Finding the natural frequency of transfer function (2s) / (3s^2+5s+2)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the natural frequency of a transfer function represented as (2s) / (3s^2 + 5s + 2) within the context of control systems. Participants explore the implications of having an 's' term in the numerator and how it affects the identification of the system's natural frequency.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses uncertainty about how to handle the 's' in the numerator of the transfer function and questions whether it should be ignored when determining the natural frequency.
  • Another participant suggests that the transfer function should be adjusted based on the system's load conditions, indicating that the transfer function may differ under different circumstances.
  • There is a mention of using Laplace transforms and partial fraction decomposition as methods to analyze the system further.
  • A participant shares their approach to solving the problem, detailing a series of equations and transformations, but remains unsure if their method aligns with the problem's intent.
  • Questions arise regarding the appropriateness of approximations in the context of the frequency domain, with a participant seeking clarification on the concept of linear approximations in this setting.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on how to handle the 's' in the numerator or the implications for finding the natural frequency. Multiple competing views and methods are presented, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the system's behavior under different loading conditions, and the discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps related to the transfer function analysis.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in control systems, particularly those exploring the nuances of transfer functions and natural frequency analysis.

s3a
Messages
828
Reaction score
8
Homework Statement
See attached PDF
Relevant Equations
(ω_n)^2 / [s^2 + 2ζ(ω_n) + (ω_n)^2]
In the context of control systems, if I have a vibratory second-order system, (ω_n)^2 / [s^2 + 2ζ(ω_n) + (ω_n)^2], I know how to get the natural frequency ω_n. So, if I have something like 2 / (3s^2+5s+2), I know how to get the natural frequency ω_n.

However, if I instead have something like (2s) / (3s^2+5s+2), I'm not sure what to do. Do I just ignore the s on the numerator and proceed like if it wasn't there or what?

Any input would be greatly appreciated!

Edit:
P.S.
For what it's worth, I'm doing this as part of a larger problem, so if I made a mistake and it's impossible for a vibratory second-order system to have an s on the numerator, just let me know. The problem is question 3 from the PDF document
 

Attachments

Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
First,G(s)=y2/u1 it is not equal G1(s) multiplied by G2(s) since y1 in G1(s) is calculated when is no load after y1.In case there is a load [L2 series with r2] then y2/u1=2s/(3s^2+6s+2) and not 2s/(3s^2+5s+2).
Second:
However, since 6^2-4*3*2=12>0 sqrt(+12) is real and then no oscillation is expected [the damping factor is more than 1 and no ω]
 
If approximations don't work you can do the Laplace transform to verify. The equation you provided you can do do a partial fraction and use a table.
 
Thanks for your input, Babadag, but I still don't fully understand how to compute the connection of the two "sub-circuits". I also don't understand why multiplying the two transfer functions isn't good enough. Could you please elaborate on those?

Having said that, I figured out how to do the problem (as you can see the final answer is what you said), but I'm not sure if that's how the problem statement intended I do it. For what it's worth, here is what I did.:

Equation 1:
u_1 = (1 Ω)(I_A (t)) + (1 H) d [I_A (t) - I_B (t)] /dt
U_1 (s) = (1 Ω)(I_A (s)) + (1 H) s [I_A (s) - I_B (s)]
Removing the units for visual clarity,
U_1 (s) = I_A (s) + s I_A (s) - s I_B (s)

Equation 2:
0 = (3 H)(d/dt I_b (t)) + (2 Ω)(I_b (t)) + (1 H)[ d (I_b (t) - I_a (t) /dt]
0 = (3 H)(s I_B (s)) + (2 Ω)(I_B (s)) + (1 H)[ s (I_B (s) - s I_A (s)]
Removing the units for visual clarity,
0 = 3 s I_B (s) + 2 I_B (s) + s I_B (s) - s I_A (s)
0 = 4s I_B(s) + 2 I_B (s) - s I_A (s)
0 = (4s + 2) I_B (s) - s I_A (s)
I_A (s) = (4s + 2)/s I_B (s)

Equation 3:
y_2 (t) = (2 Ω)( I_b (t) )
Y_2 (s) = (2 Ω) I_b (s)
Removing the units for visual clarity,
Y_2 (s) = 2 I_B (s)

Then, we mix equations 1 and 2 to get the following, Equation 4,
Y_1 (s) / U_1 (s) = [2 I_B (s)] / [I_A (s) + s I_A (s) - s I_B (s)]

Then, mixing Equation 2 and Equation 4, we get
Y_1 (s) / U_1 (s) = [2 I_B (s)] / [{(4s + 2)/s I_B (s)} + s {(4s + 2)/s I_B (s)} - s I_B (s)]
Y_1 (s) / U_1 (s) = [2 I_B (s)] / [{(4s + 2)/s I_B (s)} + {(4s + 2) I_B (s)} - s I_B (s)]
Y_1 (s) / U_1 (s) = [2 I_B (s)] / [(4s + 2)/s I_B (s) + (4s + 2) I_B (s) - s I_B (s)]
Y_1 (s) / U_1 (s) = 2 / [(4s + 2)/s + (4s + 2) - s]
Y_1 (s) / U_1 (s) = 2s / [s(4s + 2)/s + s(4s + 2) - s^2]
Y_1 (s) / U_1 (s) = 2s / [4s + 2 + 4s^2 + 2s - s^2]
Y_1 (s) / U_1 (s) = 2s / [6s + 2 + 3s^2]
Y_1 (s) / U_1 (s) = 2s / [3s^2 + 6s + 2]

And, Joshy, thanks for the partial fractions and table tip; I later realized that while doing another problem.

What do you mean about an approximation, though?

I'm not too familiar with this stuff, but I've only ever seen stuff about a linear approximation, but that was in the time domain, not frequency domain. Were you suggesting the possibility of using a linear approximation in the frequency domain and then getting the inverse Laplace transform of that?

P.S.
Sorry for the late response!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K