Laplace Transform of S+4: Explanation & Examples

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the Laplace transform of the equation involving Y(s) and the term S+4. To isolate Y(s), it is necessary to divide both sides by S+4, leading to Y(s) being expressed in terms of partial fractions. The correct interpretation of the Laplace transform indicates that 4Y(s) is not equal to 1/(S+4), and confusion arises regarding how Y(s) is factored. The participants emphasize the importance of correctly applying the inverse Laplace transform to derive y(t) from Y(s). A solid grasp of basic Laplace transforms is recommended for clarity in these calculations.
Ry122
Messages
563
Reaction score
2
http://users.on.net/~rohanlal/laplacetrans5.jpg
In the third line, what is S+4 the laplace transform of?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Ry122 said:
In the third line, what is S+4 the laplace transform of?

It doesn't matter. Just isolate Y(s) by dividing both sides by (s+4). Then use partial fractions to compute the inverse Laplace Transform of the RHS.
 
it does matter because this is part of the solution to the problem and i need to understand how its done.
 
No, "the function whose Laplace transform is s+ 4" is not part of the solution, the function whose Laplace transform is 1/(s+ 4) is.

As Gabbagabbahey said, you need to divide both sides by s+ 4 to get
Y(s)= \frac{17}{(s^2+1)(s+4)}+ \frac{1}{s+4}
Partial fractions will give something of the form
Y(s)= \frac{As}{s^2+1}+ \frac{B}{s^2+1}+ \frac{C}{s+4}
and then you can look up the inverse transform of each of those.
 
so is the laplace transform of 4y = 1/s+4? then how does it end up being a factor of y(s)?
 
Ry122 said:
so is the laplace transform of 4y = 1/s+4? then how does it end up being a factor of y(s)?

I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to ask here. If you are asking whether 4Y(s)=\frac{1}{s+4}, then the answer is no.

You have correctly gotten to this point:

(s+4)Y(s)=\frac{17}{s^2+1}+1

However, for this to be useful you need to divide both sides of the equation by s+4 in order to isolate Y(s). The reason why simply taking the inverse Laplace transform of both sides in the current form is useless is because \mathcal{L}^{-1}[(s+4)Y(s)]\neq(\mathcal{L}^{-1}[(s+4)])\cdot(\mathcal{L}^{-1}[Y(s)])

But if you divide by s+4 first, you get

Y(s)=\frac{17}{(s^2+1)(s+4)}+\frac{1}{s+4} \implies y(t)=\mathcal{L}^{-1}[Y(s)]=\mathcal{L}^{-1}[\frac{17}{(s^2+1)(s+4)}+\frac{1}{s+4}]

which allows you to find y(t).
 
The working i attached wasn't carried out by me. I haven't gotten as far as
<br /> (s+4)Y(s)=\frac{17}{s^2+1}+1<br />

someone else did. i want to know how they got there.
im unsure as to how they got y(s)[s+4]
i also don't know what the laplace transform of 4y is.
 
Ry122 said:
The working i attached wasn't carried out by me. I haven't gotten as far as
<br /> (s+4)Y(s)=\frac{17}{s^2+1}+1<br />

someone else did. i want to know how they got there.
im unsure as to how they got y(s)[s+4]
i also don't know what the laplace transform of 4y is.

Oh! Now I see what you were asking.:bugeye:

The workings in your attached image should be fairly clear: \mathcal{L}[4y(t)]=4\mathcal{L}[y(t)]=4Y(s) and \mathcal{L}[y&#039;(t)]=sY(s)-y(0)=sY(s)-1. The reasons for this should be in your textbook/notes, and if you are not comfortable with such basic Laplace transforms you need to study your text/notes and perhaps get a tutor.
 

Similar threads

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