American Journal of Mechanical Engineering 1

Available online at http://pubs.sciepub.com/ajme/1/7/33

© Science and Education Publishing
DOI:10.12691/ajme-1-7-33

Bond Graphs of the Electrical RLC Circuit

Darina Hroncová*, Alexander Gmiterko

Department of applied mechanics and mechatronics, Technical University of Košice / Faculty of mechanical engineering, Košice,
Slovakia
*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Received October 21, 2013; Revised November 01, 2013; Accepted November 22, 2013
Abstract The work shows the use of Bond Graph formalism for modeling dynamic systems. As an example a
electrical model is solved by this approach at the level of its physical behavior. In contrast with the classical
method, where the equations for individual components are created first and then the simulation scheme is
derived on their basis, the described method uses the reverse procedure. In this paper the method of generation of
system equations is discussed. From a bond graph diagram of the system, using a step-by-step procedure, system
equations may be generated. As a starting point a model of a simple electrical RLC circuit consisting of a resistor,
an inductor, and a capacitor is taken. The differential equations describing the dynamics of the system are
obtained in terms of the states of the system.
Keywords: mechatronics, bond graphs, energy modeling, modeling dynamic systems
Cite This Article: Darina Hroncová, and Alexander Gmiterko, “Bond Graphs of the Electrical RLC Circuit.”
American Journal of Mechanical Engineering 1, no. 7 (2013): 318-323. doi: 10.12691/ajme-1-7-33.

1. Introduction capacitor. The RLC part of the name is due to those letters
being the usual electrical symbols for resistance,
The concept of bond graphs was originated by Paynter inductance and capacitance respectively [11].
(1961). The idea was further developed by Karnopp and
Rosenberg in their textbooks (1968, 1975, 1983, 1990),
such that it could be used in practice (Thoma, 1975; Van
Dixhoorn, 1982). By means of the formulation by
Breedveld (1984, 1985) of a framework based on
thermodynamics, bond-graph model description evolved
to a systems theory [1-7].
A causal bond graph contains all information to derive
the set of state equations. The procedure to derive these
equations is covered by bond graph software like Enport
(Rosenberg, 1974), MS1 (Lorenz, 1997), CAMP (Granda,
1985), and 20-SIM (Broenink, 1990, 1995, 1997, 1999;
Broenink and Kleijn, 1999). Therefore, in practice,
generation of equation need not be done by hand.
However, we discuss the generation of equations to
indicate what exactly has to be done. Figure 1. Electrical system: a) electrical model of RLC system; b)
reference voltage uref with positive direction; c) efforts (voltages) with
unique names u1, u2, u3
2. Bond Graph of the Electrical System
The language of bond graphs aspires to express general
2.2. Bond Graph Construction
class physical systems through power interactions. The We have discussed the basic bond-graph elements and
factors of power i.e., effort and flow, have different the bond, so we can transform a domain-dependent ideal-
interpretations in different physical domains. Yet, power physical model, written in domain-dependent symbols,
can always be used as a generalized coordinate to model into a bond graph. For this transformation, there is a
coupled systems residing in several energy domains. systematic procedure, which is presented here. This
electrical system contains a voltage source effort SE
2.1. Description of the Model (SE:uz), a resistor R (R:R1, R:R2), an inductor I (I:L1, I:L2,)
and a capacitor C (C:1/C).
To demonstrate the bond graph methodology as an Step 1 – Determine which physical domains exist in the
example an electrical model of RLC system is analyzed in system and identify all basic elements like C (capacitor), I
Figure 1 a). An RLC circuit (or LCR circuit) is an (inductor), R (resistor), SE (source of the effort), SF
electrical circuit consisting of a resistor, an inductor, and a (source of the flow), TF (transformer) and GY (gyrator).
 This system contains a electrical domain part with the A junction between two bonds can be left out, if the
inductance L of the inductor (I:L), the resistance R of the bonds have a through power direction (one bond incoming,
resistor (R:R) and a capacity of the capacitor C (C:C). the other outgoing). A bond between two the same
Voltage uz is considered as an effort source (SE: uz). junctions can be left out, and the junctions can join into
Step 2 – Indicate in the ideal-physical model per one junction. Two separately constructed identical effort
domain a reference source – effort voltage uref (reference or flow differences can join into one effort or flow
voltage with positive direction) in Figure 1 b). difference.
The references are indicated in the ideal physical model: Step 9 – Determine the signal direction and causality in
the ideal velocity uref = 0. Figure 4 b). Causality establishes the cause and effect
Step 3 – Identify all other efforts (voltages) and give relationships between the factors of power.
them unique names u1, u2, u3, Figure 1 c).
Step 4 – Draw these efforts (electrical: voltages),
graphically by 0-junctions in Figure 2 a).

