- #26

- 18

- 0

No, and I can see that clearly on many graphs on the subject.

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter creative10
- Start date

- #26

- 18

- 0

No, and I can see that clearly on many graphs on the subject.

- #27

donpacino

Gold Member

- 1,439

- 283

so an overdamped system will slowely rise to the end value, kind of like a first order response. You'll see that it will never actually reach 100%, and will not have any overshootNo, and I can see that clearly on many graphs on the subject.

- #28

- 18

- 0

Why I've questioned this and because they don't just give you a value of Zeta, but also include a value of an I damped natural frequency wo. Why give both values to sketch a graph after all?

Are there any relationships between different values of Zeta, as you can clearly see the waveforms differ in frequency (looking at values of Zeta from 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 etc)

Thanks

- #29

donpacino

Gold Member

- 1,439

- 283

you need zeta and the natural frequency to find the resonant frequency

Why I've questioned this and because they don't just give you a value of Zeta, but also include a value of an I damped natural frequency wo. Why give both values to sketch a graph after all?

Are there any relationships between different values of Zeta, as you can clearly see the waveforms differ in frequency (looking at values of Zeta from 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 etc)

Thanks

- #30

- 18

- 0

Sorry a few typos above. Don't know how to edit.

Undamped natural frequency (wo)

Undamped natural frequency (wo)

- #31

donpacino

Gold Member

- 1,439

- 283

In general the relationship for zeta is exactly like you said. crit damped at 1, overdamped at less than one, and underdamped at more than 1

Why I've questioned this and because they don't just give you a value of Zeta, but also include a value of an I damped natural frequency wo. Why give both values to sketch a graph after all?

Are there any relationships between different values of Zeta, as you can clearly see the waveforms differ in frequency (looking at values of Zeta from 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 etc)

Thanks

- #32

- 18

- 0

Ok, but how is that helping me sketch the graph [emoji53]

- #33

- 91

- 0

Ok, but how is that helping me sketch the graph [emoji53]

I estimated ζ=2 based on the graph in the notes, it's all i could think to do.

- #34

donpacino

Gold Member

- 1,439

- 283

like gneild said, you may be overworking the problem. If you really want to plot it, solve the differential equation and plot itOk, but how is that helping me sketch the graph [emoji53]

- #35

- 18

- 0

- #36

gneill

Mentor

- 20,925

- 2,867

Take a look at the set of normalized curves presented on the wikipedia page: RLC CircuitHi Gneill. please can you take a look at my sketch and let me know if i am anywhere near?

Thanks

- #37

David J

Gold Member

- 140

- 15

I have no idea where to begin with this.

The question gives us:

a) ζ = 0.5, ω = 1×10^3 rad s^-1

b) ζ = 0.2, ω = 2×10^3 rad s^-1

c) ζ = 2, ω = 1×10^3 rad s^-1

The only thing i can find that relates ζ & ω is ζ = α/ω

a) α = 1000

b) α = 800

c) α = 4000

Apologies for digging up an old thread but I am trying to work out how you came to these answers above, namely ##\alpha = 1000##, ##\alpha=800## and ##\alpha = 4000##.

I get ##\alpha =500##, ##\alpha=400## and ##\alpha = 2000## respectfully. I am obviously wrong but could someone explain where I am going wrong with this please ??

thanks

- #38

donpacino

Gold Member

- 1,439

- 283

Apologies for digging up an old thread but I am trying to work out how you came to these answers above, namely ##\alpha = 1000##, ##\alpha=800## and ##\alpha = 4000##.

I get ##\alpha =500##, ##\alpha=400## and ##\alpha = 2000## respectfully. I am obviously wrong but could someone explain where I am going wrong with this please ??

thanks

Your alpha values and Gremlin's alpha values seem to have a constant relationship with each other.

Maybe you should look into how you did it, and what the equation is.

Hint... what do you have to do to change all of your answers to match Gremlin's?

- #39

David J

Gold Member

- 140

- 15

"The only thing i can find that relates ζ & ω is ζ = α/ω"

I cannot see where the X 2 is required unless I am missing something to do with the "rad s^-1" which is common to all of the ##\omega## values

- #40

- 19

- 0

I understand the shapes of the curves from damping ratio but struggling with the significance of the frequency.

Looking through my notes I can see the natural frequency has a great importance in the differential equation but can't relate it to the graph :-(

Share: