1. Introduction
Heated garments have been applied to prevent hypothermia in extreme cold environments, as heat therapy for relieving joint and muscle pain, or simply as a means to increase thermal comfort. The latest advancements focus on developing all-textile heating systems that are stretchable, breathable, washable, and can be produced using existing manufacturing equipment [
1,
2,
3]. Knitted heaters are made of lead wires composed of conductive yarns interconnected by parallel heating lines with a higher resistance. These heaters aim to provide a uniform temperature distribution, but the non-zero resistance of the lead wire sections causes more power to be dissipated near the power source connection and less further away (see
Figure 1).
The decrease in heating power of a ladder-type heater system is governed by three main parameters: the resistance of the lead wire sections, the resistance of the heating lines and the number of heating lines. For the design of garments with various sizes of heaters it would be beneficial to have a simple model which interrelates those parameters.
A heating element as shown in
Figure 1 can be modelled as a ladder network of series and parallel resistors, which is a well known problem in literature. In fact, ladder networks are frequently used as equivalent models for transport phenomena in systems consisting of a series of identical cells. They are thus not limited to the electrical domain but are also applicable to problems in the optical, mechanical, thermal, and chemical domains. Examples include pressure losses in irrigation systems, respiratory tissues [
4], energy loss in parallel-connected streetlamps, reflectarray antennas [
5], wave propagation in transmission lines [
6] transformer windings [
7], charge transfer in conductive polymers [
8], and the heat spreading in a heat sink with cooling fins [
9].
The electrical characteristics of ladder networks can be obtained by the application of Kirchoff’s laws to all elementary cells, resulting in a set of recursive relations for the node voltages, branch currents and equivalent resistance. In the past, various methods have been applied to find solutions for both finite and infinite ladder networks, including the use of Fibonacci sequences [
10], Z-transforms [
11], Green’s functions [
12], and the recursion-transform method [
13,
14]. As the number of cells in the ladder network increases, the number of equations also increases and either rigorous recursive circuit equations have to be solved or complex state-space matrices need to be handled resulting in rapidly increasing computational costs [
7]. It would therefore be useful to be able to express the results in simple-to-use analytical expressions. Solving the difference equation for the unit cell, Mondal [
7] derived generalized analytical expressions for the electrical characteristics of finite homogeneous ladder networks. Generalized analytical expressions for the electrical characteristics of finite homogeneous ladder networks are available, but they are often lengthy despite being in closed form. In this paper, we will derive more compact and user-friendly solutions, and apply these to obtain asymptotic expressions and design criteria. While this work focuses on purely resistive networks, the solutions can be easily extended to resistor-inductor-capacitor networks by substituting the resistances with the corresponding complex impedances. [
6,
7].
3. Example Cases
In order to validate our closed form expressions we will compare it with numerical simulations (using MatLab Simulink). In addition we will show how the approximations discussed in section 2.3 relate to these exact solutions. For this we will consider a typical case for a knitted heater strip and assume V0 = 10 V, Rh = 100 Ω and RA = RB = 1, 5 or 10 Ω, resulting in ε values of 0.02, 0.10 and 0.20, respectively.
First we consider the equivalent resistances as given by Equation (6) and 13 and their approximations, Equation (16). As shown in
Figure 4 for the ladder configuration the equivalent resistances decrease monotonically with increasing
n until they reach their asymptotic value given by the first of Equation (16). For small
ε the curves approximate the
1/n limit of the parallel resistor configuration. The closed form solutions (full lines) and simulation results agree exactly. The approximations obtained by substituting
δ = √ε (Equation (15)) almost coincide with the full solution (maximum deviation 0.65%) and can thus be considered as an accurate and practical simplification. The equivalent resistance of the diagonal configuration on the other hand, first follows an
1/n decay which is later taken over by the
asymptotic increase (2nd of Equation (16)). The asymptotes (shown as the intermittent lines in
Figure 5) are shown to converge well with the closed form solutions (full lines) and the simulations (symbols).
The currents in the lead wires and heaters (Equation (7)) are depicted in
Figure 6 and 7 for 5, 10 and 15 heater wires with an
ε value of 0.02 (colored full lines), and for
ε values of 0.10 and 0.20 (dashed lines). The simulated values (symbols) agree exactly with the closed form expressions in all considered cases. The lead wire currents are maximum near the power source and vanish at
k =
n. The heater currents (
Figure 7) always start at a value of
V0/Rh at
k=1. The curves have a parabolic shape and a minimum at
k =
n.
Figure 6.
Lead wire currents for ladder configuration. Lines are exact solutions, symbols are Simulink data.
Figure 6.
Lead wire currents for ladder configuration. Lines are exact solutions, symbols are Simulink data.
Figure 7.
Heater currents for ladder configuration. Lines are exact solutions, symbols are Simulink data.
Figure 7.
Heater currents for ladder configuration. Lines are exact solutions, symbols are Simulink data.
Figure 8.
Lead wire currents for diagonal configuration. Lines are exact solutions, symbols are Simulink data and dashed lines are approximations.
Figure 8.
Lead wire currents for diagonal configuration. Lines are exact solutions, symbols are Simulink data and dashed lines are approximations.
Figure 9.
Heater currents for diagonal configuration. Lines are exact solutions, symbols are Simulink data. Dashed lines are the approximation according to Equation (17).
Figure 9.
Heater currents for diagonal configuration. Lines are exact solutions, symbols are Simulink data. Dashed lines are the approximation according to Equation (17).
Figure 8 and
Figure 9 show similar plots for the diagonal configuration. In that case, the lead wire currents (
Figure 8) show a more linear behavior and Equation (17) (dashed lines) turn out to give good approximations. The heater currents have a minimum at
and show much more uniformity over the different heater nodes as compared to the ladder currents. The approximations now deviate more from the exact solutions.
In
Figure 10 and 11 we present the uniformity criterion for the ladder and diagonal cases. A uniformity of unity signifies that all heating wires have equal temperatures, which is only achievable in the ideal cases of
ε=0 or
n=1. For a configuration with 10 heaters, a uniformity value of 0.5 would require an
ε value of 0.09 for the diagonal case and a value of 0.02 for the ladder case, indicating that in the latter case a 4.5 times lower lead wire resistance would be needed.
Figure 10.
Contour plot for criterion Equation (18), Ladder configuration.
Figure 10.
Contour plot for criterion Equation (18), Ladder configuration.
Figure 11.
as
Figure 10, Diagonal configuration.
Figure 11.
as
Figure 10, Diagonal configuration.
The plots for the 2nd criterion are depicted in figures 11 and 12. Of practical importance is the case where the maximum heat generated by the lead wires matches that of the heaters maximum, i.e., . Assuming that we have a lead wire resistance of a fixed minimum value, we can use this criterium to calculate the maximum number of heaters in relation to a chosen heater resistance. With lead wire resistances of 1 Ω and a heater resistance of 100 Ω we obtain an ε of 0.02 and thus can have no more than 12, respectively 9 heaters for the ladder and diagonal configurations.
Figure 11.
Contour plot for criterion Equation (20), Ladder configuration.
Figure 11.
Contour plot for criterion Equation (20), Ladder configuration.
Figure 12.
as
Figure 11, Diagonal configuration. The dots are according to Equation (22).
Figure 12.
as
Figure 11, Diagonal configuration. The dots are according to Equation (22).