Find V(s) and V(t) for Vin=45 at an angle of 0o

  • Thread starter Thread starter yoamocuy
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the voltage V(s) and V(t) for a given input voltage Vin=45 at an angle of 0 degrees in the context of circuit analysis. Participants explore the implications of this notation in both the s-domain and time-domain representations, addressing the complexities of phasor notation and its interpretations.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an initial attempt at solving the problem, deriving expressions for current and voltage in terms of Vin, and identifies poles and zeros of the system.
  • Another participant corrects an earlier calculation, adjusting the expression for Vc/Vin and identifying new poles.
  • There is confusion regarding the interpretation of "Vin=45 at an angle of 0 degrees," with one participant questioning its meaning and another suggesting it represents a magnitude in the s-domain.
  • Some participants discuss the implications of the notation, suggesting that it indicates a voltage in the phasor domain and how it translates to the time domain, with differing interpretations of the time-domain representation.
  • One participant mentions the use of Steinmetz notation and its commonality among engineers, while another notes the lack of angular frequency in the notation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing interpretations of the phasor notation and its implications for the time-domain representation of voltage. There is no consensus on the correct interpretation or representation of Vin in the time domain.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the potential for confusion arising from different conventions in notation, particularly regarding the representation of phasors and their time-domain equivalents. The discussion reflects varying levels of familiarity with these concepts.

yoamocuy
Messages
37
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


everything's in the picture.



Homework Equations



V=I*R

Ic=Iin*R/(R+C)

The Attempt at a Solution


Ok, I think I got the first part alright. I found the current in terms of Vin to be: Vin/(25+(22.5*225/s)/(22.5+225/s)) which simplifies to Vin*(s+10)/(225s+475). Now that I have current I can use the current divider rule to find Ic and then multiply Ic by C to get Vc. By doing that I get the equation [Vin*(s+10)/(225s+475)]*[22.5s/(225/s+22.5)]*225/s. After much simplification I get Vc=9*Vin/(s+19). I divide that by Vin and get 9/(s+19). Setting the bottom equal to zero I get a pole at s=-19. Setting the entire thing equal to zero I get a zero at s=+or- infinity.

Once I get to the 2nd part I'm a bit confused... if Vin=45 at an angle of 0o, is my Vc(t) just simply equal to 45*9/(0+19) since no s is given?
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.jpg
    Untitled.jpg
    18.4 KB · Views: 467
Physics news on Phys.org
O i accidentally forgot to multiply my 25 by s at the beginning. I actually end up w Vc/Vin=9/(s^2+10s+9) so that makes my poles s=-1,-9 and my zeroes still + or - infinity.
 
yoamocuy said:
Once I get to the 2nd part I'm a bit confused... if Vin=45 at an angle of 0o, is my Vc(t) just simply equal to 45*9/(0+19) since no s is given?
I'm unfamiliar with the notation used. What is "45 at 0 degrees" supposed to mean?
 
well 45 at 0 degrees is still given in the s domain. 45 will be the magnitude and 0 will be the degree that's in the cos or sin if you have a jw anywhere, but since I don't have any imaginary numbers in my s then I shouldn't have a cos or sin anywhere. My problem is, I can solve for my poles and find s=-1, and -19. Does that mean that I should have a voltage for Vin that is = to 45*(e^-t + e^-19t), or is it simply 45?
 
yoamocuy said:
well 45 at 0 degrees is still given in the s domain. 45 will be the magnitude and 0 will be the degree that's in the cos or sin if you have a jw anywhere, but since I don't have any imaginary numbers in my s then I shouldn't have a cos or sin anywhere.
Sorry, that still doesn't make any sense to me.

I'm guessing it means V_{in}=45 e^{i0}=45. In other words, V_{in}(t)=45\delta(t).
 
vela said:
Sorry, that still doesn't make any sense to me.

I'm guessing it means V_{in}=45 e^{i0}=45. In other words, V_{in}(t)=45\delta(t).

Also known as the Steinmetz notation:

<br /> 45 \angle 0^{\circ}\;\texttt{V}<br />

which is basically a shorthand notation for complex numbers in polar form, whereas you in your post have used the exponential form. Both mean the same.
 
Oh, okay. From what I read about the notation, it's specifying V_{in} in the phasor domain, so in the time domain, you have V_{in}(t)=45\sqrt{2} \sin(\omega t+0^\circ).

Edit: I read a bit more, and it seems some people use different conventions. In light of the rest of what the question asks, I think it means

V_{in}(t)=45 \cos(\omega t+0^\circ)=Re(45 e^{i\omega t+0^\circ}).
 
Last edited:
<br /> 45 \cos(\omega t+0^\circ)=45 \angle 0^{\circ}<br />

That's the thing about Steinmetz notation, it doesn't show the angular frequency. It only shows you the magnitude of the corresponding phasor and its phase shift w.r.t. to the reference.

As far as I know, it's much more common amongst engineers than physicists (like the i and j conventions for complex numbers).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
3K