Sie sind auf Seite 1von 214








The Problem.............................................................................................................ii
Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................ 1
Importance of the Study ........................................................................................ 1
Purpose of the Study .............................................................................................. 3
Overview of the Study............................................................................................ 4
Problem Statement ................................................................................................. 4
Rationale of the Study/Developing a Hypothesis............................................... 7
Scope of Study......................................................................................................... 8
Definition of Terms................................................................................................ 8
Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature ................................................................... 14
Introduction........................................................................................................... 14
Signal Integrity....................................................................................................... 16
General Notes on High Performance Oscilloscopes........................................ 19
Wire Diagnostics within the Telecommunications Industry............................ 20
Application of TDR for Telephone.................................................................................... 20
Application of TDR in Cable Access Television (CATV) ............................................... 21
Application of TDR in Broadcast ....................................................................................... 22
Application of TDR in Local Area Networks (LAN)....................................................... 22
Application of TDR to Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) Technologies ............................ 23
TDR in Geological Sciences and Civil Engineering ......................................... 24
Application of TDR Monitoring of Ground Water Levels.............................................. 25
Application of TDR for Monitoring Landslide Activity................................................... 25
Modeling of TDR Waveforms in Geological Sciences..................................................... 26
Technologies and Patents: SWR vs. FDR vs. TDR.......................................... 27
TDR Patents.......................................................................................................................... 27
Alternative to TDR: Standing Wave Reflectometry (SWR) ............................................. 28
Alternative to TDR: Frequency Domain Reflectometry (FDR)...................................... 30
Time vs. Frequency Domain Measurement Tools............................................................ 32
Basic Circuit Analysis for Transmission Lines .................................................. 34
The Circuit Model................................................................................................................. 34
Connection Constraints........................................................................................................ 35
Kirchhoff’s Current Law............................................................................................... 36
Kirchhoff’s Voltage Law ............................................................................................... 37
Thevenin and Norton Equivalent Circuits.................................................................. 38
The RC and RL Circuit......................................................................................................... 40
The Step Response for a First-Order Circuit.............................................................. 42
The Series RLC Circuit.................................................................................................. 48

Understand the Transmission Line..................................................................................... 50
The Transient Response of a Transmission Line ....................................................... 51
Properties of Electromagnetic Waves................................................................................. 58
Derivation of the Analytical Expression of Cable Attenuation....................................... 62
The Inverse Scattering Problem: Removing Multiple Reflections .................. 63
The Standardized Wave Equation................................................................................ 66
Standardizing Reflection and Transmission ................................................................ 69
Pulse and Waveform Generation for TDR ....................................................... 75
Step Recovery Diode Properties................................................................................... 75
Dynamic Characteristics of the SRD ........................................................................... 78
Design of SRD Pulse Sharpening Circuits .................................................................. 80
Parametric Classification ...................................................................................... 85
Probability Laws.................................................................................................................... 85
Parameters of Distributions................................................................................................. 87
Parameter Estimation of a Distribution ............................................................................. 88
Hypothesis Testing and Linear Transformations.............................................................. 90
Hypothesis Testing ............................................................................................................... 93
The Software Engineering Process..................................................................... 96
Software Requirements......................................................................................................... 96
Summary of Chapter 2 ....................................................................................... 100
Chapter 3: Methodology ........................................................................................... 102
Describe the Approach ...................................................................................... 102
Database of Study ............................................................................................... 104
Comment on Validity of Data........................................................................... 106
Comment of Originality and Limitation of Data ............................................ 107
Summary of Chapter 3 ....................................................................................... 109
Chapter 4: Data Analysis........................................................................................... 110
Customer Requirements..................................................................................... 110
American Airlines (AA)...................................................................................................... 110
Naval Air Systems Command............................................................................................ 111
Naval Sea System Command (NAVSEA)........................................................................ 111
General Maintainer Comments ......................................................................................... 112
The Attenuation Model...................................................................................... 112
Estimation of a Wire Transfer Function .......................................................................... 113
Example Wire Attenuation ................................................................................................ 115
The Purpose of Modeling the Wire Transfer Function.................................................. 118
The Inverse System............................................................................................................. 119
Example of Wire Normalization....................................................................................... 120
Length Varying Filter.......................................................................................................... 122
Implementation of the Inverse Scattering Algorithm..................................... 124
Event Detection.................................................................................................. 126
Converting from Voltage to Reflection Coefficients...................................... 128

Event Classification ............................................................................................ 130
Building the Notional Library............................................................................................ 132
Wire Diagnostics Functional Specifications..................................................... 133
General Design Goals and Overview............................................................................... 134
Subsystem Requirements: Wire Test Characteristics ...................................................... 135
Low Level Information ...................................................................................................... 137
New Wire Test .................................................................................................................... 138
Edit A Current Wire Test................................................................................................... 138
Run the Current Wire Test ................................................................................................ 138
Intelligent Systems: Wire Diagnostic Algorithms............................................................ 139
Characteristic Calculations ................................................................................................. 141
Cable Equalization .............................................................................................................. 141
Inverse Scattering................................................................................................................ 142
Event Detection .................................................................................................................. 142
Parametric Classifier ........................................................................................................... 143
Functional Requirements ................................................................................................... 144
Application Example.......................................................................................... 144
Examples of Analysis Algorithms Performance.............................................................. 146
Functional Prototype.......................................................................................... 149
Wire Diagnostic Prototype Screen Shots ......................................................................... 150
Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations.................................. 153
Some Problems ................................................................................................... 156
Remarks on Test Technology............................................................................ 158
Bibliography ............................................................................................................... 163
A Wire Diagnostic Screen Shots: Opening Screen....................................... 167
B Wire Diagnostic New Test.......................................................................... 168
C Wire Diagnostics New Test: Wire Characteristics.................................... 169
D Wire Diagnostics Save Test......................................................................... 170
E Wire Diagnostics Run Test ......................................................................... 171
F Wire Diagnostics Overall Test Results ...................................................... 172
G Wire Diagnostics Viewable Test Results ................................................... 173
H Wire Diagnostics Event Table.................................................................... 174
I Wire Diagnostics View Waveform Graph ....................................................... 175
J Wire Diagnostic Search View............................................................................ 176
K Wire Diagnostics Analysis Listing.............................................................. 176

Figure 1 RC Step Response ............................................................................................................... 46

Figure 2 Lumped RC Circuit............................................................................................................ 52
Figure 3 Voltage and Current Propagation...................................................................................... 53
Figure 4 Simple SRD Circuit ............................................................................................................. 80
Figure 5 Example RG58 Step and Impulse Response ................................................................. 115

Figure 6 Empirical vs. Attenuation Model..................................................................................... 117
Figure 7 Example of Wire Normalization ..................................................................................... 121
Figure 8 Library of Event Types..................................................................................................... 133
Figure 9 Algorithmic Example: RG58 ........................................................................................... 147
Figure 10 Algorithmic Examples: 30-Ohm Coaxial ..................................................................... 148


System Level Engineering for a Wire Diagnostic


The Problem

In aviation and the aircraft industry in general, electricity and the wire system that carry

and distribute it are ubiquitous. Every major component or device is controlled,

monitored or enabled by the electrical system. This includes: the structural

components such as, flaps, elevator, rudder and landing gears, the propulsion systems

such as the engine fuel control and avionics such as radios or flight control systems.

While these major aircraft components have well understood maintenance practices

and procedures, relatively little is know about the diagnostic of wiring systems. This is

problematic in that as aircraft fleet around the world age, maintenance associated with

wiring is increasing while safety is decreasing. This need to deal with aging aircraft

wiring requires a new method to diagnose problem electrical systems and to potentially

provide prognoses of future loss of critical functionality.


The review of literature provides a background of the need for wire diagnostics of

aging aircraft and an evaluation of the current state of the technology. The research

then evaluates potential market discriminators to successfully enter the market.

Finally, a system level design is presented that provides:

• Hardware design for major components,

• Software considerations for the management of information,

• And algorithmic development for the analysis and diagnostics to identify

potential wire faults.

The method used for this study is both the Historical/Case Study Method and the

Experimental Method. Data was collected to evaluate the current market condition

and competing products that can diagnose wire faults. Once that analysis was

complete, research was conducted to address the short falls of the current products.

The research was the technical lead in new product development, with the intent of

bringing to market the wire diagnostics tool.


Aging aircraft wiring is difficult to troubleshoot and expensive to repair. No system

currently available can satisfactorily address all elements of wire diagnostics, leaving

space for companies to enter this market. Of the numerous technologies available, the

researcher chose Time Domain Reflectometry (TDR) as the best combination of

performance and cost. Based on this methodology, hardware and software

requirements were implemented. Four algorithmic processes where developed to

address: controlling multiple reflection, equalization of the wire to correct signal

dispersion, detection of wire events (connectors, opens, shorts and faults) and finally

parametric classification of events. The final system was released as a prototype for

evaluation by the U.S. Air Force.

Chapter 1: Introduction
Importance of the Study

Electricity is fundamental to our livelihood. It is often taken for granted that it is a

system unto itself. Yet incidents such as the TWA crash in 1996 and the more recent

Swissair crash in 1998 focus our attention on wiring systems. Only recently has the

aging of wiring systems been recognized as an issue of national concern in commercial

aviation. On February 12, 1997, the White House Commission for Aviation Safety and

Security issued a report to President Clinton identifying aging wiring as a safety issue in

aviation. This commission recommended that three federal agencies: the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA), the Department of Defense (DOD) and the National

Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) expand their aging aircraft program to

include the issue of aging wire in commercial aviation. As a result, a number of

research initiatives and partnerships with the aviation industry have been initiated to

address the issue of aging wiring.

The issue of wire is not small. A typical wide body airplane has more than 150 miles

of wiring. While most aircraft wire damage does not pose a threat to safety, data from

a two year old Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) study, reported in Air Safety Week,

suggest that there were 1.5 service difficulty reports (SDRs) specifically associated with

wiring, the wire harnesses and connectors per week in the first 10 months of 1999.

The armed services within the DOD conduct accident investigation to determine the

cause of wire-related mishaps. These organizations have well defined techniques for

investigating such mishaps and the information gained during safety and engineering

investigation provides invaluable insight into the cost associated with a mishap. The

U.S. Navy has estimated that 2 million man-hours are expended annually for the repair

of wire.

The average age of aircraft within the civilian and military fleet will continue to rise,

with corresponding increases in maintenance cost. Despite this increasing cost, aging

wiring is not well understood. The term “aging wire” will be defined as wire exhibiting

degraded performance as a result of accumulated damage from long-term exposure to

mechanical, chemical, thermal and electrical stress. These stresses are often induced by

the operational environment, maintenance and event installation. Repairing or even

diagnosis wiring problems can be extremely difficult, resulting in poor readiness and

excessive downtime.

Wire, because it is so common, is treated more as a commodity rather than a system.

In trouble shooting a system (including aircraft built-in-test (BITE) or tests run within

the line replaceable unit (LRU)), it is usual for fault indications to be within the LRU.

Connector failures (corrosion or cold pins) cannot be checked. Additionally, many

wire faults are intermittent and are difficult to isolate.

Wire repairs on the aircraft line or in the field can be difficult to verify since there are

few effective tools available to the maintainer. As a result, the time to diagnose and

repair electrical equipment is one of the leading causes of low mission aircraft

readiness. Basically, current maintenance practices do not adequately address wiring as

a system.

Any given aircraft could have several hundred insulation breaks extending to the

conductor. Visual inspection of individual wires in a bundle or connector is not

feasible because, as the wire ages, it becomes stiff. Dismantling the bundle or

connector can generate additional collateral damage and a greater safety hazard.

Without providing maintenance personnel with improved diagnostic capability, the

cost of wire failures increase and readiness will be adversely affected.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to: evaluate the system requirements necessary to diagnose

wire faults and then to design a marketable wire diagnostics system. The system (e.g.

maintenance tool) that is designed will be used as the basis for a new product line that

can assist both military and civilian customers with maintaining flight readiness in an

aging fleet of aircraft.

Overview of the Study

This research provides a system engineering approach to the development of a wire

diagnostics test tool. Interviews with potential customers, such as: American Airlines

maintenance facilities, U. S. Navy Science and Technology Wire Group, and U.S.

Naval Shipyard were used to establish design goals for the device. An evaluation of

the current wire diagnostics technologies, to include Standing Wave Reflectometry

(SWR), Frequency Domain Reflectometry (FDR) and Time Domain Reflectometry

(TDR), was completed to establish a technological focus. Once a technology was

selected (TDR), functional requirements for software and hardware were determined

and implemented. Based on software requirements, signal processing algorithms were

developed to improve the performance of the test equipment over that available to

current test equipment. Hardware was designed, simulated in netSpice(c),

implemented on a breadboard, and then physically tested. Finally, software and

hardware integration was completed in a prototype wire diagnostic maintenance tool.

Problem Statement

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has identified wiring as a potential

cause of the TWA Flight 800 fuel tank explosion. As a result of the NTSB finding, the

FAA initiated a study of the condition of aging aircraft wiring under the guidance of

the Air Transport Systems Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ATRAC). The

inspection phase of the ATRAC study evaluated the wire condition of five retired

commercial aircraft. This involved three tasks: detailed visual inspection of the wire

bundles, non-destructive testing and laboratory analysis.

Visual inspection is the general procedure of routine aircraft maintenance. It was

expected that visual inspection would find most of the wire defects and that NDT

testing would verify all defects that had been identified during visual inspection.

However, NDT found a large number of defects had gone undetected using the visual

inspection. This was not unexpected, as the findings of many studies to evaluate visual

inspection effectiveness had shown it to not be entirely effective. In general, visual

inspection is the least effective means of finding defects when compared with other

technology based-inspection techniques.

Visual inspection of wiring is the only technique currently used in both commercial

and military aircraft to monitor the condition of wire. Given the results of the

ATSRAC study (the results of the inspection are reported in the Transport Aircraft

Intrusive Inspection Project Final Report: An Analysis of the Wire Installations of Six

Decommissioned Aircraft dated December 29, 2000, available at, clearly

most faults are going undetected. In fact, it can be assumed that many wire defects go

undetected under normal operations and are found only after a system failure or

noticeable damage in a wire harness (see Lane).

Maintenance personnel indicated that electrical problems (particularly intermittent

faults) often result in the unnecessary replacement of good line replaceable units

(LRU), at great cost and prior to wring being considered as the possible cause.

Additionally, once wire is identified as the potential problem, diagnosing the problem

and evaluating the effectiveness of the repair is time consuming and difficult.

Obviously, needlessly testing and replacing boxes only lowers readiness and drives up

operational cost.

To effectively manage aging aircraft and address the issues of wire maintenance, a new

type of wire diagnostics tool is needed. An effective wire diagnostics tool could result

in more effective diagnosis and repairs of wire system defects, improved aircraft

readiness and most importantly, safety. Improved inspection techniques, given a wire

diagnostic tool, could identify precursor faults prior to defect and allow condition

based maintenance practices to be performed.

The ideal wire diagnostics tool should be portable and have a short set up time

(maintainer preference). Additional capability included in the design should be:

• Identify hard opens and short,

• Physical location of faults,

• Locate intermittent and degraded connections,

• Identify soft faults, such as nicks, crimps, chafes and bad splices,

• Physical location of soft faults,

• Store results in order to track over time.

Rationale of the Study/Developing a Hypothesis

Fleets of both commercial and military aircraft will continue to age and as a result, the

cost and readiness of these fleets will be adversely affected. Therefore, new techniques

must be developed to quickly and economically diagnose and identify wiring faults.

The advent of more powerful hardware components (in terms of computational

speed) at low cost allows the rapid prototyping and development of tools that will

assist in identifying the type and location of a fault. Additionally, with advanced signal

processing techniques, condition based maintenance procedures could be developed to

predict the future condition of wire harness. Given this advancement in technologies,

the hypothesis develops:

What is the best technology to implement in a wire diagnostics test set? Give a test

technology, what are the limiting performance factors? What signal processing

algorithms can be employed to improve the capability of the tool. Finally, what

information management paradigms can be used to manage the test information and

limit maintenance personnel interpretation of the test results? This research will look

at: the technologies available, develop the hardware and software requirements,

examine digital signal processing techniques to improve performance of a system, and

to build a prototype wire diagnostic tool.

Scope of Study

The potential for large cost savings and improvement in fleet readiness by the

introduction of a tool specifically designed to diagnose wire faults. In order to address

this need, research was conducted by interviewing aviation and industrial maintenance

personnel on the specific problems associated with trouble shooting and repairing

wire. The researcher conducted an exhaustive literature search of books, articles and

patent, to include: wire diagnostics, modeling transmission lines and electromagnetics.

Based on this literature, hardware and software design requirements were developed

and implemented. The prototype wire diagnostics tool was tested and its performance

evaluated. The researcher developed the test tool as technical lead of Goodrich Fuel

and Utility systems as part of a program to develop new markets.

Definition of Terms

Time Domain Reflectometry (TDR) - the analysis of a conductor (wire, cable or

fiber optic) by sending a pulsed signal into the conductor, then examining the reflected

pulse. Wiring and insulation anomalies will have different capacitance and inductance

than the nominal wire, which causes a change in the local characteristic impedance.

This change in characteristic impedance will scatter in the pulsed signal; reflecting

some small part of the signal energy. By measuring the time delay, the precise location

of the anomaly is known while the polarity of the anomaly can be used to determine

the type of fault.

Standing Wave Reflectometry (SWR) - this technique involves sending a sinusoidal

waveform into the wire under test. A reflected waveform is returned from the wire

termination. The two signals add to a standing wave at the receiver. The peaks and

nulls of the standing wave give information on the length and terminating load of the


Frequency Domain Reflectometry (FDR) - this technique for wire analysis

comprises splitting an input signal to the cable under test and to a mixer, then sending

the reflected input signal back to the mixer to generate a mixed signal where the high

frequency components are removed. The remaining DC components contain

information regarding impedance and length of the cable under test. This operation is

performed a number of times at different frequencies, and the digitized signals are

used to determine the impedance and length of the cable under test.

Current - is a measure of the flow of electrical charge. It is the time rate of change of

the charge passing a given point in a circuit. The physical dimensions of current are

coulombs per second - an ampere.

Voltage - is related to the change in energy that would be experienced by a charge as it

passes through a circuit. If a small charge was to experience a change in energy in

passing from point A to point B, the voltage between and A and B is defined as the

change in energy per unit charge.

Capacitor - is a dynamic element involving the time variation of an electric field

produced by a voltage. Electrostatics shows that a uniform electric field exits when a

voltage is applied across two metal plates, the simplest form of a capacitor. When the

separation difference is small compared with the dimension of the plates, the electric

field is proportional to the electric charge on the plates divided by the permittivity of

the dielectric and area of the plates. The relationship between electric charge and the

voltage applied across the plates is the capacitance C of the capacitor. The unit of

capacitance is the farad (F). Wires have a capacitance per unit length on the order of a

few pF (10-12).

Inductor - is the dual circuit element to the capacitor involving the time variation of

the magnetic field produced by a current. Magnetostatics indicate that a magnetic flux

surrounds a wire carrying an electric current. When the wire is wound into a coil, the

lines of flux concentrate along the axis of the core. In a linear magnetic medium, the

flux is proportional to both the current and the number of turns in the coil. The

magnetic flux intercepts or links the turns of the coil. This flux linkage is proportional

to the flux and the number of turns in the coil. The proportionality constant is the

inductance L of the coil and the unit is a henry. A wire has an inductance of a few µH


Impedance is the relationship of voltage to current in a sinusiodally driven circuit (e.g.

phasor) is: V = ZI, where Z is called the impedance of the element. This is analogous

to Ohm's law in a resistive circuit. Wires and cables have characteristic impedances

that relate to the wires capacitance per unit length, inductance per unit length and the

velocity of signal propagation within the wire.

Reflection coefficient is the ratio between the reflected energy (voltage) and the

incident voltage. The relationship is non zero where an anomaly exits in a wire, i.e.

where the impedance at a distinct point changes from the wire characteristic

impedance. A reflection coefficient of 1 represents a large impedance (open) while a

reflection coefficient of -1 represents a short.

Dispersion occurs as a high frequency signal passes down a wire, the inductance and

capacitance of the wire act as a low-pass filter on the signal. The characterization of

the filtering effect is the transfer function (which relates an input and response at

different points in the wire or circuit) of the wire and relates to length. The effect of

the transfer function is to attenuate the high frequency components and disperse the

signal (e.g. stretch).

Hardware Requirements is a working document used to describe and define the

problem space for the desired performance of the tool. This requirements document

gives guidance on the design of the hardware.

Software Requirements are similar to a hardware requirement, but specifying what

the software functionality must do.

Functional Requirements Specification is the governing document that takes user

preferences, system engineer desires and puts them into once place as a talking paper

for the over design goal of the product. This document specifies the function that the

tool should do in order to satisfy the desire of the user.

Digital Signal Processing - all waveforms are analog. While many signal processing

operation (such as filtering and amplifying) can be done with analog devices, digitizing

the waveform allows more powerful analysis to be performed. Digitizing an analog

signal requires sampling the waveform at high speed and converting the analog value

into an integer value. For a given maximum frequency (e.g. Nyquist frequency),

sampling must occur at twice the frequency. For example, with a TDR step pulse of

200 pico-seconds (10-12 seconds), the Nyquest frequency is 5 Gigahertz and the

sampling rate is 10.0 giga-samples/second.

Simulation Program with Integrated Circuit Emphasis (SPICE) is a simulation

program for the analysis of electronic circuits. D.O. Peerson and L.W. Nagel at the

University of California, Berkeley, developed it in 1970. Early versions where

distributed as public domain software and quickly proved to be a very useful tool for

integrated circuit engineers. The ability of SPICE to simulate increasingly complex

integrated circuits allows engineers to produce their circuits faster and more


Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature

The need for a tool for wire diagnostics has been show in Chapter 1. The aerospace

industry in general is conservative and slow to adopt new technologies. The

researcher, working as the system engineer at an aerospace company, was assigned the

task of developing a system methodology for a product to meet the market demand of

a diagnostic tool. Previous experience with diagnostics of complex systems, such as

helicopter power train components, indicated that there are many aspects of the


For example, there is the test hardware technology that is to be used. Other than

aspects of performance (e.g. can a technology find hard and soft faults), can the

technology be implemented? What is the cost per unit production? What are the

form factor, power consumption and hazard to the cable under test? Are active

patents held on that particular technology? If a patent is held, will the Assignee license

the technology?

Once the technology is chosen, there are a series of software issues. What algorithms

need to be implemented? How does the implementation of the algorithms interact

with the user interface to provide information? What is experience level of the user?

Does the software need to provide decision support or is the user sophisticated

enough to make diagnoses based on raw data provided by the tool?

Finally, there is the management of the information itself. Test tools in general, a

multi-meter for example, provide a snap shot view of the device under test. Yet, many

systems, wire included, have a history and a dimension of time involved in the analysis

that cannot be captured in a single look. It is entirely conceivable that a wire could

have a detectable anomaly, from corrosion or a splice, which does not require a

maintenance action. However, if the aircraft operator could trend over time and

observed the fault propagating, it may then be advisable, at the next scheduled phased

maintenance, to replace the harness. This changes the current paradigm of the

operator from reactive to on-condition maintenance practices and can reduce cost and

improve safety. This type of maintenance activity cannot be performed without

systematically managing inspection information. This concept is called parts life

tracking and is performed on most major aircraft components (engines, drive train).

Given these requirements, the researcher explored books, periodicals, journals,

product documentation, and the U. S. Patent office for information regarding signal

integrity, transmission line theory, TDR, SWR and FDR. Most of the information

from these searches resulted in diagnostic inventions related to non-aviation

application. There were three principal users of these diagnostic techniques:

• Testing of signal integrity in high frequency circuits,

• Testing and diagnostics of telecommunication equipment, such as Digital

Subscriber Line (DSL) or Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN),

• Evaluation of soil properties, such as moisture content and dielectric


Signal Integrity

As digital systems pursue higher clock and data rates in computers, communications,

video and network systems, anything that affects the signal rise time, pulse width,

timing or noise content can impact reliability. In order to ensure signal integrity, test

and verification of the impedances in the transmission environment is required.

Mismatches and variations can cause reflections that decrease signal quality. Stated

simply, signal integrity is the circuit design and layout issues that arise as a result of

analog characteristics of high-speed digital signals. These issues include cross talk,

EMI, ground bounce, impedance, terminations, etc., that become critical factors when

the edge speeds increase relative to circuit board geometries (Bishop).

One method for quantifying signal integrity, through measuring impedances is TDR.

Tektronix, Agilent Technologies, Hewlett Packard and other manufactures of test

equipment all market high performance oscilloscopes with high-frequency step


For example, Tektronix’s TDS 8000 Sampling Oscilloscope with 80EO4 TDR

sampling module provides 50 GHz of electrical bandwidth. The sampling head

generates a 17 ps rise-time pulse. This instrument has been designed for test and

evaluation of printed circuit boards (PCB) in many of today’s systems components,

including Universal Serial Bus 2.0 (USB) or Firewire (IEEE 1394).

Typically, the components and other etched circuit boards have impedance-controlled

microstrip and stripline transmission lines. Over the span of these transmission lines,

devices, connectors and other interruptions (such other inductive transmission lines)

create impedance discontinuities. These parasitic events can be modeled as inductors,

capacitors and transmission lines; in practice it is desirable to design the system in such

a way as to minimizes these changes in impedance.

A high performance TDR waveform will show the effect of all the reflections created

by these impedance mismatches. The time domain nature of TDR allows correlation

of the impedance trace with the PCB layout, a virtual road map of the device under

test. This allows the engineer to evaluate the PCB impedance mismatches against a

nominal design or test the current design to identify areas that could result in degraded

performance (Corey).

TDR evaluation of power supplies is particular effective in reducing EMI (electro-

magnetic interference). When inductance drops or capacitances rises on a PCB occur,

the characteristic impedance drops. On high frequencies applications, this causes high

currents densities on the board. These in turn the resulting magnetic fluxes that

effectively turn the microstrip into a radiation source. The resulting electromagnetic

radiation affects all surrounding transmission lines as radiated noise, which increases

bit rate errors.

Validation of High Speed Interconnect Modeling

One aspect in the control of signal integrity is improvement of design and modeling

tools. Essentially, the interconnects on the PCB become transmission lines and

interconnect discontinuities become lumped L-C (inductive - capacitive) networks.

The consequences of poor modeling results in jitter and eye diagram degradation

(losses and crosstalk on the interconnects). The resulting distortion and switching

error are often difficult to correct and result in significant hardware design delays.

