdot y_{max}+ T\left(1-D\right)y_{min}}{T}\\ &= D\cdot y_{max}+ \left(1-D\right)y_{min}. \end{align}

This latter expression can be fairly simplified in many cases where as . From this, it is obvious that the average value of the signal is directly dependent on the duty cycle D.

The simplest way to generate a PWM signal is the intersective method, which requires only a sawtooth or a triangle waveform (easily generated using a simple oscillator) and a comparator. When the value of the reference signal (the red sine wave in figure 2) is more than the modulation waveform (blue), the PWM signal (magenta) is in the high state, otherwise it is in the low state.

Read more about this topic:  Pulse-width Modulation

Famous quotes containing the word principle:

    “Custom, then, is the great guide of human life. It is that principle alone, which renders our experience useful to us, and makes us expect, for the future, a similar train of events with those which have appeared in the past.”
    —David Hume (1711–1776)

    “The principle of majority rule is the mildest form in which the force of numbers can be exercised. It is a pacific substitute for civil war in which the opposing armies are counted and the victory is awarded to the larger before any blood is shed. Except in the sacred tests of democracy and in the incantations of the orators, we hardly take the trouble to pretend that the rule of the majority is not at bottom a rule of force.”
    —Walter Lippmann (1889–1974)

    “Why does philosophy use concepts and why does faith use symbols if both try to express the same ultimate? The answer, of course, is that the relation to the ultimate is not the same in each case. The philosophical relation is in principle a detached description of the basic structure in which the ultimate manifests itself. The relation of faith is in principle an involved expression of concern about the meaning of the ultimate for the faithful.”
    —Paul Tillich (1886–1965)