COMSOL _ frequency response of piezoelectric device

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on modeling the frequency response of a thin PZT disc using COMSOL Multiphysics. The user is attempting to calculate the impedance (Z) and phase from the current density defined as I=-imag(nJ_smpz3d). The key takeaway is that for accurate impedance calculations, the model must include damping to avoid a zero impedance at resonance. The user also confirms that Z can be calculated as V/I, where V is the potential difference applied across the device.

PREREQUISITES
  • Familiarity with COMSOL Multiphysics for modeling piezoelectric devices
  • Understanding of impedance and phase calculations in electrical engineering
  • Knowledge of PZT (lead zirconate titanate) material properties
  • Experience with frequency response analysis techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Learn how to implement damping in COMSOL models to improve impedance accuracy
  • Research the effects of boundary conditions on impedance calculations in piezoelectric devices
  • Explore the use of COMSOL's frequency response analysis tools for better resonance identification
  • Study the relationship between current density and impedance in piezoelectric materials
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for electrical engineers, researchers in piezoelectric materials, and COMSOL users focused on modeling and analyzing the frequency response of piezoelectric devices.

luis_cam
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I'm trying to model the frequency response of a thin PZT disc using COMSOL, but I am not sure how to calculate the impedance Z vs frequency. I defined the current density at the top electrode as I=-imag(nJ_smpz3d) and then plotted V/I using the domain plot parameters in the postproc menu. This gives me a V/I vs freq plot, but V/I is not equal to Z!

Does anybody know how to calculate Z? And the Phase?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hmm...

Did you compute the solution for the entire disc or did you make use of the symmetry and only compute the solution for a segment?
 
Last edited:
In fact I did both cases, the main difference is that when I used symmetries then defined the variable I as I=-imag(nJ_smpz3d)*N, where N is the number of segments contained in the whole disc, i.e., if a 10 deg segment then N=36. I obtained in both ases the same solution.

However the question still remains, and is: how do we, in either case, calculate Z? Is V/I = Z using the difinition above?? Or not? How do I use the current density to calculate Z? and the Phase? Is there a way of calculating Z without defining I?
 
luis_cam said:
In fact I did both cases, the main difference is that when I used symmetries then defined the variable I as I=-imag(nJ_smpz3d)*N, where N is the number of segments contained in the whole disc, i.e., if a 10 deg segment then N=36. I obtained in both ases the same solution.

However the question still remains, and is: how do we, in either case, calculate Z? Is V/I = Z using the difinition above?? Or not? How do I use the current density to calculate Z? and the Phase? Is there a way of calculating Z without defining I?
If you have set up your model correctly V/I should give you the impedance.

How have you defined the potential difference?
 
From the boundary settings dialogue box, I grounded the base of the disc and applied 1V to the top. The rest of boundaries are set at "zero charge/symmetry"
I am using the "frequency response" analysis, and I am varying the frequency from 3 to 4.5 MHz in steps of 0.02MHz (I expect the disc to resonate at around 3.8MHz since it is PZT 0.6 mm thick. I defined I at the top electrode as I=-imag(nJ_smpz3d)

Should I define I=nJ_smpz3d, rather than the imaginary part?
Are you sure Z=V/I, i.e., V/(-imag(nJ_smpz3d))? Do you know how do I find the phase?

Looking at the plot of the results I obtain, there is a resonance at around the right frequency (plus another one at 4.2MHz I don't know where it comes from...), but somehow does not look totally right: Z is flat and near 0 at frequencies lower that the resonance. Then I assume that my definition of I is giving me information about the resonance but Z is not well calculated...

Thanks!
 
if your imedance is zero at resonance, then it means you have not defined damping in your model. By defining damping you lower the Q *quality factor) and hence will provide you with the right resistance (impedance).

Good luck
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
970
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
36K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
30K