TDR allows the designer to correlate analytical models to physical structures

experimentally. Measurement-based modeling provides a method to identify what

aspects of the model differ from reality. The accuracy and assumptions of the

analytical tool, the material properties of the device under test, and the component

manufacturing tolerances all contribute to errors. By accurately measuring the true

impedance, analytical models can be validated. With validated models, the hardware

engineer can cut development time and be assured that hardware specifications are met

with little breadboard testing. Software, such as TDA Systems IConnect (R) is one

such product available (Corey,

General Notes on High Performance Oscilloscopes

Higher performance oscilloscopes are precision instruments that are not suitable for

the environment encountered on aircraft flight lines or in aircraft hangers. The cost of

one of these tools is extremely high: sixty thousand dollars is common when taking

into account the test probes and stand. However, they also incorporate the power of a

desktop computer. Many of these oscilloscopes operate on a Windows(c) operating

system, which allows the oscilloscope to perform higher levels of processing and some

limited management of data as flat files. This processing can perform digital signal

processing and error correcting functions to allow normalization.

Normalization is an error-correction process that helps to ensure that the TDR

measurements are as accurate as possible. The Agilent 86100A oscilloscopes include

one type of normalization as a standard feature. With the normalization software built

into the oscilloscope, additional applications or converters are not needed to enhance

the measurement accuracy. This simplifies waveform analysis.

Normalization can be used to remove oscilloscope response, step aberrations, cable

attenuation, signal dispersions loss, and the effects of multiple reflections (“Improving

TDR/TDT Measurements Using Normalization”).

Wire Diagnostics within the Telecommunications Industry

No single industry has benefited more from wire diagnostics techniques than the

telecommunication industry. As a result, there are a number of products in TDR,

SWR, and FDR available to test cable installation. Companies such as Riser Bond

Instrument, Bicotest Ltd, and Eclipse Industry provide portable test units for testing a

number of wire and cable applications. These units are typically limited to determining

the length to an open or short over long distances. The step function (e.g. bandwidth )

are much slower than those available for signal integrity products. It is not uncommon

for units to have 5 ns, 10 ns, 25 ns rise times vs. 35 ps to 200 ps seen in the high

performance oscilloscopes. Additionally, the voltages tend to be higher (20 volts) -

which would be problematic when used where the termination is voltage sensitive

(TDR Tutorial and Riser Bond TDR Product Review).

Application of TDR for Telephone

The largest number of twisted pair problems is related to moisture intrusion into the

cable. TDR has been shown to assist the maintainer in identifying this type of fault

and the fault location. Water within twisted pair affects the signal as an increased local

capacitance. Water seeps into the conductor through pinholes in the plastic insulator

around the conductors. Water in a multi-paired, non-flooded cable may be several feet

wide, although the distance of the fault is not accurate as the water affects the velocity

of propagation.

While it is possible to find point of damage, it is still necessary to locate where the

water actually entered the cable - the entry point may not be within the span of where

the water is located. If the entry point is not found, it may be possible to locate the

damage by using the cable sheath as ground and a wire close to the sheath as the


Application of TDR in Cable Access Television (CATV)

When cable signal becomes intermittent or fails altogether, TDR becomes the

diagnostic tool of choice. With coaxial cable impedance, mis-match is almost always

associated with a fault, splice, or connector. Simple by checking this distance from the

terminal station to the source, and from the source to termination, corroded splices or

breaks can be found to within a foot.

TDR is often used to map existing cables from a pedestal to a subscriber. This may be

necessary when new construction indicates that the current identity of a cable is not

accurate. A cable technician can use TDR to get length information on the various

cables and use that information to verify the identities of the cables.

Application of TDR in Broadcast

TDR is used as a preventative maintenance tool for broadcast tower transmission lines.

A broadcast transmission line is made of rigid elements that are bolted together. The

point where the sections are connected wears and deteriorates. The center conductors

are spliced using solid copper section called bullets.

Due to thermal expansion, the center conductor will wear against the solid connection

sleeve. This can generate small copper filings to drop onto the spacer below the

connection. Over time, these filing will create an RF power path to the transmission

cable sleeve and ground. The path to ground will cause momentary power shorts to

ground and loss of output power. This deterioration is readily visible on the TDR

waveform and can become the basis of condition based maintenance practice. The

cost of refurbishing the copper bullets is low compared to the damage resulting form

an instantaneous short to ground.

Application of TDR in Local Area Networks (LAN)

TDR is one of the easiest and most accurate ways to qualify copper cabling for data

communications. As LANs proliferate, TDR has become the standard method for

verifying and maintaining LAN cabling systems. LAN topology can consist of a

number of connectors, taps, and terminations. This can lead to a number of potential

defects, such as opens, shorts, mis-terminations, frays, kinks, etc. Any of these faults

can result in degradation in system performance.

While cable manufacturers go to great length to ensure specification performance on

Category 5 UTP cable, this cannot alleviate a poor installation. Poor installation will

almost guarantee system errors and early saturation. Locating cable near air condition

fans motors, compression, or higher current devices will cause excessive noise.

Installing excessive lengths of cable instead of the specified maximum of 90 meters

will cause signal loss and low noise margin. Other practices, such as striping wiring

and re-twisting the pairs will again degrade performance.

TDR can test both the backbone and LAN segments. While length can also be tested,

high performance TDR can be used to look at the quality of the cable within in a few

meters of the wall plate or patch panel. Impedance changes caused by excessive cable

striping and re-twisting can easily be identified and fixed. This can be used to repair

weak links and bring system performance back to specification.

Application of TDR to Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) Technologies

High bandwidth demand for access to the Internet is a rapidly growing. DSL

technology is an attractive solution for telephone companies because of the immense

base of twisted pair cabling in place. For the telephone company to use its pre-existing

infrastructure, accurately predicting the DSL access performance is needed. The

subscriber line, a set of twisted pair cables extending from a central office to the

customer, needs to be tested for performance. Use of TDR allows a single port

measurement from a central office port rather than a two-port test from a central

office to the subscriber.

The TDR performs topology identification of a given subscriber loop from the central

office. The details of the identified subscriber loop are then used to simulate the two-

port transfer function between the different nodes. The transfer function is then used

to calculate loop characteristics, such as insertion loss, to determine the available

performance of the DSL service (Yoho).

TDR in Geological Sciences and Civil Engineering

TDR techniques have been used extensively in geological sciences and civil

engineering. Two techniques predominate:

• Injection of a high voltage TDR signal into the ground to evaluate the

volumetric soil water content and bulk soil electrical conductivity (Feng et


• Implantation of a coaxial cable within an unstable substrate, which when

distortion occurs, deforms the coaxial cable, changing local characteristic

impedance (Kane et al.).

The technology involved in waveform generation, measurement, and evaluation is the

essentially unchanged from the techniques used in signal integrity or

telecommunication. A number of applications follow.

Application of TDR Monitoring of Ground Water Levels

An air dielectric coaxial cable is inserted into an existing riser pipe. The outer

conductor of a hollow coaxial cable is separated from the inner conductor by a thin,

spiral plastic. This allows air to fill the remaining space. The separation allows water

to flow into the air space between the two conductors. The presence of water acts as

short due to the large difference in dielectric constant between water and air. The

short causes the reflected voltage going to zero. The depth of the water is easily

calculated as the velocity of propagation, multiplied by time, and then divided by two.

As the air-water interface moves up and down between the inner and outer

conductors, the location of the voltage drop shifts proportionally. By sampling over

time, fluctuations in ground water can be monitored (Dowding).

Application of TDR for Monitoring Landslide Activity

Coaxial cables are grouted into a boar hole in a test site. Data from the TDR is

analyzed from a number of different cables. The length and amplitude of the

reflections indicates the severity of the instability. For a cable in shear, a voltage

reflection spike of short wavelength is recorded. The wavelength increases in direct

proportion to the shear deformation. A distinct negative spike occurs just before

failure. After failure, the cable is open. For cables in tension, the waveform reflection

is a subtle, trough-like voltage signal that increases in length as the cable is further

deformed (e.g. an increase in capacitance resulting form the dielectric material being

stretched thinner). At tensile failure, a small necking trough appears which

distinguishes the failure from a shear failure (Kane).

Modeling of TDR Waveforms in Geological Sciences

One aspect of TDR in geological sciences that is of particular interest is the concept of

scattering and multiple reflections. When using TDR systems, it is common that

multiple reflections occur as a result of the TDR signal being scattered between two or

more changes in local impedance. This phenomenon is regularly encountered in

seismology (reverberation) and degrades the measurement by allowing artifacts of the

changes in impedance to be measured as changes in impedance. This issue of multiple

reflections initiated much research activity in numerous and disparate fields of study,

resulting in inverse scattering techniques to remove these artifacts. Multiple reflections

is just one type of measurement error that can distort a TDR measurement (Gladwell).

Technologies and Patents: SWR vs. FDR vs. TDR

TDR Patents

There is no explicit patent for TDR that limits a company from building and selling

such a device. Innovations in hardware, advanced analysis algorithms or an

improvement in the way TDR are used can have an issued patent. One patent of

interest for the aviation industry is United States Patent 6,442,498, “Apparatus and

Method for Determining the Integrity of Cables and Wiring Harnesses.”

The patent covers a technique for testing an entire wire harness. In the aviation

industry, this has large implications. A typical wire harness has a number of wires -- up

to one hundred. Additionally, it is difficult to determine the return path of the wire.

Without a return path, the wire under test acts as an antenna instead of a circuit. It is

impossible to diagnose shorts under these circumstances. Thus, using typical TDR test

equipment is not practicable.

The patents innovation was, via a number of controllable, low capacitance and

shielded relays, to connect an analog to digital converter and TDR pulse generator to a

wire in the harness. The device then sequentially grounds all of the other wires in the

harness. By doing this, the inventor was able to determine whether the wire under test

was shorted, and if not shorted, find a wire that was most coupled. Normally, wires

are terminated under high impedance and act as an open, thus it is not possible to

explicitly define the return path. However, the TDR signal will induce voltage in a

wire that is physically close. Typically the closest, most inductively coupled wire is the

return path. For a high impedance termination, grounding the inductively coupled

return path will result in the highest measured voltage.

With the return path found, the time delay to the peak voltage or short is determined.

The time delay is converted to distance and the distance for the wire under test is

compared to a database of nominal wire lengths. A test of the new distance made to

the nominal wire length (from the database) and if in absolute distance has changed by

some percentage the wire under test is faulted.

The invention claims explicitly two improvements: the ability to test a harness and the

management of test information. Saving a nominal cable as parameters and using this

historic data to identify potential wiring faults against a recent maintenance test is a

step towards condition based maintenance procedures.

Alternative to TDR: Standing Wave Reflectometry (SWR)

One type of non-intrusive cable testing technique other than TDR is SWR. Under a

contract by NASA, and subject to provisions of the National Aeronautics and Space

Act of 1958, this new technique was invented as an apparatus for determining the

location of a short circuit or an open circuit in an electrical cable, based on the

impedance measurements made at one end of the cable.

The NASA space shuttle uses a number of signal conditions, which converts a number

of signals into a format compatible with the orbiter telemetry, display, and data

processing systems. These signal conditioners are sometimes located in difficult to

access locations. When diagnosing a potential instrument problem, it is frequently

required to remove the cable to verify that the cables are not the source of the fault.

Once the cable is removed, all signal conditioners and systems, which had wires

passing through the cables connectors, have to be tested when the cable is

reconnected. This testing is man-hour intensive and expensive. A system, which

would allow cable continuity to be checked non-intrusively, without opening the

connection, would save many man-hours of re-validation.

TDR could be used as a method of non-intrusive testing. However, hardware pulse

generators and analog to digital converters where not yet available with sufficient

bandwidth to test relatively short distances (a few meters). Currently, this is not an

issue as TDR systems are commercially available with pulse rise times on less that 100

ps - a distance of less than an inch). In view of the foregoing need, SWR was


The SWR test set has a numerically controlled variable frequency oscillator to generate

a sinusoidal test signal, which is applied across a reference resistor to the cable under

test. A microcontroller controls operations of the oscillator so that the frequency of

the applied signal is swept in increments over a range of frequencies during the test.

The root mean square voltage (RMS) generated at the signal injection point in

response to the applied test signal is analyzed to determine the frequency at which the

voltage is nearly zero (e.g. the null). This indicates that the reflected signal from the

discontinuity is approximately 180 degrees out of phase form the injected signal. This

occurs when there is an open circuit at a distance of approximately one-quarter

wavelength from the injection point. If the circuit is shorted, the null occurs at

approximately one half wavelengths down the cable. Typical sinusoidal frequencies

range from 10 KHz to 50 MHz. Currently, SWR tools are manufactured and sold by

Eclypse Industries and protected under United States Patent 5,977,773.

Alternative to TDR: Frequency Domain Reflectometry (FDR)

Another alternative to non-intrusive diagnostic testing of cables is FDR. Given the

need of cable testing, the desire for a practical (meaning relatively inexpensive and

portable test equipment), is required. One of the main perceived disadvantages to

TDR is that the equipment required to perform the analysis is expensive and bulky.

Additionally, SWR could be considered, but is generally less accurate and nearly as

expensive. A smaller and less expensive (due to the nature of the components utilized)

technique is desired.

FDR is based on single frequency radar or stepped frequency radar. A sinusoidal wave

is transmitted from a voltage-controlled oscillator into two paths, one being a

directional coupler. From there, the input signal goes to a mixer as a test or reference

signal. The second path for the input signal is into the cable under test. The reflected

signal is then split using the directional signal and then received by the mixer; and a

combined output signal is then read from the mixer and sent to an analog to digital

converter. Because a mixer is a frequency multiplier, the combined output signal has

three components: the input signal, the sum of the input signal and the reflected signal,

and the difference of the input signal and the reflected signal. Because the input signal

is equal to the reflected signal, the difference is a direct current signal, while the sum of

signal is high frequency signal.

The operation of anti-aliasing filtering, within the analog to digital filter, automatically

removes the high frequency components. This leaves only the direct current

component, which has a magnitude relating to the electrical length and the load. This

signal is now held in a buffer of a microcontroller. The microcontroller performs a

Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) on the buffered signal. The maximum magnitude of

the FFT determines the number of cycles of the direct current signal. Given the

number of cycles, the bandwidth of the sampling range, and the velocity of wave

propagation, the length can be found. Once the length is known, calculation of

impedance at the length can be calculated. Low impedance is indicative of a short, and

high impedance is indicative of an open cable.

The low frequencies and commonality of the components required to build the test

system, allows a low cost - on the order of twenty dollars in parts. FDR systems are

marketed by Management Sciences with a World Intellectual Property Organization,

International Patent Application Number of PCT/US02/01128.

Time vs. Frequency Domain Measurement Tools

As noted, TDR measure reflected and transmitted voltage to provide the maintainer a

map of the impedance mis-match over the cable. Frequency domain devices, such as

FDR, give a measure voltage vs. frequency instead of time. This mapping of voltage

and frequency is mapped into a scattering parameter, S. S-parameters are a ratio of the

reflected or transmitted wave voltage to the incident wave voltage. The notation is:

S11 = Vreflected (f)/Vincident (f),

S21 = Vtransmitted (f)/Vincident (f).

Where the S11 and S21 parameters are frequently referred to as reflection and

transmission coefficients, similar to reflection and transmission coefficients in TDR.

The relationship between voltage in frequency and time domain is the Fourier

Transform, which is typically implemented as an FFT (Fast Fourier Transform). It is

readily apparent that the relationship between TDR reflection and transmission

coefficients and FDR S-parameters is:

S11(f) = FFT(ρ(t)) and ρ(t) = 1/N IFFT(S11(f) )

S21(f) = FFT(τ(t)) and τ(t) = 1/N IFFT(S21(f) )

FDR measures both real and imaginary parts of the signal vs. frequency, while TDR

measures voltage vs. time. The duality of the equations clearly shows the one to one

relationship between FDR and TDR. All information about the frequency domain is

contained in the TDR measurements.

However, the maintainer lives and works in the time domain. For the maintainer,

TDR offers well know advantages, such as its intuitive, visual operation. The visual

nature of TDR comes from the time domain transient measurements, where each

change in the TDR waveform can be correlated to an appropriate component, such as

a connector or fault. While multiple reflections can obscure the correlation between

physical hardware, these can be removed leaving the true impedance profile.

In design, manufacturing and merchandising, cost are always a consideration. In terms

of design cost, a high performance TDR will be more expensive that an FDR system

solely because the frequencies are so much higher. Stray capacitances, even a few

pFarads, will degrade rising edge performance. Additionally, the higher frequency

requirements of the analog to digital converter will be more expensive. Alternatively,

software cost will be lower because less processing of the signal is required to display

maintainer results (Smolyansky).

Basic Circuit Analysis for Transmission Lines

The evaluation of the condition of a wire or cable is dependent on the electro-

magnetic behavior of the wire when subject to a change in voltage and current.

Transmission line theory characterizes this behavior. To understand the effects of

cuts, chafes, crimps, opens, and shorts on a wire, it is necessary to understand the

transmission line as a circuit. A review of basic signal analysis is developed with the

intent of providing a foundation in transmission line theory and the subsequent

modeling of a transmission line.

The Circuit Model

A circuit is a collection of inter-connecting electrical devices. A device is a component

that is treated as a separate entity. A two terminal device is described by its i-v

characteristics; e.g. the relationship between the voltage across and current through the

device. Most real world devices are non-linear, but linear models are used that

approximate the dominant behavior of the device. The linear resistor elements are:

v = iR or i = Gv

Where R and G are positive constants that are reciprocally related:

R = 1/G

This is collectively known as Ohm’s law. The parameter R is called resistance and has

units of ohms, Ω. The parameter G is called conductance with units of siemens. The

power associated with the resistor can be found from p = vi. Using the relationship v

= iR and eliminating v form this gives:

p = i2R.

Note that the parameter R is always positive, indicating that the power is positive.

This means that the resistor always absorbs power.

Connection Constraints

The laws governing circuit behaviors are based on the work of Gustav Kirchhoff.

The Kirchhoff’s laws are derived from conservation laws applied to the circuit.

Effectively, the laws describe the element voltages and currents behavior when devices

are interconnected to form a circuit. These conditions are called connection

constraints. These constraints are based only on circuit connections and are not

dependent on the specific devices in the circuit. Kirchhoff’s laws use the following


• A circuit is an inter-connection of electrical devices.

• A node is an electrical juncture of two or more devices.

• A loop is a closed path formed by tracing through an ordered sequence of

nodes without passing through any node more than once.

It is customary to designate the juncture of two or more elements as a node.

However, it is important to realize that a node is not confined to a point, but includes

all the zero resistance wire from the point to each element.

Kirchhoff’s Current Law

Kirchhoff’s first law is based on the principal of conservation of charge. Kirchhoff’s

current law (KCL) states that:

The algebraic sum of the currents entering a node is zero at every


In forming the algebraic sum of currents, the current reference direction associated

with each device must be taken into account. If the current reference direction is into

the node, then the convention is to assign a positive sign to the corresponding current

in the algebraic sum. If the reference direction is away from the node, the assignment

is negative. Given this, the alternative KCL statement is:

The sum of the currents entering a node equals the sum of the currents

leaving a node.

There are two algebraic signs associated with each current in the application of KCL.

First is the sign given to a current in writing a KCL connection equation. The sign is

determined by the orientation of the current reference direction relative to a node.

The second sign is determined by the actual direction of the current relative to the

reference direction. The actual direction is found by solving the set of KCL equations.

Finally, since the circuit is a closed system, the following general principal applies:

In a circuit containing a total of N nodes, there is N-1

independent KCL connection equations.

The current equations are written with N-1 nodes that contain all the independent

connection constraints that can be derived from KCL. To write these equations, one

node is selected as the reference or ground node, and then KCL equations for the N-1

non-reference nodes are written.

Kirchhoff’s Voltage Law

The second of Kirchhoff’s circuit laws is based on the principle of conservation of

energy. Kirchhoff’s voltage law (KVL) states that:

The algebraic sum of all the voltages around a loop is zero at every


There are two signs associated with each voltage. The first is the sign given the voltage

when writing the KVL connection equation. The second is the sign determined by the

actual polarity of a voltage relative to its assigned reference polarity. The actual

polarities are found by solving the set of KVL equations. For a more detailed

description of Kirchhoff’s Laws see The Analysis and Design of Linear Circuits.

Thevenin and Norton Equivalent Circuits

An interface is a connection between circuits. Circuit interfaces occur frequently in

electrical and electronic systems, so special analysis methods are used to handle them.

In a typical two-terminal interface circuit, it is normal to think of one circuit as the

source and the other as the load. If the signal being produced by the source circuit is

delivered to the load circuit, then the source-load interaction at the interface is one of

the central problems of circuit analysis.

Thevenin and Norton equivalent circuits are valuable tools for dealing with circuit

interfaces. The conditions under which these equivalent circuits exist can be stated as a


If the source circuit in a two-terminal interface is linear, then the

interface signal v and i do not change when its Thevenin or Norton

equivalent circuit replaces the source circuit.

The equivalence requires the source circuit to be linear, but places no restrictions on

the linearity of the load circuit.

The Thevenin equivalent circuit consists of a voltage source (vT) in series with a

resistance (RT). The Norton equivalent circuit is a current source (iN) in parallel with a

resistance (RN). The two circuits have the same i-v characteristics, since replacing one

by the other leaves the interface signals unchanged. To derive the equivalency

conditions, simple apply the KVL and Ohm’s law to the Thevenin equivalent circuit to

obtain its i-v relationship at the two terminals:

v = vT - i RT

Next, applying KCL and Ohm’s law to the Norton equivalent circuit yields its i-v

relationships at its two terminal points:

i = iN - v/RN

Solving for voltage v yields

v = iNRN - iRN

The Thevenin and Norton circuits have identical i-v relationships. Comparing these

equations, it is apparent that:


iNRN = vT

Thus, both the Thevenin and Norton equivalent circuits are related by the source

transformations (e.g. relationships between voltage, current, and resistance). It is not

necessary to find both equivalent circuits. Once one of is found, the other can be

determined by a source transformation. The Thevenin and Norton circuits involve

four parameters (vT, RT, iN, RN ) and given the before noted relationship, only two

parameters are needed to specify either equivalent circuit.

It is common in circuit analysis to use the short-circuit current and open-circuit voltage

to specify Thevenin and Norton circuits. It can be shown that when the load is an

open circuit, the interface voltage is equal to the Thevenin voltage, e.g. v = vT. Since

there is no voltage across RT when i= 0. Similarly, it can be shown that when the load

is a short circuit, the interface current equals the Norton current i = iN since all the

source current iN is diverted through the short circuit load.

The RC and RL Circuit

RC and RL circuits contain linear resistors and a single capacitor or a single inductor.

To formulate the equations governing either of these circuits, it is common to replace

the resistor and sources by their Thevenin and Norton equivalent circuits. Examining

the RC circuits first, note that the Thevenin equivalent source is governed by the


RTi(t) + v(t) = vT(t)

The subscript (t) is used to indicate the values of these variables, and can change with

time. The capacitor i-v constraint is:

i(t) = C dv(t)/dt.

Substituting the i-v constraint into the source constraint gives:

RT C dv(t)/dt + v(t) = vT(t)

This produces the equations governing the RC series circuit. The unknown variable is

the capacitor voltage v(t), which determines the amount of energy stored in the RC


Note that this is a first-order linear differential equation with constant coefficients.

The equation is first-order because the first derivative of the dependent variable is the

highest order derivative in the equations. The product of RT C is a constant coefficient

because is depends on the fixed circuit parameters. The signal vT(t) is the Thevenin

equivalent of the independent source which is driving the circuit. The input to the

circuit is v(t) and the circuit response is the capacitor voltage vT(t)..

The dual problem to the RC circuit is the RL circuit. The Norton equivalent source in

the RL series circuit is governed by the constraints:

Gnv(t) + i(t) = iN(t)

The elements constraint for the inductor can now be written:

v(t) = L di(t)/dt

By combining the element and source constraints, the differential equation for the RL

circuits is now:

GNLdi(t)/dt + i(t) = iN(t)

The response of the RL circuit is also a first-order linear differential equation with

constant coefficients. The dependent variable is the inductor current. The circuit

parameters enter as the constraint product GNL, and the driving forces are represented

by a Norton equivalent current iN(t). Thus, the unknowns are the inductor current,

which is the state variable and determines the amount of energy stored in the RL


It was noted that the RL circuit is the dual of the RC circuit. What this means is that

these variables are duals of each other:

RT < — >GN C < — > L v < — > i vT < — > iN

When interchanged with each other, this converts the RC equations into the RL

equations. Because of this duality behavior, one set of equations can be used to

describe the other set of equations.

These circuits are first-order circuits because they are described by a first-order

differential equation. Any circuit containing a single capacitor or a single inductor, and

linear resistors and sources, is a first-order circuit.

The Step Response for a First-Order Circuit

Ultimately, the behavior of transmission line response to a step voltage is desired. In

order to describe this response, which is shown to be a second order response, a

thorough understanding of the first-order circuit is needed. When the input to the RC

circuit is a step function, the Thevenin sources are written as:

vT(t) = Vau(t).

Where u(t) is the unit step function, the circuit differential equation then becomes:

RT C dv/dt + v = Vau(t)

It must be noted that the step response is a function of v(t) which satisfies this

differential equation for t >= 0 and meets the initial condition v(0). As noted, u(t) is

the unit step such that u(t) = 1 for t >= 0. We can now write:

RT C dv(t)/dt + v(t) = Vau(t)for t >= 0.

Because the circuit is defined to be linear, it is common to use superposition to divide

the solution of v(t) into two components:

v(t) = vN(t) + vF(t).

The natural response, vN(t), is the general solution when the input is set to zero. The

natural response is the physical characteristic of the circuit and does not depend on the

form of the input. The forced response, vF(t), is the solution when the input is the step

function. It is called forced response because it represents what the circuit is

compelled to do by the form of the input.

The general solution for the natural response, with the input set to zero, can be written


RT C dvN(t)/dt + vN(t) = 0.

This is a homogeneous equation because the right side is zero. The classical approach

to solving the linear homogeneous differential equation is to try a solution of the

exponential form:

vN(t) = Kest,

where the constants K and s are to be determined. If the exponential is a solution, then

it must satisfy the differential equation RT C dvN(t)/dt + vN(t) . Substituting the trial

solution yields:

RT C Ksest + Kest = 0.

Which reduces to:

Kest( RT C s + 1) = 0.

The exponential function est cannot be zero for all t. The condition K = 0 is the trivial

solution, leaving the only non-trivial solution to be:

RT C s + 1 = 0

This is the circuit characteristic equation, as its roots determine the attributes of vN(t).

The characteristic equation has a single root at s = -1/RT C . Thus, it has been shown

that the natural response takes the form of:

vN(t) = Ke-t/RT C for t >= 0.

This is the general solution of the homogeneous equation because it contains the

arbitrary constant K, which cannot be evaluated from the initial conditions. The initial

conditions applies to the total response, and as of yet, the forced response still needs a

solution. For the forced response, the solution needs to satisfy the equation:

RT C dvF(t)/dt + vF(t) = VAt for t>= 0.

