Phasors: How to go from Re{} to Re{}+Im{}

  • Thread starter Thread starter jaydnul
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Phasors
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion clarifies the distinction between time-domain voltage representation V=Re[e^{j(wt+\phi)}] and phasor domain representation V=e^{j(wt+\phi)}. The author emphasizes that while both forms represent the same concept, they are not equivalent in value. The importance of returning to the time domain after performing calculations in the phasor domain is highlighted, as well as the utility of phasor transforms in simplifying complex problems. A rigorous mathematical proof for using phasors in calculations is sought, focusing on the relationship between phasors and their real components.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of complex numbers and Euler's formula
  • Familiarity with phasor analysis in electrical engineering
  • Knowledge of time-domain and frequency-domain concepts
  • Basic skills in circuit analysis techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the mathematical foundations of phasor transforms
  • Learn about the application of phasors in AC circuit analysis
  • Explore the relationship between time-domain signals and their frequency-domain representations
  • Investigate advanced topics in Fourier transforms and their applications
USEFUL FOR

Electrical engineers, physics students, and anyone interested in mastering phasor analysis and its applications in circuit design and analysis.

jaydnul
Messages
558
Reaction score
15
I understand that V=cos(wt+\phi)=Re[e^{j(wt+\phi)}]

But when doing calculations (like loop voltage analysis or junction current analysis) you're just using V=e^{j(wt+\phi)} (where all of the e^{jwt} will cancel out and you're just left with the phasors)

Example: A_se^{j\phi _s}{e^{jwt}}=A_1e^{j\phi _1}e^{jwt}+A_2e^{j\phi _2}e^{jwt}

So how do you get from the initial V=Re[e^{j(wt+\phi)}] to the form V=e^{j(wt+\phi)} to do calcuations? Those two don't equal.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
They do not represent the same quantity, even though they represent the same concept. It is an error to equate both to V; my book used v (lower case) for the time-domain value, and V (capital) for the phasor (or "frequency") domain value. The units are the same, but the values are not!

The important thing is that addition and multiplication in the phasor domain are very meaningful. But, to get the final, physically meaningful answer after doing these calculations, you must return to the time domain.

Edit: Transforms (like the phasor transform) are actually very interesting to me. They allow us to solve hard problems by instead working on easy problems that have no real connection to the original ones. It's just an incredibly useful coincidence that changes in the phasor domain can be mapped directly to changes in the time domain.

I'm rambling, but I wish I could convey this idea more clearly. Understanding it is very helpful as you learn more and more transforms.
 
Last edited:
Is there a more rigorous mathematical answer? So we define the phasor P_0 as V=Re[P_0e^{jwt}].
Now what is the mathematical proof that we can just use P_0 as the voltage in the phasor domain?
 
For a rigorous proof, we need a precise question.

The units of P_0 are clearly volts, so that much is self-evident. It is also evident that if V_0=Re[P_0e^{jwt}] and V_1=Re[P_1e^{jwt}], then V_0+V_1=Re[P_0e^{jwt}]+ Re[P_1e^{jwt}]=Re[(P_0+P_1)e^{jwt}].

What do you want to prove?
 
It's like counting people with your fingers; you are representing each person with a finger, because math works similarly for both fingers and people, but fingers are more convenient.

Or maybe I should sleep.
 
Aaaaaaaah. I'm an idiot.

I was confusing myself because \frac{Re[e^{j\theta}]}{Re[e^{j\phi}]}\neq Re[\frac{e^{j\theta}}{e^{j\phi}}]

But Re[e^{j\theta}]+Re[e^{j\phi}] = Re[e^{j\theta}+e^{j\phi}]

I'm good now. Thanks a bunch Nick O!
 
No problem! I'm glad that helped, because I haven't used phasors since learning them a few semesters ago, and I wouldn't have been able to make many more useful observations in my sleep-deprived state [emoji14]
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dlgoff

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
12K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K