# What is the RMS value in this context?

• B
• Frigus
In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of rms value and how it can be calculated using different methods. The text explains that the rms value is the square root of the average value of i² over a certain time period, while the equations suggest calculating it by dividing the total area of the graph of i² and t with time. The conversation also touches on the usefulness of rms value in finding the power of a function. Finally, there is a discussion on different ways to calculate the area under a graph.
Frigus

In this text they are saying that rms value is square root of average value of i² but i am not able to relate this thing to equations they have given.
It feels to me that the equations tell something different from the text.
From text I interpret that if we add each and every value of i² from 0 to T and then divide it by no. of values and then take it's square root then value we will get will be rms value but from equations i interpret that "if we divide the total area of graph of i² and t from 0 to T with T then the take square root of that value then that will be the rms value".
I can't relate how these two things are equivalent.
Please tell me if my question is not clear.

Last edited by a moderator:
Hemant said:
From text I interpret that if we add each and every value of i² from 0 to T and then divide it by no. of values and then take it's square root then value we will get will be rms value but from equations i interpret that "if we divide the total area of graph of i² and t from 0 to T with T then the take square root of that value then that will be the rms value".
I can't relate how these two things are equivalent.

sophiecentaur
Hemant said:
From text I interpret that if we add each and every value of i² from 0 to T
Hemant said:
the total area of graph of i² and t from 0 to T
Those two things are the same. That's why it is equivalent.

To find the total area under a graph from point A to point B using finite steps, simply divide the graph into rectangular bars. The area of each bar is width times hight. The sum of those areas for all bars is the area under the curve.

Do you have a different way to calculate the area of graph from 0 to T?

Basically, if you want to find the average of some function ##f(t)## in the interval ##[t_a, t_b]##, then you can split the interval into ##n## regions of width ##\Delta t_k = \frac{t_b - t_a}{n} = \frac{T}{n}##, and find an expression for the mean using the discrete formula$$\bar{f} = \frac{\sum_{k=1}^{n} f({t_k}^*)}{n}$$where ##{t_k}^* \in [t_{k-1}, t_k]##, and ##t_a = t_0##, ##t_b = t_n##. Substituting for ##n = \frac{t_b - t_a}{\Delta t_k}##,$$\bar{f} = \frac{\sum_{k=1}^{n} f({t_k}^*) \Delta t_k}{t_b - t_a} = \frac{1}{T} \sum_{k=1}^{n} f({t_k}^*) \Delta t_k$$Take limit ##n \rightarrow \infty##, and the Riemann sum approaches a Riemann integral,$$\bar{f} = \frac{1}{T} \int_{t_a}^{t_b} f(t) dt$$That's how to obtain the formula for the mean value of a function on a certain interval. The RMS value of a function, like ##i(t)##, is defined as "the square root of [the mean of [the function squared]]", i.e. the square root of the mean of ##i^2(t)##, in the interval ##[t_a, t_b]##. The ##\sqrt{\langle i^2 \rangle}## often a more useful quantity than the mean of the function when there is positive/negative symmetry, since ##\langle i \rangle## is just going to be zero over a whole time period for a sinusoidal current!

Last edited by a moderator:
DaveE
I think this is the first time in my life I've seen someone express T as ## \int_0^T \,dt ##

edit: OK, I'm sure I saw this in my first calculus class. The first and last time I did that integral.

etotheipi said:
The ⟨i2⟩ often a more useful quantity than the mean of the function
Well in this case it is a little stronger than this usual rationale for distributions. Explicitly the power is the time average of ## i^2## and that is exactly what you want.

hutchphd said:
Well in this case it is a little stronger than this usual rationale for distributions. Explicitly the power is the time average of ## i^2## and that is exactly what you want.

I didn't see a mention of power above, but yes you do have e.g. for a resistor ##P = Ri^2 \implies \langle P \rangle = R\langle i^2 \rangle##

hutchphd
anorlunda said:
Those two things are the same. That's why it is equivalent.

To find the total area under a graph from point A to point B using finite steps, simply divide the graph into rectangular bars. The area of each bar is width times hight. The sum of those areas for all bars is the area under the curve.

Do you have a different way to calculate the area of graph from 0 to T?
I tried to do this with some concrete values but i am getting different results.
If we suppose that speed was
2m/s from t=0s to 2s
3m/s from t=2s to 6s
And take rms by squaring each term and dividing by number of terms then value i got is ##\frac {13}{2}## but if i find area of speed² time graph and then divide it by time and then take it's square root then value I get is ##\frac {44}{6}##.

Hemant said:
I tried to do this with some concrete values but i am getting different results.
If we suppose that speed was
2m/s from t=0s to 2s
3m/s from t=2s to 6s
And take rms by squaring each term and dividing by number of terms then value i got is ##\frac {13}{2}## but if i find area of speed² time graph and then divide it by time and then take it's square root then value I get is ##\frac {44}{6}##.
I take it you get 13/2 m/s by squaring the speed in the first two seconds, squaring the speed in the last four seconds, and taking the mean? (Side note: this is the mean square velocity, not the root mean square). If you use this method to calculate the mean velocity (just the mean, not RMS) you get (2+3)/2=2.5 m/s. Is this a correct approach? If not, what would you do differently and how could you apply the same reasoning to the RMS calculation?

Ibix said:
I take it you get 13/2 m/s by squaring the speed in the first two seconds, squaring the speed in the last four seconds, and taking the mean? (Side note: this is the mean square velocity, not the root mean square). If you use this method to calculate the mean velocity (just the mean, not RMS) you get (2+3)/2=2.5 m/s. Is this a correct approach? If not, what would you do differently and how could you apply the same reasoning to the RMS calculation?
If mean value by definition means ##\frac{sum-of-terms}{no.-Of -terms}## then by no doubt i will follow it But if i try to find average value by this formula :- ##\frac {distance- traveled}{time- taken}## then i get different value(which is ##\frac {8}{3}##),
Due to this i think that dividing area by time is different from dividing sum of terms by no. Of terms.

Hemant said:
If mean value by definition means sum−of−termsno.−Of−terms then by no doubt i will follow it But if i try to find average value by this formula :- distance−traveledtime−taken then i get different value(which is 83),
Due to this i think that dividing area by time is different from dividing sum of terms by no. Of terms.
The problem is that the bars in the chart you are summing aren't the same width. By just adding the heights (or heights squared) and dividing by the number, you are implicitly assuming that they are the same width. Read @anorlunda's post #3 again - he tells you how to deal with it.

Thanks to all,
I got it why these are equal.

Ibix

## What is the RMS value?

The RMS (Root Mean Square) value is a mathematical concept used to describe the average value of a set of numbers by taking the square root of the mean of the squares of the individual numbers.

## How is the RMS value calculated?

The RMS value is calculated by taking the square root of the mean of the squares of the individual numbers in a set. This is expressed as: RMS = √(1/n * (x1² + x2² + ... + xn²)), where n is the total number of values in the set.

## What is the significance of the RMS value?

The RMS value is significant because it provides a way to calculate the average value of a set of numbers that may have positive and negative values. It is commonly used in fields such as electrical engineering, physics, and statistics.

## How is the RMS value different from the average or mean value?

The RMS value differs from the average or mean value in that it takes into account the magnitude of each individual number in the set, rather than just their sum. This makes it a more accurate representation of the overall values in the set.

## In what contexts is the RMS value commonly used?

The RMS value is commonly used in fields such as electricity and electronics to calculate the effective or average value of alternating currents or voltages. It is also used in physics to calculate the root mean square speed of molecules in a gas and in statistics to describe the variability of a set of data.

• Mechanics
Replies
2
Views
2K
• Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
6K
• Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
2K
• Classical Physics
Replies
2
Views
800
• Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
5K
• Electromagnetism
Replies
3
Views
1K
• Electromagnetism
Replies
7
Views
1K
• Electrical Engineering
Replies
18
Views
4K
• Classical Physics
Replies
4
Views
460
• Classical Physics
Replies
2
Views
729