2nd order non-homogenous differentila equation

  • Thread starter Thread starter ofarook81
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    2nd order
ofarook81
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I have to start from a simple 2nd order ordinary deifferential equation as:

y’’+2ξωny’+ω2y = F

The solution should be of the form

y = ∫F(Ω) G(t - Ω) dΩ (integral from 0-t)


where

G(t) = 1/ω * e^(-ξωnt)sin(ξt) for ξ<1

G(t) = e^(-ωnt) for ξ=1

G(t) = 1/ω * e^(-ξωnt)sinh(ξt) for ξ>1

and

ω = ωn√|1-ξ^2|

n in ωn is subscript.

Any help in this regard will be highly gratified.

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
What exactly do you want to do?
 


I have to start from a simple 2nd order ordinary deifferential equation as:

y’’+2ξωy’+ω^{2}_{n}y = F


The solution should be

y = ∫F(Ω) G(t - Ω) dΩ (integral from 0-t)


G(t) and ω is given in my first post.

Can u help. If u can give me ur email i will email u the problem in a better readable manner.

Thanks a lot for your concern.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure what you are trying to do but I'm pretty sure the problem is not properly stated.
By convolution, G(t) must be the impulse response of the second order LTI system which implies G^{&#039;&#039;}+2 \zeta \omega _{n} G^{&#039;} + \omega _{n}^{2} G=\delta (t)

The stated G(t) are wrong for *all* cases (underdamped, critically-damped, and overdamped). i.e for the underdamped case, the damped rad freq should be omega_d, not zeta; in critically-damped case, the response is not a monotone function.

Solve the G(t) correctly first. It can be done by finding the step response first then take a time derivative of the step response.

If F(t) is LapLaceable, using Laplace transform to find y(t) is usually easier.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top