How to Find h(t) in Time Domain for y(t)=x(t)*h(t)?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around finding the impulse response h(t) in the time domain for the equation y(t) = x(t) * h(t), where * denotes convolution. Participants explore the use of the doublet function and the implications of the Fourier transforms of x(t) and y(t), concluding that h(t) may not have an inverse Fourier transform, suggesting the absence of a linear time-invariant (LTI) system. The conversation emphasizes the need for proper integration and the consideration of circuit responses to determine h(t). Ultimately, the complexity of the integration process is acknowledged, with suggestions to utilize Fourier integral tables for assistance. The thread highlights the challenges in deriving h(t) and the potential limitations of the system in question.
asmani
Messages
104
Reaction score
0
Suppose that y(t)=x(t)\ast h(t).

(\ast 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
    2.4 KB · Views: 910
Physics news on Phys.org
Bump!
 
Using the doublet function:

h(t) =
\begin{cases}
\delta', & \text{for } -\infty < t <0 \\
-\delta', & \text{for } 0 < t < \infty\\
\end{cases}
 
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 -\delta&#039;(t)?
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    627 bytes · Views: 835
The doublet is the derivative of the Dirac delta function.
 
You need to show your attempt at solving the problem on your own before you receive help here.
 
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_emi_guy said:
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:
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
asmani said:
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
rude man said:
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


the_emi_guy said:
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
    6.4 KB · Views: 750
  • #12
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
asmani said:
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!
rude man said:
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
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.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
32K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top