This means that the linear combination of vF(t) and its derivative equal a constant VA

for t >= 0. Setting vF(t) = VA satisfies this condition as dvF(t)/dt = dVA/dt = 0. Now

substituting vF(t) = VA reduces to the trivial solution: VA = VA.

It is now possible to combine the force and natural responses, such that we obtain:

v(t) = vN(t) + vF(t),

= Ke-t/RT C + VA for t >= 0

Because this satisfies the equation:

RT C dvF(t)/dt + vF(t) = VA,

it can be show that the general solution for the step response is:

v(t) = Ke-t/RT C + VA,

which contains an arbitrary constant K. By fixing the initial conditions, it is possible to

solve for K.:

v(0) =V0 = Ke0 + VA = K + VA

This assignment requires that K = (V0 - VA), which when substituted back into the

general solution yield the step response of the RC circuit:

v(t) = (V0 - VA)e-t/RT C + VA for t >= 0.

The step response for the RC circuit is:

Step Response for the RC Circuit


a 0.7
V 0.6

n 0.5
o 0.4




0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time Constant, RC

Figure 1 RC Step Response

The RC circuit step response begins at the initial condition and is driven to its final

voltage, which is the amplitude of the step function input. This is an exponential

waveform with a time-constant that is the circuit time-constant, τ = R*C. The circuit

will reach its final value after approximately 5 time constants.

Noted earlier, the RL circuit is the dual of the RC circuit. As such, the development of

its response follows a similar pattern. The Norton equivalent input is a step function

IA u(t), and for t >= 0 the RL circuit differential equation is:

GNLdi(t)/dt + i(t) = IA t >= 0.

The solution to this equation is again found by superimposing the natural and forced

components. The natural response is the solution of the homogeneous equation and

takes the same form as the dual for the RC natural response, namely;

iN(t) = Ke-t/GNL for t >= 0.

Where K is a constant to be determined from the initial condition once the full and

complete response is known. The forced response is a solution of the equation:

GNLdi(t)/dt + i(t) =IA, t >= 0.

Setting iF = IA satisfies the equation since dIA /dt = 0. Now, combining the forced and

natural responses, the general solution to the RL circuit becomes:

i(t) = iN(t) + iF(t),

= Ke-t/GNL + IA for t >= 0.

The constant K is now found from evaluation of the initial conditions:

i(0) =I0 = Ke0 + IA = K + IA.

The initial condition forces K = I0 - IA , so the step response of the RL circuit is:

i(t) = (I0 - IA) e-t/GNL + IA for t >= 0.

The RL circuit step response has the same form as the RC circuit step response. At

t=0, the initial value of the response is i(0) =I0 , as required by the initial condition.

The final value is the forced response iF = IA.

Note, that for an RC or RL circuit, the step response input drives the state variable

from an initial value to a final value determined by the amplitude of the step function

applied at t = 0; the time needed to transition from the initial condition to the final

condition is always approximately 5 times the circuit time constant. The first order

circuit, either RC or RL, depends on three quantities:

• The amplitude of the step input,

• The circuit time constants, and finally,

• The value of the state variable at the initial condition.

Building on the RC and RL circuits, the series RLC circuit is now developed. It will be

shown that the general model for the transmission line is a number of RLC elements

distributed uniformly down the length of the transmission line.

The Series RLC Circuit

The series RLC circuit is a class of second order circuits containing two energy storage

elements that cannot be replaced by a single element. They are sometimes called

second-order circuits because the circuit differential equation involves the second

derivative of the dependent variables.

In the series RLC circuit, the inductor and capacitor are connected in series. The

source-resistor circuit can be reduced to a Thevenin equivalent, which reduces to a

circuit that has a voltage source, resistor, inductor, and capacitor connected in series.

The Thevenin equivalent of the source and resistor produces the KVL constraint:

v + RTi = vT.

Applying KVL around the loop containing the inductor and capacitor yields:

v = vL + vC.

As noted earlier, the i-v characteristics of the inductor and capacitor are:

vL = L di/dt,

i = C dvC /dt.

Given this, there are now four independent equations with four unknowns: i, v, vL, and

vC . This set of equations provides a complete description of the dynamics of the series

RLC circuit. It is now possible to find the circuit response by deriving a circuit

equation containing only one of these unknowns.

One must use the circuit state variable as solutions variables because they are

continuous functions of time. In the series RLC circuit there are two state variables:

the capacitor voltage vC(t) and the inductor current i(t). Deriving a single equation in

vC(t) is a substitution into the inductor voltage and KVL constraint of the inductor and

capacitor of the KVL source constraint, yielding:

vL + vC + RTC dvC /dt = vT.

These substitutions eliminate the unknowns except for vL and vC. To eliminate the

inductor voltage, the derivative of current with respect to time is taken:

vL = L di/dt , i = C dvC /dt, vL = LC d2 vC/dt2.

Substituting this result into a single equation results in:

LC d2vC /dt2 + RTC dvC /dt + vC = vT.

This is a KVL equation around the loop of the series RLC circuit, where the inductor

and resistor voltages have been expressed in terms of the capacitor voltage. This is a

second-order linear differential equation with constant coefficients. It is a second-

order equation because the highest order derivative is the second derivative of the

dependent variable vC(t). The coefficients are constant because the circuit parameters

L, C and RT do not change. The Thevenin voltage is always a known driving force,

where the initial conditions are:

vC(0) = V0, dvC (0)/dt = 1/C i(0) = I0/C.

This is the values of the capacitor voltage and inductor current at t = 0. The second-

order differential equation characterizes the response of the series RLC circuit in terms

of the capacitor voltage. Once the solution of the capacitor voltage is found, it is

possible to solve for every other voltage or current, including the inductor current,

using the element and connection constraints.

Understand the Transmission Line

Generally speaking, there are two models of the transmission line: Lossless and Lossy.

Both transmission line models are described by a distributed inductance and

capacitance. However, the lossy transmission line model can take into account the

series resistance and dielectric conductance that is present in transmission lines where

loss is significant. The lossy transmission line model would be appropriate in

modeling propagation in earth, water, or other media where loss is large. Without loss

of generality, when working with copper or aluminum core wire, the model will be

considered to be lossless (e.g. as in Christopoulos).

The inductance and capacitance per unit length, respectively, will designate as Ld and

Cd. There are two conditions that can be used to describe the transmission line

response. The first is that one end to the line may be suddenly switched to a source,

and the voltage and current at any point on the transmission line are then a function of

time. This is the transient response of the transmission line and it requires a model of

the line in the time domain.

Alternatively, one end of the transmission line may be switched to a sinusoidal source.

The voltage and current at some point on the line can be analyzed once a steady state

has been reached. This type of problem is best addressed by constructing a line model

in the frequency domain. The first modeling method is the most appropriate method

with analyzing the effect of TDR.

The Transient Response of a Transmission Line

Consider the lossless transmission line that is switched to a direct current (dc) source.

The conditions on the line at a time dt after the connection of the source, when the

source voltage has penetrated a distance dx into the line can now be described. The

capacitance of the energized segment of the line Cd dx has charged to a voltage of VA,

hence a charge of dQ = Cd dx VA has been transferred.


Figure 2 Lumped RC Circuit

The current flowing into the line is:

i = dQ/dt = Cd dx VA /dt = Cd VA u.

Where u is the velocity of propagation along the line of the disturbance caused by line

being switched to the source. The flow of the current establishes a magnetic flux Φ,

which is associated with the line inductance:

Φ = Ld dx i = Ld Cd VA u..

Faraday’s Law states that the rate of change of the flux must equal the line voltage, e.g.:

VA = dΦ /dt = Ld Cd VA u2.

From this, the velocity of propagation on the line is simply:

u = ( Ld Cd )-1/2.

Substituting the velocity of propagation back into the equation for current on the line


i = Cd VA ( Ld Cd )-1/2.

= VA ( Ld Cd )-1/2

Note that this is the same relationship for resistance, namely:

iR = VA, or i = VA/R

The quantity in the denominator of the expression is described as the characteristic

impedance of the line, or:

Z0 = ( Ld Cd )1/2

with units of Ohms (Ω). When a driving voltage propagates along a line, there is an

associated current pulse, namely, i = VA/Z0. Given this, until a condition on the line

affects the characteristic impedance, (discontinuities such as a termination), the input

impedance of the line is Z0.

Further analysis of the transmission line requires the establishment of a voltage and

current convention. The velocity of propagation u will be taken at going to the right,

with voltage and current being positive:


I = Va/Zo Current

Figure 3 Voltage and Current Propagation

Now consider the moment when the voltage and current pulses travel the length of

the line and encounter an open-circuit termination. The current at the open-circuit

must be zero. This means that a current pulse must be initiated at the termination,

traveling toward the source with a magnitude of - VA/Z0 so that the line current is

progressively forced to zero. When the pulses reflected from the open circuit

termination arrive at the source end, the voltage along the entire length of the line is V’

+ VA, and the current is zero. This occurs at a time 2τ following the switching of the

source, where τ is the travel time of the pulses from the source to the termination and

is equal to the length divided by the velocity of propagation.

The magnitude of the voltage pulse V’ is obtained by demanding the energy be

conserved. At the end of the 2τ period, the energy stored on the line is associated with

the capacitance only, namely:

1/2 Cd (V’ + VA)2

The energy supplied by the source is:

VA (VA/Z0)2τ

These two expressions are equal, and by substituting Z0 and τ in terms of the line

parameters give V’ = VA .

This is an important finding, as it indicated that the voltage pulse incident on an open

circuit at the termination is equal to twice the voltage associated with the incident

pulse. To distinguish between the incident and reflected pulses, subscripts i and r will

be used, respectively. The incident and reflected pulses at the open-circuit just

described are:

Vi = VA, Vr = VA, Ii = VA/Z0, Ir = -VA/Z0.

It is useful to note that for an observer at the end of a line toward which the pulse Vi

is traveling, a Thevenin equivalent circuit can replace the line. Here the voltage source

is equal to the open-circuit voltage (show to be 2Vi) with impedance equal to the input

impedance of the line (show to be Z0 earlier). This is a valid description of the circuit

regardless of the actual line termination, provided that Vi does not change due to

reflections from other parts of the network to which the line is connected.

Additionally, this implies that the Thevenin equivalent circuit is valid for a period equal

to τ, the transit time of the line, and must be updated whenever a new incident pulse


As an example, it now becomes a simple matter to apply the Thevenin equivalent

circuit when calculating the voltage on a line terminated with a resistance value of R.

First one must define the voltage and current pulses as Vi and Vi/Z0, incident at the

termination. Now it line is Replaced by its Thevenin equivalent, and connecting the

load, R, yields the voltage constraint:

V = R/(R + Z0 ) 2Vi.

The voltage reflected and traveling away from the termination is now:

Vr = V-Vi = (R-Z0 )/(R+Z0 )Vi.

The ratio of the difference and sum of impedances is called the reflection coefficient,

and is used extensively in many systems, such as: elastic pressure waves, plane sound

waves, and one-dimensional waves:

ρ = (R-Z0 )/(R+Z0 ).

Note that for an open-circuit where R goes to infinity, ρ = 1, and, for a short-circuit, R

goes to zero and ρ = −1. In the special case where R = Z0 , ρ = 0. In this case, the

termination is matched by its own characteristic impedance and there is no reflected


In the case where the termination is an inductor, the behavior of an inductor when not

under steady state (e.g dIi/dt not equal to zero) is subject to Faraday’s Law. The

voltage across the inductor is equal to the time rate of change of flux linkage.

Therefore, one obtains an inductor i-v relationship in the form:

VL(t) = LdIi(t)/dt.

The time derivative means that the voltage across the inductor is zero unless the

current is time varying. Under DC excitation, the current its constant and VL = 0. In

other words, the inductor acts as a short circuit. The inductor is a dynamic element

because only a changing current produces a non-zero voltage. Thus, in the case of Vi

and Ii pulses, the inductance voltage VL(t) = Vr. Recall that:

Vr = (R-Z0)/(R+Z0 )Vi.

Rearranging terms, we have:

(R-Z0)/(R+Z0 )= Vr /Vi = ρ,

and finally,

LdIi(t)/dt / Vi = ρ(t).

This model shows that an inductor termination gives a positive value of ρ while the

current is time varying, then ρ goes to -1 as per a short circuit.

When the circuit has a capacitive termination, the circuit is the dual of the inductor-

terminated circuit. The defining relationship for a capacitor is:

q(t) = Cvc(t).

To express the circuit behavior in terms of voltage and current, this equation is

differentiated with respect to time:

dq(t)/dt = d(Cvc(t))/dt.

Where C is a constant and ic(t) is the time derivative of q(t), which establishes the

capacitor i-v relationship as:

ic(t) = Cdvc(t)/dt.

This means the current is zero when the voltage across the capacitor is constant, and

vice versa. The capacitor acts like a short circuit:

ic(t) = 0, Vr = ic(t)Z0, = 0.

The capacitor is another dynamic element because the current is zero unless the

voltage is changing. Therefore, once the voltage is steady state, the capacitor acts like

an open circuit and ρ goes to 1.

In a complex system where there are a number of lines, each with of different lengths,

characteristic impedances, and terminations, an infinite number of reflections take

place. The voltage and current anywhere in the network consists of a superposition of

these reflected signals.

Properties of Electromagnetic Waves

When studying classical behavior of electromagnetic fields, Maxwell equations are used

(see Heald and Marion). Maxwell’s equations predict the existence of electromagnetic

waves. In free space or in a dielectric, the vector fields must satisfy a simple wave

equation. In a conducting media, such as a transmission line, there is a damping or

attenuation of the field. To describe electromagnetism, there are five vector fields that

are used:

E electric field (statvolt/cm)

D dielectric displacement field (statvolt/cm)

B magnetic field (gauss)

H magnetic intensity (oersted)

J current density (statamp/cm2)

When the medium has a conductivity σ, the wave electric field drives a current that

follows Ohm’s Law:

J = σE

It is common to assume that there is not other free charge or current present and that

the medium is linear, homogenous, and isotropic. Maxwell’s equation then reduces to:

div E = 0

div B = 0

curl E + 1/c ∂B/∂t = 0

curl B - εµ/c ∂E/∂t = 4πσµ/c E.

Where the three properties of the medium (σ, ε, µ conductance, the dielectric

constant and the dipole constant) enter the Ampere-Maxwell law, but nowhere else.

Note, the notation grad, div and curl are vector differential operators. The gradient

of a scalar function F(x) id defined by:

∆ F = grad F = Σ e ∂F/∂x.

The divergence of a vector F is defined by:

div F = Σ ∂F/∂x.

The curl of a vector F is defined by the cross product of the gradient with the vector


curl F = Σi Σj Σk ei ∂Fk /∂xj.

By taking the curl of each of the curl equations in turn and making the appropriate

substitutions, the differential equations for the two fields become:

∆2E - 4πσµc2 ∂E/∂t - εµc2 ∂2E/∂t2 = 0

∆2 B - 4πσµc2 ∂B/∂t - εµc2 ∂2 B/∂t2 = 0

These equations have the form of the standard wave equations to which the non-zero

conductance has added a term proportional to the conductance, σ, and the first-order

time derivative. When the conductance is relatively low, it can be shown that the

added term causes the wave to damp or attenuate as it propagates. In the limit of high

conductivity, the term involving the second order time derivative becomes negligible

and the equation reduces to a diffusion equation.

When considering the solution for the plane waves that vary harmonically in time, the

following results:

grad D = σ.

This is used to derive the differential equation that will determine the penetration of

fields into the conductor:

curl(curl E) = grad(divE) - ∆2E = -jωµ curl B.

For transmission lines with high conductance, the displacement current is small when

compared with the current i, such that ωε is much less than σ. Now, taking the

differential of the electric field equation, and substituting the dialectic displacement

field results, one finds:

∆2E = -jωµσE.

Similar analysis can be performed on the magnetic field and current density resulting in

the following:

∆2B = - jωµσ B,

∆2J = - jωµσ J.

Given the last three differential equations, consider the example of a plane conductor

of infinite depth, and no filed variation along the width or length. The topology will

become important in the analysis of conductors with limited topology (e.g. a wire),

because the depth over which appreciable field are concentrated is small. It is

important to note that any field variation along the surface, due to edge effects or

curvature, are small compared with the penetration into the conductor and are ignored.

Taking the uniform field just described, the electric field becomes (see Yoho):

d2B/dx2 = -jωµσE = τ2E,


τ2= -jωµσ.

Taking the positive square root of j,

τ = (1 +j) (ωµσ/2).5 = (1 +j)/δ.

The term δ will be used extensively, as the quantity is called the skin depth, or the

depth of current penetration.

δ = (2/ωµσ).5 meters.

The complete solution to the differential equation (in terms of the exponential), results

in the solution for plane waves that vary harmonically in time and space:

E = Ee x = Ee x e jx .
−τ − /δ − /δ

Both the magnetic field and current density are governed by the same differential

equations, and gives:

B = Be x e jx ,
− /δ − /δ

J = Je x e jx .
− /δ − /δ

It is evident that the magnitude of the fields and current density decrease exponentially

with penetration into the conductor as a function of frequency. Additionally, at high

frequency, the current density is predominately on the surface. This extremely

important result allows the modeling of the attenuation of high frequency wave

content in a transmission line.

Derivation of the Analytical Expression of Cable Attenuation

As note previously, the distribution of current carried on a conductor is primarily on

the surface. The depth of penetration is a function of the skin depth, namely: δ =

(2/ωµσ).5, where ω is the frequency in radians. Substituting 2π f = ω, gives:

δ = 1/ (fπµσ).5.

For a round conductor (e.g. coaxial cable or twisted pair), with a conductor radius of r,

and a uniform current distribution of the conductive skin, the resistance per unit

length as a function of frequency becomes (as per Sadok):

R(f) = 1/(2r) (uf/µσ).5

Collecting terms, the equation reduces to:

R(f) = K/(r) (f).5,

where the constant K is approximately 4.51x10-8 Ω -s1/2 for a copper conductor. As

the limit of the length of wire section x approaches zero, a voltage pulse of magnitude

Vi drops in voltage dVi(x) proportional to the resistance R(f)dx:

dVi(x) = Ii(x)R(f)dx,

dVi(x) = (Vi(x)/Zo)R(f)dx.

Solving for the differential equation with respect to length x of the wire, gives the

attenuation as an function of both frequency, characteristic impedance, and length (see


!( R ( f ) )
Zo X
A( f , Z o , X ) = e .

This is the attenuation model used in the study.

The Inverse Scattering Problem: Removing Multiple Reflections

It has been shown that when there is a mismatch in characteristic impedance, some

small amount of energy is reflected from the discontinuity. Where there are a number

of these mismatches close to each other on the transmission path, their reflections

interact and generate a number of reflection artifacts. These artifacts corrupt the

measured waveform and make analysis of the true impedance of the transmission path


The process of determining the true transmission line impedance from the measured

waveform is the inverse scattering problem. It is an extraordinarily difficult problem

to solve found in any field that studies waves. Some examples include the study of

elastic pressure waves (geology, seismology), sound waves (acoustics), transmission

lines (electrical engineer), and the wave behavior of matter (quantum mechanics).

Fortunately, the inverse scattering problem for simpler, one-dimensional system of

layered media is relatively easy to solve. This is the case for lossless transmission lines,

waves in an elastic medium, and sound waves in a tube. In each case, there is a pair of

coupled first-order partial differential equations that govern two-state variables. For

sound, it is particle velocity and vertical force; for electricity, it is current and voltage;

and for pressure waves it is elastic velocity and pressure. In each case, it can be shown

that if the material parameters (area of a cross - section, density and elastic constants,

or inductance and capacitance) are constant, then all the state variables are governed by

the 1-D wave equation. By simple examples, it will be shown what happens when a

wave travels in a system with constant material parameters suddenly encounters an

abrupt change, a discontinuity.

The analysis will be conducted in terms of seismological pressure waves following the

procedure outlined in Inverse Problems in Scattering, but the conclusions readily apply

to other systems. Consider a medium with a discontinuity at a depth of l consisting of

parameters Δ0, c0 prior to l and Δ1, c1 after the discontinuity. The displacement and

pressure in each part will have the form:

w(x,t) = f0(w-cot) + g0(w+cot), 0 < x < l,

p(x,t) = Z0 f0(w-cot) + Z0 g0(w+cot) ,0 < x < l,

w(x,t) = f1(w-c1t) + g1(w+c1t), 0 < x , l,

p(x,t) = Z1 f1(w-c1t) + Z1 g1(w+c1t), 0 < x , l.

At time t = 0, the entire medium is quiescent and p(x,0) = w(x,0) = 0. Now consider

the medium for x>l, for which p,w are given. This implies that f1(x) = g1(x) = 0 for x >

l. If g1(x) = 0 when x>l, then g1(w-c1t) is 0 for all x,t. This means that there is only a

right moving wave, f1(w-c1t) in the portion x>l. As time progresses, the argument x-ct

becomes zero or negative when at x = 0, such that f0(w-cot) will not be forced to be

zero. Similarly, x+ct, which is positive, may exceed l, so that g0(w+cot) need not be zero.

Consider now that a right moving wave enters the medium at x = 0 at time t = 0 with

speed c0. This wave will travel through the medium until it reaches l. At this point,

there is a continuity of w and p on opposite sides of the discontinuity:

f0(l-cot) + g0(l+cot) = f1(l-c1t),

Z0 f0(l-cot) + Z0 g0(l+cot) = Z1 f1(l-c1t),

which means:

g0(l+cot) = (Z0 -Z1)/(Z0 +Z1) f0(l-cot) and f1(l-c1t) = 2 Z0/(Z0 +Z1) f0(l-cot).

After the appropriate substitution:

x + cot = l+co(t+(x-l)/co),

x - c1t = l-c1(t+(l-x)/c1).

This given, finally:

w(x,t) = f0(x-cot)+(Z0 -Z1)/(Z0 +Z1) f0(2l-x-cot) 0<x<l,

p(x,t) = Z0 f0(x-cot)-Z0(Z0 -Z1)/(Z0 +Z1)f0(2l-x-cot) 0<x<l,

w(x,t) = 2 Z0/(Z0 +Z1)f0[l+co/c1(x-l)-cot] x>l,

g(x,t) = 2 Z0 Z1/(Z0 +Z1)f0[l+co/c1(x-l)-cot] x>l,

This significant result indicates that the first position, [0,l] there is the original incident

right moving wave (given by the first term) and a reflected waved given by the second

term. Since f0(x) is zero for positive arguments, this reflected wave will not arrive at x

= a in [0,l] until the argument 2l-a- cot becomes zero at time t = (2l-a)/co. In other

words, there is no reflected wave at x = a until the incident wave has had time to travel

from 0 to l and back, a total distance of 2l-a. This illustrates the fundamental concept

of causality. For waves moving in a one dimensional medium with speed c, a cause or

disturbance at x0, t0 can have no effect at x1 until t1 > t0, at which a wave starting at x0

at t0 reaches x1.

The Standardized Wave Equation

The equations governing plane waves in various mediums are all described by similar

second-order differential equations. The solutions to these equations, additionally,

involve solutions in which the waves travel with some speed c. The squares of the

wave speeds are:

Sound on a string - T/(ρA),

Electromagnetic waves - 1/(LC),

Elastic pressure waves - (λ+2µ)/ρ,

Plane sound waves - γPo/ρ.

At any position x on the transmission line, there will be a local value of the wave

speed, c(x). When the wave moves from x to x + dx, the time taken is;

d = dx/c(x).

This ensures that the time taken to move from 0 to x is:

" = ! du / c(u ).

This time ς will be defined at the travel time. With this definition, it is possible to

transform the equations with independent variables of ς,t instead of x,t. This allows

the differential equations to be written as:

∂p/∂ = -Z ∂w/∂t;

∂p/∂t = -Z ∂w/∂ .

Again, Z is the characteristic impedance and is not a function of ς (vs. x).

Having reduced the equations to standard form, refer back to the original pressure

wave relationship:

w(x,t) = f0(w-cot) + g0(w+cot), 0 < x < l,

p(x,t) = Z0 f0(w-cot) + Z0 g0(w+cot), 0 < x < l,

which refer to Z. There is a down-moving wave and an up-moving wave. The down-

moving wave is p = Zw, while for the up moving wave is p = -Zw. Consider combining

these equations into Zw +/-p instead of p,w. In a down-moving wave, Zw+p is non-

zero and Zw-p is zero. For the up-moving wave, the dual of this will be true. Let one

now consider a way to maintain symmetry: Z1/2w+/-Z-1/2p.


η( ) = Z( )½.

Then define

D( ,t) = ½(ηw+η p), U( ,t) = ½(ηw-η p),

−1 −1

where D and U represent the down and up moving waves. It can now be shown that

by making a substitution into the differential equations ∂p/∂ = -Z ∂w/∂t and ∂p/∂t =

-Z ∂w/∂ , that:

∂D/∂ + ∂D/∂t – η-1 dη/dU = 0.

Defining k = ½ d//∂ (ln Z), the differential equations are now

∂D/∂ + ∂D/∂t -kU = 0,

∂U/∂ - ∂U/∂t -kD = 0.

These equations show that when Z is constant, k = 0, and the two equations become

decoupled. The physical meaning of decoupling D and U is that the two waves do not

interact as long as k = 0. When Z changes, the D and U waves will interact, causing

multiple reflections. This interaction complicates the problems of transmission and

reflection. It is the interaction that must be de-convolved in the inverse scattering


Standardizing Reflection and Transmission

The concept of travel time as a measure of distance, allowed the equations

governing waves to be reduced to standard form. In this standard form, the medium

in which the wave propagates is specified by a single parameter, the characteristic

impedance Z, as a function of travel time, Z( ). Additionally, and alternative

formulation was provided in terms of down and up moving waves. Using these

formulations, an analysis of the reflection and transmission wave in a medium will be


Consider a medium in which Z( ) is piece-wise constant with discontinuities only as

some dx, 2dx .... positions; the medium is called a Goupillaud medium. The analysis

of the waves medium requires two situations: as the waves travel along a part where Z

is constant, and as the wave crosses a discontinuity. Over the distance traveled ,

which is a member set of [(i-1)d, id] where Z is constant, the waves are separated into a

downward moving wave and an upward moving wave:

D( ,t) = f( -t),

U( ,t) = f( + t).

The downward moving wave is just above the discontinuity at id at any given time t

must have departed from (i-1)d at the instant t - d. The wave has traveled without any

change in shape, such that;

D(id-,t) = D[(i-1)d+,t-d].

The value of D[(i-1)d+,t-d] at the instant prior to t-d, is obtained from D[(i-1)d+,t], by

executing the delay operator d. The delay operator has the defining property of

changing any function of time, f(t), into its value at the instant t-d. Therefore:

df(t) = f(t-d),

such that D(id-,t) = D[(i-1)d+,t-d], and can be written as:

D(id-,t) = dD[(i-1)d+,t].

