Author
Listed:
- Stephen Birkett
- Jean Thoma
- Peter Roe
Abstract
As tools for teaching physical system modelling and simulation both the bond graph and graph-theoretic methods have clearly demonstrated value at undergraduate and graduate levels of education, and in applied industrial contexts. The very close connections between the two techniques give them various shared attributes in this respect, notably the three main virtues of physical analogy, capability for causal analysis and the cross-disciplinary universality of the energy flow representation. An outline is given of the main technical features, and how these relate to the pedagogical virtues, as well as an account of the complete technical equivalence of bond graphs and linear graphs as representations of a discrete physical system. Several important misconceptions about this relationship are discussed and clarified, including continued doubts about methodological equivalence, apparent differences that can be attributed to arbitrary formality and convention, and the non-use of some graph-theoretic equation formulation procedures with a bond graph model. Despite these facts, teaching experience has demonstrated that a degree of pedagogical asymmetry still exists between the bond graph and linear graph approaches. This situation is explained through differences in model symbolism and, in particular, as a consequence of following different pathways to arrive at the simultaneous port and terminal representations that characterize either model. The existence of an extensive resource of universal, flexible computer software for implementing and analysing bond graph physical system models is also an important factor which is not available for linear graph modelling, an important practical consideration that is likely to have curtailed the widespread use of the latter method in pedagogical situations.
Suggested Citation
Stephen Birkett & Jean Thoma & Peter Roe, 2006.
"A pedagogical analysis of bond graph and linear graph physical system models,"
Mathematical and Computer Modelling of Dynamical Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2-3), pages 107-125, April.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:nmcmxx:v:12:y:2006:i:2-3:p:107-125
DOI: 10.1080/13873950500069052
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:nmcmxx:v:12:y:2006:i:2-3:p:107-125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/NMCM20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.