Can You Always Factor the Denominator in Partial Fraction Expansion?

Runei
Messages
193
Reaction score
17
Now this is a pretty straight forward question. And I just want to make sure that I am not doing anything stupid.

But when doing partial fraction expansions of the type

\frac{K}{s^{2}+2\zeta\omega_{n}s+\omega_{n}^{2}} Shouldnt I always be able to factor the denominator into the following:

\left(s-s_{1}\right)\left(s-s_{2}\right)

where

s_{1} = -\zeta\omega_{n}+\omega_{n}\sqrt{\zeta^{2}-1} and
s_{2} = -\zeta\omega_{n}-\omega_{n}\sqrt{\zeta^{2}-1}

And thus being able to make the following expansion:

\frac{A}{s-s_{1}}+\frac{A}{s-s_{2}} = \frac{K}{\left(s-s_{1}\right)\left(s-s_{2}\right)}

Since s1 and s2 are the roots of the polynomial?

These roots may ofcourse either be real and distinct, repeated or complex conjugates.

Thank in advance,
Rune
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The reason for the question is that I am reading for an exam for Control Systems. And I am using LaPlace transforms to solve the differential equations.

To get back to the time-domain I am using partial fraction expansions, and for example right now I am trying to do the partial fraction expansion of

\frac{K}{s\cdot\left(s^{2}+2\zeta\omega_{n}s + ω_{n}^{2} \right)}

And I am trying to determine whether I am actually doing it wrong when factoring, or whether I can actually solve the problem by expanding to the following:

\frac{A}{s}+\frac{B}{s-s_{1}}+\frac{C}{s-s_{2}} = \frac{K}{s\cdot\left(s-s_{1}\right)\cdot\left(s-s_{2}\right)}
 
This factorization is fine, as long as there are no repeated real roots in the quadratic.

Consider the case where the denominator is s(s2 + 4s + 4). Here is the partial fraction decomposition:

$$ \frac{K}{s(s^2 + 4s + 4)} = \frac{A}{s} + \frac{B}{s + 2} + \frac{C}{(s + 2)^2}$$
 
Thank you Mark!

I actually found an error further back in my work and that was because I didn't get the correct result. But thank you for clarifying and making me sure :)
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top