The same argument applies to the upward moving wave such that:

U[(i-1)d+,t] = U(id-,t-d) = dU(id-,t).

This can be inverted to give:

U(id-,t) = d-1U[(i-1)d+,t].

The equation establish a non-causal relationship between U(id-,t) and U[(i-1)d+,t+d].

The downward and upward wave equations can now be combined into the matrix


& D(id ', t )# &d # & D[(i ' 1)d +, t ]#

$U (id ', t ) ! = $ .
% " % d !" $%U [(i ' 1)d +, t ]!"

This is the first of two equations that describes the evolution of the waves. It shows

that the D,U waves travel without change of shape when the characteristic impedance,

Z does not change.

The second equation states that w, p is continuous across a discontinuity in Z,


& w(id +, t )# & w[(i ' 1)d ', t ]#

$ p (id +, t ) ! = $ p[(i ' 1)d , t ] ! .
% " % "

Together, these equations, with the appropriate substitutions, completely describe the

evolution of the waves:

& D(( , t )# 1 &) ) '1 # & w(( , t )#

$U (( , t ) ! = 2 $ !$ !
% " %) ' ) '1 " % p (( , t ) "

It is important to understand the duality between the D, U waves and p, w. The D,U

waves maintain their shape where Z is constant and are disturbed when they cross a

discontinuity. Conversely, p, w change there shape while traveling in the medium and

are unchanged as they cross a discontinuity.

These basic equations can now be combined to obtain separate pairs equations

describing the evolution of w, p and U, D. First, substitute:

η(id-) = ηi-1,

η (id+) = ηi.

Then define, as the evolution transfer function:

&( ( '1 #
Hi = 1 $ !.
2 ( ' ( '1 "


& D(id ', t )# & w(id ', t )#
$U (id ', t ) ! = H i'1 $ p (id ', t ) ! ,
% " % "

& D(id +, t )# & w(id +, t )#

$U (id +, t ) ! = H i $ p (id +, t ) ! .
% " % "

To obtain the second evolution equation for w, p, the inverse of the evolution transfer

function is used and appropriate substitutions are made, such that:

& w(id , t )# &d # & w(i ' 1)d , t #

$ p (id , t ) ! = H i'1 $ d !" $% p (i ' 1)d , t !"
% " %

This equation describes how the p, w waves change as they travel in the region between

(i-1)d and id, where Z = Zi-1. A similar equation for the downward and upward wave

can be built to describe how the waves interact as they pass through the discontinuity

between Zi and Zi-1:

& D(id +, t )# '1 & w(id ', t ) #

$U (id +, t ) ! = H i H i'1 $ p(id ', t ) ! .
% " % "

This important equation is the result needed to define the ith reflection coefficient

(recalling the earlier definition of reflection coefficient):

ρi = (Zi-1-Zi)/(Zi-1 + Zi),

τi = (1-ρi2)½.


&1 ' )i #
( i = H i H i''11 1 $ .
* i % )i 1 !"

The matrix Φ describes how the D, U waves interact as they cross the discontinuity,

and is called the transfer or chain scattering matrix. The downward and upward

interaction equations can now be combined into a single evolution equation:

& D(id +, t )# &d # & D[(i ' 1)d +, t ]#

$U (id +, t ) ! = ( i $ .
% " % d !" $%U [(i ' 1)d +, t ]!"

This equation expressed quantities below one discontinuity in terms of those at the

previous one within a medium. This means that it is possible to obtain quantities at

nd+ in terms of quantities at 0+ simply my multiplying the appropriate operators. This

equation expresses U(id-,t) in terms of U[(i-1)d+,t+d], or in terms of a quantity in the

future. This is a non-causal relationship, and the evolution equation, which is based

on, is therefore non-causal as well. In order to obtain a causal relationship, one must

rearrange the evolution equations. Temporally, the suffix i is dropped on σ and τ as:

& Di # 1 &1 ' ( # &d # & Di'1 #

$U ! = ) $( 1 ! $ .
% i" % "% d !" $%U i'1 !"

As a set of linear equations, this states:

Di = σ -1 (dDi-1 - τd-1 Ui-1 ),

Ui = σ -1 ( - τdDi-1 + d-1 Ui-1 ).

By eliminating d-1 Ui-1, the equation reduces to:

Di + - τUi = σ dDi-1,

Because the relation (1-τ )/σ = σ. This generates a casual relation:


Di = σ dDi-1 - Ui.

The second causal relationship can now be solved in term of Ui-1, namely:

Ui-1 = τ d2 Di-1 + σ dUi.

Now, define the matrix operations Σ as:

&) '* i #
( = (i = $ i ,
%' * i ) i !"

which allows one to reverting back to the original matrix notation:

& D(id +, t ) # &1 # &d # & D[(i ' 1)d +, t ]#

$U [(i ' 1)d +, t ]! = $ d ! ( i $ .
% " % " % 1!" $% U (id +, t ) !"

Note that this is the casual evolution equation: the D waves move down such that it

will reach id+ after (i-1)d+. The U waves moves up such that it reaches id+ before (i-

1)d+. The derived evolution equations for waves in a Goupillaud medium allow for

the derived difference equations. This will be the basis for algorithms constructing

waves in a medium from a given initial and boundary data. The essential characteristic

of wave phenomena in a Goupillaud medium is that a response at any discontinuity

point ς = id at any time t depends only on the input at the times t, t-d, t-2d, etc. This is

true whatever the form of the input, whether it is continuously varying, a series of

peaks, or steady state. In particular, this means that the response at time t = nd will

depend only on the inputs at time nd, (n-1d), ...,d,0. For a more complete description

see Bruckstein and Kailath. For higher dimension inverse scattering problems see

Ware and Aki.

Pulse and Waveform Generation for TDR

There are a number of ways to generate signals with rise times in the nanosecond

range, such as programmable logic, clock devices, etc. However, to generate rise times

in the pico-second (ps) range, other techniques must be employed, specifically, the

Step Recovery Diode (SRD). Hewlett Packard commercially introduced the SRD and

one of its major applications as in pulse shaping and waveform generation (Hewlett


The SRD is a charge-controlled switch. For example, when charge is inserted into the

diode by forward bias, the diode appears as a low impedance device. When the charge

is being removed, the diode continues as a low impedance device until all the charge is

removed, at which point it snaps to a high impedance device. The ability of the SRD

to store charge and to change impedance levels quickly can be used for generating

extremely fast rise time pulses.

Step Recovery Diode Properties

The SRD is a two terminal P-I-N junction whose static (DC) characteristics are similar

to the usual p-n junction diode. However, the dynamic characteristic is different. The

most distinguishing feature of the SRD is the very abrupt dependence of its junction

impedance upon its internal charge storage. This storage of charge occurs as a result

of the non-zero recombination time of minority carriers that have been injected across

the junction under forward bias conditions.

The charge stored under forward bias can be obtained from the charge continuity


i(t) = dQ/dt + Q/τ,


i = total instantaneous diode current

Q = charge stored at the junction, and

τ = minority carrier lifetime of the diode.

For a constant charging current, the stored charge is:

QF = IF τ(1-e-tf/ ).

Where QF is the stored charge from the forward current, IF is the forward charging

current and tf is the length of time the forward current IF is applied. If tf is long

compared to the minority carrier lifetime of the diode, τ, then QF is approximately IF τ.

If a constant reverse current is now used to remove stored charge on the SRD, then

the time required is:

ts /τ = ln[1+ IF τ(1-e-tf/ )/Ir].


ts is the time required to deplete the stored charge and Ir is the reverse current supplied

by a controlled bias voltage. These simple relationships give a fundamental

understanding to the charge flow of the SRD. While idealized, they are useful in

design and analysis of most SRD circuits.

Given this, if a forward biases SRD is suddenly reversed-current biased, it will first

appear as a very low impedance (less then 1 Ohm) until the stored charge is removed.

At that point, the impedance will suddenly increase to its normal high reverse

impedance. This effectively stops the flow of reverse current. The impedance

transition takes generally less than 1 nanosecond. Many SRD have transitions times

down into the tens of picoseconds.

Due to charge storage during forward conduction, the SRD impedance remains low,

short-circuiting the source by a time designated as ts. The time, called the storage time,

is measured between the 50% points of the reverse current waveform, or equivalently,

between the 50% point of the output waveforms obtained with and without the diode

in the circuit. The storage phase ends when the stored charge is removed and the SRD

suddenly becomes an open circuit causing output of the voltage source to be applied

to the load. The fall time of the SRD reverse current, tr, which also equals the rise time

of the voltage on the load, is called the transition rise-time. This time is a function of

diode design, circuit constraints, and diode operating conditions.

For a given pulse amplitude and source resistance, ts, can be adjusted by varying IF to

be many times greater than tr.. Therefore, the output rise-time of the circuit can be

many times smaller than the rise-time of the drive waveform. In practice, a 10-

nanosecond circuit can be easily sharpened to 300 picoseconds with one SRD, and to

100 or even 50 picoseconds, with two or three diode circuits.

Dynamic Characteristics of the SRD

Errors in the resulting waveform can result from package parasitics, and the

dependence of diode dynamic characteristics on both the circuit and the operating

conditions. The waveform could have ramping, rounding, overshoot, and ringing. To

determine what gives rise to the various parasitic effects, one must consider the

equivalent circuit of a packaged SRD.

The first parasitic effect is the voltage drop of the diode under the forward bias,


VF = φ + IF RS.

This voltage φ is typically .7 to .8 volts. The steady state voltage will not appear in a

circuit where the SRD is capacitively coupled to the load. The second effect is the

voltage spike, VL. This is the result of the rapid change of current through the package

inductance, and is given as:

VL = LP (di/dt).

For a typical package inductance of 4 nH and a reverse current of 400 mA occurring in

10 nanoseconds, VL = 4 nH x .4A/10ns = .16 volts. For faster current fall times, i.e.,

when sharpening a 1-nanosecond rise-time pulse, the voltage would be 1.6 volts and

may not be negligible. In this case, a SRD package with a smaller inductance should be

used. Because of the SRD fast transition rise-time specification, they are generally

packaged in a low inductance package. For example, the Metalics SRD used in the

prototype unit was a low capacitance and inductance package - it measured only 3 mm

in length and .5mm width!

The third parasitic effect is the voltage plateau, VP. This is caused by the reverse

current component flowing through the dynamic series resistance RS of the SRD

during the storage phase and is given by:

VP = (IP +IR)RS.

For the circuit conditions used in the previous example, the plateau voltage is: VP =

410 mA x .4 Ohms = .16 volts, and is generally negligible. The transition time, tr, is

dependent on SRD design, circuit constraints, and the level of stored charge. The

transition rise-time is composed of two components:

tr = (tt2 + tRC2)1/2,

where tt is the intrinsic SRD transition time and tRC is the circuit (RC controlled) rise

time. The SRD intrinsic transition time is dependent on the level of stored charge and

SRD design. The circuit controlled rise-time is dependent on the diode reverse biased

capacitance and the equivalent circuit resistance in parallel with it. The 10% - 90%

specification of rise time is,

tRC = 2.2 Req CVR,

where Req is the equivalent resistance consisting of the parallel combination of the

source and load resistance.

The last parasitic effect that can be observed is the over-shoot and ringing waveform.

This is due to a damped resonance of the SRD and package capacitance, with the

package and stray circuit inductance, excited by the high frequency components of the

rapidly changing SRD current. This effect can be minimized by reducing stray circuit

reactances, choosing a SRD with a smaller package inductance, or by special circuit

techniques (see Staffer).

50 Ohms

Figure 4 Simple SRD Circuit

Design of SRD Pulse Sharpening Circuits

The basic function of a pulse sharpening circuit is to convert a slow-rise time or fall-

time input pulse into a faster rise-time or fall-time output pulse. A variety of SRD

circuits can be configured to perform such a function, depending on the detailed

requirements. One of the simplest circuits of this type is the restive source and load

SRD test circuit. Besides being simple, this circuit also lends itself well to illustrating

the fundamental design principles that are used in more complicated circuits. The

design usually starts with knowledge of the input waveform, the desired output

waveform, and the source and load resistances. Assume the following design


Input Waveform
Pulse-Width: 50 ns
Rise-Time: 10 ns
Fall-Time: 10 ns
Repetition Rate 10 kHz
Peak Open Circuit Voltage 20.5 volts
Peak Loaded Output Voltage at 50 Ohms 10 volts
Source Resistance 50 Ohms

Output Waveform
Rise-Time less than 300 ps
Load Resistance 50 Ohms
Peak Load Voltage 10 Volts

First, the proper SRD must be selected. Since clipping of the output amplitude is not

desired, the breakdown voltage of the diode must be great than 10 volts. This value is

well within the limits of any available SRD. Because the transition time of the diode is

dependent on the stored charge, one must next determine the minimum stored charge

that is required. The storage time should be equal to or slightly great than ½ the input

rise-time. Given this, set:

ts = ½ tr1.

If ts < ½ tr1, the SRD will transition prior to completion of the input rise-time and only

a portion of the rise time will undergo sharpening. If ts >> ½ tr1, then there will be a

greater delay and the output rise-time will be slower since the transition time of the

SRD increases with stored charge.

The amount of peak reverse current switched by the SRD must equal the current step

applied to RS and RL by the output voltage step, namely:

IR = Vo /[RS RL/(RS +RL)] = 10 volts/25 Ohms = 400 ma.

It is assumed that the IF RS drop in the forward biases diode will be small. Thus, by

making ts = ½ tr1 the reverse current waveform through the SRD is essentially


The stored charge that is removed by the reverse current is the area under the curve.

For this case:

QS = (tr1 IR )/2 = 10 ns x 400/2 = 2000 pC.

This suggests that any SRD used in this circuit must store at least 2000 pC. From the

design specification, the rise-time of the circuit must be less than 300 ps. The SRD

transition time is related to the circuit rise-time, namely tr = (tt2 + tRC2)1/2. At the

minimum, tr = 2.2 Req CVR. Assuming that the circuit blocking capacitance C is large,

then the equivalent resistance of Req shunting the SRD capacitance CVR during

transition is:

Req = RS RL/(RS +RL) = 50 x 50/100 = 25 Ohms.

Since this is the resistance used during SRD test, the required SRD can simply be

selected from the catalog specifications.

Having selected the SRD, one must now determine the forward bias current, the

required input pulse amplitude, and the effects of the series resistance and package

inductance on the output pulse shape. The forward current is obtained from:

IF = Q/τ = 2000ps/150ns = 13mA.

The required input current step amplitude is:

ISC = IF + IR = 410 mA.

The required battery open circuit voltage is:

VB = ISC RB = 410 mA x 50 Ohms = 20.5 volts.

The inductive spike at the start of the output pulse, due to the package inductance, will

then be approximately 4 nH. Assuming the source has a linear rise-time, then:

VL.= LP (di/dt) = 4 nH x 330 mA/10 ns = 0.132 volts.

The plateau voltage VP following the inductive spike is due to the series resistance RS

of the SRD. For a typical SRD, a RS of .5 Ohms could be expected, such that:

VP = IR RS = 410 ma x .5 = 205 mV.

As noted, for SRD packages with larger inductances, one must check if the leading

edge will exhibit an overshoot and ringing. Calculation of the exact leading edge shape

is much easier with a properly line-mounted SRD since the line is know to be resistive

for a certain amount of time (the round trip travel time of the wave to reach the first

discontinuity). Assuming that the diode switches instantaneously, the leading edge of

the waveform will be on the form:

VO = IB ZO /2[1/(LS CVR )1/S3+1/S2 2LS /ZO + 1/S LS CVR ],

where 1/(LS CVR ).5 is the ringing frequency and ZO /4 ( CVR /LS ).5 is the damping

factor. For a notional SRD with 4 nH LP and CVR = 4 pF, the damping factor is :

ZO /4 ( CVR /LS ).5 = 50/4 (4 x 10-12 /4 x 10-9) = 0.4.

Which, for a ring frequency of 1/(LS CVR ), gives a peak overshoot of approximately 2

volts. To complete the design, one must additionally investigate the stability of the

leading edge (jitter) and repetition rate limit of the circuit. Jitter will occur if tS is not

constant. Since tS = τIF /IR, jitter will occur due to variation in τ, amplitude changes in

either bias supply or input pulse. For short-term variations, τ is effectively constant.

Ripple or noise in the bias supply and/or input pulse will produce a proportional

change in tS. For a 1% peak to peak amplitude change in either bias supply or input

pulse, the leading edge jitter will be (0.01)(5ns) = 50ps.

Maximum repetition rate will be limited due to the time required to build up the stored

charge in the SRD after each pulse. The charge buildup in the SRD was given as QF =

IF τ(1-e-tf/ ). For a 5% variation in QF and a nominal lifetime of 200 ns, the minimum

charging time will be:

tF = τ ln(1/0.05) = 200 x 3 = 600 ns.

With a 50 ns pulse, the maximum repetition rate will be 1.54 MHz. Note, that for

capacitively coupled circuits, the capacitors used in the circuit will generally impose a

more severe limit on the maximum repetition rate. This completes the design and

analysis of simple pulse sharpening circuits. A number of additional circuits can be

built that eliminate some the problems encountered. However, for the design

requirements of a TDR system, the general SRD pulse sharpening circuit is adequate.

Parametric Classification

The final aspect of the wire diagnostics design is the classification of a detected event

as a connector, termination, or fault. The problem of parametric classification has a

number of potential solutions. However, we will focus the design on statistical pattern

recognition. Statistical pattern recognition is based on the statistical hypothesis test,

which is concerned with grouping a test sample into a separation function. The

following definitions are defined to build the mathematics used in the separation

function (see Mendenhall et al.).

Probability Laws

The A random vector is a measured vector sampled from a random process.

X = [ x1 , x2 ,..., xn ]T ,

where xi is a collection of sample from measurement i. The probability distribution

function of n measurements can now be defined as:

P( x1 ,...xn ) = Pr{x1 ! x1 ,..., xn ! xn } .

Where Pr{A} is the probability of event A or,

P( X ) = Pr{X ! X } ,

e.g. a cumulative probability. The probability density function of X is, in contrast,

defined as:

Pr{x1 < x1 " x1 + !x1 ,..., x1 < xn " xn + !xn }

P( X ) = !lim ,
x #0
i !x1 ...!xn
!xn #0


! n P ( X)
P( X ) = .
!x1 ...!xn

The conditional probability density of a class I is defined as:

P( X | " i ) ! pi ( X ) (i = 1...L) L number of classes .

The conditional probability is the probability of measuring X when it is drawn from

classes I. The unconditional density of X, from Bayes Theorem, is:

p( X ) = ! Pi pi ( X ) ,
i =1

where Pi is the a priori probability of class i. The A posteriori probability of i is now:

Pi pi ( X )
P(! i | X ) or qi ( X ) = .
p( X )

Parameters of Distributions

A random vector is characterized by its distribution. However, if the distribution is

too complicated to characterize, other characterizations can be used. The most

common parameter is the expectation vector, more commonly know as the mean:

M = E{ X } = ! Xp( X )dX
mi = ! xi p ( x)dx = ! xi p ( xi )dxi

Each component of M is calculated as the expected value of an individual variable.

The conditional expectation vector of a random vector X for ωi is

M i = E{ X | " i } = ! Xpi ( X )dX .

The description of the variance and the relationship of variances between one set and

another is the covariance matrix:

! = E{( X " M )( X " M )T } or

= E{ XX T } " E{ X }M T " ME{ X T } + MM T
! = S + MM T where S = E{ XX T },

where S is the auto correlation matrix. Sometimes it is more convenient to use cii=σ i, 2

and cij=ρijσiσj , in which case:

&* i # & 1 : )1n #

( = 'R', ' = $$ : ! $
!, R = $ :
$% * n !" $% ) n1 1 !"

where R is called the correlation matrix.

The Normal distribution is commonly used to model real world data. It is defined as:

N x ( µ , ") = exp{! 1 d 2 ( x)} ,
(2# ) n/2
1/ 2 2


d 2 ( x) = ( X ! M ) T " !1 ( X ! M ) .

Note that d is the normalized distance between X and M.

Parameter Estimation of a Distribution

When working with experimental data, it is rare that the distribution is known

explicitly. Because of this, one must estimate the parameters. Estimation of these

parameters introduces errors and bias, which must be accounted for. Let Y be a

function of x1 ,.., xn such that y = f ( x1 ,.., xn ) with mean µ y , and variance ! y2 . At

times, the function of Y can be too complex to derive experimentally; therefore, the

function and its parameters are estimated as:

µ̂ y = 1 y .
N! k =1

Then, the biased estimator of the variance is:

VAR( µˆ y ) = 1 E{( y k " mk ) 2 } = 1 ! y2 .
k =1
By extension, then:

COV ( µˆ y , µˆ z ) = E{( µˆ y ! m y )( µˆ z ! m z )} = 1 COV ( y , z ) .


The sample mean and sample autocorrelation function will then be, respectively:

mˆ = 1
N " X k , Sˆ = 1
k =1
k =1
X k X k , E{mˆ } = m, COV (mˆ ) = 1 ! .

Note, that the estimator for the mean and autocorrelation are unbiased and consistent.

Let us define a function y = ( xi ! mi )( x j ! m j ) where mi,,j are the means, then

E{mˆ y } = E{ y} = " ij! i! j . In most applications, however, the means are not known,

so substituting in the sample means,

y = ( xi ! mˆ i )( x j ! mˆ j ),

then by extension,

E{mˆ y } = E{ y} # " ij! i! j .

The matrix representation is now:

"ˆ = 1 # ( xk ! mˆ )( xk ! mˆ )T = 1 {( xk ! m) ! (mˆ ! m)}{( xk ! m) ! (mˆ ! m)}T ,
N k =1
k =1
=1 (x ! mˆ )( xk ! mˆ )T !(mˆ ! m)(mˆ ! m)T .
N# k =1

Now that we have defined the matrix representation of covariance, we take the

E{!ˆ } = ! " E{(mˆ " m)(mˆ " m) T } = N " 1 ! .


The expected value of covariance is similarly a biased estimator. To eliminate the bias,
define the sample covariance matrix as:

#ˆ = 1 ( xk " mˆ )( xk " mˆ ) T ,
N " 1!
k =1

which is the unbiased estimator of system covariance.

Hypothesis Testing and Linear Transformations

When testing the hypothesis of the distribution of a sample measurement, one is

comparing the sample to two or more known classes. Given two classes or events,

there are four possible outcomes of the test:

• Accept Ho when in fact Ho is true.

• Accept Ho when in fact H1 is true.

• Reject Ho when in fact Ho is true.

• Reject Ho when in fact H1 is true.

Two of these conditions result in errors. A type I error is made when one rejects Ho,

when in fact Ho is true, which is a false alarm. A type II error is made when one

accepts Ho when in fact H1 true, which is a missed detection.

There is always a trade off between type I and type II errors, and ideally a system

would attempt to minimize both. One way to minimize these errors would be to make

the separation between the two distributions as large as possible, perhaps by using a

transformation. Given the probability laws, it will be shown that such a

transformation exists and that this transformation is optimal as per Bechhoefer.

The definition of a linear transformation of an n dimensional vector X into another n

dimensional vector Y; expressed as



mx=E{X}, my = E{Y} = ATE{X} = ATmx.

The covariance of this linear transformation will be, following standard rules for the
linear transformation of variance is:

Σy=E{[Y-my][Y-my]T} = ATE{[X-mx][X-mx]T}A = ATΣxA.

Given this, we will define a distance function as:

d y2 = (Y ! m y )T " !y1 (Y !m y ),
= ( X ! m x )T AA !1" !x1 ( AT ) !1 AT ( X ! m x ),
= ( X ! m x )T " !x1 ( X ! m x ),
= d x2 .

Note that distance is invariant under any non-singular linear transformation A. Now,
define a function Z = X-M, (e.g. a shift), so that d z2 ( z ) = Z T " !1 Z (this distance is the n
dimensional distance between two distributions). In order to minimize a type I error,
some Z is need to be found that maximizes the distance function, subject to the side

constraint that ZTZ = I. Using standard Lagrange multiplier to find the local extrema
(e.g. the maximum):

# {Z T " !1 Z ! µ ( Z T Z ! I )} = 2" !1 Z ! 2 µZ .

Setting to zero to find the extrema and solving for Z:

! "1 Z = µZ , or equivalently "Z = !Z where ! = 1 .


In order that a non-null Z exits, λ must be chosen to satisfy the determinant:

" ! #I = 0 . This is very significant - there exits a simple solution to this problem. λ

is the eigenvalue of X, and Σ is the corresponding eigenvector. If Σ is a symmetric n x

n matrix (e.g. a covariance matrix), there are n real eigenvalues (λ1…λn) and n real

eigenvectors φ1...φn. The eigenvectors corresponding to two different eigenvectors are

orthogonal. Therefore, one can rewrite the characteristic equation as:


subject to:

Φ Φ=Ι,

where Φ is an n x n matrix consisting of n eigenvectors and Λ is a diagonal matrix of

eigenvalues (e.g. the eigenvector matrix and eigenvalue matrix, respectively).

Given this, we will use Φ as the transformation matrix A, Y = Φ X, at which point

# y = " T # x " = ! . This is important in that Λ is diagonal (no cross correlation - the

variance of Y is now independent). This now allows the matrix to be broken down

into n separate equations: yi = "iT X so that, "iT X = "i X cos(! ) = X cos(! ) .

Theta is now the angle between the two vectors X and φi, and yi is the projection of X

onto φi. Practically speaking, this defines the principal components of the distribution

as a new, orthogonal coordinate system where the eigenvalues are the variance of the

transformed variables yi's.

Hypothesis Testing

The purpose of the parametric classification is to determine if a detected event on a

wire is a fault, such as a short or open. The event is composed of attributes, which are

represented as a vector of reflection coefficients. In the most basic terms, the

reflection coefficients are a random vector in which we desire to determine with class

of events it belongs. We are interested if the detected event is from the class of shorts,

opens, connectors, etc. While there may be any number of event classes, there is no

loss in specificity when developing the notation for two classes (consequently, it will be

show that for a n class problem, there are n-1 degrees of freedom).

We will define the random vector X as the reflection coefficients associated with a

detected event. We will set X to ω1 or ω2, such that:

q1 ( X ) <> q2 ( X ) .

The notation <> means that if ω1 is greater than choose set 2, or if ω2 is less than,

choose set 1. Additionally, define qi as the a posteriori probability of ωi given X, which

can be computed using Bayes theorem, as qi = PipI(X)/p(X), where p(X) is the mixed

density function. The decision rule, since p(X) is common is:

P1 p1 ( X ) <> P2 p 2 ( X ) .

Or as the likelihood function:

p1 ( X ) !1 P2
l( X ) = <> .
p 2 ( X ) ! 2 P1

The likelihood ration is the basic quantity in hypothesis testing. The value P2/P1 is the

threshold value. In many cases, it will be easier to calculate the minus log likelihood

ratio such that the decision rule becomes (e.g. now called the discriminate function):

h( X ) = " ln l( X ) = " ln p1 ( X ) + ln p 2 ( X ) <> ln .
!2 P2

It will be assumes that P1 = P2, so the threshold value is zero.

