4.8 Article

Influence of DSRD Operation Cycle on the Output Pulse Parameters

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS
卷 37, 期 6, 页码 6271-6274

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TPEL.2021.3139536

关键词

Energy loss; Optical switches; Voltage; Current density; Semiconductor diodes; Silicon; Power electronics; High-speed electronics; high-voltage (HV) techniques; power semiconductor diode switches

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation [075-152020-790]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents experimental research on circuit optimization of drift step recovery diodes (DSRDs) and proposes explicit definitions of DSRD pulse parameters for the first time. The experimental results demonstrate that optimization of different parameters contradicts each other, requiring compromises to be found based on application-specific recommendations.
Drift step recovery diodes (DSRDs) are semiconductor opening switches designed for the forming of high-voltage nanosecond pulses. DSRD-based circuit includes inductive energy storage and works as a high-efficient compression stage of the tens to hundreds of nanoseconds input pulse down to nanosecond or subnanosecond range output pulse. Despite the well-investigated physical principles, a lot of published DSRD simulations, and practical DSRD-based pulsers, the fundamental research aimed at optimization of DSRD circuit has not been conducted yet. The present letter shows the result of extensive experiments elucidating the maximum voltage rise rate, pulse compression ratio, energy losses, and prepulse amplitude in DSRD circuits. The explicit definitions of DSRD pulse parameters, which are vital for the optimization process, are suggested for the first time. It is demonstrated that optimizations of different parameters contradict each other, and there is no universal optimal solution. The compromise should be found for each application using the recommendations presented in the letter.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据