Figure 2. Electrical system (a) voltages are shown as 0-junctions (b)

connecting 0-junctions with 1-junctions

Step 5 – Identify all effort differences (electrical:

voltage = effort) needed to connect the ports of all
elements enumerated in step 1 to the junction structure.
When checking all ports of the elements found in step 1
linear voltage differences, u12 and u23 are identified: Figure 4. Simplified Bond graph (a) the 0-junctions with voltages u2 and
u3 (b) causality determination
u1  u2  u12 , u2  u3  (1)
u23.
Step 6 – Construct the voltages differences using a 1- uz 0 1 0
1
SE:uz u2 u u u R:R 2
2 3 3
junction and draw them as such in the graph in Figure 2 b). i1 i1 u2 i2 i2 u3 i5
The junction structure is now ready and the elements u12 i1 u2 i3 u23 i2 u3 i4
can be connected.
Step 7 – Connect the port of all elements found at step
R:R 1 I:L1 I:L2 C:C
1 with the 1-junction of the corresponding efforts or
efforts differences in Figure 3 a). Figure 3. Electrical system: a) connecting elements R, I, C, SE with 0-
Step 8 – Simplify the resulting graph by applying the junctions; b) applying the simplification rules
simplification rules in Figure 3 b) and in Figure 4 a).
 Figure 5. Final bond graphs with signal direction and causality

In bond graphs, the inputs and the outputs are

characterized by the causal stroke. The causal stroke
indicates the direction in which the effort signal is
directed (by implication, the end of the bond that does
not have a causal stroke is the end towards which the
flow signal is directed).
There are two ways of describing an element's
behavior (e.g. effort in, flow out vs. flow in, effort out)
as different causal forms. Note that the two alternative
causal forms may, in general, require quite different
mathematical operations. The causal form we use, i.e.
which variable we select as input and which we select
as output, can make a lot of difference. For example, the
required mathematical operations may be well defined
in one causal form, but not defined at all in the other.
The causal bond graph of this system can be derived,
in which the inputs and the outputs are characterized by
the causal stroke. This is the starting point, from which
we continue toward the differential equations describing
the dynamics of the system.

2.3. Expansion to Block Diagrams

The equations are derived in the steps described below.
320 American Journal of Mechanical Engineering

A fe B A e B orientation does change, then a minus sign is added

f
e e
representing a negative contribution to the summation. In
AfB A B
f
principle, a complete block diagram is obtained at this
point.
Figure 6. The bond graph example – bilateral signal flows between ports
and definition of the causal stroke

A causal bond graph in Figure 5 b) can be expanded

into a block diagram in three steps.
Step 1 – All node symbols are encircled in Figure 7 a).
Step 2 – All bonds are expanded into bilateral signal
flows according to the assigned causality in Figure 7 b).
Step 3 – All constitutive relations of each node are
written into block diagram form, according to the assigned
causality of each port; one-junction is represented by a
signal-node for the flows and a summation for the efforts
in Figure 8.
All signals entering a summation resulting from a
junction are given a sign corresponding to the half-arrow
direction: if, while traveling from causal input to causal
output, the bond orientation does not change (this does not
exclude an orientation opposite to the signal direction),
then a plus sign is added representing a positive
contribution to the summation; by contrast if the bond Figure 7. The bond graphs example: a) element layout and b) bond
graph with bilateral signals flow

i1
i1 i2 i2 i2 i5 1
- ∑
rozvetvovací uzol pre toky
+∑ -R2
i1 -rozvetvovací uzol pre úsilia i
i1 -i 2 +i
3 4 u3
SEu =u
Z1 u2 u2 u2 u2 u u3
∑+ ∑ -3
u2 + u3
- + u23 i
u12 4