Given the decision rule and the optimal transformation, we will assume that pi(X), is

the reflection coefficients associated with event i, are normal with expected vectors Mi

and covariance matrix Σi . This can be done without loss of generality because any

non-normal distribution can be whitened with the appropriate power transform.

Given this, the decision rule becomes (see Fukinaga):

h( X ) = # ln l( X ),
1 1 1 " !1 P
= ( X # M 1 ) T "1#1 ( X # M 1 ) # ( X # M 2 ) T " #21 ( X # M 2 ) + ln 1 <> ln 2 .
2 2 2 " 2 ! 2 P1

Now, simultaneously diagonolize the coordinated shifted value by defining:

AT # 1 A = I , AT # 2 A = " and AT ( M 2 ! M 1 ) = L.

The information matrix of the classes under test, ("1!1 ! " !21 ) !1 is transformed to a

diagonal matrix Λ by A as:

# = AT [ A( I ! " !1 ) AT ]!1 A = ( I ! " !1 ) !1

Substituting into the discriminate function:

1 1 1 P
h( X ) = Y T #!1Y ! [(!" !1 L) T ]Y + [! LT " !1 L ! ln " ! ln 2 ] .
2 2 2 P1

For the wire events, the covariance of the event classes is approximately the same, so

that the log likelihood ratio test for classification becomes significantly easier. The new

model is now a linear vs. quadratic problem. The simplified model is now:

(M 2 # M 1 )T " #1 X + 1 2 (M 1T " #1 M 1 # M 2T " #1 M 2 )<>! ln P2 .


2 P1

Note we define the threshold as zero, because P2 = P1.

This is the parametric classifier. The classifier is run by testing the hypothesis, Ho , no

fault, vs. the n-1 alternative hypothesis that the event is a fault. The event with the

largest positive value is the most likely event. If all scores are less than zero, the Null

hypothesis is not rejected and there the detected event is not a fault.

The Software Engineering Process

Software engineering is the application of scientific principles to the orderly

transformation of a problem into a working software solution and the subsequent

maintenance of that software until the end of its useful life. Given this, there is a

primary path in the development process that should be accomplished prior to the first

line of code being written. Briefly, the process should entail the following (Davis).

Software Requirements

This includes analyzing the software problem at hand and concludes with a complete

specification of the desired external behavior of the software system to be built.

Others also call it the functional description, functional requirements and


The preliminary design decomposes the software system into its actual constituents

(architectural) components and then interactively decomposes those components until

the resulting design are small enough so that an individual can have a good conceptual

grasp of the function. In practice, this suggests functionality that will map into 50 to

200 lines of code. Each of these code modules is documented in terms of its inputs,

outputs and functions. This is followed by a detailed design, which defines and

documents algorithms for each module in the design that will be realized as code.

Once the detail design is complete, the design is transformed into a computer–

understandable language. This is usually performed in two steps: converting the

algorithms into a high level language (e.g. writing the algorithms into C), followed by

converting the high level language into machine language (e.g. compiling).

Following coding, the testing process in used to uncover and removes logical and

programming error. This is done in unit test. Unit tests purpose is to ensure that each

as-built module behaves according to its specification defined during detailed design.

On complete of unit test, the software undergoes integration testing. This ensures that

the set of modules behave as well when integrated as they did as independent tested

modules. Ideally, each integrated set of modules should correspond to a component in

the design tree defined during preliminary design. Thus, purpose of integration testing

is to ensure that each as-built component behaves according to its specification

defined during preliminary design.

System testing is then used to check that the entire, fully integrated software system

embedded in its actual hardware environment behaves according to the software

requirements specification. On completion of system test, the software is ready for

delivery, production and deployment. At this point, the software and hardware are

considered operations. Maintenance (continued detection and repair of bugs after

deployment) and enhancement (additional capability and functionality) complete the

full development life cycle of the product.

It is inappropriate to wait until the testing stage to determine how testing will be done.

System test planning assesses how the software will conform to the requirements. It

includes the development and documentation of test plans and procedures, and might

include the full-scale development of a test environment to run the actual system.

Another critical purpose of software system test planning is to thoroughly examine the

software requirements specification to determine if it is verifiable; that is, whether or

not it has been written in a manner that makes it possible to verify that the software

meets its content.

Additionally, an integration test plan is generated, which documents plans and

procedures to effect orderly system integration. This may include developing:

• Specification concerning the order of integration,

• Test data to be used to test sets of components,

• Provide feedback to project management concerning relative priorities to

apply during the detailed design, coding and unit test process in order to

optimize the integration testing activity.

This activity might spawn a software development effort of its own to create test

harness and scaffolding software (e.g. software used to test or temporarily join a

number of components together during integration testing that would be removed

before final system test).

In general, the cost of requirements is around five percent of the total development

effort. Preliminary design will account for fifteen percent of the time, while detailed

design, coding, and unit testing will take taking sixty-five percent. The remaining

fifteen percent of development time will be used by integration and system test. Given

that five percent of the development cost is tied up in requirements, why are

requirements done in the first place? Essentially, there is a great deal of empirical

evidence to support the hypothesis that: The later in the development life cycle that a software

error is detected, the more expensive it will be to repair.

In the early 1970s, three companies, GTE, TRW, and IBM performed independent

studies to determine the relative cost of repair for a software error. All three

companies were unaware of the studies being researched by the other two, but they all

reached roughly the same result. Basically, if one arbitrarily assigned a unit cost to the

effort of detecting and repairing an error during the coding stages, it was found that

the cost to detect and repair an error during the requirements stage was between a fifth

and tenth as much, and the cost to detect and repair an error during maintenance

phase was twenty times a much. All together, this implies a cost saving ratio of 200 to

1 for repairs between the requirements and maintenance (Davis).

Summary of Chapter 2

The reference material cited in Chapter 2 gives the background information needed to

conduct the research of wire diagnostics. Essentially, the laws governing the behavior

of circuits were reviewed so that a transmission line theory could be developed and

understood. A description and model of the inverse scattering problem was

developed. Together, the transmission line models and inverse scattering models allow

the development of the behavior of an electrical pulse on a transmission line model.

The determination of what type of detected event is made using statistical processes.

A review of basic statistics and statistical pattern recognition now allows the complete

evolution of a wire diagnostic system.

Chapter 3: Methodology

The study methodology combines the Historical/Case Study Method to gather user

preferences and desires for a wire diagnostics system, with the Experimental Method

to design and build the hardware, software, and algorithms for such a product. A

review of literature provides background of the need for wire diagnostics of aging

aircraft, and an evaluation of the current state of the technology. Interviews with

potential customers were then conducted to determine user preferences and

performance requirements. The research then evaluates potential market

discriminators to successfully enter the market. Finally, a system-level design is

presented that provides hardware design for major components, software

considerations for the management of information and algorithmic development for

the analysis and diagnostics to identify potential wire faults.

Describe the Approach

As an entry point into the study, an extensive literature review was conducted into

wiring problems. A number of articles released by the FAA and NASA (Hall, et al)

indicated the need for improved maintenance practices addressing wire and the wire in

aging aircraft. Additionally, the Review of Federal Programs for Wire System Safety

(Lane, 2000) gives a listing of all interagency research into wire and wire related issues.

From this, a basic knowledge of the problem scope was developed, to include the

commercial and governmental organizations in the process of research/development

of wire test systems.

Potential customers were selected and then interviewed to determine their individual

wire needs. Goodrich has a number of relationships with various air carriers (such as

American Airlines) for the purpose of developing new products.

A search of the exiting products was then conducted. This included evaluation of the

commercial product specification from companies such as Riser Bond Instrument,

Bicotest Ltd, and Eclipse. High-end test equipment, such as the Tektronix TDS 8000

was rented to evaluate the upper limits of performance available from a TDR system.

While in the process of evaluating the TDS 8000, a number of test data files where

compiled on various wire and cable types. Tests were conducted with different lengths

of cable, connectors, and fault types. These files where saved for model and algorithm

development. Algorithms were prototyped in Matlab© and later implemented in C++

using the Microsoft Visual C++, with the target platform being the Windows CE

operating system.

Hardware prototypes where first modeled in SpiceNet using ICAPS/4 RF modeling

tool from Intusoft. Once modeling was finished, the hardware was build on a

breadboard using Metelics MMD 830-E28X Step Recovery Diodes and MHS-40,02-

G2sX Hybrid Schotkey high conductance diodes. Performance measure of the pulse

shaping circuit where made by a Tektronix TDS 7404, 4Ghz bandwidth, 20 Gs/s

oscilloscope with a P74240 4.0 Ghz test probe. The test probe had a capacitance of

1.0pf and a resistance of 20K Ohms. For the prototype hardware, the oscilloscope

was a PC Compatible ISA oscilloscope board with a 2.5GHz bandwidth.

Database of Study

The research is primarily concerned with diagnosing wire associated with fuel tank

harnesses. Goodrich Fuels and Utility Systems builds a number of fuel systems found

on commercial aircraft (such as the Boeing 727, 737, 747, 767, 777 models, Airbus 340,

and a number of other aircraft) and military aircraft (such as the F-16, B-1B, B-2, etc.).

As such, the research made available a number of wire times and harnesses to

experiment with.

For the initial test, coaxial cable such as RG-58 and ECO 185059D were used. ECO

185059D is a coaxial cable use in the C-130 fuel system. It has a characteristic

impedance of 46 Ohms, a capacitance of 31 uF/ft., a velocity of propagation of .71c,

and an inner conductor diameter of .032 inches (32 AWG). This is an ideal wire to test

as it has closely matched impedance to the nominal 50 Ohms cable used as the test


For single-core wire, the researcher experimented with a tank harness removed from

the wing tank of a Boeing 727. This tank wire was particularly difficult to test and

represents worst case, as the wire has a characteristic impedance of 67 Ohms (a large

fraction of the test energy is reflected away from the wire), is old and has numerous

faults. Additionally, these tank wires are not shielded and are not mounted within a

harness, per say. This wire type is run along aluminum stringers and frames,

periodically held in place with a clamp, to the tank probe. Any time the wire runs close

to another conductor, such as a frame or spar, there is a change in impedance due to

capacitive inductance.

Tank harnesses are not terminated in a large resistive load, which would be typical of a

switch or load coil. The fuel system estimates the quantity of fuel by measuring the

capacitance of the fuel probe, which is dependent on the height of the fuel. Thus, the

termination acts as a capacitive short. Typical capacitive loads associated with a fuel

probe are on the order of 120 pf. To simulate the proper termination, the tank

harness was mounted on a 2 ft by 5 ft board, on which terminal blocks where added.

Capacitors of 110 pf to 140 pf were used to represent the fuel probe.

A number of data files were generated from various experiments. These flat files were

composed of time and voltage measurements. A Tektronix TDS-8000 was used,

which samples 500 points with selected time scales form 2 ps to 1 microsecond.

Experiments were typically run at a sample rate of 2 x 10-10 seconds. Data from the

oscilloscope board had a sample rate of 2.5 GHz, or 4 x 10-10 seconds. For a sample

length of 1024, this gives a maximum test range of approximately 140 feet.

Comment on Validity of Data

The historical/case study approach will always be open to some amount of

interpretation. The researchers bias cannot but color his appraisal of user

specification, wants and desires. Additionally, the researchers evaluation of the current

market and product offers from other commercial vendors will be tainted by his

experiences and preferences. However, part of being a system engineer is attempting

to be impartial and judge, as best as possible, what is practicable to implement based

on a balance of technologies, capabilities, and cost.

The market for aviation wire diagnostics, being relatively new, has no metrics to

evaluate the cost or benefit to a customer. Thus, while the cost of design and

production can be quantified, it is difficult to establish the benefit to the customer, and

therefore, a sales price. Since this is a new product with few entrants, the customer in

many cases does not know what the tool should do, how to appropriately use it, or

even if it is useful. While there is a tacit desire in the aviation community to address

the wire maintenance, no explicit methodology or solutions have been proposed.

The research, based on experience in condition-based maintenance practices of

mechanical systems, is extending this paradigm to wire systems. Many of the same

maintenance issues apply, and as such, the validity of the model should be similar. The

assumptions, based on user tacit knowledge and combined with prior experience in the

art of maintenance, give as much validity as can reasonably be hoped.

In terms of the physical aspect of the engineered product, it is simply a matter of

testing to prove the validity. The removal of inverse scattering artifacts can be tested

for, visually, by comparing the processed to raw waveforms. The model assumptions

for attenuation will be tested against physical cable, with measurements being taken

with the Tektronix TDS 8000 or Tektronix TDS 7404 oscilloscope. The frequency

response of a cable at various lengths will be compared to the attenuation model to

explicitly evaluate the performance.

Fault detection will be evaluated by using seeded faults on a test cable (such as

connectors, opens, shorts, cuts, capacitive shorts). Additionally, the detection

algorithms will be run on real-world harnesses. Many of the test data points will be

generated and tested in support of customer demonstrations. The product could

potentially be used on a wet tank (e.g. tank with fuel or fuel vapors in it), which will

require the validity of the data to be scrutinized by a third-party test engineer.

Comment of Originality and Limitation of Data

While TDR is not a new test procedure, it is believed that the system design approach

to wire diagnostics is novel. The development of the hardware is based on public

domain application notes, yet the design is original because it supports a specification

developed for the aircraft environment.

While the inverse scattering phenomena, has been solved, it has not been integrated

into a wire diagnostics tool. The research developed an Inverse Scattering

functionality to support the larger system question of making the measured waveform

as free from environmental effects as possible.

The researchers approach of using length-varying filtering to control attenuation and

dispersion effects, is new. The filter is a convolution matrix where the filter

coefficients are a function of the inverse attenuation of the signal. This filter applies

the gain and signal compression that corrects the dispersion of the TDR pulse, due to

the skin effect attenuation in the wire. While adaptive filters are a known technology –

this is the first application of a distance varying filter, to the researchers knowledge.

Statistical pattern recognition is a field of study that is in the process of maturing. The

use of statistical pattern recognition appears to be new to fault identification in wire

diagnostics. Fault detection based on statistical threshold, again, is new. Basically, no

commercial wire test product incorporates automatic cable equalization, fault

detection, and identification. Currently, all commercial products require maintainer

interpretation of the waveform.

Most significantly, the use of condition-based maintenance paradigms to manage

waveform data and track wire condition over time, is new. The functionality is

technically available, even if one stores the data on a text flat file. But, to actively

manage and automate the warehousing of data, is new.

Summary of Chapter 3

This chapter briefly reviews the methodologies, materials, and validity of the wire

diagnostics study. After review of literature, interviews with potential customers, the

research developed the functional requirements for a wire diagnostics test set.

Commercially available hardware (Tektronix oscilloscopes) and parts were used to

build a breadboard for test and evaluation, while Matlab® was used to prototype the


Software was then developed using Microsoft CE, based on function requirements and

software requirements. A prototype system was developed which was testing against

seed fault data. The test wire used was commercial aviation cable used for fuel


Certain aspects of the study, individually, are not new. The significance of the study is

that through the integrations of a number of technologies, a new system approach was

developed to make a unique and innovative product.

Chapter 4: Data Analysis

This is the compilation of experimental results, analysis, and design of the wire

diagnostics tool. Initial requirements were built from customer interviews, followed by

modeling, analysis, and hypothesis testing. Finally, system requirements were

developed and implemented.

Customer Requirements

A number of potential customers were contacted for requirement generations. Since

the intent was for a commercial product, interactions with potential customers were

used to gage the difficulty of the wire problem and establish what the user would want

in a product.

American Airlines (AA)

A technical review of the wire diagnostics development effort was held with AA

depot-level maintenance executives on May 8th, 2002. AA confirmed that there are

potential airline applications and expressed an interest in the technology. Additionally,

AA agreed to support development work with maintenance data.

Generally, there was an acknowledgement of the need for a wire diagnostics

maintenance system. It was agreed that once a prototype unit has been built, AA

would be willing to test the unit at its depot facility.

Naval Air Systems Command

Project engineers with the Science and Technology group, Wiring System Branch,

Naval Air System Command were briefed on the development of a wire diagnostics

system on May 20th, 2002. This group has been one of the major initiators of research

and development in aging aircraft. One of their primary concerns is wiring and

methods to detect wire faults. The Wiring Systems Branch had recently awarded a

contract for a wire diagnostics device to CM Technologies, and voiced the need for a

maintenance tool. It became apparent that Goodrich was a latecomer to the

development of a commercial product. However, the group noted that if Goodrich

subsequently developed a system, they would be willing to evaluate its operations. Of

particular interest to this group was the need to test a multi-wire harness. It was noted

that no commercial product has been offered to test an entire harness, where the

return path of the wire under test was unknown.

Naval Sea System Command (NAVSEA)

Representatives of the NAVSEA in Portsmouth Naval Shipyard where interviewed for

insight into non-aviation related maintenance of wiring. NAVSEA noted that a

number of industrial application exist. One of particular of interest was a large, heavy

lift crane. NAVSEA stated that large industrial cranes have a number of electrical

contacts and wire harnesses that must be working in order for the crane to operate.

When a crane fails, it may require a maintainer to work in some very awkward

positions (300 feet up on a boom, for example). For this reason, whatever test

equipment is used must be compact and easy to move.

General Maintainer Comments

All the potential customers acknowledged that aging wire is a serious problem. For

aviation application, there will be a need for a wire diagnostics system that can test a

number of wires within a harness. To successfully do this, the system must be able to

automatically find a return path for the wire under-test. A test unit should be portable

in order to easy maintenance in difficult to reach places.

The Attenuation Model

As noted, the TDR signal is a step-pulse with a short rise-time. This equates to a high

frequency component within the TDR signal, which due to the properties of the

transmission line, is attenuated and dispersed in time. In order to correct for this

behavior, an inverse filter is required that is matched to the transmission line transfer

function for a given frequency and length.

The attenuation was modeled as an exponential function of wire core diameter,

frequency, characteristic impedances, and length:

!( R ( f ) )
Zo X
A( f , Z o , X ) = e ,


R(f) = K/(r) (f).5.

To validate this model, the frequency response of the RG 58 coaxial cable and ECO

185059D coaxial cable (a 30 Ohm wire used on the C-130) was estimated and

compared to the analytical model.

Estimation of a Wire Transfer Function

The transfer function for any system is completely characterized by its impulse

response (Oppenheim and Schafer). This is difficult to realize, as an impulse is derived

from a Dirac function – a perfect impulse. However, the TDR system generates a step

response, from which an impulse response can be calculated by taking the derivative

with respect to time. This numerical estimation will be close to the actual impulse

response, if both the sampling rate and step generator rise-time is a small fraction of

the circuit time constant, RC. The Tektronix TDS-8000 oscilloscope was set up to

generate pulse with rise-time and sampling rate of 2 x 10-10. The wire under-test had a

characteristic impedance of 46 Ohms with 85 x 10-8 F capacitance per meter. This

suggests that any measurement made over 1 meter satisfies the time constant


The model of the transfer function is a finite impulse response (FIR) filter. This

model was chosen instead of the infinite impulse response (IIR) filter, because when

there is no change in impedance, the wire is purely feed forward. This means that the

filter order of the A coefficients is 1 (e.g. A(eiw) = 1). The filter order for the B

coefficients was set at 50. This value was used because, for wire lengths of less than

300 feet, the dispersion of the signal will not exceed 10-9 seconds (or about 25

samples). Additionally, as will be shown, computational time becomes an issue with

larger order filters. Note: the transfer function is the ratio of the difference equations


H(eiw) = B(eiw)/A(eiw).

Since the filter is an FIR filter with A(eiw) = 1, the transfer function:

H(eiw) = B(eiw).

As noted earlier, the transfer is completely described by the impulse response.

Additionally, the time domain impulse response is the time difference of the step

response (e.g. the derivative with respect to time). The best estimator of the transfer

function H(eiw) will then be the Fourier transform of the impulse response,

H(eiw) = FFT(b).

The transfer function, in the Fourier domain, is the frequency response of the wire for

a given distance and characteristic impedance. The transfer function frequency ranges

from 0 to π radian, where π is the Nyquest frequency (half the sampling rate). Given

the sampling rate of 2 x 10-10, the Nyquest frequency is 109 Hz.

Example Wire Attenuation

The step function of a RG58 coaxial cable was taken using a 200 ps rise-time pulse of

0.25 volts. The length of the cable was 5 meters, with a 1-meter test harness. The

impulse response was calculated by taking the difference between successive time

samples, which is a numerical estimate of the derivative, with respect to time.

Figure 5 Example RG58 Step and Impulse Response

In order for the frequency response to be estimated from impulse response b, the

coefficients must be calculated from the unit step. The step function used for the

measurement was a voltage step of 0.25 volts, which must be scaled appropriately such

that it is a unit (e.g. 1 volt) response. This requires the minimum voltage (0.25) be

subtracted from the waveform, then the resulting waveform be divided by the

maximum value of the waveform:

Vm(t) = V(t) – min(V(t)),

Vs(t) = Vm(t)/max(Vm(t)).

The derivative is now:

dVs(t) = Vs(t-1)- Vs(t) for t = 2:end.

The frequency response can now be estimated from the Fourier transform of dVs, and

can now be compared to the model frequency response.

Figure 6 Empirical vs. Attenuation Model

The modeled transfer function is a surprising good match with the empirically

calculated transfer function. In general, the modeling error is less than five percent.

This was observed at a number of different length wires (0.25 to 5 meter RG48, and

0.25 to 4.5 meter 30 Ohm coax). Since the attenuation model is based on Maxwell

equations, error could be attributed to the test measurement or set up. For example,

the test connection is a BNC connector, with could add additional dispersion to the

signal. For the purposes of the study, it will be assumed that the error introduced in

model is acceptable.

The Purpose of Modeling the Wire Transfer Function

The transfer function of a wire acts to attenuate the high frequency component of the

pulse, as shown (see figure 6.). This is in fact a low pass filter. The effect of the filter

is to cause dispersion or stretching of the step function. This has two deleterious

effects on a wire diagnostics system.

First, any system must be able to detect an event. Since the attenuation is both a

function of wire length and frequency, as the length of the wire increases, the

attenuation of the high frequency components increases. Recall that any change in

characteristic impedance causes a change in the reflected voltage. The magnitude of

the change in voltage is governed by the change in inductance or capacitance,

following the second order differential equation (see The Series RLC circuit). The

RLC circuit-step response, and the corresponding reflected voltage, is driven by dv/dt.

Thus, as the length of the cable increases, with the corresponding increase in step

response time (with a corresponding decrease in dv/dt), the system becomes less

sensitive to events. That is to say, the change in characteristic impedance, due to a

fault or connector, needs to become larger relative to the system noise, in order to be

detected. However, if some methodology were devised to correct for the attenuation,

then the probability of detection of an event could be constant for each point on the


Second, any detected event must be classified as a type of event, such as connector,

noisy wire, or a fault. The method of event classification is based on a statistical type

of pattern recognition. Patten recognition requires a prototype event for comparison

to the detected event. Without some method of equalization, the pattern classifier

would need a different set of a priori prototype for different lengths of wire. This

simply is not practical. Instead, based on the model of attenuation, some method is

needed that take into account the wire length at a particular measurement, and applies

the correct amount of gain for each frequency to “neutralize” the attenuation.

The Inverse System

For an linear, time-invariant system with a given transfer function H(eiw), the

corresponding inverse system is defined to be the transfer function Hi(eiw) such that if it

is cascaded with H(eiw), the overall transfer function is unity:

H(eiw) Hi(eiw) = 1.

This implies that the frequency response of the inverse system, if it exist, is

Hi(eiw) = 1/H(eiw).

Equivalently, the log magnitude, phase, and group delay of the inverse system are

negatives of the corresponding functions for the original transfer function. Not all

systems have an inverse, such as the ideal low pass filter. However, since there is high

frequency content in any wire, the inverse system does exist for the wire transfer


The time-domain equivalent for the above transfer function is:

h[n]*hi[n] = δ[n].

This states that the convolution of the wire transfer function with the inverse wire

transfer function is the unit impulse. This means that the inverse wire transfer

function, when convolved with the TDR waveform, will correct for the high-

frequency attenuation. The calculation of the time-domain inverse wire transfer

function can now be calculated:

hi[n] = IFFT(Hi(eiw)) = IFFT(1/H(eiw)).

This allows an algorithmic approach to normalize the effects of attenuation on any

wire, for any length, simply by taking the real part of the inverse FFT of the inverse of

the attenuation model.

Example of Wire Normalization

Given the step function and derived impulse response of the RG58 coaxial cable, the

derived method for normalization will be tested. The attenuation model generates a

modest error term, typically less than 5%, which will not significantly affect the results.

The time-domain inverse system, hi[n], is calculated by taking the inverse Fourier

transform of the one over the attenuation. The attenuation model, in the frequency

domain, generates 512 evenly spaced points from zero to 1 GHz.

Figure 7 Example of Wire Normalization

Most of the information in the time-domain is in the first few points, and since the

convolution operator is an order n2 operation, only the first 50 points are used. The

convolution of the inverse system with the RG58 impulse and step response should

result in the unit impulse response δ[n], and the unit step response. Note that the

error does results in some mismatch. However, a significant portion of the high

frequency content is restored, with the result being that the normalized impulse

response is very close to ideal, while the original response has less than ½ the energy

content, in this example.

Length Varying Filter

The calculation of a normalization filter was shown to be effective in correcting for the

attenuation in the step signal at a specific wire length. This suggests that the filter must

be applied to each distinct sampled point on the wire. For example, sampling at 2

GHz means that at there is a voltage measurement taking each 2 inches on the wire.

For equalization modeling to be effective, new filter coefficients needs to be calculated

at each measured point. Normal filtering, such as convolution in FIR filters, does not

apply. Instead, a tool used to explain convolution as a matrix operation, can be

modified to satisfy the length varying coefficients.

The operation of convolving two finite-length signals (e.g. the waveform and the time

domain representation of the filter coefficients) can be represented as a matrix-vector

product involving a circulant matrix, which is a special case of a Toeplitx matrix

(McClellan et. al.). Interpretation of the convolution sum in this way leads to the

convolution matrix. The convolution matrix is a rectangular (N x p) Toeplitz matrix

whose first row are all zeros except for the first element, and whose first column has

zeros in the last p-1 elements. The first p elements are the filter coefficients, b:

&b 0 0 0#
$0 b 0 0!!
H =$
$0 0 b 0!
$ !
%0 0 0 b"

The convolution of the waveform x[n] and h[n] can be done by making one of the

signals the non-zero part of the first column, and the other signal be a vector the

multiplies the convolution matrix:

y = Hx.

