Engineering OpAmp Circuit Analysis: Finding the Differential Equation for Vo

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on deriving the differential equation for the output voltage (Vo) in an operational amplifier (op-amp) circuit using nodal analysis. Key equations derived include those at nodes V1, VP, VN, and V2, which involve resistances R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, and R6, as well as capacitors C1 and C2. Participants emphasize the importance of correctly applying nodal analysis and eliminating variables to simplify the equations. The consensus is that the system is second-order, requiring both first and second derivatives of Vo and Vin in the final equation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Nodal analysis of electrical circuits
  • Understanding of operational amplifier behavior
  • Knowledge of differential equations
  • Familiarity with circuit components such as resistors and capacitors
NEXT STEPS
  • Study operational amplifier circuit analysis techniques
  • Learn about differential equations in electrical engineering contexts
  • Explore methods for eliminating variables in systems of equations
  • Research the D operator technique for solving differential equations
USEFUL FOR

Electrical engineering students, circuit designers, and anyone involved in analyzing op-amp circuits and their differential equations.

eehelp150
Messages
235
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


upload_2016-11-27_23-26-9.png

Find the differential equation for Vo

Homework Equations


KCL

The Attempt at a Solution


At node v1:
##\frac{V_1-V_{in}}{R_1}+\frac{V_1-V_p}{R_2}+C_2(\dot{V_1}-\dot{V_2})=0##
At node vp:
##C_1\dot{V_P}+\frac{V_P-V_1}{R_2}=0##
At node vn:
##\frac{V_N}{R_3}+\frac{V_N-V_o}{R_4}=0##
At node v2:
##\frac{V_2}{R_6}+\frac{V_2-V_o}{R_5}+C_2(\dot{V_2}-\dot{V_1})=0##
At node Vo:
##\frac{V_o-V_N}{R_4}+\frac{V_o-V_2}{R_5}=0##This is my attempt at solving for Vo:
Take equation of node VP and solve for V1
##C_1\dot{V_P}+\frac{V_P-V_1}{R_2}=0##
##V_1=R_2C_1\dot{V_P}+V_P##
derivative
##\dot{V_1}=R_2C_1\ddot{V_P}+\dot{V_P}##

Take equation of node Vo and solve for V2
##\frac{V_o-V_N}{R_4}+\frac{V_o-V_2}{R_5}=0##
##V_2 = \frac{R_5}{R_4}(V_o-V_{N})+V_o##
derivative
##\dot{V_2} = \frac{R_5}{R_4}(\dot{V_o}-\dot{V_{N}})+\dot{V_o}##

Plug these four (V1, dV1, V2, dV2) equations into node V1 equation
##\frac{V_1-V_{in}}{R_1}+\frac{V_1-V_p}{R_2}+C_2(\dot{V_1}-\dot{V_2})=0##
##\frac{R_2C_1\dot{V_P}+V_P-V_{in}}{R_1}+\frac{R_2C_1\dot{V_P}+V_P-V_P}{R_2}+C_2(R_2C_1\ddot{V_P}+\dot{V_P}-\frac{R_5}{R_4}(\dot{V_o}-\dot{V_{N}})+\dot{V_o})=0##
Simplify
##\frac{R_2C_1\dot{V_P}+V_P-V_{in}}{R_1}+C_1\dot{V_P}+C_2(R_2C_1\ddot{V_P}+\dot{V_P}-\frac{R_5}{R_4}(\dot{V_o}-\dot{V_{N}})+\dot{V_o}=0##
By property of opamps: VN = VP
##\frac{R_2C_1\dot{V_P}+V_P-V_{in}}{R_1}+C_1\dot{V_P}+C_2(R_2C_1\ddot{V_P}+\dot{V_P}-\frac{R_5}{R_4}(\dot{V_o}-\dot{V_{P}})+\dot{V_o}=0##

This is where I am stuck... Are my original equations correct? Can someone give me a hint as to how to get rid of Vp?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
eehelp150 said:
At node Vo:
This "equation" doesn't belong. Omit it, solve the others.
 
NascentOxygen said:
This "equation" doesn't belong. Omit it, solve the others.
Why does this equation not belong?
 
What rule did you use to form it?
 
NascentOxygen said:
What rule did you use to form it?
Nodal analysis
These points all have a voltage of Vo, don't they?
upload_2016-11-28_0-16-37.png
 
Show precisly how you applied nodal analysis here.
 
NascentOxygen said:
Show precisly how you applied nodal analysis here.
upload_2016-11-28_0-19-42.png


(Vo-Vn)/R4 + (Vo-V2)/R5 = 0
 
That can't be right. There are 4 paths for current to/from that node, including the unknown current from the op-amp's output.

You already accommodated that node to the extent possible, there's nothing more to be done here.
 
NascentOxygen said:
That can't be right. There are 4 paths for current to/from that node, including the unknown current from the op-amp's output.

You already accommodated that node to the extent possible, there's nothing more to be done here.
So I just ignore it? I'm not really understanding why...
 
