FM Signal Complex Envelope: Understanding & Resolving Integral

  • Thread starter Thread starter FrankJ777
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Complex Fm
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the complex envelope of a Frequency Modulated (FM) signal, specifically focusing on the integral used to determine the angle θ(t) of the complex envelope modulated by a cosine signal m(t). Participants explore the implications of different limits of integration and the nature of the signals involved.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the equation for the complex envelope and expresses confusion about the lower limit of integration being -∞, questioning if it should be 0 instead.
  • Another participant suggests that the integral should indeed be from 0 to t, indicating a preference for evaluating realizable signals.
  • A participant references a tutorial that uses a different approach, noting inconsistencies that may arise from simplifying the concept.
  • One participant explains that the integral represents the phase and discusses the periodic nature of sine waves, suggesting that an arbitrary starting time can be assumed.
  • Another participant clarifies that the integral can technically go from -∞ to t if the signal is causal, providing a more general expression for the phase.
  • There is a discussion about the notation and the implications of using causal versus non-causal signals in the context of the integral.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriate limits of integration for the integral, with some advocating for a lower limit of 0 and others supporting the use of -∞. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these choices on the interpretation of the FM signal.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the choice of integration limits may depend on whether the signal is considered causal or non-causal, and there are references to potential inconsistencies in simplified tutorials.

FrankJ777
Messages
140
Reaction score
6
Hey guys, I'm trying to understand the complex envelope of a Frequency Modulated signal. According to the Textbook by Leon Couch, the complex envelope of an FM signal, g(t) modulated by the signal m(t) is given by:

g(t) = Ae[itex]^{jθ(t)}[/itex]

where

A = |m(t)|

and

θ(t) = D[itex]_{f}[/itex] [itex]\int[/itex][itex]^{t}_{-∞}[/itex] m(σ) dσ

Now if i want to determine the angle θ(t) of the complex envelope of the FM signal modulated by m(t) = Am cos (ωt)

i get:
θ(t) = D[itex]_{f}[/itex] [itex]\int[/itex][itex]^{t}_{-∞}[/itex] Am cos (ωσ) dσ

= D[itex]_{f}[/itex] Am [itex]\frac{sin(ωσ)}{ω}[/itex]|[itex]^{t}_{-∞}[/itex]

= D[itex]_{f}[/itex] Am ( [itex]\frac{sin(ωt)}{ω}[/itex] - [itex]\frac{sin(ω(-∞)}{ω}[/itex] ) This is where i get stuck. I'm not sure what to do with the -∞.

I though I knew how to deal with improper integrals, but I'm not sure where to go from here. Also I'm not sure why the lower limit of integration should be -∞, it seems to me like it should be zero? Any one know how I can resolve that integral? I would like to really understand this concept, but this part has me stuck.

Thanks a lot.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
It should be 0 to t
 
Here is the equation for the FM complex envelope given by a tutorial from the Illinois Institute of Technology, also my textbook by Leon Couch uses an integral with the lower limit at negitive infinty. I did notice however that there are some tutorials that use 0 as the lower limit. Anyways, I'm not sure what to do with this.

99o0eo.jpg


Here's a link to the whole tutorial.

http://www.ece.iit.edu/~biitcomm/research/references/Other/Tutorials%20in%20Communications%20Engineering/Tutorial%2017%20-%20Frequency%20Modulation%20(FM)%20,%20FSK,%20MSK%20and%20more.pdf
 
Read the wikipedia page for fm modulation. Also, try to understand phase modulation vs frequency modulation.

I'll take a stab at it, but I'm not an expert. Since, in the above equation, the intregal represents the phase, you must integrate the frequency since the beginning of time to determine the phase. Since you are dealing with a sinewave and it repeats you can assume an arbitrary starting time. I'm not sure about the difference between starting at 0 or pi/4 or any other initial time. But I think you just exploit the periodic nature of the signal.
 
I read the whole tutorial: it tries to keep things simple, which is a good (since it is just an introductory tutorial), but I think this may lead to some inconsistencies if you aren't careful. However, I noted a slightly abused notation; thus, let me restate things a bit.

Given the following signal: [itex]s(t) = A_c\cos(2\pi f_c t + \varphi(t))[/itex], you can define the so-called instantaneous phase [itex]\theta(t) \triangleq 2\pi f_c t + \varphi(t)[/itex], and the so-called instantaneous frequency [itex]f_i(t) = \frac{1}{2\pi} \frac{d}{dt} \theta(t)[/itex]. We know that in FM: [itex]k_fm(t)=\frac{1}{2\pi} \frac{d}{dt} \varphi(t)[/itex]. Now, if you try to solve this equation, giving an explicit expression of [itex]\varphi(t)[/itex], you end up with the integral you wrote. Usually, that integral goes from [itex]t_0[/itex] (which can be set equal to zero) to a generic [itex]t[/itex]. However, it isn't technically incorrect to say that it goes from [itex]-\infty[/itex] to [itex]t[/itex] if you let [itex]m(t)[/itex] be a causal signal, i.e. there must exist [itex]t_0[/itex] (which, again, can be zero) such as that [itex]m(t)=0 \ \ for \ \ t<t_0[/itex]. More precisely, the generic expression is: [tex]\varphi(t) = 2\pi k_f \int^t_{t_0} m(\tau) d\tau + \varphi_0[/tex] where [itex]\varphi_0 \triangleq \varphi(t_0)[/itex] is the initial phase (which is irrelevant and can be neglected). By choosing [itex]t_0=0[/itex] and [itex]\varphi_0=0[/itex], you obtain:
[tex]\varphi(t) = 2\pi k_f \int^t_0 m(\tau) d\tau[/tex] and this is the standard formula. If you (re)do all the computations with this formula, you can "forget" the fact that [itex]m(t)[/itex] must be causal, since the integration domain is now a finite time interval. However, if you want to keep using your notation, then you must write: [itex]m(t)=A_m cos(\omega t) u(t)[/itex], where u(t) is the unit step function (zero for t<0, 1 otherwise), where I assumed (for simplicity) [itex]t_0=0[/itex]. Hope this helps.
 
Nice explanation.
 
Thanks for your guy's explanations. If i can sum up what you said...
When we consider signals, m(t) that begin at time t=0 or t> 0, which are realizable signals, we evaluate the integral from the lower limit of 0?
That seems to make sense to me. Hope I understand it correctly.
Thanks.
 
So the integral with the lower limit of neg infinity, is a more general expression, that could include non causal signals?
 
Last edited:
FrankJ777 said:
So the integral with the lower limit of neg infinity, is a more general expression, that could include non casual signals?
You mean "causal", right? Yes, it may be thought as such (theoretically).

meBigGuy said:
Nice explanation.
Thanks!
 
  • #10
Oops! Causul. Just edited it!
Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K