In the length-varying filter, the filter coefficients, b, are defined for each measured

point on the wire (as per the attenuation model). Thus, each column of H is the gain

filter for the length-measured index i for n measure point, resulting in the following

convolution matrix:

&b1 0 . . 0#
$0 b 0 !!
$ 2

H =$. . .!
$ !
$. . .!
$% 0 0 . . bn !"

The concept of this convolution matrix allows the correct filter to be applied to each

measured point, resulting in true wire equalization. Again, the point of equalization is

to increase the signal to noise, which improve fault detection. Additionally, this allows

one library of faults to be used for parametric analysis.

Implementation of the Inverse Scattering Algorithm

Earlier, the Upward and Downward evolution equation:

& D(id ', t )# &d # & D[(i ' 1)d +, t ]#

$U (id ', t ) ! = $ d !" $%U [(i ' 1)d +, t ]!"
% " %

was developed to model the effects of multiple reflections. Additionally, the equation

that describes how the p ,w waves change as they pass through a discontinuity between

Zi-1 and Zi was developed:

& D(id +, t )# '1 & w(id ', t ) #

$U (id +, t ) ! = H i H i'1 $ p(id ', t ) ! .
% " % "

Now, instead of constructing difference schemes in terms of p and w, a substitution

will be made, as it is more convenient to use the down and up combination D, U.

Because D(ς,t), U(ς,t) are discontinuous at ς = id, a notation which distinguishes

between values at ς = id- and ς = id+ is now described. Specifically,

D(id+,jd) = Di,j, U(id+,jd) = Ui,j,

D(id-,jd) = Di-1,j-1, U(id-,jd) = Ui-1,j-1,

Combining the evolution and discontinuity equations gives:

& Di , j # 1 & 1 ' ( i # & Di '1, j '1 #

$U ! = $ $ !.
% i , j " ) i %( i 1 !" %U i '1, j +1 "

It is assumed that (w0,2j, p0,2j)N measurements are known. The causal condition now


U0,0 = ½(η0w0,0 - η0-1p0,0),

So that

Z0 = η02 = p0,0/w0,0.

With Z0 known, one can compute:

& D0, 2 j # 1 &(0 (0'1 # & w0, 2 j #

$U ! = $ !$ !
% 0, 2 j " 2 %(0 ' (0'1 " % p0, 2 j "

With the causal condition that Ui,I = 0, all that is required is to compute the γ’s is:

γI = Ui-1,i+1/Di-1,i-1.

This relationship, with the evolution equations, allows the development of the Layer

Peeling Algorithm. The listing that follows is a Matlab© implementation (Note that

Matlab© is a 1 vs. 0 based indexing).

Define the following:

Vref: Reflected Voltage

Vmes: Measured Voltage
Vin: Incident Voltage

N = length(Vmes);
Vref = Vmes-Vin; %This is a vector assignment
Z(1) = Zo; %Initialize Based on Wire Characteristic Impedance
Zr(1) = Zo;
L = N*2+2;
D = zeros(L,L); %Initialize the Upward and Downward Wave Matrix
U = zeros(L,L);

D(1,1:2:L) = Vin; %Downward Wave Is the Incident Voltage

U(1,1:2:N*2) = Vref; %While the Upward Wave is the Reflected Voltage
EN = N*2-1;
for i = 1:N,
ii = i+1;
(ii) = U(i,i+2)/D(i,i);
(ii) = (1- (ii)2)1/2 ;

for j = i:EN,
jj = j+1;
D(ii,jj) = (D(i,j) - (ii)*U(i,j+2))/ (ii);
U(ii,jj) = (- (ii)*D(i,j) + U(i,j+2))/ (ii);
for i = 1:N,
Z(i+1) = Z(i)*(1+ (i))/(1- (i));
Zr(i+1) = Zo*(Vin+Vref(i))/(Vin-Vref(i));
Vref(i) = (Z(i+1)-Zo)/(Zo+Z(i+1))*Vin + Vin;

The output of the calculation is the true impedance Z and the true reflected voltage,

Event Detection

Once the wire has been equalized for attenuation loss in the rise-time of the step

function, and after the multiple reflections have been removed, events need to be

detected in order to classify them. An event is any change in characteristic impedance.

This can be a: connector, cut, nick, crimp, damage to the insulation due to age, or

coupling with structure or other wires.

An event, once identified, will be passed to the classifier to identify the type of event.

Thus, the issue is to balance probability of detection with the probability of false alarm.

It must be noted that no system will have perfect detection; the objective of detection

should then be to have as low a probability of false alarm, all the while maintaining an

acceptable probability of detection.

There are a number of issues that need to be resolved for successful event detection.

First, the wire has noise resulting from electromagnetic interference. This, coupled

with the Analog to Digital conversion (for example, the A/D converter might only

have 10 bits, giving rise to 1024 distinct measured voltages), will lead to sampling

noise. Secondly, the wire itself is not perfectly loss less, which means that the

measured voltage will fall slightly with length. Third, when testing a wire, the

characteristic impedance may not be a nominal 50 Ohms. Finally, the termination is

not typically known.

Thus, simply assigning voltage thresholds will not adequately distinguish between wire

properties (such as low or high characteristic impedance) and true events, such as

connectors or a cut. Two methods where developed to for successful event detection.

First, the derivative dv/dt, must be taken. Taking the time difference of the voltage

waveform gives:

dv[i] = v[i-1] – v[i].

This removes the effect of wire loss and changes in characteristic impedance due to

coupling. Since these events results in small changes in voltage vs. time, the derivative

is approximately zero. Secondly, a good threshold must be established such that when

the absolute value of the waveform derivative exceeds this, an event is detected.

A threshold can be established by calculating the standard deviation of the waveform

derivative on a portion of the waveform free from defects.

The wire under-test is connected to the test set via a test harness. The test harness is a

nominal 50-Ohm coaxial cable with known length, which is perfectly suited for

generating the threshold statistics. The threshold statistic is three times the standard

deviation of the test harness waveform derivative, which gives a false alarm rate of

.002, or 2 in 1000 events. An event is then defined by any waveform absolute value

that exceeds this threshold statistic. This is not the absolute false alarm rate, as the true

rate is also a function of the classification engine and will typically be less (e.g. less than

2 in 1000). Note that within classification engine that was used, the null hypothesis is

that the wire is noisy. In this case, the event is not reported. Finally, the waveform is

converted to reflection coefficients.

Converting from Voltage to Reflection Coefficients

Reflection coefficients are the ratio of incident voltage to reflected voltage. However,

there are some subtleties that must be taken into account in this simple conversion.

Foremost, if the wire under-test is not 50 Ohms, then the incident voltage will not be

the typical value of one half the step voltage. It would be possible to calculate the

incident voltage if the wire characteristic impedance was known, but this is one of the

parameters that is being tested. Instead of using incident voltage, settled voltage is

used. Settled voltage is the incident voltage normalized for changes in characteristic

impedance and is:

ZWire /50 Ohm* Vincident = VSettled

The settled voltage is the voltage after the test harness, but prior to the end of the wire

under-test. Note, that in most cases the termination of a wire under-test is either high

impedance (voltage goes to the step voltage and the reflection coefficient goes to 1), or

the wire is shorted (impedance and voltage goes to zero and the reflection coefficients

goes to –1). This is an issue since the end of the wire is not known, which makes it

difficult to measure settled voltage.

In order to estimate the end of the wire, two heuristic procedures were developed.

Since it is rare that a wire will have a matched impedance termination, the maximum

absolute difference is taken between the incident voltage and the waveform. Since the

waveform is generally in either of two states, open or shorted, the index of the

maximum difference will be close to wire termination. To refine this termination

distance, the index of the maximum derivative just prior to this point is chosen to be

the best estimate of the wire termination.

Now that a wire termination has been identified, the settled voltage is estimated by

taking the median of the voltage waveform between the start of the wire under-test to

estimated wire termination. The median is used because there may be faults or other

events that could bias the results. The median is less susceptible to outliers and other

error (such as an incorrect termination point) than the mean. With the settled voltage

calculated, the reflection coefficients for the waveform is calculated:

= Vmeasured/Vsettled,

and the characteristic impedance of the wire is estimated as:

Zwire = 50 Ohms x Vmeasured/(2Vsettled - Vmeasured).

Event Classification

Once the events have been detected on the wire, those events must be classified. The

statistical pattern recognition algorithm takes an event, and sequentially tests the event

against the null hypothesis. The null hypothesis is an event with reflection coefficient,

, of zero (e.g. a normal wire). The alternative hypotheses are those events listed in a

notional library, which represent the total potential set of events that would be

detected. The event type that is selected is the event with the maximum score of the

sequentially tested hypothesis. This will be the maximum likely fault type.

There is only one notional library, which requires that the waveforms be normalized,

corrected for multiple reflections, and converted to reflection coefficients using the

settled voltage. This allows wires of different characteristic impedances to be tested

against only one notional library.

The use of settled voltage is critical in order to have only one notional library. For

example, if the incident voltage were used instead of the settled voltage, a 30-Ohm

characteristic impedance wire would have a reflection coefficient of - .2. Any event

detected on this wire would, without using the settled voltage, be interpreted as a


The libraries consist of a set of potential events, such as connectors, terminations, and

faults. The faults fall under two categories: Inductive faults and capacitive faults.

Inductive faults relate to damage to the insulation due to cuts, nicks and breaks. They

are called inductive faults because the local wire inductance is larger than the nominal

wire, resulting in an increase in characteristic impedance. The capacitive faults relate to

damage characteristic of crimps or bends in a wire, where the insulation is “thinned”

and the local capacitance increases. This causes a drop in the wire characteristic


Terminations fall under four basic categories: open, short, inductive short and

capacitive short. An open termination could reflect a switch, high impedance load, or

cut in the wire. A short reflects a termination to ground and is immediately

characterized as a fault. Inductive shorts and capacitive shorts could reflect various

hardware terminations, such as a fuel probe and can be used for fault classification.

For example, for a wire supplying a fuel probe, any termination other than a capacitive

short would be a fault. These fault classification would be part of an a priori library

built to support the maintenance process.

Building the Notional Library

The notional library represents sets of event types that would be encountered in that

wire type. Ideally, one would over time sample a number of wires types and annotate

the associated event with each measurement. For example, the set of measurements

would include normal and faulted wires. The faults would be classified by severity and

type (e.g. termination types, connectors, etc.). From these identified types, mean

values and covariance would be calculated. This would then become the notional


In practice, since faults are relatively rare, modeling tools such as SPICE could be used

to build different fault types, and statistics could be taken from these. For

development purposes, this was done, and the following non-fault events were used:

Line, Connector Type 1, Connector Type 2 and Connector Type 3. Five fault events

where developed: Short Type 1, Short Type 2, Inductive Fault Type 1, Inductive Fault

Type 2 and Capacitive Fault Type 1. Four termination events where developed: Open

1, Open 2, Capacitive Short, and Inductive Short. See Figure 8 for the notional rho

( ) values that where used for these event types.

Figure 8 Library of Event Types

Wire Diagnostics Functional Specifications

Based on the maintainer input and the research completed, a Wire Diagnostic Rapid

Prototype (WDRP) system function specification was developed. The purpose of the

WDRP is to build a user-friendly device to test the condition of a cable or wire. The

test set is based on Time Domain Reflectometry (TDR) technology, where changes in

the wire characteristic impedance are measured as reflection from a fast rise-time

electrical pulse. The sign and shape of the reflection are indicative of opens, shorts,

connectors and various types of faults. The location of reflections are calculated from

the time delay, which is converted to wire length based on the velocity of propagation.

Algorithms within the application will interpret and display pertinent information to

the user and interface with an electronic maintenance manual to expedite maintenance


General Design Goals and Overview

General design goals of the WDRP are:

• The WDRP design shall be easily adaptable to work with multiple airframe

types and models.

• The WDRP functional design shall be configurable (e.g. data configuration


• The WDRP functional design shall allow for easy adaptation to newly designed

airframes and other aircraft types.

• The WDRP functional design shall integrate with existing Interactive

Electronic Technical Manual (IETM) maintenance database applications.

• The WDRP shall be designed to maximize expansion capability without

compromising cost or reliability.

The WDRP has six basic functionalities based on the wire characteristic:

• Add a new wire type (e.g. a learn mode),

• Edit a current wire type,

• Test a current wire,

• View test results and wire waveform.

• Interaction with IETM database to display location of fault and corrective


• Call an intelligent system, which consist of the algorithms for wire diagnostics.

Subsystem Requirements: Wire Test Characteristics

When condition based maintenance techniques are applied to a new wire or cable, each

wire in the cable has a number of characteristics that are integral to evaluating the wire

condition. The wire has these characteristics:

• Date of configuration,

• Wire definitions:

o User defined name,

o System identification of the wire or cable (e.g. aircraft side number),

o Cable name and part identifier,

o Which sub-part within the cable (e.g. wire pair a. and ah., for example),

o The type of wire (e.g. coaxial, twisted pair, single core, etc.). Note: for

a twisted pair, the return path should be just the same as the forward

path. The tool should keep track of twisted pair return path, such that

when the return path is loaded, the user does not have to re-enter

configuration data.

• Characteristics - Can be calculated from collected data or entered:

o Velocity of Propagation (VOP),

o Characteristic impedance (Ω)

o Inductance per unit length,

o Capacitance per unit length,

o Termination.

• Wire definitions which could have default values or maintainer entered values;

o Test voltage (device should allow use to set hardware voltage),

o Number of samples (e.g. the test is performed n number of times and

the results averaged),

o System noise (the standard deviation of the voltage in the wire under-


• State, both baseline and test result characteristics.

The state of the wire is the lengths and event of the wire at the time of the test and the

raw waveform data. A wire has a total length and relative length between n number of


An event is something that is detected, be it the end of the wire, a connector, a tap, or

a fault (e.g. open, short, abrasion, or crimp). Configuration consists of the baseline

state, and each subsequent state (total length, the number and type of events and the

length of wire between events). A fault is either a change in state (e.g. lengths, open,

short, termination) or identified parametrically as an abrasion, cut, or crimp.

Low Level Information

The application shall have the following functionality:

• Add a new test,

• Edit test,

• View test,

• Set test to baseline,

• Compare test to baseline,

• Save results of test,

• And Search the database for a test.

New Wire Test

When a new wire is entered for test, information must be taken so that the wire can be

uniquely identified, such as the system, harness, wire within the harness, type of wire

(e.g. twisted pair) and test voltage (default test voltage to 1 v.). VOP, characteristic

impedance, inductance, capacitance, terminations and lengths/events are not required

to be entered by the maintainer as this information can be determined from the test.

The results of the test definition can be saved as Baseline data, or saved as the current

state of the wire or discarded.

Edit A Current Wire Test

The user may need to edit a selected wire, such a changing the name and saving at a

different wire. Additionally, the user may wish to update the VOP, changing the type

from coaxial to twisted pair, etc. This function would be used to allow a wire to be

replicated, which may be useful in populating a harness.

Run the Current Wire Test

The user's primary interest is in testing a wire. The user shall be able to test a wire and

save the results (e.g. making a new wire and learning it, then setting the baseline wire

state), or open a wire from the wire database, test and update the state of the wire.

The test consists of activating the step-pulse generator, sampling the wire n number of

times to reduce system noise (based on the total length of the wire), processing the raw

wave form data and displaying test results. The test result shall include:

• Interpretation of results, i.e. no fault or specific fault type.

• Graphical view of raw and processed waveform.

Specific faults will be:

• Change in lengths or change in termination (e.g. short, open, capacitance, etc.)

which are compared to the baseline state or:

• Parametric identification of abrasion/cut or crimp, which is calculated at time

of test.

The test results shall allow symbolic display and comparison to the baseline.

Intelligent Systems: Wire Diagnostic Algorithms

The WDRP has a number of algorithms to enable the maintainer to identify faults

within a wire. Functions include:

• Saved test data:

o Calculate the characteristic impedance, inductance and capacitance per

unit length,

o Calculate system noise,

• Algorithms that require coefficient/input data:

o Cable equalization (gain filtering to correct pulse dispersion and

compensate for frequency loss due to cable length),

o Parametric classification (decision algorithm to classify each event that

has been detected).

• Algorithms which process raw waveform data:

o Inverse scattering (to remove multiple reflection due to scattering at

impedance changes),

o Constant False Alarm Rate (CFAR) event detection,

o Estimate total length of wire and length to each event.

The cable equalization and the parametric classifier require configuration data

to support that functionality. Cable equalization consists of a number of gain

filters to match the wire transfer function at each discrete point in the wire (e.g.

a matrix of lengths and gains). The parametric classifier consist of m number

of tables, where each table is an event type, such as termination, open, short,

connectors, taps, and faults. Each table fault table has reflection coefficients

and covariance for that fault.

Characteristic Calculations

The characteristic calculation function estimates the capacitance, inductance, and

characteristic impedance of the wire under-test.

• Inputs

o Source voltage (from the test definition)

o Reflected voltage (calculated from return)

o Velocity of propagation (user entered or specified from configuration)

• Output

o Capacitance per unit length

o Inductance per unit length

o Characteristic impedance

Cable Equalization

The cable equalization function corrects attenuation and dispersion of the high-
frequency components in the TDR signal due to the length of the cable:

• Inputs

o Raw voltage waveform array

o Length of sampling interval (only selectable from configuration)

o Capacitance per unit length

o Inductance per unit length

• Output

o Equalized waveform array

Inverse Scattering

The inverse scattering algorithm calculates the true characteristic impedance.

• Inputs

o Initial characteristic impedance scalar,

o Equalized waveform array

• Output

o Corrected waveform array

Event Detection

The event detection algorithm returns an array of n indexes that indicate an event on

the wire that was not associated with process noise. The event detection algorithm is a

constant false alarm rate detection algorithm.

• Inputs

o Corrected waveform array

o Current process noise (default for first test)

o False alarm rate (from configuration)

• Outputs

o Array of index which map to detections on the wire under-test

o New estimate of process noise (updated current state)

Parametric Classifier

The parametric classifier takes in each detected event, and compares the event to a

library of faults and returns the best fitting fault identification. This is performed on

each event on the wire.

• Inputs

o Corrected waveform array

o Index of event

o Library of faults (m number of fault arrays of length n, m scalars)

• Output

o Fault ID at for a given index

Functional Requirements

These functional specifications are now used to design the applications. All functions

within the application must test back to the functional requirements. As noted earlier,

the function requirements allow software design to be more efficient. The efficiency

comes from identifying problems early in the design, instead of fixing software bugs or

application shortcomings after the application has been released.

Application Example

The wire diagnostics prototype application was designed based on a number of factors.

Maintainer input from the user community dictated a compact, portable form factor.

For this reason, a Pocket PC was chosen at the target platform. The Pocket PC has a

number of intrinsic functions that makes this a desirable platform. The Pocket PC has

a 400 MHz processor with 64 megabytes of RAM, which is sufficient processing


Another benefit of using the Pocket PC is that the Microsoft CE Visual C++

integrated development environment (IDE, now called the compiler) has a number of

support applications to speed development. The function specification requires some

database capability. The compiler has a native XML (extended markup language)

database that allows that all the wire characteristics to be stored with relative ease.

Additionally, the compiler has a number of standard visual components. This

simplifies the design of user interface to a simple matter of adding the visual

components the application form instead of object characteristic to the forces resource

file directly.

Finally, the Pocket PC and compiler have a number of built-in synchronizing

functions. This allows data taken by the Pocket PC test tool to be downloaded and

stored on a desktop computer for further analysis. Note, that one of the functional

requirements, along with storing detected events, was to store the raw waveform. This

allows historic waveforms to be tested for changes in events and characteristics over


The Pocket PC allows the use of a PCMCIA device. Initially, it was planned that the

step generator and analog to digital converter (together called the TDR card) would be

designed and packaged in the PCMCIA form factor. This would allow for a very

compact test tool. Early in the TDR card design, it was found that a company, CM

Technologies, was developing a similar PCMCIA TDR card as a commercial product.

It was decided to use this commercially available card instead of developing the TDR

card in-house.

Software development proceeded by developing the algorithm in Matlab©, using data

generated by the Tektronix TDS 8000 oscilloscope. Once the algorithms were

functioning in Matlab©, the algorithms where coded into C++ using Microsoft Visual

C++ and tested against the Matlab© functions. The analysis algorithms were built

into a Component Object Model (COM) object, which allows the same software to be

built, run and tested on the Pocket PC and a standard Windows© desktop PC. COM

is a language-independent software component model that enables interaction between

software components and applications running on a Windows platform. The key

aspect of COM is that it enables communication between components, between

applications, and between clients and servers through clearly defined interfaces.

Interfaces provide a way for clients to ask a COM component which features it

supports at runtime. To provide additional features for a component, one simply adds

an additional interface for those features. This was done in order to ease the software

test and validation process.

Examples of Analysis Algorithms Performance

Algorithmic testing was performed primarily on RG58 coaxial cable and 30-Ohm

coaxial cable. As an example, a RG58 coaxial cable with a length of 3.25 m was

connected to a 10 cm cable with a 1 mm cut through the insulating jacket. Note, that

the braided ground of the cable was not cut. The termination of the 10 cm cable was

open. The algorithms correctly identified the connectors, and more importantly,

detected the cut as an inductive fault and the termination as an open. The algorithm

calculated the cable characteristic impedance as 49.47 Ohms vs. the published 47

Ohms. In all accounts, the results were encouraging.

Figure 9 Algorithmic Example: RG58

The cable was sampled 32 times, which is equivalent to a 12 dB gain. Additionally, the

cable equalization accounted for another 3 to 6 dB gain in signal to noise, increasing

the probability of event detection.

As a second example, a 30-Ohm coaxial cable was tested. This wire was a 4 m cable

terminated with a BNC connector followed by a short.

Figure 10 Algorithmic Examples: 30-Ohm Coaxial

This is an interesting example in that there is a large impedance mismatch between the

step generator (50 Ohm) and the wire under-test. If the waveform were not

normalized, the cable would have a nominal reflection coefficient of –0.2.

Normalization brings the wire under-tests reflection coefficient to a nominal reflection

coefficient of zero.

There were five events detected on the wire. The first event does not reject the null

hypothesis – indicating noise on the cable. The second and third events were detected

as inductive faults and should be considered false alarms. Because of the large

impedance mismatch, much of the energy from the TDR pulse was reflected prior to

entering the wire under-test. This suggests that for wires where there is a large

impedance mismatch, a larger number of samples should be used to account for the

energy lost in reflection, and corresponding smaller signal to noise ratio (SNR) on the

wire under-test. The fourth event detected on the line was correctly identified as a

connector and the short (fifth event) was correctly identified. The calculated

characteristic impedance was 32.78, which is close to the specified impedance.

Functional Prototype

The functional prototype application was written in the Microsoft CE C++

development environment. The application followed the functional requirements by

populating configuration data, executing the analysis algorithms and displaying results.

As noted, it was decided to use a CM Technologies TDR card vs. developing the TDR

card in-house. However, licensing issues between CM Technologies and the research

would not allow CM Technologies to release the device driver.

The device driver allows the application to control the TDR card and record test

information. The device driver where not available, as noted, so there was no way to

control the TDR card, or gather test data. This meant that waveform data could not

be recorded in real-time. As a result, the research used time and voltage from the

Tektronix TDS 8000, loaded into the Pocket PC, as test data. Screen shots of the

application are now presented in the Appendix to better explain the functionality.

Wire Diagnostic Prototype Screen Shots

The initial application screen displays the manufacture name and allows the selection

of various functions to run the Tool. These functions are: New, Edit, Run and View

Result (Appendix A). A New test allows the maintainer to enter test definitions, such

as system identification, the system serial number, and the test name.

A New test guides the maintainer in uniquely identify the cable by name, part number,

wire identification within the cable, and the wire type. The edit boxes are drop-down;

selectable text entries that automatically filter subordinate text boxes. For example, the

system ID might have F16 and F15 aircraft. Once F16 is selected, only data associated

with F16 is carried in the drop-down edit boxes for System Serial Number, Test

Name, Cable Name, etc. As the maintainer selected System Serial Numbers, only data

associated with both F16 and that selected serial number are available for Test Name

and any other subordinate test box. This method allows the maintainer to quickly and

efficiently drill down to the desired test (Appendix B).

Additional data, such as Test Parameters, are added by scrolling to the bottom of the

New Test page. Test Parameters include Velocity of Propagation, Test Length,

Voltage, and Samples. Velocity of Propagation is based on the wire type (e.g. coaxial,

twisted pair, solid core). The core diameter is the diameter of the wire conductor.

Test Length and Voltage would normally be left to default values. In some application

it would be important to control the TDR voltage and sampling rate. For example,

when testing a wire over 300 feet in length, a higher voltage and lower sampling rate

would be used. The Samples edit box commands the TDR card in the number of

sample that would be used for signal averaging (Appendix C). Once all characteristics

of the new test have been entered, the maintainer can save the Test, Reset (clear) the

test, or Run the test. Running the test automatically saves the test (Appendix D).

Once the test has been saved, the application triggers the TDR hardware and collects

the waveform data. The maintainer has indications of the test progress with the help

of a bar tumbler that rotates while that portion of the test is completed. This is similar

to the “hour glass” which desktop users observe when the computer is busy. The test

box holds the identification of the wire that is undergoing a test. Once the waveform

data is collected, the application calls the analysis engine, and notifies the maintainer

when the analysis is finally complete. Currently, the analysis takes approximately 20

seconds for a test.

Once the test is complete, the Over All Test Window is displayed (Appendix F). This

window displays the wire test identification and the over all test results. If there is a

fault, application indicates the distance down the wire from the connector. There are a

number of types of faults: hard faults and soft faults (associated with state change).

Hard fault are defined as a short or improper termination (open when it should be a

capacitive short, for example). A soft fault occurs when the current test changes from

the baseline states. This could occur if the termination changed, the length of the wire

changes, or the calculated characteristic impedance changes. Specific test views are

selectable from this window (Appendix G).

The parameter table lists the current test and baseline test parameters. The baseline

parameters are set the first time the wire is tested, and allows the maintainer to view

how the wire is changing over time. The parameters table has the time and date of the

tests, calculated impedance, inductance, capacitance and noise. As the wire degrades

over time, the characteristic impedance will increase (due to insulation degradation)

and system noise will increase.

The event table (Appendix H) lists the baseline events and the current test detected

events. The event relative and absolute distance is given, along with the event type.

Any fault types are annotated with a warning mark. Additional maintenance

information will be available if the maintainer selects the fault. Note in this vies (see

Appendix H), the current test events have changed from the baseline test. Those

events that are different will generate a fault. In this example, the inductive fault has

changed to a short, resulting in a fault indication. The event graph view would display

the same information, but graphically, and with symbols to identify different types of


The maintainer can view the raw and normalized waveforms in the graph view

(Appendix I). This allows the maintainer to visually see changes in a test over time and

analyze the waveform. While the test tool was designed to improve the fault detection

process by removing the requirement for maintainer evaluation, it was felt that having

a graph view would ultimately build user confidence in the tool.

