Why is RMS used for averages when considering a sine wave?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter iScience
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rms
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the use of Root Mean Square (RMS) values in the context of sine waves, particularly in relation to averaging techniques. Participants explore the differences between RMS and the average of the absolute value of a sine wave, discussing their implications in scientific applications such as electrical engineering.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests calculating the average of a sine wave using the integral of its absolute value, yielding a specific numerical result.
  • Another participant acknowledges that the average calculated is valid but highlights that it has different properties compared to RMS, which may be more suitable depending on the context.
  • A participant emphasizes the practical application of RMS in alternating current scenarios, noting its equivalence to direct current voltage for consistent brightness in light bulbs.
  • There is a challenge to the notion of what constitutes the "actual" average, with a participant arguing that multiple methods of averaging exist, each with its own validity.
  • Discussion includes the mathematical foundation of RMS as an extension of Euclidean distance in infinite dimensions, with references to the Pythagorean theorem and Cauchy-Schwarz inequality as advantages of using RMS.
  • Another participant mentions the relationship between RMS voltage and current in calculating average power, clarifying terminology around RMS power versus average power.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriateness of using RMS versus the average of the absolute value, with no consensus reached on which is more correct or preferable in various contexts.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the choice of averaging method may depend on the specific application and the properties of the data being analyzed. There are unresolved questions regarding the implications of using different norms or averages.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying electrical engineering, signal processing, or mathematical analysis, particularly in understanding the implications of different averaging methods in practical applications.

iScience
Messages
466
Reaction score
5
consider a sin wave

to find the average of this function over interval 2pi, why not just do...

$$\frac{1}{2\pi}\int |sinx|dx$$

this turns out to be..

$$\frac{4}{2\pi}= 0.63619$$


the whole purpose of squaring and then sqrt'ing at the end is to make sure there are no negative values. this would be fine if its value came out to be the same as the average of the absolute value (which is what i thought we were trying to find in the first place), but the value is different.

so.. i guess i have two questions:

1.) is 0.636 more correct to use as an avg than 0.702?

2.)why do we always use RMS value in science as opposed to the ACTUAL avg (of the absolute)?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
That is a perfectly valid "average" with slightly different properties than "rms". Which you choose to use depends upon the data and what you plan to do with the data. One can show, for example, that if your data is from a "normal distribution" the rms will, on average, lie closer to the true mean of the distribution than the absolute value mean. Also, since the absolute value function is not differentiable, it can be harder to work with, analytically, than rms.
 
iScience said:
the whole purpose of squaring and then sqrt'ing at the end is to make sure there are no negative values. this would be fine if its value came out to be the same as the average of the absolute value (which is what i thought we were trying to find in the first place), but the value is different.
One of the key uses of the RMS of a sinusoid is in alternating current. Suppose you have a light bulb and you want to make it shine equally brightly using direct current as opposed to a 120 volt RMS AC supply? The answer is 120 volts. The RMS voltage (or current) gives the equivalent DC voltage (or current).


so.. i guess i have two questions:

1.) is 0.636 more correct to use as an avg than 0.702?
No.

2.)why do we always use RMS value in science as opposed to the ACTUAL avg (of the absolute)?
What makes you think your average is the "ACTUAL" one?

There are many ways of computing a "norm" or average. Your's is but one, RMS is another. Yet another is the maximum absolute deviation. There are others as well. Which one is "right"? That's the wrong question. They all are, in their own way.
 
One reason that RMS is a natural measurement to use is that you can think of it as the extension to infinite dimensions of standard euclidean distance.

If we have some point, say, (3,4,5) in 3-dimensional euclidean space, then the norm (the distance from this point to the origin) is ##\sqrt{3^2 + 4^2 + 5^2}##. We can think of a function as a "point" in infinite-dimensional space, and its "distance" from the origin (the zero function) is ##\sqrt{\int |f(x)|^2 dx}##.

But even in euclidean space, there are many other norms we can use, for example ##(3^p + 4^p + 5^p)^{1/p}## where ##p## is any real number ##\geq 1##. The special case ##p=2## gives euclidean distance. Similarly, ##(\int |f(x)|^p dx)^{1/p}## is a perfectly valid norm to use for functions.

A couple of advantages of the ##p=2## case (RMS):

1. The pythagorean theorem: if ##f## and ##g## are orthogonal (meaning ##\int f(x)g(x) = 0## in the case of functions), then ##\int |f(x) + g(x)|^2 dx = \int |f(x)|^2 dx + \int |g(x)|^2 dx##. This makes it easy to calculate the RMS of the sum of certain kinds of functions, such as sinusoids or noise.

2. The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality: ##|\int f(x) g(x) dx| \leq \sqrt{\int |f(x)|^2 dx}\sqrt{\int |g(x)|^2 dx}##
 
Related to DH's post:

RMS voltage multiplied by (in phase) RMS current gives average power. Some references call this product RMS power, but this is not correct, it is average power, hence the equivalent brightness of a lightbulb.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K