  • #10
You are forming an equation based on ∑ currents into a node = 0. That node has 4 currents, yet you are ignoring two of them and writing an "equation" based on just the other two. That's not valid.

Yes, pay no further attention to this node. You already have it covered.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
NascentOxygen said:
You are forming an equation based on ∑ currents into a node = 0. That node has 4 currents, yet you are ignoring two of them and writing an "equation" based on just the other two.

Yes, pay no further attention to this node. You already have it covered.
At node v1:
##\frac{V_1-V_{in}}{R_1}+\frac{V_1-V_p}{R_2}+C_2(\dot{V_1}-\dot{V_2})=0##
At node vp:
##C_1\dot{V_P}+\frac{V_P-V_1}{R_2}=0##
At node vn:
##\frac{V_N}{R_3}+\frac{V_N-V_o}{R_4}=0##
At node v2:
##\frac{V_2}{R_6}+\frac{V_2-V_o}{R_5}+C_2(\dot{V_2}-\dot{V_1})=0##

Any tips for solving these equations?
 
Last edited:
  • #12
4 equations, 5 unknowns, so it's easy to solve to obtain the ratio ##\dfrac {V_o}{V_{in}}##.

The instructions say "Find the differential equation for Vo" and all I can think that means is keep the Laplace operator, s, in your final result. Is that your understanding?
 
Last edited:
  • #13
NascentOxygen said:
4 equations, 5 unknowns, so it's easy to solve to obtain the ratio ##\dfrac {V_o}{V_{in}}##.

The instructions say "Find the differential equation for Vo" and all I can think that means is keep the Laplace operator, s, in your final result. Is that your understanding?
We are not supposed to use Laplace. Can you give any hints as to how I'd start solving it? I can't see any way to get rid of everything but Vo and Vin
 
  • #14
It looks like a second-order system, so the answer will involve first and second derivatives, too.

If you were to use Laplace you would end up with both s and s2 terms. These can be substituted by the first and second derivatives, represented as either ##D^2V_o## or ##\ddot V_o## form, to give the general transfer function involving possibly all of the first- and second-order derivatives of both ##V_o## and ##V_{in} ##

Do you have a worked example to follow?
 
  • #15
NascentOxygen said:
It looks like a second-order system, so there will be first and second derivatives, too. If you were to use Laplace you would end up with both s and s2 terms. These can be substituted by the first and second derivatives, represented as either ##D^2V_o## or ##\ddot V_o## form, to give the general transfer function involving possibly all of the first- and second-order derivatives of both ##V_o## and ##V_{in} ##

Do you have a worked example to follow?
No worked example to follow. We have to solve this using algebra. No laplace allowed.
 
  • #16
Are you allowed to use mathematical software, such as Wolfram Alpha, to help with the work, or must you do it all by hand?
 
  • #17
The Electrician said:
Are you allowed to use mathematical software, such as Wolfram Alpha, to help with the work, or must you do it all by hand?
Everything by hand, sadly.
 
  • #18
Have you studied Gaussian elimination, or any of the related methods of systematized solution of simultaneous equations?
 
  • #19
The Electrician said:
Have you studied Gaussian elimination, or any of the related methods of systematized solution of simultaneous equations?
Yes, but I'm a bit rusty. How would guassian work with differentials?
 
  • #20
You would probably have to use the differential operator D technique; look up "Operational Calculus". You don't have to use Gaussian elimination; doing so just helps avoid errors.

You can just do what you were doing in post #1. You will have to find the right substitutions to get rid of Vp in your last equation.

I will tell you that your equations are correct, and solving using the Laplace variable S gives the correct answer. Even though you're not supposed to do that, you don''t have to tell your instructor that you verified your answer that way.

I'm afraid you will just have to slog it out for what you hand in.
 
  • #21
The Electrician said:
You would probably have to use the differential operator D technique; look up "Operational Calculus". You don't have to use Gaussian elimination; doing so just helps avoid errors.

You can just do what you were doing in post #1. You will have to find the right substitutions to get rid of Vp in your last equation.

I will tell you that your equations are correct, and solving using the Laplace variable S gives the correct answer. Even though you're not supposed to do that, you don''t have to tell your instructor that you verified your answer that way.

I'm afraid you will just have to slog it out for what you hand in.
This will most likely be an exam question (he takes exam questions from homework) so I can't use Laplace no matter what.
NodeV1
##\frac{V_1-V_{in}}{R_1}+\frac{V_1-V_p}{R_2}+C_2(\dot{V_1}-\dot{V_2})=0##

NodeVP
##C_1\dot{V_P}+\frac{V_P-V_1}{R_2}=0##

NodeVN
##\frac{V_N}{R_3}+\frac{V_N-V_o}{R_4}=0##

NodeV2
##\frac{V_2}{R_6}+\frac{V_2-V_o}{R_5}+C_2(\dot{V_2}-\dot{V_1})=0##

I want to solve nodeV1 for VP, and then derive to get ##\dot{V_P}##

Then I can plug VP and ##\dot{V_P}## into NodeVP and solve for V2?
Am I on the right track?
 
  • #22
Try it and see. If it works it's valid. :smile:

You'll need a way to eliminate V1 and its derivative.
 
  • #23
NascentOxygen said:
Try it and see. If it works it's valid. :smile:

You'll need a way to eliminate V1 and its derivative.
I can get rid of ##V_1## and ##\dot{V_1}## by taking equation 2 and solving for ##V_1## and then deriving. However, I do not see any way to get rid of V2.
 
  • #24
Don't forget that Vp= VN. So your third equation gives you Vp being directly proportional to Vo.
 
  • #25
NascentOxygen said:
Don't forget that Vp= VN. So your third equation gives you Vp being directly proportional to Vo.
##\frac{V_N}{R_3}+\frac{V_N-V_O}{R_4}=0##
##V_N=V_P##
##\frac{V_P}{R_3}+\frac{V_P-V_O}{R_4}=0##
##V_P(1+\frac{R_4}{R_3})-V_O=0##

Solve eq1 for Vp
##V_P = \frac{R_2}{R_1}(V_1-V_{in})+V_1+C_2R_2(\dot{V_1}-\dot{V_2})##
Plug into earlier equation
##V_P(1+\frac{R_4}{R_3})-V_O=0##
##(\frac{R_2}{R_1}(V_1-V_{in})+V_1+C_2R_2(\dot{V_1}-\dot{V_2}))(1+\frac{R_4}{R_3})-V_O=0##
Expand
##\frac{R_2}{R_1}(V_1-V_{in})+V_1+C_2R_2(\dot{V_1}-\dot{V_2})+\frac{R_4R_2}{R_3R_1}(V_1-V_{in})+\frac{R_4V_1}{R_3}+\frac{R_4C_2R_2(\dot{V_1}-\dot{V_2})}{R_3}-V_O=0##

solve eq2 for V_1
##C_1\dot{V_P}+\frac{V_P-V_1}{R_2}=0##
##V_1=V_P+R_2C_1\dot{V_P}##
derive
##\dot{V_1}=\dot{V_P}+R_2C_1\ddot{V_P}##
Am I on the right track? I still don't know how to get rid of ##V_2## and ##\dot{V_2}#
 
  • #26
eehelp150 said:
##\frac{V_N}{R_3}+\frac{V_N-V_O}{R_4}=0##
##V_N=V_P##
##\frac{V_P}{R_3}+\frac{V_P-V_O}{R_4}=0##
##V_P(1+\frac{R_4}{R_3})-V_O=0##

Solve eq1 for Vp
##V_P = \frac{R_2}{R_1}(V_1-V_{in})+V_1+C_2R_2(\dot{V_1}-\dot{V_2})##
Plug into earlier equation
##V_P(1+\frac{R_4}{R_3})-V_O=0##
##(\frac{R_2}{R_1}(V_1-V_{in})+V_1+C_2R_2(\dot{V_1}-\dot{V_2}))(1+\frac{R_4}{R_3})-V_O=0##
Expand
##\frac{R_2}{R_1}(V_1-V_{in})+V_1+C_2R_2(\dot{V_1}-\dot{V_2})+\frac{R_4R_2}{R_3R_1}(V_1-V_{in})+\frac{R_4V_1}{R_3}+\frac{R_4C_2R_2(\dot{V_1}-\dot{V_2})}{R_3}-V_O=0##

solve eq2 for V_1
##C_1\dot{V_P}+\frac{V_P-V_1}{R_2}=0##
##V_1=V_P+R_2C_1\dot{V_P}##
derive
##\dot{V_1}=\dot{V_P}+R_2C_1\ddot{V_P}##
Am I on the right track? I still don't know how to get rid of ##V_2## and ##\dot{V_2}#
How about trying this:
Solve this: ##\frac{V_P}{R_3}+\frac{V_P-V_O}{R_4}=0##
for Vp, then substitute that in: ##V_1=V_P+R_2C_1\dot{V_P}##
 
  • #27
The Electrician said:
How about trying this:
Solve this: ##\frac{V_P}{R_3}+\frac{V_P-V_O}{R_4}=0##
for Vp, then substitute that in: ##V_1=V_P+R_2C_1\dot{V_P}##
##V_P=\frac{R_3V_O}{R_3+R_4}##
##\dot{V_P}=\frac{R_3\dot{V_O}}{R_3+R_4}##
##V_1=\frac{R_3V_O}{R_3+R_4}+R_2C_1(\frac{R_3\dot{V_O}}{R_3+R_4})##
 
  • #28
OK. Now you have V1 in terms of Vo. Substitute that in some of the earlier equations. Get Vin in terms of V1. Slog away.
 
  • #29
The Electrician said:
OK. Now you have V1 in terms of Vo. Substitute that in some of the earlier equations. Get Vin in terms of V1. Slog away.
I need Vin, so Equation 1 has to be used right? I still can't see any way to get rid of V2
 
  • #30
If you combine your first and fourth equations, the derivatives can disappear and you will be left with V2 in terms of things you know.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K