Finally, the tools have a search capability; such that the maintainer can load and view

any historic data simply by using the drop-down edit boxes. The application gives an

indication that the maintainer is in a search mode by changing background color to

red, from green. This color-coding gives indications that the operation of search is

incomplete (Appendix J).

The analysis software is given in Appendix K.

Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations

A wire diagnostics system was developed based on TDR technologies. The system

engineering approach combined a number of software algorithms to:

• Remove multiple reflections,

• Equalize the wire for losses in high frequency signal content as a result of wire


• Detect statistically significant events, and finally,

• Classify events as connectors, termination types, or faults.

Additionally, the system design used a condition-based maintenance approach,

whereby software manages the data and provides the maintainer “on condition”

indicators. These indictors result when soft faults, such as change in length,

impedance or events, are detected. The system has been designed so that hard faults,

such as opens and shorts, can now be reliably detected.

The central design issue of the research was the need for a test system that enables

maintainers to diagnose reliably the condition of a wire harness. A number of

environmental conditions make identification of events difficult. For example,

multiple reflections occur any time there is more than one change in impedance on the

wire. Any machine pattern recognition algorithm would then attempt to classify these

reflection artifacts and thereby render the analysis less credible.

Other environmental issues arise from the attenuation of the test signal, high-

frequency content. This causes the TDR step-function to be stretched in time, which

results in two adverse conditions. The first adverse effect is that the shape of an

event, which is used in pattern classification, is stretched. Without some method to

equalize for wire length, templates required for pattern recognition would be length

dependent, resulting in a complex and large library of events and faults. Secondly, the

stretching of the signal causes the rate of change of voltage associated with a fault to

become smaller. The means that event detections become less effective as the wire

length increases.

Maxwell’s equation, which governs the electrostatic behavior of currents, was used to

model the attenuation as a function of frequency and length. This allowed the

construction of the gain filter that was matched to the frequency attenuation at any

given length. This Finite Impulse Response (FIR) filter compresses the signal to the

nominal zero meter distance and equalized the wire. This allows the use of a library

that is length independent. Additionally, the signal compression increases the signal to

noise ratio and allows for a fault detection, irrespective of wire length.

Event detection was based on the concept of a Constant False Alarm Detection

(CFAR). The derivative of the equalized waveform was taken with respect to time and

the standard deviation of this waveform was calculated. A false alarm rate of 0.002

was used to set a detection threshold (based on a Gaussian distribution), 2.8 multiplied

by the standard deviation of the derivative of the waveform. Any waveform index

which exceeded the threshold are then presented to the classifier.

In order to improve event detection, the waveform must be averaged to reduce system

noise. System noise is reduced by three dB for every doubling of the number of

samples taken for the average. A gain of fifteen dB is readily available when averaging

the signal thirty-two times.

Events were classified using a hypothesis testing technique, which was shown to be

mathematically optimal. This technique tested the null hypothesis, that the wire had

no fault, against the alternate hypothesis, which was the set of all faults. The algorithm

depends on the mean value and covariance of each fault index. The library can be

derived from modeling or from empirical measurements and represents the reflection

coefficient for each type of event.

A database system was derived such that waveform, parameters, and events for each

test were stored for time-series analysis. At the conclusion of a test, the maintainer can

view the current test result and could compare these results against a baseline. The

maintainer always has the option to view the raw and processed TDR waveform. Due

to the time domain nature of the waveform, it becomes a simple matter to correlate

indicators on the wire under-test with the waveform.

The algorithms developed for the wire diagnostics system were tested on a number of

wire types. The algorithm can successfully identify: different types of connectors;

various faults, such as capacitive fault or inductive faults; and different types of


Some Problems

Initially, the wire diagnostics test tool design required a PCMCIA format for the step

generator and the analog to digital converter. A commercially available TDR card

fitting this requirement was found, and it was decided to proceed with the study using

this hardware. However, no Windows CE drivers had yet been developed for this

device, which would have enabled the software to communicate with the card on the

Pocket PC platform. After four weeks of negotiations with the vendor, it was decided

that it would not be advantageous to build the drivers for the vendor. At this point,

driver development was stopped (the vendor would not directly give the researcher the

hardware offsets to control the card).

Initial design work was started on to build a TDR card in-house. While it is a trivial

manner to generate a 100 ps step function, it became apparent that there were a

number of engineering issues that needed to be overcome. Foremost was the design

of the analog to digital converter needed to sample a waveform at a bandwidth of over

1.5 GHz.

Commercially available 1.0, 2.0, 2.5 and 3.0 Gsps analog to digital converters was

found. The problem was that at this data rate, there is no RAM fast enough to simply

buffer the sampled data. Oscilloscope manufactures use a number of techniques to

clock down the real-time data rates, such as using programmable logic (FPGA) to

sequentially shift registers. Alternatively, a number of sampling techniques exist, such

as sequential sampling or random repetitive sampling, which allow effective sample

rates in the gigahertz sample range. These alternative techniques have their own

technical difficulties, such as the need for a jitter-free clock. It was felt that it was

beyond the scope of the study to overcome these technical issues, as it did not

progress the science of the study.

Remarks on Test Technology

Time Domain Reflectometry (TDR) was chosen over Standing Wave Reflectometry

(SWR) or Frequency Domain Reflectometry (FDR) as the technology for the study. It

was apparent that the simplicity of the step-function generation, ease of manual

interpretation, and high resolution made this the best choice. Additionally, it is a

simple matter to take n number of samples that average the waveform.

However, the difficulty of hardware design work in the gigahertz range suggests that

one of the other technologies may be easier and cheaper to implement as a commercial

product. Certainly there will be technical challenges in using one of the frequency

domain techniques, but they may be easier to overcome than the issue of real-time

sampling at 3.0 Gsps. The researcher recommends additional effort be spent on these

other techniques to see if the fault detection and identification capability is similar to

that found in time domain reflectometry.

Time domain reflectometry has two limiting performance factors. The first is the issue

of data acquisition. It has been noted that there are some technical challenges in

sampling at 3.0 GHz and getting the data into RAM. Additionally, for a portable unit,

the power consumption of the Analog to Digital (CMOS) device is high. Typically,

one finds these devices draw 4.5 amps at 5 volts. When implementing the system in a

compact, battery-powered device, a number of power management approaches would

have to be implemented.

For example, a capacitor would store charge that would be released once the analog to

digital device was switched on. Once the device had reached operating voltage, the

step recovery diode would trigger, an acquisition would be sampled, and the device

switched off. The powered operational time of one acquisition cycle (e.g. duty cycle)

would be on the order of microseconds. Only in this manner could any meaningful

battery life be maintained with this type of device.

The second issue regards limitation imposed by the effect of Maxwell’s equations.

There is simply no way to get around the skin effect, which attenuates the high

frequency component of the TDR pulse. At some length, the high frequency

component has been attenuated below the level of noise, such that any gain applied is

only amplifying noise. Thus, there is a particle limit beyond which small events cannot

be detected. The current design has a maximum usable distance of approximately 140

feet. It is believed that this is within the practical limit of small event detection.

The application of advance signal processing algorithms, such as: inverse scattering,

length variable filtering, and statistical pattern recognition, make this a unique product

offering. On a recent visit the meet with personnel from the Air Force Research

Laboratory at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (January 13th, 2003), the researcher was

told that this is the only product that does any type of automated decision-making or


This signal-processing algorithm gives approximately 15 to 20 dB gain in sensitivity

from signal averaging of the waveform, with selectable gain in the higher frequencies

of 6 to 9 dB. This gives a total gain in event detection of 21 to 29 dB. It is believed

these signal-processing algorithms greatly improve the utility of the wire diagnostics

prototype over current TDR, SWR or FDR products.

The use of a database to hold wire state information allows the maintainer to treat the

harness as a system instead of a commodity. This allows the use of “Parts Life

Tracking”, which is critical in implementing an “On Condition” maintenance system.

This is a large paradigm shift from current maintenance practices, but could have

significant cost savings as the fleet of aircraft age and wiring becomes more


If the FAA mandates wire inspection on aging aircraft, or certain aircraft types within

the fleet, this may be an alternate means of compliance. The following case could be

made on a harness that has been regularly tested: by trending historic data and

observing no significant degradation, no maintenance inspection would be required.

This would be a huge success in wire diagnostics, and would save the operator literally

millions of dollars in maintenance costs.

It must be noted that this type of FAA credit is not given without extensive

documentation and historic proof. In order for the certification to be granted, years of

data would need to be taken on a number of aircraft. This is the goal of a wire

diagnostics tool and one of the driving forces of this research.

Perhaps most significant is the simple display of information to the maintainer. The

test systems use of a scrollable list to record and display all detected events reduces the

training burden of maintenance personnel. All faults are identified and presented,

which reduces variance in maintenance practices.

This will result in a number of significant cost savings. Initially, the number of spare

line replaceable units (LRUs) required will drop significantly. The current maintenance

practices for intermittent calls for LRU to be pulled and replaced instead of any wire

analysis or testing. It has been found that a significant number of maintenance on

intermittent faults is not the LRU, but the wire. By correctly identifying the wire as the

issue, all of those excess replacement actions will disappear, which would reduce the

number of spares needed to service a fleet.

Other significant cost savings will result in reducing the manning and aircraft

requirements. In the military, readiness is the measure of performance. Readiness is

the number of aircraft that are mission capable. Based on the researches military

aviation experience, rarely, if ever are all the aircraft allotted to a squadron are mission

ready. Currently, it may require nine aircraft to maintain six mission ready aircraft. If

electrical problems can be identified more effectively, the benefit could be such that

only eight aircraft are required to maintain six mission ready aircraft.

Similarly, for maintenance crew, a squadron may require 300 personnel to maintain six

out of nine mission ready aircraft. However, if electrical faults could be identified

more effectively, the squadron may be able to deploy with only 250 personnel. The

key is that providing a reliable method of wire diagnostics will improve maintenance

practices. This will have huge implications to the aviation community.

In summary, it is believed that the research resulted in a successful wire diagnostics

tool. The signal processing and warehousing of data could allow for the development

of an on condition maintenance practice. These practices will result in large cost

saving to aircraft operator and significantly improve safety.


Agilent Technologies, “Improving TDR/TDT Measurements Using Normalization,”

Application Note 1304-5, April 2001, [journal on-line]; available from

Bechhoefer, Eric. ”Optimal Decision Making Under Uncertainty”, Goodrich

Engineering Paper E-4108, Vergennes, VT, 2001.

Bishop, Paul. Signal Fidelity & Jitter, Tektronix Measurements Seminar, October 2002.

Bruckstein, A. M., Kailath, T, “Inverse Scattering for Discrete Transmission-Tine

Models,” SIAM Review, 29 359-389, 1987.

Christopoulos, Christos. The Transmission-Line Modeling Method, TLM. New

Jersey, IEEE Press, 1995.

Corey, Stephen D., “Characterizing Interconnects Using Time Domain

Reflectometry”, ChipCenter, May 2002, [journal on-line]; available from /tn020.html.

Cory, Stephen, “Choosing Signal Integrity Measurement Tools: Time or Frequency

Domain?” DesignCon2002, 2002.

Davis, Alan M., Software Requirements, Objects, Functions and States. New Jersey,
Prentice Hall PTR, 1993.

Dowding, et al., “Recent Advancements in TDR Monitoring of Ground Water Levels
and Piezometric Pressures,” Proceeding of the 2nd North American Rock Mechanics
Symposium, NARMS, Jun. 1996.

Feng, W., Lin, C. P., Deschamps, R.J., and Drnevich, V.P, “Theoretical Model of a
multisection time domain reflectometry measurement system,” Water Resources
Research, Vol. 35, No. 8, Aug. 1999, 2321-2331.

Fukunaga, Keinosuke. Introduction to Statistical Pattern Recognition. New York,

Academic Press, 1990

Furse, et. al., “Low-cost, compact, frequency domain reflectometry system for testing
wires and cables,” World Intellectual Property Organization, WO02/068968 A2, Sep.

Gladwell, G.M.L, Inverse Problems in Scattering, An Introduction. Dordrecht,

Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993.

Hall, R., and Brown, M., “U.S. Air Force Aging Aircraft Wiring Implementation Plan,”
The 6th Joint NASA/FAA/DoD Conference on Aging Aircraft, Jul 2002.

Heald, Mark A., Marion, Jerry B., Classical Electromagnetic Radiation. Fort Worth,
Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1995.

Hewlett Packard, “Pulse and Waveform Generation with Step Recovery Diodes,”
Application Note 918, Oct. 1984.

Johnson, David H., White, Edward L., D’Angelo, Johseph J., Dicks, Dwayne, and
Decker, Adam L., “Wiring system Diagnostic Techniques for Legacy Aircraft”

Kane, William F., “Development of a Time Domain Reflectometry System to Monitor
Landslide Activity:” Final Report, FHWA, CA TL-96, June 1996.

Krigel, H.,Y., “Apparatus and method for determining the integrity of cables and
wiring harnesses”, United States Patent 6,442,498, Aug 2002.

Lane, Neal. Review of Federal Programs for Wire System Safety, Final Report,
National Science and Technology Council, Committee on Technology, Wire System
Safety Interagency Working Group, November, 2000.

McClellan, James, et al. Computer-Based Exercises for Signal Processing Using Matlab
5. New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 1998.

Medelius, et al., “non-intrusive impedance-based cable tester,” United States Patent

5,977,773, Nov. 1999.

Mendenhall, William, Wackerly, Dennis, D., Scheaffer, Richard L., Mathematical

Statistics with Applications. Boston, PWS-Kent Publishing Company, 1990.

Oppenheim, Alan V., Schafer, Ronald W., Discrete-Time Signal Processing. New
Jersey, Prentice Hall, 1989.

Thomas, Roland E., Rosa, Albert J., The Analysis and Design of Linear Circuits, New
Jersey, Prentice Hall, 1998.

Sadok, Mohktar, Ph.D., “Pre-emphasis Equalization for Cable Loss Mitigation in Wire
Diganostics,” Goodrich Engineering Note, Vergennes, VT 2002.

Smolyansky, D., A., “Choosing Signal Integrity Measurements Tools: Time or

Frequency Domain?,”, Application Note TDA Systems, Jan 2002

Staffer, George H. Jr., “Spice up the development of a step recovery diode frequency
mutiplier,”, Jun. 1999, 16-22.

TDR Impedance Measurements: A foundation for Signal Integrity. Tektronix

Application Note, <>

TDR Tutorial and Riser Bond TDR Product Review, Granite Island Group, 21
October 2002, <>

Ware, J.A., Aki, K., “Continuous and Discrete Inverse Scattering Problems in a
Stratified Elastic Medium. I Plane waves at Normal Incidence,” J. Acout. Soc. Amer.
45, 911-921, 1968.

Yoho, Jason J., “Physically-Based Realizable Modeling and Network Synthesis of

Subscriber Loops Utilized in DSL Technology,” Dissertation Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, October 2001.

A Wire Diagnostic Screen Shots: Opening Screen

B Wire Diagnostic New Test

C Wire Diagnostics New Test: Wire Characteristics

D Wire Diagnostics Save Test

E Wire Diagnostics Run Test

F Wire Diagnostics Overall Test Results

G Wire Diagnostics Viewable Test Results

H Wire Diagnostics Event Table

I Wire Diagnostics View Waveform Graph

J Wire Diagnostic Search View

K Wire Diagnostics Analysis Listing

// WireTest.cpp : Implementation of CWireTest
#include "stdafx.h"
#include "WireAnalysis.h"
#include "WireTest.h"
#include "vector.cpp"
#include "image.cpp"

// CWireTest

STDMETHODIMP CWireTest::SetValues(float dt, float vop, float diameter, float vin, float maxFreq, short numPts,
short startIdx, short eventLength)
DT = dt;
VOP = vop;
NUMPTS = numPts;
DIAMETER = diameter;
VIN = vin;

MAXFREQ = maxFreq;
STARTIDX = startIdx;
EVENTLEN = eventLength;

return S_OK;

STDMETHODIMP CWireTest::RoughEndOfWire(short size, float *Vmeas)

vector<float> vmeas;
vmeas.setvect (Vmeas,size);
Vmeas = vmeas.getvect ();

return S_OK;

void CWireTest::RoughEndOfWire(vector<float> &Vmeas){

// Get a Rough Estimate of Length and Termination (0pen or Short)
// Inputs
// Vmeas :vector of voltage measurements
// vin :drive voltage
// startIdx :length of harness from configuration
// Outputs
// term :type of termination
// endIdx :rough estimate of end of wire

int maxIdx,maxDidx,minIdx,minDidx;
float maxDv,maxV,minDv,minV,vin;
vector<float> dVmeas;

vin = VIN*(float)0.5;

if (maxV-vin> vin-minV){
ENDIDX = maxDidx; //Open
ENDIDX = minDidx; //Short


STDMETHODIMP CWireTest::CalculateZo(short size, float *Vmeas)

vector<float> vmeas;

vmeas.setvect (Vmeas,size);
Vmeas = vmeas.getvect();

return S_OK;

void CWireTest::CalculateZo(vector<float> &Vmeas){
// Calculate the characteristic impedance of the wire under test
// Inputs
// Vmeas :vector of voltage measurements
// vin :drive voltage
// startIdx :length of harness from configuration
// endIdx :rough estimate of end of wire
// Outputs
// Zo :estimate of characteristic impedance

float vSettled,ZoU,U;

vector<float> v;

v = Vmeas;

vSettled = v.median(STARTIDX,ENDIDX);
ZO = (float)50.0*vSettled/(VIN-vSettled);

if (U < (float)1000) U = (float)1000.0;

ZoU = ZO*U;
CAP = (float)1./ZoU;

STDMETHODIMP CWireTest::InverseScattering(short size, float *Vmeas)
//Pointer Implementation of the Loss Model
vector<float> pVmeas;
Vmeas = pVmeas.getvect();

return S_OK;
void CWireTest::InverseScattering(vector<float> &vmes){
// Glad Inverse Scattering Aglroithm
// glad(vmeas, vin, Zo,vref)
// Inputs
// vmeas :vector of measured voltage
// Outputs:
// vref :corrected reflected voltage

int i,ii,j,jj,n,l,EN;

vector<float> r;
vector<float> s;
image<float> DU;
float Z1,Z2;
float vin = VIN*(float).5;
float thres;

thres = (float)0.9999;
n = vmes.length();
l = n*2+2;


VREF = vmes;
VREF -= vin;

Z1= ZO;

for(i = 0; i < n*2; i +=2){

DU(0,i) = vin;
DU(1+i,0) = VREF(i/2);
DU(0,l-1) = vin;

EN = n*2-1;
for(i = 0; i < n;i++){
ii = i+1;
r(ii) = DU(ii+2,i)/DU(i,i);
if(r(ii) > 1)r(ii) = thres;
if(r(ii) < -1)r(ii) = -thres;
s(ii) = (float)sqrt((float)1.0-r(ii)*r(ii));
for(j = i; j <EN; j++){
jj = j+1;
DU(ii,jj) = (DU(i,j) - r(ii)*DU(jj+2,i))/s(ii);
DU(jj+1,ii) = (-r(ii)*DU(i,j) + DU(jj+2,i))/s(ii);
for(i = 0; i < n; i++){
Z2= Z1 * (1+r(i))/(1-r(i));
VREF(i) = (Z2-ZO)/(ZO+Z2)*vin + vin;
Z1 = Z2;
STDMETHODIMP CWireTest::LossModel(short size, float *Vnorm)
//Pointer Implementation of the Loss Model
vector<float> vnorm;
Vnorm = vnorm.getvect();

return S_OK;
void CWireTest::LossModel(vector<float> &Vnorm){
//Calculates the frequency attenutation based on cable length, diameter
//distance normalized voltage

float crtLength,bsum, C, dZ;

float K;
int n,i,j,L2;
vector<float> freq,tmpfreq;
vector<float> b,bi;
image<float> B;
K = (float)4.15e-8;

L2 = FIRLEN/2;
n = DIST.length();


dZ = (float)DIAMETER*ZO;

for(i = 0; i < n; i++){

crtLength = DIST(i)*(float)2.0;
C = -crtLength*K/dZ;
tmpfreq = freq;
tmpfreq *= C;
b.fir(FIRLEN,tmpfreq); // calculates the loss transfer function

bi(0) = b((int)L2);
for (j = 1; j <= L2; j++){
bi(j) = b(L2+j)*2;
bsum = bi.sum();
bi /= bsum;

for(j = 0; j <= L2; j++) B(i,j+i) = bi(j);



STDMETHODIMP CWireTest::Convert2Rho(short size, float *Vnorm)
vector<float> v;
v.setvect (Vnorm,size);
Vnorm = v.getvect();

return S_OK;
void CWireTest::ConvertToRho(vector<float> &V){
// converts from voltage to reflection coefficients
// Inputs
// startIdx :start of wire under test:
// endIdx :end of wire - estimate
// Input/Outputs
// V :vector of normalized voltages

int i,cnt,len;
float vSettled;

vector<float> v;
cnt = 0;
for(i = STARTIDX; i< ENDIDX; i++){
v(cnt) = V(i);
vSettled = v.median ();

RHO = V;

STDMETHODIMP CWireTest::EventDetection(int size)
// Performs statistical Event Detection
// Inputs
// vnorm :Normalized voltage measuremetns
// startIdx :Start Indx of Wire Under Test (e.g. Harness length)
// runlength :minimum detection length
// Output
// event :vector of detected events

int i,n,cnt;
float m;
vector<float> drho;

m = 0.;
//estimate the noise
for(i = 0; i < STARTIDX; i++)m += (float)pow(drho(i),2);

NOISE = (float)sqrt(m/((float)STARTIDX - 1));

//n = dv.length();
cnt = 0;
m = (float)NOISE * (float)NOISEMULT; //set the threshold
for(i = STARTIDX; i < ENDIDX; i++){//Find the events
if(fabs(drho(i))>m) cnt++;
if(cnt > size) cnt = size;
cnt = 0;
for(i = STARTIDX; i < ENDIDX;i++){
if( fabs(drho(i)) > m && cnt < size ){
idx(cnt) = i;
cnt++ ;

n = didx.length();
cnt = 0;
for(i = 0; i < n; i++){
if (didx(i)> EVENTLEN)cnt++;
cnt = 0;
for(i = 0; i < n; i++){
if(didx(i)> EVENTLEN){

EVENT(cnt) = idx(i+(int)1);

return S_OK;


STDMETHODIMP CWireTest::Classifier(short libLength, short numCol, float *Lib, float *covin, short size, int
*typeEvent, float *distance)
//The Lib array is a matrix that runs by row over all columns,
//e.g lib(col,row) = Lib(row*numCol + col);
image<float> lib;
vector<float> cov;
vector<int> event;
vector<float> dist;
int i,j, numRow;
numRow = libLength/numCol;

for(i = 0; i < numRow; i++)

for(j = 0; j < numCol; j++) lib(j,i) = Lib[i*numCol+j];

covin = cov.getvect();
typeEvent = event.getvect();
distance = dist.getvect();

return S_OK;
void CWireTest::Classifier(const image<float> &Lib,
vector<float> &covin,
vector<int> &typeEvent,
vector<float> &distance){
// Performs the classification by calling LHyp
// Inputs
// rho :vector reflection coefficients
// Lib :matrix of libaries in colum, row order. Each Row is an event type
// covin :vecotr of inverse covaraince - from configuration
// Outputs
// typeEvent :vector of event types
// distance :vector of distance to event;

int i,j,k, numLib, lenLib, numEvent, nRho, crtIdx, maxIdx;

float max;
vector<float> crtRho;
vector<float> crtLib;
vector<float> score;
vector<float> Ho;
vector<float> Hi;

numEvent = EVENT.length();
nRho = RHO.length();
lenLib = Lib.width();
numLib = Lib.height();



for(j = 0; j < lenLib; j++)Ho(j) = Lib(0,j); //load up NULL Hypo

for(i = 0; i < numEvent; i++){

crtIdx = EVENT(i);
for(j = 0; j < lenLib; j++){ //load up current event
if(crtIdx+j < nRho) crtRho(j) = RHO(crtIdx+j);
else crtRho(j) = 0.;
for(j = 1; j < numLib; j++){
for(k=0; k< lenLib; k++)Hi(k)= Lib(k,j); //load up alternate Hypo
score(j) = LHyp(crtRho,Ho,Hi,covin);
typeEvent(i+1) = maxIdx;
distance(i+1) = DIST(crtIdx)-DIST(STARTIDX);
typeEvent(0) = 2;
distance(0) = 0.0;


float CWireTest::LHyp(vector<float> &crtEvent,vector<float> &m1,vector<float> &m2,vector<float> &covin){

// Performs the linear hypothesis test
// Inputs
// crtEvent :vector of the curent event under test
// m1 :vector of Ho mean values - from configuration
// m2 :vector of H1 mean values - from configuration
// covin :vecotr of inverse covaraince - from configuration
// Output
// h :test score

float h,dotm1,dotm2,dotx;
vector<float> m2m1;
vector<float> m1ci;
vector<float> m2ci;

m2m1 = m2;
m2m1 -= m1;
m2m1 *= covin;

m1ci = m1;
m2ci = m2;

m1ci *= covin;
m2ci *= covin;

dotm1 = (float)m1ci.dot_product(m1);
dotm2 = (float)m2ci.dot_product(m2);
dotx = (float)m2m1.dot_product(crtEvent);
h = dotx + (float)0.5*(dotm1-dotm2);
return h;


STDMETHODIMP CWireTest::Zo(float *z)
*z = ZO;

return S_OK;
STDMETHODIMP CWireTest::Capacitance(float *cap)
*cap = CAP;

return S_OK;

STDMETHODIMP CWireTest::Inductance(float *induct)

*induct = INDUCT;

return S_OK;

STDMETHODIMP CWireTest::Noise(float *nos)

*nos = NOISE;

return S_OK;
void CWireTest::ConvMatrix(image<float> &B, const vector<float> &A,vector<float> &C)
// implements the a matrix convolution, a length varying FIR filter
// Inputs
// B :Convolution Matrix
// A :vector of measurements
// Outputs
// C :filtered measuremetns

int i, j, col;
float tmp;

col = B.width();
for (i = 0; i < col; i++){
tmp = 0;
for(j = 0; j < col; j++) tmp += B(j,i)*A(j);
C(i) = tmp;

void CWireTest::CalcDist(){
// generate a distance vector based on velocity of propagation and sample rate
// Input/Output
// dist :vector of distance
int i;
float C;

C = SPD_LIGHT * VOP * DT * (float)0.5;

for(i = 0; i<NUMPTS; i++) DIST(i) = ((float)(i+1))*C;


// WireTest.h : Declaration of the CWireTest

#ifndef __WIRETEST_H_
#define __WIRETEST_H_

#include "resource.h" // main symbols

#include "vector.h"
#include "image.h"
#define NUMFRQPNT 64
#define FIRLEN 100
#define SPD_LIGHT 299792458
#define NOISEMULT 2.5

