Transient VRM Response From a Large Circular Loop Over a Conductive and Magnetically Viscous Half-Space

1Appendix

We wish to solve expression (39) for RB=1R_B=1 to obtain expression (42). This is equivalent to solving an expression of the form:

At3/2+lntγ+lnτ2,A t^{-3/2} + \ln t \approx -\gamma + \ln \tau_2,

where

A=ln(τ2/τ1)15Q(ρ/a)π ⁣(2+ΔχΔχ)(μ0σ)3/2a3.A = \frac{\ln(\tau_2/\tau_1)}{15 \, Q(\rho /a) \sqrt{\pi}} \! \Bigg ( \frac{2+\Delta \chi}{\Delta \chi} \Bigg ) (\mu_0 \sigma)^{3/2} a^3.

Changing the variable u=t3/2u=t^{-3/2}, and with some algebra, we can rewrite Eq. (1) as

32Aue32Au32Ae32(γlnτ2).- \frac{3}{2} A u e^{- \frac{3}{2} A u} \approx - \frac{3}{2} A e^{\frac{3}{2} (\gamma - \ln \tau_2)}.

Solutions to an expression of the form xex=Cx e^x = C are defined as branches of the Lambert W function W[n,C]W[n,C], where nn are integer values Corless et al., 1996. Therefore, the solutions unu_n to Eq. (3) are

un23AW[n,32Ae32(γlnτ2)]u_n \approx - \frac{2}{3A} W \Big [ n, - \frac{3}{2} A e^{\frac{3}{2}(\gamma - \ln \tau_2)} \Big ]

We can use Eqs. (41) and (2) to show A=23tβ3/2A = \frac{2}{3} t_\beta^{3/2}. By replacing un=tn3/2u_n = t_n^{-3/2}:

tn3/2tβ3/2W[n,tβ3/2e32(γlnτ2)]        tntβ(W[n,(tβτ2eγ)3/2])2/3\begin{align} &t_n^{-3/2} \approx - t_\beta^{-3/2} W \Big [ n, - t_\beta^{3/2} e^{\frac{3}{2}(\gamma - \ln \tau_2)} \Big ] \nonumber \\ \implies \; \; &t_n \approx t_\beta \Bigg ( - W \Bigg [ n, - \Big ( \frac{t_\beta}{\tau_2} e^\gamma \Big )^{3/2} \Bigg ] \Bigg )^{-2/3} \end{align}

Real-valued solutions W[n,x]W[n,x] only exist for n=1,0n=-1,0 Corless et al. (1996). Additionally, for tnt_n to occur after the primary field has been removed (tn0t_n \geq 0), W[n,x]W [n,x] requires 1/ex0-1/e \leq x \leq 0. Thus, by Eq. (5):

1/e(tβτ2eγ)3/20    e23γ0.288267tβτ20\begin{align} & -1/e \leq - \Big ( \frac{t_\beta}{\tau_2}e^\gamma \Big )^{3/2} \leq 0 \nonumber \\ \implies & e^{-\frac{2}{3}-\gamma} \approx 0.288267 \geq \frac{t_\beta}{\tau_2} \geq 0 \end{align}

Recall that our choice in after-effect function (11) is only valid for τ1tτ2\tau_1 \ll t \ll \tau_2. Therefore, the condition defined in expression (6) is reasonable under the assumption that tβτ2t_\beta \ll \tau_2. We evaluated Eq. (5) for n=0n=0 and noticed the solutions were t0≪̸τ2t_0 \not \ll \tau_2. This violates our conditions for the after-effect function and is therefore not a valid solution. On the other hand, solutions of Eq. (5) for n=1n=-1 did not violate conditions for the after-effect function. The solutions obtained using W[1,x]W[-1,x] consistently showed tαtβt_\alpha \leq t_\beta. As a result, the time tαt_\alpha which solves RB=1R_B=1 in expression (39) is given by:

tαtβ(W[ ⁣1,(tβτ2eγ)3/2])2/3tβ(47)t_\alpha \approx t_\beta \Bigg ( - W \Bigg [ - \! 1, - \Big ( \frac{t_\beta}{\tau_2} e^\gamma \Big )^{3/2} \Bigg ] \Bigg )^{-2/3} \leq t_\beta \tag{47}
References
  1. Corless, R. M., Gonnet, G. H., Hare, D. E. G., Jeffrey, D. J., & Knuth, D. E. (1996). On the Lambert-W function. Advances in Computational Mathematics, 5(1), 329–359. 10.1007/BF02124750