Diode Bridge Rectifier Loss Estimator mechanism

Model scope

NEEDS_REVIEW because the declared full/half bridge input is not matched by a defined formula, and the units and meaning of load current are not explicit. The honest_label field is empty; the instrument should explicitly label the result as an estimated forward-conduction loss, not total rectifier heat dissipation.

• Ploss=2×Vf×Iload is correct for a conventional full-wave bridge when exactly two diodes conduct and Vf is treated as a constant forward drop.
• The specification accepts bridge type full/half, but provides no formula or unambiguous definition for half. A half-wave rectifier typically uses Ploss=Vf×Iload during conduction; a center-tapped full-wave rectifier also has one conducting diode at a time, so the term half is ambiguous.
• The formula requires Iload to represent the relevant average diode/load current for average conduction loss. If the input is RMS current, peak current, or a time-varying waveform, the formula is insufficient without waveform and diode-model assumptions.
• The output description heat dissipation to plan for could be misleading because the calculated value is only diode forward-conduction loss, not total rectifier thermal design power including switching/reverse-recovery losses, leakage, wiring, or other component losses.

Units and conventions

• Vf must be entered in volts (V).
• Iload must be entered in amperes (A).
• For the stated formula, Iload is assumed to be the average load current during normal full-bridge operation, with two diodes carrying that current.
• Vf is assumed constant and identical for both conducting diodes; diode dynamic resistance and temperature dependence are ignored.
• The output Ploss is in watts (W), since V×A=W.
• The test vectors use bridge_type=full because the supplied formula does not define an unambiguous half-bridge calculation.

Inspectable vector

One of 4 source-bound review vectors:

{
  "inputs": {
    "diode_Vf": 0.7,
    "Vf_unit": "V",
    "load_current": 2,
    "current_unit": "A",
    "bridge_type": "full"
  },
  "expected_outputs": {
    "power_loss_W": 2.8
  },
  "working": "Two diodes conduct: Ploss=2×Vf×Iload=2×0.7 V×2.0 A=1.4 V×2.0 A=2.8 W."
}

Failure boundary

BREAK_CLAIMED · SELF_FLAGGED

The estimator has no stated overflow handling for extreme numeric inputs, and the half-bridge branch is accepted as an input but lacks an explicit formula. Negative-current handling is also undefined and can produce a physically invalid negative loss.

Other records

Sources and evidence

These pointers bind the page to evidence. They do not grant authority or collapse verification into deployment.

• VERIFIED_LEDGER.json
• evidence-tranche5/tranche5-results.json
• BOUNDARY_HAZARD_CATALOG.json