R1L 1 L2 C
i1u2 i2 u3

Figure 8. The block diagram with the line signal direction

i1 i2 i2 i2 i51
∑
-- +∑ - R2
i +i
- rozvetvovací
i3
uzol pre úsilia 2
4 u3
u =u
Z1 u2 uu22 u2 u u3
SE ∑+ u2 +∑ - 3 u3
- + u23 i
u12 4

R1 L1 L2 C
i1 u2 i2 u3

Figure 9. The block diagram and line signal direction with ideal source the effort uZ

The procedure to obtain a signal flow graph is

nodes, as signal nodes can be distinguished from signal
completely analogous to the above procedure as all
summation points by observing the signal directions
operations represented by blocks, including the signs of
(signal node has only one input, summation has only one
the summations, are combined as much as possible and
output).
then written next to an edge, while all summations become
 Table 1. Element in block diagram

Bond graph Type of element Element in block diagram Equations

1
u23 ∫ Φ(t) i(t)  .  t 
u23 u23

i
I:L I
i i 1
L

i
u12 u12
i
R:R R R u (t)  R . i t 
i
i u12
i
u12 u12
i
R:R R R u (t)  R . i t 
i
i u12

u3 i t
u3 1
u3
C:C C 1
C ∫ u (t)  . Q t  Q t    i   d
i i Q(t)

Figure 10. Bond graph expanded to a block diagram: a) with source effort voltage uz and b) with ideal source uz

2.4. Generation of the Equations u2   u12  (5)

The state equations derived from a bond graph diagram
in Figure 10 a) and in Figure 10 b) are: u1, u23  u2  (6)
d  t  u3 , (7)

i1   i2  i3 ,
1
 u2 , (2) i i i , (8)
dt 2 4 5

d 2 t  1
i3  . 1 t (9)
u , (3)
dt
23 ,
L1
dQ t  i2 
1
. 2 t
i , (4) (10)
,
4
dt L2
where state variables Φ1(t), Φ2(t) and Q(t) are magnetic
flux and electric charge respectively. u12  R1 . i1 (11)
,
 Now we rewrite variable parameters from Figure 9 and 1
i5  . u3 , (12)
Figure 10 to equations: R2
 1
u3  . Q(t), 2.5. State Space Equation in Matlab/Simulink
C (13)
Solution of the non-homogenous system of differential
After substitution we get: equations of a mechanical system with two degrees of
1 freedom in Figure 11, is done in Matlab/Simulink using
d 1 t  1 t   R . t   u (14) State-Space. The most general state-space representation
. R . . ,
1 1 1
L2
2 1 of a linear system with u(t) inputs, y(t) outputs and n state
dt L1 variables is written in the following form:
d 2 t  1 1 1
R . . t   R . t   .Qt   u , x  t   A . x t   B. (25)
(15) u t  ,
. 1
dt
 

1 1 2 1
L L C
1 2
dQ t  1 1 1 yt   C. xt   D. ut (26)
.
 . .Qt   .2 t , (16) where A, B, C, D are the respective matrices of the
dt
L
R2 C 2
mechanical system defined as follows:
and in matrix form: We determine the matrix and block diagram in
 1 1  Matlab/Simulink shown in Figure 11:
 d  t  
  R1 . R1 . L 0
1
 1 2   t   1 
 dt    1
 d 2 t    R .
1 1  . t   1  . u (17)
1  R .
   1
dt L
1
L 2     1

