Laplace transform integral problem

TyErd
Messages
297
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hey guys, I've attached the question that's troubling me. I've also attached the table and formulas of Laplace transform for you convenience.




Homework Equations



attached

The Attempt at a Solution



Right now, I am thinking the best way to do this problem is by working backwards. I'm using the convolution integral formula.
I've already established that G(s) is 1/(s+4) using inverse Laplace transforms but I am not sure if that will get me an answer for f(t) rather F(s).

thats my inverse laplace------->invL
and laplace is ------> L
 

Attachments

  • 666666666666.png
    666666666666.png
    3 KB · Views: 586
  • 777777777777.png
    777777777777.png
    58.3 KB · Views: 647
  • 8888888888888.png
    8888888888888.png
    50.6 KB · Views: 574
Physics news on Phys.org
When you take the Laplace transform of both sides of the equation, what are you getting? Where are you getting stuck?
 
I think I'm stuck because I'm not sure how to approach a problem like this. anyway, Laplace transform of both sides just makes it L{f(t)}= F(s)G(s) right? no that's not right coz there the 6t-5
 
Last edited:
edit:
I am incorrect. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
so that means h(t)= 6t so H(t) = 6/s^2

therefore
F(s) = 6/s^2 + 5/(s+4) F(s),
rearrange and F(s) = 6(s+4) / s^2(s-1)
and inverse Laplace it and f(t) = 6*(-4t + 5 e^t - 5)

is that right, I am not sure if my calculations are correct.
 
Last edited:
i just saw your last post...r u sure ur wrong coz it actually made sense to me...
 
TyErd said:
i just saw your last post...r u sure ur wrong coz it actually made sense to me...

The limits of integration in the problem are from 0 to t, which makes me feel uncomfortable about my answer. If it were convolution, the limits would be -infinity to infinity. If f(u) is nonzero only for u > 0, then the limits could be from 0 to infinity. I'm just unsure why the top limit is t.
 
in the formula table I've provided, for convolution the limits says 0 to t.
 
TyErd said:
in the formula table I've provided, for convolution the limits says 0 to t.

If that's the case, then what I said made sense. I suppose G(i) is also zero for i < 0. So G(t-u) is zero outside u > t.
 
  • #10
TyErd said:
so that means h(t)= 6t so H(t) = 6/s^2

therefore
F(s) = 6/s^2 + 5/(s+4) F(s),
rearrange and F(s) = 6(s+4) / s^2(s-1)
and inverse Laplace it and f(t) = 6*(-4t + 5 e^t - 5)

is that right, I am not sure if my calculations are correct.

[tex]F(s) = \frac{6}{s^2} - 5 \frac{1}{s+4} F(s)[/tex]
Note the minus sign. Your next step would have been right if it had been addition (assuming a/bc is atually a/b/c). It is actually:
[tex]F(s) = 6\frac{s+4}{s^2(s+9)}[/tex]

Your final answer also WOULD have been right without the sign error. Give it a try again with the proper minus sign this time.
 
  • #11
ah i see so then the value of f(t) is 6 ((4t)/9 - 5e^(-9 t))/81 + 5/81 correct?
 
  • #12
or (8*t)/3 - (10*exp(-9*t)/27) + 10/27
 
  • #13
TyErd said:
ah i see so then the value of f(t) is 6 ((4t)/9 - 5e^(-9 t))/81 + 5/81 correct?

This has a lot of right terms in it, but it looks like you messed up on your parentheses.

[tex]6(\frac{4t}{9} - \frac{5e^{-9t}}{81}+\frac{5}{81})[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K