Using laplace transforms to solve IVP problems with cramers rule

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around solving the initial value problem (IVP) y'' + 4y = sin(2t) using Laplace transforms and Cramer's rule. The user initially struggles with obtaining values for the coefficients A, B, C, and D after performing partial fraction decomposition, leading to confusion when all variables yield zero. It is clarified that an algebra mistake was made during the multiplication step, which resulted in incorrect equations. The correct application of Cramer's rule is confirmed to work for any number of equations, although it becomes cumbersome with larger systems. The user is encouraged to consider the derivative of the Laplace transform to aid in finding the correct solution, which differs from the book's answer.
fufufu
Messages
14
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


y'' + 4y = sin(2t)

y(0) = 1
y'(0) = 1

Homework Equations


cramers rule

The Attempt at a Solution



after isolating Y(s) i end up with:

Y(s) = 2 / (s^2+4)^2 + s/(s^2+4)

after i do partial fraction decomposition, i get 4 equations with 4 unknowns, A, B, C and D

i inserted B = 2- 4D into other 3 equations..

when i used cramers rule to get values for A , B and C I am getting zeroes for all three variables. (??) ..also, I noticed that each equation also equals zero, but I am not seeing what that might mean?
i am doing something wrong

my 3 equations are:

A + 5C + D = 0
-A -5C + D = 0
2A + 16C -4D = 0

any help is really appreciated...thanks

Homework Statement


Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution

 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't get the same thing as you did for Y(s). Are both y(0) and y'(0) supposed to equal 1, or is one of them equal to 0?

It would help if you showed what terms you're trying to break Y(s) into.
 
Thanks for the reply. yup you're right i copied down one of the IV's wrong; should be y(0) = 1 and y'(0) = 0. But I actually solved with the correct IV's, so my Y(s) is the same:
heres how i got it

s^2Y(s) -sf(0) - f'(0) + 4Y(s) = 2/(s^+4)

Y(s) = 2 / (s^2+4)^2 + s/(s^2+4)


Y(s) = 2/(s^2+4)^2 + 2/(s^2+4)

i decomposed just the first term on RHS into this

2/(s^2+4)^2 = As+B/(s^2+4) + Cs+D/(s^2+4)^2

multiplying by the denom i get:

2 = As+B + Cs+D/(s^2+4)

i next plugged in values of s=-1, 0, 1 and 2

this gave me 4 equations and 4 unknowns

i then solved for B in terms of D which is B=2-4D

i am now left with 3 equations 3 unknowns

A + 5C + D = 0
-A -5C + D = 0
2A + 16C + 4D = 0but like i said in initial post, i am puzzled as to what all the zeroes mean? (equations wrong somehow?)

Also, a quick aside question: i just learned cramers rule for 3 equations and 3 unknowns does the rule work exactly the same for 4 equations with 4 unknowns? (and beyond?) and also, the method seems really susceptible to basic book keeping mistakes.. is this just because i just learned it, or is it not a very fast and efficient method for solving equations? thanks again

UPDATE: i just plugged in my (originally) 4 equations into cramers rule calculator and got A=C=D=0 and B=2

that would mean my decomposition = 2/s^2+4 + 2/s^2+4

= sin2t + sin2t = 2sin2t
but the book solution is cos2t - (1/4)tcos2t + (1/8) sin2t
 
Last edited:
fufufu said:
i decomposed just the first term on RHS into this

2/(s^2+4)^2 = As+B/(s^2+4) + Cs+D/(s^2+4)^2
You really need to get in the habit of using parentheses. You might notice that the LHS is exactly what you'd get when A=B=C=0 and D=2. In other words, it's already in the form you want.

multiplying by the denom i get:

2 = As+B + Cs+D/(s^2+4)
You made an algebra mistake. Since you multiplied by (s2+4)2, you should have
$$2 = (As+B)(s^2+4) + Cs+D$$ If you solve for the coefficients, you'll indeed find that A=B=C=0 and D=2.
Also, a quick aside question: i just learned cramers rule for 3 equations and 3 unknowns does the rule work exactly the same for 4 equations with 4 unknowns? (and beyond?) and also, the method seems really susceptible to basic book keeping mistakes.. is this just because i just learned it, or is it not a very fast and efficient method for solving equations? thanks again
Yes, Cramer's rule works for any number of unknowns. I find it's actually a nice method to use when you have unpleasant coefficients. For larger systems, it gets unwieldy simply because calculating determinants of large matrices is a pain. The largest system I'd use it for is probably one with three unknowns, unless I happened to have a lot of zero coefficients to make the big determinants easy to calculate.

UPDATE: i just plugged in my (originally) 4 equations into cramers rule calculator and got A=C=D=0 and B=2

that would mean my decomposition = 2/s^2+4 + 2/s^2+4

= sin2t + sin2t = 2sin2t
but the book solution is cos2t - (1/4)tcos2t + (1/8) sin2t
You will find it helpful to consider the derivative
$$\frac{d}{ds} \left( \frac{2}{s^2+4} \right)$$ and use the property of the Laplace transform involving F'(s).
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K