Sketching Nyquist Plots for Complex Arguments

  • Thread starter Thread starter ajtgraves
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Complex
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on sketching the Nyquist plot for the function (jω - 1)/(jω + 1) and the challenges in calculating its argument. The initial calculation of the argument as -2arctan(ω) is questioned due to its implications for behavior as ω approaches 0 and infinity. A correction is suggested, noting that when the real part is negative, the argument should be adjusted by adding 180 degrees to the arctan result. This adjustment clarifies the misunderstanding and aligns the calculations with expected Nyquist plot behavior. The conversation concludes with appreciation for the clarification provided.
ajtgraves
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to sketch the nyquist plot of
$$\frac{j\omega-1}{j\omega+1}$$
but can't seem to calculate the argument correctly. I think it should be $$\arctan(-\omega) - \arctan(\omega) = -2\arctan(\omega)$$ but this doesn't give the correct nyquist plot behaviour for $\omega \to 0$ and $\omega \to \infty$ - surely $-2\arctan(\omega)$ implies that $\lim_{x\to 0} = 0^\circ$ and $\lim_{x\to \infty} = -180^\circ$?

Wolfram Alpha disagrees but I can't see where I'm going wrong. Am I making a glaring error somewhere? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks very much
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You're an electrical engineer, right? So j means the square root of -1?

Assuming it does, I think you are off by 180 degrees. The formula ##\mathrm{arg}(x + yj) = \arctan(y/x)## is valid when ##x > 0##, but if the real part of ##x + yj## is negative, as it is in the numerator, you need to adjust for the fact that arctan only returns angles in ##(-\pi/2, \pi/2)## by using ##\mathrm{arg}(x + yj) = \pi + \arctan(y/x)##.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
6K
Replies
25
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
2
Replies
67
Views
11K
Replies
2
Views
6K
Back
Top