// CWireTest
class ATL_NO_VTABLE CWireTest :
public CComObjectRootEx<CComSingleThreadModel>,
public CComCoClass<CWireTest, &CLSID_WireTest>,
public IDispatchImpl<IWireTest, &IID_IWireTest, &LIBID_WIREANALYSISLib>




// IWireTest
STDMETHOD(Noise)(float *nos);
STDMETHOD(Inductance)(float * induct);
STDMETHOD(Capacitance)(float * cap);
STDMETHOD(Zo)(float * z);
STDMETHOD(Classifier)(short libLength,short numCol,float *Lib,float *covin,short size, int *typeEvent,float
STDMETHOD(EventDetection)(int size);
STDMETHOD(Convert2Rho)(short size, float *Vnorm);
STDMETHOD(LossModel)(short size, float *Vnorm);
STDMETHOD(InverseScattering)(short size, float *Vmeas);
STDMETHOD(CalculateZo)(short size, float *Vmeas);
STDMETHOD(RoughEndOfWire)(short size, float *Vmeas);
STDMETHOD(SetValues)(float dt,float vop, float diameter, float vin, float maxFreq,short numPts,short
startIdx,short eventLength);
vector<float> RHO;
vector<float> DIST;
vector<float> VREF;
vector<int> EVENT;


float LHyp(vector<float> &crtEvent, vector<float> &m1, vector<float> &m2,vector<float> &covin);

void ConvMatrix(image<float> &, const vector<float> &,vector<float> &);
void LossModel(vector<float> &Vnorm);
void CalculateZo(vector<float> &Vmeas);
void RoughEndOfWire(vector<float> &Vmeas);
void ConvertToRho(vector<float> &V);
void Classifier(const image<float> &Lib, vector<float> &covin, vector<int> &typeEvent,vector<float> &distance);
void CalcDist();
void InverseScattering(vector<float> &vmes);


#endif //__WIRETEST_H_

// ============================================================================
// Project : Wire Diagnostics Prototype
// CSCI :
// P/N :
// CSC :
// File Name : Vector.cpp
// ============================================================================
// Purpose:
// Notes:
// ============================================================================
// Revision History
// $Log::$
// Rev 1.0 Dec 11 2002 15:29:34 ebechhoe
//Initial revision.
// Rev 1.2 Dec 09 2002 09:03:10 ebechhoe
//Udated the vector class to copy a pointer array, fixed bug in Test Analysis in the CalculateZo method
// * Rev 1.0 Nov 16 2002 16:22:48 ebechhoefer
// * Initial revision.
// ============================================================================

#include "stdafx.h"
#include "vector.h"


template <class T>
vector<T>::vector (int size)
if (s) {vect=new T [size];
for (int i=0;i<size;i++) vect[i]=0;
else vect=NULL;
template<class T>
vector<T>::vector(const vector &rhs)
vect = new T [s];
for (int i=0; i<s; i++) vect[i]=rhs(i);
template <class T>
void vector<T>::resize (int newsize)
int i;
T* newvec=new T [newsize];
if (!newvec) {
//cout<<"Memory allocation error in vector::resize, newsize="<<newsize<<endl;
//throw xMemory();
for (i=0; i<newsize; i++) {
if (i<s && vect) newvec[i]=vect[i];
else newvec[i]=0;
if (vect) delete [] vect;
vect=new T [newsize];
for (i=0;i<newsize;i++) vect[i]=newvec[i];
delete [] newvec;
template <class T>
void vector<T>::getmem(int width)
if (vect) delete [] vect;
vect=new T [s];
if (!vect) {
//cout<<"Memory allocation error in vector::getmem, s="<<s<<endl;
//throw xMemory();
for(int i=0; i<s; i++)
vect[i] = 0;
template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::operator /= (T a)
if (a!=0)
for (int i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]/=a;
else {
//cout<<"Attempting /0 in vector::operator /= (). Exiting."<<endl;

//throw xDivide();
return *this;
template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::operator += (const vector<T>& a)
if (a.length() != s) {
//cout<<"Cannot add (+=) two vectors of different lengths! Exiting..."<<endl;
//throw xDim();
for (int i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]+=a(i);
return *this;
template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::operator -= (const vector<T>& a)
if (a.length() != s) {
//cout<<"Cannot subtract (-=) two vectors of different lengths! Exiting..."<<endl;
//throw xDim();
for (int i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]-=a(i);
return *this;
template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::operator *= (const vector<T>& a)
if (a.length() != s) {
//cout<<"Cannot multiply (*=) two vectors of different lengths! Exiting..."<<endl;
//throw xDim();
for (int i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]*=a(i);
return *this;
template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::operator /= (const vector<T>& a)
if (a.length() != s) {
//cout<<"Cannot divide (/=) two vectors of different lengths! Exiting..."<<endl;
//throw xDim();
for (int i=0;i<s;i++) {
if (a(i)!=0) vect[i]/=a(i);
else {
//cout<<"Attempting /0 in vector::operator /=. Exiting..."<<endl;
//throw xDivide();
return *this;
template <class T>

vector<T>& vector<T>::operator = (const vector& a)
if (a.length() != s) {
delete [] vect;
vect=new T [s];
for (int i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]=a(i);
return *this;
template <class T>
T vector<T>::vmax()
T max=vect[0];
for (int i=1;i<s;i++) if (vect[i]>max) max=vect[i];
return max;
template <class T>
T vector<T>::vmin()
T max=vect[0];
for (int i=1;i<s;i++) if (vect[i]<max) max=vect[i];
return max;
template <class T>
void vector<T>::min_with_index(T& min_value, int& index, int start)
T min=vect[start];
int local_index=start;
for (int i=start;i<s;i++)
if (vect[i]<min)
local_index = i;
min_value = min;
index = local_index;
template <class T>
void vector<T>::max_with_index(T& min_value, int& index,int start)
T min=vect[start];
int local_index=start;
for (int i=start;i<s;i++)
if (vect[i]>min)
local_index = i;
min_value = min;
index = local_index;

template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::demean ()
double m=mean();
for (int i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]-=m;
return *this;
template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::blank ()
for (int i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]=0;
return *this;
template <class T>
double vector<T>::magnitude ()
double mag=0;
for (int i=0;i<s;i++) mag+=(vect[i]*vect[i]);
return mag;
template <class T>
double vector<T>::mean ()
double mean=0;
for (int i=0;i<s;i++) mean+=vect[i];
return mean;
template <class T>
float vector<T>::median (int start, int end)
int n, n2;
float m;

if(end == 0) end = s;
n = end-start;
n2 = n/2;


if (n%2 == 0) m = (vect[n2-1]+vect[n2])*(float).5;
else m = vect[n2];
return m;

template <class T>

float vector<T>::sum ()
float sum=0;
for (int i=0;i<s;i++) sum+=vect[i];
return sum;
template <class T>
float vector<T>::product ()

float product=0;
for (int i=0;i<s;i++) product*=vect[i];
return product;
template <class T>
float vector<T>::variance ()
float variance=0,m=mean(),dif;
for (int i=0;i<s;i++) {
if (dif<0) dif*=-1;
return variance;
template <class T>
double vector<T>::angle_between(vector<T>& b)
int i;
double ang,maga=0,magb=0,summ=0;
if (s!=b.length()){
//cout<<"Warning: taking the angle between vectors of different length..."<<endl;
//cout<<"newy len = "<<s<<", kept len = "<<b.length()<<". Exiting..."<<endl;
//throw xDim();
for (i=0;i<s;i++){
if (maga!=0) {
if (summ>=1.0) summ=1.000;
if (summ<= -1.0) summ=-1.000;
else ang=0;
return ang;
template <class T>
double vector<T>::dot_product(vector<T>& b)
int i;
double sum=0;
if (s!=b.length()){
//cout<<"Warning: taking the dot product between vectors of different length..."<<endl;
//cout<<"newy len = "<<s<<", kept len = "<<b.length()<<". Exiting..."<<endl;
//throw xDim();
for (i=0;i<s;i++)
return sum;

template <class T>
double vector<T>::project_onto(vector<T>& b)
double ang=angle_between(b);
double mag=magnitude();
double proj=mag*cos(ang);
return proj;
template <class T>
double vector<T>::distance_from(vector<T>& b)
double ang=angle_between(b);
double mag=magnitude();
double proj=mag*sin(ang);
return proj;
/*template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::mean_vector(sequence<T>& a)
int i,j,k;
for (i=0;i<a.width();i++){
for (j=0;j<a.height();j++){
for (k=0;k<s;k++){
return *this;
} */
/*template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::sigma_vector(sequence<T>& a)
int i;
if (s!=a.length()) {
cout<<"vector and sequence don't match in sigma_vector! Exiting."<<endl;
for (i=0;i<a.length();i++) vect[i]=sqrt(a[i].variance());
return *this;
} */
template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::real_FFT()
void four1(double* data,int nn, int isign);
int sz=2,i;
while (sz<s) sz*=2;
double* data = new double [2*sz];
for (i=0;i<2*sz;i++){
if ((i/2)<s && (i%2)==0){

for (i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]=(T)(data[i]);

delete []data;
return *this;

template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::FFT(bool INV)
{ //Performs the complex FFT, where the input is in real/imaginary pairs
//(e.g. even are real, odds are imaginary)
//returns the complex FFT

int sz=2,i,j,j1;
while (sz<s/2) sz*=2;
float* RealIn = new float [sz];
float* ImagIn = new float [sz];
float* RealOut = new float [sz];
float* ImagOut = new float [sz];
for (i=0;i < sz;i++){
j = i*2;
j1 =j+1;
if (j1 < s){


for (i=0;i<s;i +=2){

j= i/2;
delete []RealIn;
delete []ImagIn;
delete []RealOut;
delete []ImagOut;

return *this;

template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::IFFT()
{ //Performs the complex IFFT, where the input is in real/imaginary pairs
//(e.g. even are real, odds are imaginary)
//returns the complex FFT
return *this;


template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::mag_FFT()
//void four1(double* data,int nn, int isign);
int sz=2,i;
while (sz<s) sz*=2;
double* data = new double [2*sz];
for (i=0;i<2*sz;i++){
if ((i/2)<s && (i%2)==0) data[i]=(double)(vect[i/2]);
else data[i]=0;
for (i=0;i<s;i++) {

delete []data;
return *this;
template <class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::real_IFFT()
//void four1(double* data,int nn, int isign);
int i,sz=2;
while (sz<s) sz*=2;
double* data = new double [sz];
for (i=0;i<sz;i++){
if (i<s){
for (i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]=(T)(data[i])/((double)(sz/2));
// for (i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]=(T)(data[i*2])/((double)(sz/2));

delete []data;
return *this;
template <class T>
void vector<T>::four1(double* data,int nn, int isign)
int n,mmax,m,j,istep,i;
double wtemp,wr,wpr,wpi,wi,theta;
double tempr,tempi;
n=nn << 1;
for (i=1;i<n;i+=2) {
if (j>i) {
m=n >> 1;
while (m>=2 && j>m) {
j -= m;

while (n>mmax) {
istep=mmax << 1;
for (m=1;m<mmax;m+=2) {
for (i=m;i<=n;i+=istep) {
template <class T>
vector<T> operator + (const vector<T>& v1, const vector<T>& v2)
vector<T> v(v1.length());
return v;
template <class T>
vector <T> operator - (const vector<T>& v1, const vector<T>& v2)
vector<T> v;
return v;
template <class T>
vector <T> operator * (const vector<T>& v1, const vector<T>& v2)
vector<T> v;
return v;

template <class T>
vector <T> operator / (const vector<T>& v1, const vector<T>& v2)
vector<T> v;

return v;
ifstream& operator>>(ifstream& FileIn, vector<bool>& rhs)
int size, depth;
bool *input; *)&size, sizeof(int)); *)&depth, sizeof(int));
input = rhs.getvect(); *)input, size*sizeof(bool));
return FileIn;
ofstream& operator<<(ofstream& FileOut, vector<bool>& rhs)
int size, depth;
bool *output;

size = rhs.length();
FileOut.write ((char* )&size,sizeof(int));
depth = sizeof(bool);
FileOut.write ((char* )(&depth),sizeof(int));
output = rhs.getvect();
return FileOut;
template<class T>
void vector<T>::insertSort(long lb, long ub){
T t;
long i, j;
if(lb < 0 || ub >= s){
//throw xDim();
* sort array a[lb..ub] *
for (i = lb + 1; i <= ub; i++) {
t = vect[i];
/* Shift elements down until */
/* insertion point found. */
for (j = i-1; j >= lb && vect[j]>t; j--)
vect[j+1] = vect[j];
/* insert */
vect[j+1] = t;
template<class T>
long vector<T>::partition(long lb, long ub){
T t, pivot;
long i, j, p;

if(lb < 0 || ub >= s){

//throw xDim();

* partition array a[lb..ub] *
/* select pivot and exchange with 1st element */
p = lb + ((ub - lb)>>1);
pivot = vect[p];
vect[p] = vect[lb];

/* sort lb+1..ub based on pivot */

i = lb+1;
j = ub;
while (1) {
while (i < j && pivot>vect[i]) i++;
while (j >= i && vect[j]>pivot) j--;
if (i >= j) break;
t = vect[i];
vect[i] = vect[j];
vect[j] = t;
j--; i++;

/* pivot belongs in a[j] */

vect[lb] = vect[j];
vect[j] = pivot;

return j;
template<class T>
void vector<T>::quickSort(long lb, long ub){
long m;
* sort array a[lb..ub] *
while (lb < ub) {
/* quickly sort short lists */
if (ub - lb <= 12) {
/* partition into two segments */
m = partition (lb,ub);
/* sort the smallest partition */
/* to minimize stack requirements */
if (m - lb <= ub - m) {
quickSort(lb, m - 1);
lb = m + 1;
} else {
quickSort(m + 1,ub);
ub = m - 1;
template<class T>
void vector<T>::quickSort(){
long m,lb,ub;
lb = 0;
ub = s-1;
* sort array a[lb..ub] *

while (lb < ub) {
/* quickly sort short lists */
if (ub - lb <= 12) {
/* partition into two segments */
m = partition (lb,ub);
/* sort the smallest partition */
/* to minimize stack requirements */
if (m - lb <= ub - m) {
quickSort(lb, m - 1);
lb = m + 1;
} else {
quickSort(m + 1,ub);
ub = m - 1;
template<class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::linspace(float d1, float d2, int n)
{ // Linearly spaced vector.
//LINSPACE(X1, X2, N) generates N points between X1 and X2.

int i;
for(i = 0; i < n-1; i++){
vect[i] = d1 + i*(d2-d1)/((float)floor(n)-1);
vect[n-1] = d2;
return *this;
template<class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::hamming(int n)
{ // Linearly spaced vector.
//LINSPACE(X1, X2, N) generates N points between X1 and X2.
int i, m, n_1;
float r,x,h, pi2 = (float)M_PI*(float)2.0;
if(s != n) resize(n);
r = (float)fmod(n,2);
if (r == 0) m = n/2;
else m = n/2+1;
n_1 = n-1;

for(i = 0; i < m; i++){

x = (float)i/((float)n_1);
h = (float)0.54 - (float)0.46*(float)cos(pi2*x);
vect[i] = h;
vect[n_1 - i] = (float)h;
return *this;
template<class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::fir(int nn,const vector<T>& aa)
{ // returns the arbitrary shape fir filter coefficients design using the
// frequency sampling method. B = FIR2(N,A) designs an N'th order FIR
// digital filter with response called by transfer function A, and returns
// the filter coefficients in length N+1 vector B.

int i,j,re,im, npt, nbrk, nint, nb, ne;
float inc, dt,real,imag, h;
vector<float> a(10);
vector<float> freq;
vector<float> H;
vector<float> HC;
vector<float> rad_imag;
vector<float> wind;
vector<float> HR;
vector<float> HI;

if(nn < 512) npt = 256;

else npt = (int)pow(2,ceil(log(nn)/log(2)));

resize(nn+1); //Resize the FIR filter to the desired size

for(i = 0; i <=nn; i++) vect[i] = 0;

nbrk = aa.length();

freq.linspace(0.,1.,nbrk); //Generate the frequencies between 0..1

H.resize(npt+1); //This is the transfer function
HC.resize(npt*4); //This is the complex conjugate of the tran.
wind.hamming(nn+1); //Hamming Windown

++npt; //Length of [dc 1 2 ... nyquist] frequencies.

nb = 0;
for(i= 0; i < nint; i++){
ne = (int)floor(freq(i+1)*npt);
for(j = nb; j<ne; j++){
if( (nb+1) == ne) inc = 0.;
else inc = ((float)(j-nb))/((float)(ne-nb-1));
h = inc*aa(i+1) + (1 - inc)*aa(i);
H(j) = h;
nb = ne;
dt =(float) 0.5* nn;

for (i = 0; i < npt; i++){

rad_imag(i) = -dt*(float)M_PI*(float)i/((float)npt-1);

for (i = 0; i < npt;i++){

re = i*2;
im = re+1;
real = H(i)*(float)cos(rad_imag(i));
imag = H(i)*(float)sin(rad_imag(i));
HI(i) = imag;
HR(i) = real;
HC(re) = real;
HC(im) = imag;
for (i = 1;i < npt-1;i++){ // Fourier transform of real series.
j = i*2;

re = (npt-1)*4 - j;
im = re+1;
HR(re/2) = HC(j);
HI(re/2) = -HC(j+1);

for (i = 0; i < (npt-1)*2; i++){

re = i*2;
im = re+1;
HC(re) = HR(i);
HC(im) = HI(i);

HC.IFFT(); // Symmetric real series.

for(i = 0; i <= nn; i++){

vect[i] = HC(2*i)*wind(i); //Grad real part Apply window

return *this;
template <class T>
unsigned vector<T>::NumberOfBitsNeeded ( unsigned PowerOfTwo )
unsigned i;

if ( PowerOfTwo < 2 )
// fprintf (
// stderr,
// ">>> Error in fftmisc.c: argument %d to NumberOfBitsNeeded is too small.\n",
// PowerOfTwo );


for ( i=0; ; i++ )

if ( PowerOfTwo & (1 << i) )
return i;
template <class T>
unsigned vector<T>::ReverseBits ( unsigned index, unsigned NumBits )
unsigned i, rev;

for ( i=rev=0; i < NumBits; i++ )

rev = (rev << 1) | (index & 1);
index >>= 1;

return rev;
template <class T>
void vector<T>::fft(

unsigned NumSamples,
int InverseTransform,
float *RealIn,
float *ImagIn,
float *RealOut,
float *ImagOut )
unsigned NumBits; /* Number of bits needed to store indices */
unsigned i, j, k, n;
unsigned BlockSize, BlockEnd;

float angle_numerator = (float)-2.0 *(float) M_PI;

float tr, ti; /* temp real, temp imaginary */

if ( InverseTransform )
angle_numerator = -angle_numerator;

NumBits = NumberOfBitsNeeded ( NumSamples );

** Do simultaneous data copy and bit-reversal ordering into outputs...

for ( i=0; i < NumSamples; i++ )

j = ReverseBits ( i, NumBits );
RealOut[j] = RealIn[i];
ImagOut[j] = (ImagIn == NULL) ? (float)0.0 : ImagIn[i];

** Do the FFT itself...

BlockEnd = 1;
for ( BlockSize = 2; BlockSize <= NumSamples; BlockSize <<= 1 )
float delta_angle = angle_numerator / (float)BlockSize;
float sm2 = (float)sin ( -2 * delta_angle );
float sm1 = (float)sin ( -delta_angle );
float cm2 = (float)cos ( -2 * delta_angle );
float cm1 = (float)cos ( -delta_angle );
float w = 2 * cm1;
float ar[3], ai[3];

for ( i=0; i < NumSamples; i += BlockSize )

ar[2] = cm2;
ar[1] = cm1;

ai[2] = sm2;
ai[1] = sm1;

for ( j=i, n=0; n < BlockEnd; j++, n++ )

ar[0] = w*ar[1] - ar[2];
ar[2] = ar[1];
ar[1] = ar[0];

ai[0] = w*ai[1] - ai[2];

ai[2] = ai[1];
ai[1] = ai[0];

k = j + BlockEnd;
tr = ar[0]*RealOut[k] - ai[0]*ImagOut[k];
ti = ar[0]*ImagOut[k] + ai[0]*RealOut[k];

RealOut[k] = RealOut[j] - tr;

ImagOut[k] = ImagOut[j] - ti;

RealOut[j] += tr;
ImagOut[j] += ti;

BlockEnd = BlockSize;

** Need to normalize if inverse transform...

if ( InverseTransform )
float denom = (float)NumSamples;

for ( i=0; i < NumSamples; i++ )

RealOut[i] /= denom;
ImagOut[i] /= denom;

template<class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::vinv()
{ // vector inverse

for(int i=0;i<s;i++){
if(vect[i] != 0){
vect[i] = 1/vect[i];
return *this;
template<class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::conv(const vector<T>& aa)
{ // convolution or FIR filter
int sa, i, sz;
sa = aa.length();
sz = 2;

while (sz<s) sz*=2;

double* RealIn = new double [sz];
double* ImagIn = new double [sz];
double* RealOut = new double [sz];
double* ImagOut = new double [sz];

double* RealInAA = new double [sz];
double* ImagInAA = new double [sz];
double* RealOutAA = new double [sz];
double* ImagOutAA = new double [sz];

for(i = 0; i < sz; i++){

if(i < s)RealIn[i]=(double)vect[i];
else RealIn[i]=0.;
if(i<sa)RealInAA[i] = (double)aa(i);
else RealInAA[i] = 0.;
ImagIn[i] = 0.;
ImagInAA[i] = 0.;
for(i = 0; i < sz; i++){ //Complex Multiplication
RealIn[i] = RealOut[i]*RealOutAA[i]-ImagOut[i]*ImagOutAA[i];
ImagIn[i] = ImagOut[i]*RealOutAA[i]+RealOut[i]*ImagOutAA[i];

fft(sz,1,RealIn,ImagIn,RealOut,ImagOut); //Inverse FFT

for(i = 0; i < s; i++){

vect[i] = RealOut[i];

delete []RealIn;
delete []ImagIn;
delete []RealOut;
delete []ImagOut;
delete []RealInAA;
delete []ImagInAA;
delete []RealOutAA;
delete []ImagOutAA;

return *this;

template<class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::diff(const vector<T>& aa)
{ // calculate the derivative
int sa,i;
sa = aa.length();
for (i = 0; i < sa-1; i++) vect[i] = aa(i+1)- aa(i);

return *this;

template<class T>
vector<T>& vector<T>::offset(float shift,float scale)
{ // shift and scale the vector
for (int i = 0; i < s; i++) vect[i] = (vect[i]-shift)/scale;

return *this;


// ============================================================================

// Project : Wire Diagnostics Prototype
// CSCI :
// P/N :
// CSC :
// File Name : Vector.h
// ============================================================================
// Purpose:
// Notes:
// ============================================================================
// Revision History
// $Log::$
// Rev 1.0 Dec 11 2002 15:29:36 ebechhoe
//Initial revision.
// Rev 1.2 Dec 09 2002 09:04:08 ebechhoe
//setVect allows copy of pointer array. getVect sets a pointer array.
//Caller is responsible for memorey management
// *
// * Rev 1.0 Nov 16 2002 16:22:48 ebechhoefer
// * Initial revision.
// ============================================================================

#ifndef vectorH
#define vectorH
#pragma once
#define M_PI 3.14159265358979
#define SWAP(a,b) tempr=(a); (a)=(b); (b)=tempr
#define SQR(a) ((a)*(a))
#define VMIN(a,b) (a)<(b)? (a):(b)
#define VMAX(a,b) (a)>(b)? (a):(b)

//#include <iostream>

//template<class T>
//class sequence;

class xBoundary {};

class xDim {};
class xDivide {};
class xMemory {};

template <class T>

class vector {

T* vect;
int s;
unsigned NumberOfBitsNeeded ( unsigned PowerOfTwo );
unsigned ReverseBits ( unsigned index, unsigned NumBits );
void fft(unsigned ,int ,float *,float *,float *,float *);
void four1(double* data,int nn, int isign);
vector() {vect=0; s=0;}
vector (int size);
vector (const vector &rhs);

~vector () {wipe();}
void wipe () {if (vect && s) delete [] vect;}
int length () const {return s;}
void setvect (T* a,int i) {vect=a;s = i;}
T* getvect () {s = 0; return vect;}
void resize (int newsize);
void getmem (int size);
T& operator () (int a)
//if (a>=s || a<0)
//throw xBoundary();
return (vect[a]);
T& operator () (char *complex ,int a)
if (a>=s || a<0)
//throw xBoundary();
if (strcmp(complex,"im") == 0)
return (vect[a]);
return (vect[a]);

const T& operator () (int a) const

//if (a>=s || a<0)
//throw xBoundary();
return (vect[a]);
vector& operator += (T a)
{for (int i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]+=a; return *this;}
vector& operator -= (T a)
{for (int i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]-=a; return *this;}
vector& operator *= (T a)
{for (int i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]*=a; return *this;}
vector& operator /= (T a);
vector& operator += (const vector& a);
vector& operator -= (const vector& a);
vector& operator *= (const vector& a);
vector& operator /= (const vector& a);
vector& operator = (const vector& a);
vector& operator = (T a)
{for (int i=0; i<s; i++) vect[i]=a; return *this;}
vector& abs() { for(int i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]=(float)fabs(vect[i]); return *this; }
vector& vsqrt() { for(int i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]=(float)sqrt((float)fabs(vect[i])); return *this; }
vector& vexp() { for(int i=0;i<s;i++) vect[i]=(float)exp(vect[i]); return *this; }
vector& vinv();

T vmax();
T vmin();
void min_with_index(T& min_value, int& index, int start=0);
void max_with_index(T& min_value, int& index ,int start=0);
vector& demean ();
vector& blank ();
double magnitude ();
double mean ();
float median (int start = 0, int end = 0);
float variance ();
double angle_between (vector& b);
double project_onto(vector& b);
double distance_from(vector& b);
double dot_product(vector& b);
float sum();
float product();
vector& real_FFT();
vector& FFT(bool INV=0);
vector& IFFT();
vector& mag_FFT();
vector& real_IFFT();
void insertSort(long lb, long ub);
long partition(long lb, long ub);
void quickSort(long lb, long ub);
void quickSort();
vector & linspace(float d1, float d2, int n);
vector & hamming(int n);
vector & fir(int nn,const vector<T>& aa);
vector& conv(const vector<T>& a);
vector& diff(const vector<T>& a);
vector& offset(float ,float );

template <class T>
vector <T> operator + (const vector<T>& v1,const vector<T>& v2);

template <class T>

vector <T> operator - (const vector<T>& v1,const vector<T>& v2);

template <class T>

vector <T> operator * (const vector<T>& v1,const vector<T>& v2);

template <class T>

vector <T> operator / (const vector<T>& v1,const vector<T>& v2);