Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Comments on H(jω) does not exist for unstable systems, but we still use it when designing controllers - contradiction?

Parent

H(jω) does not exist for unstable systems, but we still use it when designing controllers - contradiction?

+3
−0

According to Signal processing and linear systems by Lathi, the transfer function $H(j\omega)$ does not exist for systems with poles in the RHP: -

Lathi

This makes sense to me, since $H(j\omega) = \frac{Y(j\omega)}{X(j\omega)} $. However, since the system is unstable $Y $ is unbounded (and growing) and the fourier transform doesn't exist for such functions. So $Y(j\omega)$ doesn't exist and therefore, $H(j\omega) $ must be meaningless for unstable systems.

BUT! we use $H(j\omega) $ when designing controllers for unstable systems anyway - and it works. We look at the Bode Plot, we look at the Nyquist Plot both of which you need to know $H(j\omega)$ and design a controller based on what we see - and the controller actually works!

How can this be? How can there be this contradiction between systems and signals theory and control theory? It seems that concepts like region of convergence and existence of fourier integral are only dealt with on coursework and once that's done, you don't hear from them ever again.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

Post
+2
−0

I think this is partly semantics.

For example, consider designing a compensator for a power supply. The transfer function under consideration is essentially the open loop impulse response of the system. If that goes nuts, then you have other problems to fix first. You are right in that it needs to be stable (not oscillate or grow exponentially or something) in response to a single blip.

But again, that's the open loop response. You can certainly make a mess and cause closed loop instability with the wrong feedback, but that's not the transfer function being quantified. In the end, of course, we do care about the closed loop transfer function. By that time, we've designed the compensator (feedback) to make sure the system is stable.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

Hi Olin thanks for your answer. Yes, I realize you need the system to be stable before you can start ... (1 comment)
Hi Olin thanks for your answer. Yes, I realize you need the system to be stable before you can start ...
Carl‭ wrote almost 3 years ago

Hi Olin thanks for your answer. Yes, I realize you need the system to be stable before you can start designing any form of controller. The problem I have is that there seems to be a disconnect between theory and real life. If I have a system with a pole in the RHP I can use the Nyquist Plot of $H(j\omega)$ to make the system stable by having one CCW encirclement of -1. However, $H(j\omega)$ should be meaningless in this situation to begin with! TimWescott argues in the comments here that you certainly can obtain the frequency response for an unstable system in real life which led me to more skepticism: https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/565149/conceptual-question-regarding-the-laplace-transformation I hope you understand why I have my concerns.