C
   1 2   Q  t   0 
  
 dQ t 
 
   1 1 1
dt
  
0  .
 L2 C Figure 11. The block diagram in Simulink

R2

By choosing different state variables i electric current

and u3 electric charge, after substitution the state equations
are in following form: 3. Conclusion
d  L1.i3  1 1 Bond graphs represent a convenient tool for physical
 R . . L .i   R . . L .i   u ,
system analysis. We presented a method to systematically
(18) build a bond graph starting from an ideal physical model.
1 1 3 1 2 2 1 Causal analysis gives, besides the computational direction
dt L1 L2
d  L2 .i2  1 1 of the signals at the bonds, also information about the
 R . . L .i   R . . L .i 
1 1 3 1 2 2 correctness of the model. A practical example of an
dt L1 L2 (19) electrical model is presented as the application of this
1
 . C.u3   u1 , methodology.
C The differential equations describing the dynamics of
the system in terms of the states of the system were
d C.u3  1 . 1 . C.u3  1 .  L2 .i2  , (20)
 derived from a bond graph diagram of a simple electrical

dt C L2 system. The results correspond with equations obtained
using traditional method, where the equations for
and finally: R2
di 1 1 1 individual components are created first and then the
. 3 R. R.  .u ., (21) simulation scheme is derived on their basis, although the
.i .i
1 3 1 2 1 described method uses the reverse procedure.
dt L1 L1 L1 However, manual derivation of equations for larger
d i2 1 . R .i  R . 1 .i 1 1
.u3  .u1,
systems is not all that simple. For instance, in some cases
 1 3 1 2 (22) the derivation may lead to formation of so called algebraic
dt L L2 L2
2  loops. Similarly, complexities and errors of various types,
L2
 d u3 1 1 1 like causal loops, power loops and differential causalities
 . .u3  .i2 , (23) may exist in the model of a system.
dt R2 C
C
or in matrix form:
 1
Acknowledgement
 di3  1 R . R.  1 
0
 dt   1 L 
i3   L11 
1 This work was supported by grant projects VEGA No.
 di2  11 L1 1/0289/11, VEGA No. 1/1205/12 and grant projects
 R. 1 1 .  .u , VEGA No. 1/0937/12 and APVV-0091-11.
R. i (24)
 dt   21 1  2   1
 du  L
 L2 L2  u3  L2 
 3   0 
 dt   0

1
C 1R 1C
. References
 2   
The equation can be solved in Matlab/Simulink for [1] Breedveld, P., C., Rosenberg, R., C., Zhou, T., 1991. Bibliography
example [8-13]. of Bond Graph Theory and Application, Journal of the Franklin
Institute, 328(5/6), p. 1067-1109.
[2] Breedveld, P., C. Modeling and Simulation of Dynamic Systems
[8] Hroncová, D., 2012. Studies of compatible software tools for
Using Bond Graphs, http://eolss.net.
abstract and concrete design of mechatronic systems and linking
[3] Broenink, J., F. Introduction to Physical Systems Modelling with
them for the purpose of logical and physical modeling,
Bond Graphs, http://www.ce.utwente.nl.
Dissertation thesis, Košice, Slovakia.
[4] Virgala, I., Frankovský, P., Kenderová, M.: Friction Effect
[9] Karban, P., 2006. Výpočty a simulace v programech Matlab a
Analysis of a DC Motor. In: American Journal of Mechanical
Simulink. Computer Press, Brno, Česko.
Engineering. 2013. Vol. 1, no. 1 (2013), p. 1-5
[5] Karnopp, D., C., Margolis, D., L., Rosenberg, R., C., 2005. [10] Gmiterko, A., 2004. Mechatronics, Emilenia, Košice, Slovakia.
Modeling and simulation of mechatronic systems. John Willey & [11] Vittek, J., 1997. Matlab pre elektrické pohony, Nakladateľstvo
Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey. Žilinskej univerzity, Žilina, Slovensko, p. 35-36.
[6] Horáček, P., 1999. Systems and models, Nakladatelství ČVUT, [12] Ogatha, K., 1978. System Dynamics. Prentice Hall, Inc.,
Praha, Česko. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
[7] Gmiterko, A., Šarga, P., Hroncová, D., 2012. Mechatronika I, [13] Delyová, I., Frankovský, P., Hroncová, D., 2011. Kinematics
Technická univerzita Košice, Košice, Slovakia. analysis of movement of a point of a simple mechanism, In:
Modelling of mechanical and mechatronic systems 2011, The 4th
International conference, TU Košice, Herľany, Slovakia.