Finding the impulse response

  • Thread starter asmani
  • Start date
  • #1
105
0
Suppose that [itex]y(t)=x(t)\ast h(t)[/itex].

([itex]\ast[/itex] denotes convolution)

Here are the signals:

attachment.php?attachmentid=49419&stc=1&d=1343586159.png


How to find h(t) in time domain? Does there exist such h(t)?

Thanks in advance.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    2.6 KB · Views: 796

Answers and Replies

  • #2
105
0
Bump!
 
  • #3
766
79
Using the doublet function:

h(t) =
\begin{cases}
\delta', & \text{for } -\infty < t <0 \\
-\delta', & \text{for } 0 < t < \infty\\
\end{cases}
 
  • #4
105
0
Thanks.

Let's consider the delta function as the limiting case of the following function:

attachment.php?attachmentid=49463&stc=1&d=1343722276.png


Now, isn't your function the same as [itex]-\delta'(t)[/itex]?
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    997 bytes · Views: 710
  • #5
766
79
The doublet is the derivative of the Dirac delta function.
 
  • #7
vela
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Education Advisor
15,093
1,672
You need to show your attempt at solving the problem on your own before you receive help here.
 
  • #8
105
0
A clarification: This thread is moved from electrical engineering forum. Maybe it is a homework or coursework-type question, but actually it's not a homework or a coursework question, and I believe cannot be.

Anyway, here is my attempt:
$$\mathcal{F}\left \{ x(t) \right \}=sinc^2(f)\; ;\: \mathcal{F}\left \{ y(t) \right \}=2sinc(2f)$$
$$\mathcal{F}\left \{ h(t) \right \}=\frac{\mathcal{F}\left \{ y(t) \right \}}{\mathcal{F}\left \{ x(t) \right \}}=\frac{2sinc(2f)}{sinc^2(f)}=4\pi f\cot(2\pi f)$$
I guess that this function has no inverse Fourier transform, and thus there is no LTI system with x(t) as input and y(t) as output. Is this correct? If yes, how to prove?

The doublet is the derivative of the Dirac delta function.
I know that, but for t<0 we have δΔ(t)=0, which implies that for t<0, δΔ'(t)=0. That's why I think your function is the same as -δ'(t).
 
Last edited:
  • #9
766
79
Think of it this way...

1 - What kind of circuit would convert your x(t) to your y(t)?

2 - Next, what would be the impulse response of that circuit? This would be your h(t).
 
  • #10
rude man
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
7,931
820
A clarification: This thread is moved from electrical engineering forum. Maybe it is a homework or coursework-type question, but actually it's not a homework or a coursework question, and I believe cannot be.

Anyway, here is my attempt:
$$\mathcal{F}\left \{ x(t) \right \}=sinc^2(f)\; ;\: \mathcal{F}\left \{ y(t) \right \}=2sinc(2f)$$
$$\mathcal{F}\left \{ h(t) \right \}=\frac{\mathcal{F}\left \{ y(t) \right \}}{\mathcal{F}\left \{ x(t) \right \}}=\frac{2sinc(2f)}{sinc^2(f)}=4\pi f\cot(2\pi f)$$
I guess that this function has no inverse Fourier transform, and thus there is no LTI system with x(t) as input and y(t) as output. Is this correct? If yes, how to prove?

What reason do you have for assuming your H(f) has no inverse? Have you tried doing the integration?

Ref: G.A. Campbell and R. M. Foster, "Fourier Integrals for Practical Applications", D. Van Nostrand 1958.

PS - I did not check to see that you did X(f) and Y(f) correctly ...
 
  • #11
105
0
What reason do you have for assuming your H(f) has no inverse? Have you tried doing the integration?

Ref: G.A. Campbell and R. M. Foster, "Fourier Integrals for Practical Applications", D. Van Nostrand 1958.

PS - I did not check to see that you did X(f) and Y(f) correctly ...

When the plot is as follows, I don't know how to do the integration, if the integral exists.

attachment.php?attachmentid=49543&stc=1&d=1344077746.png


Think of it this way...

1 - What kind of circuit would convert your x(t) to your y(t)?

2 - Next, what would be the impulse response of that circuit? This would be your h(t).

I guess there is no such circuit/LTI system/h(t). Let's consider two cases:

1. The input to the system S is y(2t), and the output is x(t). We can easily find that the impulse response of S is h(t)=y(2t).

2. The input to the system S' is y(t), and the output is x(t). We can observe that S' is the same S series with another system S'' which gives the output z(2t) for the input z(t). Obviously S'' is not a LTI system, so S' isn't.

That's why I think it's possible that the original system cannot be LTI either.

Thanks.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    7.7 KB · Views: 640
  • #12
rude man
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
7,931
820
You're not integrating the function you sketched, which I presume is your H(f).
You're trying to integrate ∫H(f)ejωtdf over f = -∞ to f = +∞ with ω = 2πf.
 
  • #13
105
0
The input to the system S' is y(t), and the output is x(t). We can observe that S' is the same S series with another system S'' which gives the output z(2t) for the input z(t). Obviously S'' is not a LTI system, so S' isn't.
Actually this argument was not correct!
You're not integrating the function you sketched, which I presume is your H(f).
You're trying to integrate ∫H(f)ejωtdf over f = -∞ to f = +∞ with ω = 2πf.

Of course, that's h(0). Can you help me on this integration?

Thanks.
 
  • #14
rude man
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
7,931
820
I'm wondering about your initial approach, now that I've looked at it some more.

Looking at your x(t) and y(t) graphs, and taking the Fourier integrals of both,

X(w) = (1/2π)∫(t+1)exp(-jwt)dt from t= -1 to 0 + (1/2π)∫(1-t)exp(-jwt)dt from t= 0 to +1.

Similarly,
Y(w) = (1/2π)∫exp(-jwt)dt from t = -1 to +1.

Then H(w) = Y(w)/X(w) and finally

h(t) = ∫H(w)exp(jwt)dw.

I tried to do the X(w) integration and found it pretty messy, which means subject to making mistakes. I used ∫eaxdx = eax/a and ∫xeaxdx = (eax/a2)(ax-1).

The Y(w) integration is of course much simpler. The h(t) inverse integral promises to be messy also.

So, best I can do for you is to suggest either you try to muddle through the integrations, or get a table of Fourier integrals like the one I recommended previously. I wish I had that table but I don't.

Of course, it may be that the best approach is graphic convolution, but I'm not inclined to try that myself.
 

Related Threads on Finding the impulse response

Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
0
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
111
Replies
1
Views
629
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
714
Replies
4
Views
1K
Top