diffrent plots if I add the command assume (0<=t) why ?

2 次查看（过去 30 天）
tomer polsky
tomer polsky 2022-7-23
评论： tomer polsky 2022-7-23
so I want to get laplace transform of f(t)=cos(12t)*exp(-0.4t). the strange this is that if add the command : assume (0<=t) I get the right laplace transform but the plot of f(t) is not starting from zero ,but insted start from -20 . hot to fix this problem ?
clc;clear all;
syms t
assume(0<=t);
f_t3 = piecewise(0<=t,cos(12*t)*exp(-0.4*t));
f_s3=laplace(f_t3);
pretty(f_s3)
fplot(f_t3,[-20 20]);
but if I write the same code but with out assume(0<=t) I get the right plot but not the right laplce transform of f(t) .
clc;clear all;
syms t
f_t3 = piecewise(t<0,0,0<=t,cos(12*t)*exp(-0.4*t));
f_s3=laplace(f_t3);
pretty(f_s3)
fplot(f_t3,[-20 20]);

请先登录，再回答此问题。

回答（2 个）

Walter Roberson
Walter Roberson 2022-7-23
assume(0<=t);
You solemnly swear that t will never be complex or negative
fplot(f_t3,[-20 20]);
but you make t negative down to -20 anyhow.
  2 个评论
Paul
Paul 2022-7-23
Ran in:
Let me see if I understand this correctly
syms t
assume(0<=t);
f_t3 = piecewise(0<=t,cos(12*t)*exp(-0.4*t))
f_t3 = 
So the piecewise is simplified away due to the assumption. laplace() works fine on f_t3. But then fplot() comes along and basically does a subs type of thing over [ -20 20 ] w/o caring about the assumption.
In the second case, fplot has no reason not to work, but laplace() and piecewise() just don't play nice together. I'm not quite sure why that has to be the case, but I'm really not suprised.
Is that about right?

请先登录，再进行评论。

Paul
Paul 2022-7-23
Ran in:
I suggest getting in the habit of using heaviside for problems like this
syms t
f_t3 = cos(12*t)*exp(-0.4*t)*heaviside(t);
f_s3=laplace(f_t3)
f_s3 = 
fplot(f_t3,[-20 20]);

类别

在 Help Center 和 File Exchange 中查找有关 Mathematics 的更多信息

标签

产品


版本

R2022a

Community Treasure Hunt

Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!

Start Hunting!

Translated by