Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations waross on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Can someone aid in my understanding how author dervied this equation?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lucifer12

Mechanical
Feb 24, 2019
16
engtips_plcp7g.png


The highlighted equation. I just can, not think of a way to decompose the equation into getting A and B without getting rid of j. Any ideas?
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

the last line looks like vector summation. but I wonder if B is in the "j" direction ? would that make it A^2+(jB)^2 = A^2-B^2 ??

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?
 
Haven't figured it out, but I think his third equation is wrong, and he meant to set A=2acos(wt) and B=2asin(wt) which makes the last equation work.
 
but what about the "-j" term ? doesn't that change the bracket to sin(wt)-j*cos(wt) ?

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?
 
You can go from the second equation to the third by assuming A= -2aj and B= -2aj(j)= 2a. But when I substitute that into the last equation, I get zero, not 2a. Either I'm doing that wrong, or one of the last three equations is wrong.
 
JStephen : for me is B = -2aj^2 and not B=2a and substituting I get 2aj * (1+j^2)^0.5
 
I was assuming j=i=square root of -1 so (1+j^2) is zero. If you take j as a real number, then the first two equations disagree.
 
pain2_etklcd.png
To answer the question of first poster.

This is the equation it comes from originally. I was thinking that if -j rotated the complex clockwise by 0.5pi vectorialy but even then the components don't add up since j is a necessary coefficient in de moviere theorem!

Another issue is getting rid of j when the terms inside the bracket are multiplied by j which eliminates j on sine term but not on the cosine one.
The amplitude is bothersome indeed.
 
e^(i*x) = cos(x) +i*sin(x)

so e^(-ikx) - e^(ikx) = cos(-kx) + i*sin(-kx) - (cos(kx) + i*sin(kx)) = (cos(-kx) - cos(kx)) + i*(sin(-kx) - sin(kx))
cos(-kx) = cos(kx)
sin(-kx) = -sin(kx)
so we get = -2i*sin(kx) which is what you have.


another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?
 
Its the yellow equation that I can, not derive I know how that is derived. Anyway shall I assume an error on account of author?
 
I can't see how it can be correct. How do you change an expression with real and imaginary components into a real number ?

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?
 
I have a gut feeling the author is using complex vector geometry in the argand plane or in polar coordinates. I will think into it otherwise I am moving on. It will be bothersome for a bit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor