1 00:00:04,710 --> 00:00:06,880 PROFESSOR: Last time we introduced poles. 2 00:00:06,880 --> 00:00:09,270 And in particular, we introduced how to move from 3 00:00:09,270 --> 00:00:11,590 the manipulation of feed-forward and feedback 4 00:00:11,590 --> 00:00:15,370 systems and the geometric sequence that fell out into 5 00:00:15,370 --> 00:00:18,240 using the base of that geometric sequence to attempt 6 00:00:18,240 --> 00:00:21,010 to predict the long-term behavior of the system. 7 00:00:21,010 --> 00:00:23,600 When we're solving for poles and we're only interested in 8 00:00:23,600 --> 00:00:26,320 long term behavior, one of the easiest ways to do so to solve 9 00:00:26,320 --> 00:00:29,770 for the roots of z, where z is a substitution for 1 over R in 10 00:00:29,770 --> 00:00:33,230 the denominator of the system function. 11 00:00:33,230 --> 00:00:36,380 Once we've done that, we have a list of poles. 12 00:00:36,380 --> 00:00:38,990 From that list of poles, we would like to select, the 13 00:00:38,990 --> 00:00:41,400 dominant pole, or the pole with the greatest magnitude, 14 00:00:41,400 --> 00:00:43,820 and then based on the magnitude and period of that 15 00:00:43,820 --> 00:00:46,540 pole we can determine what the long term behavior of our 16 00:00:46,540 --> 00:00:47,790 system looks like. 17 00:00:52,380 --> 00:00:55,620 Today I'd like to mention to you some notable 18 00:00:55,620 --> 00:00:57,150 things about poles. 19 00:00:57,150 --> 00:00:59,730 If you are interested in this information or feedback and 20 00:00:59,730 --> 00:01:03,130 controls in the general sense, I highly recommend 6.003. 21 00:01:03,130 --> 00:01:05,340 But here's some information you should at least be aware 22 00:01:05,340 --> 00:01:08,400 of as a consequence of 6.01. 23 00:01:08,400 --> 00:01:10,130 The other thing I would like to do is just walk through a 24 00:01:10,130 --> 00:01:12,940 couple of pole problems to familiarize you, or get you 25 00:01:12,940 --> 00:01:15,740 more comfortable with the idea of solving for the poles of a 26 00:01:15,740 --> 00:01:19,450 system function, or looking at the unit sample response of a 27 00:01:19,450 --> 00:01:23,670 system function and then graphing the poles. 28 00:01:23,670 --> 00:01:25,450 The first thing that I want to mention is pole-zero 29 00:01:25,450 --> 00:01:26,450 cancellation. 30 00:01:26,450 --> 00:01:27,990 And what do I mean when I say that? 31 00:01:27,990 --> 00:01:40,950 I mean that if both the numerator and the denominator 32 00:01:40,950 --> 00:01:43,970 have a degree of R in them, then you're going to have both 33 00:01:43,970 --> 00:01:46,420 a zero and a pole. 34 00:01:46,420 --> 00:01:50,740 If the zero and the pole have the same value associated with 35 00:01:50,740 --> 00:01:54,590 them, you may be tempted to cancel them out. 36 00:01:54,590 --> 00:01:58,740 Unless both the zero and the pole are equal to 0 -- 37 00:01:58,740 --> 00:02:00,230 don't do it. 38 00:02:00,230 --> 00:02:03,720 The reason why is that when you get to a implementation of 39 00:02:03,720 --> 00:02:07,300 a real system, it is highly unlikely that both the zero 40 00:02:07,300 --> 00:02:12,170 and the pole will be implemented to a degree of 41 00:02:12,170 --> 00:02:15,320 accuracy that you will actually see those two things 42 00:02:15,320 --> 00:02:16,190 cancel out. 43 00:02:16,190 --> 00:02:18,640 The only exception to this is when both the pole and the 44 00:02:18,640 --> 00:02:21,140 zero are equal to 0, or in this case. 45 00:02:34,520 --> 00:02:37,990 This you should feel free to convert to this. 46 00:02:37,990 --> 00:02:40,880 In almost any other situation, don't factor. 47 00:02:43,400 --> 00:02:45,280 The other thing I want to talk about is repeated roots. 48 00:02:57,530 --> 00:03:01,540 If you have a repeated root, you'll have repeated poles. 49 00:03:01,540 --> 00:03:06,370 This does get tricky when you're talking about how to 50 00:03:06,370 --> 00:03:09,290 add the unit response of those poles. 51 00:03:09,290 --> 00:03:11,330 But the long term behavior of your system is 52 00:03:11,330 --> 00:03:12,640 going to look the same. 53 00:03:12,640 --> 00:03:16,090 So if both of these poles are the dominant pole, then the 54 00:03:16,090 --> 00:03:19,240 characteristics of both, which are the same, are going to 55 00:03:19,240 --> 00:03:22,060 determine what your long term behavior looks like. 56 00:03:22,060 --> 00:03:24,930 If they're not, then the dominant pole is going to 57 00:03:24,930 --> 00:03:28,630 determine what your long term behavior looks like. 58 00:03:28,630 --> 00:03:29,910 The last thing I want to mention is superposition. 59 00:03:35,270 --> 00:03:38,490 So far we've only talked about the unit sample response of a 60 00:03:38,490 --> 00:03:42,430 system function and how we use poles to determine what the 61 00:03:42,430 --> 00:03:45,500 long term behavior of our system's going to be. 62 00:03:45,500 --> 00:03:50,730 We can look at the response to more complicated inputs than 63 00:03:50,730 --> 00:03:53,160 the unit sample response, or the delta. 64 00:03:53,160 --> 00:03:54,850 In fact, one of the things we' probably end up looking at 65 00:03:54,850 --> 00:03:58,380 some point is the step function. 66 00:03:58,380 --> 00:04:00,570 The thing that you need to know to go from talking about 67 00:04:00,570 --> 00:04:03,940 unit sample response to any other sort of response, is 68 00:04:03,940 --> 00:04:05,820 that we're still working with an LTI system. 69 00:04:09,350 --> 00:04:17,589 What that means is if you take the summation of your inputs, 70 00:04:17,589 --> 00:04:20,649 and apply the system function to that summation, it is the 71 00:04:20,649 --> 00:04:27,300 same as the output that would result from inputting all 72 00:04:27,300 --> 00:04:28,550 those values at once. 73 00:04:39,540 --> 00:04:41,500 The best way I would like to explain it is by referring 74 00:04:41,500 --> 00:05:04,990 again to if your function was a system function, the same 75 00:05:04,990 --> 00:05:06,240 property applies. 76 00:05:12,190 --> 00:05:14,730 Now let's walk through a pole problem. 77 00:05:14,730 --> 00:05:17,170 Here I have a second order system set up. 78 00:05:17,170 --> 00:05:25,700 We've got two degrees of R. I have feedback, and I can solve 79 00:05:25,700 --> 00:05:29,540 for an expression of y in terms of x. 80 00:05:29,540 --> 00:05:32,320 In fact, let's do that right now. 81 00:05:32,320 --> 00:05:38,960 y is the result of the summation or a linear 82 00:05:38,960 --> 00:05:48,900 combination of x plus a delayed signal of y scaled by 83 00:05:48,900 --> 00:05:58,710 1.6 in a linear combination with a delayed value of the 84 00:05:58,710 --> 00:06:10,020 delayed value of y scaled by negative 0.63. 85 00:06:10,020 --> 00:06:11,270 There's my first degree. 86 00:06:21,070 --> 00:06:24,150 For consistency's sake, there's my second degree. 87 00:06:27,610 --> 00:06:29,380 Let's first solve for the system function. 88 00:07:02,460 --> 00:07:05,600 If you're confused, I recommend doing the algebra 89 00:07:05,600 --> 00:07:09,520 from here to this expression. 90 00:07:09,520 --> 00:07:10,770 You should get this fraction out. 91 00:07:13,450 --> 00:07:16,510 Our second step is to solve for the roots of z. 92 00:07:16,510 --> 00:07:27,210 Remember that z is equal to 1 over R in the denominator of 93 00:07:27,210 --> 00:07:28,460 the system function. 94 00:07:39,520 --> 00:07:44,085 In this case, we'll be working with-- 95 00:07:52,780 --> 00:07:56,885 all I've done there is taken every degree of R, substitute 96 00:07:56,885 --> 00:07:58,740 it in for 1/z. 97 00:07:58,740 --> 00:08:02,120 and then multiply it out, so that I'm not working with z in 98 00:08:02,120 --> 00:08:03,370 the denominator anymore. 99 00:08:03,370 --> 00:08:06,730 I'm actually just working with everything in the numerator. 100 00:08:23,810 --> 00:08:25,930 If I follow this back out, I get this expression. 101 00:08:31,720 --> 00:08:37,150 And my poles are going to be 0.7 and 0.9. 102 00:08:37,150 --> 00:08:42,460 All right, based on my poles, what are the properties of the 103 00:08:42,460 --> 00:08:45,380 unit sample response in the long term? 104 00:08:45,380 --> 00:08:48,190 First thing I'm going to do is look for the dominant pole 105 00:08:48,190 --> 00:08:49,990 among the poles that I found. 106 00:08:49,990 --> 00:08:52,530 In this case, I don't even have to worry about finding 107 00:08:52,530 --> 00:08:55,680 the length of the distance from the origin for poles in 108 00:08:55,680 --> 00:08:56,940 the complex plane. 109 00:08:56,940 --> 00:08:58,890 All I have to worry about is the magnitude of 110 00:08:58,890 --> 00:09:02,070 poles on the real axis. 111 00:09:02,070 --> 00:09:04,700 0.9 is my dominant pole, because it's the largest pole. 112 00:09:10,500 --> 00:09:13,010 0.9 is less than 1. 113 00:09:13,010 --> 00:09:15,670 So I'm going to end up with convergence. 114 00:09:15,670 --> 00:09:18,630 Eventually, my system is going to converge, or 115 00:09:18,630 --> 00:09:19,880 tend towards 0. 116 00:09:23,250 --> 00:09:26,180 The other interesting property of my system is what is its 117 00:09:26,180 --> 00:09:30,780 period, how does that relate to what my function's 118 00:09:30,780 --> 00:09:32,400 going to look like. 119 00:09:32,400 --> 00:09:34,430 In this case, we're only working on the positive real 120 00:09:34,430 --> 00:09:38,390 axis, so the angle associated with graphing this pole on the 121 00:09:38,390 --> 00:09:42,470 complex plane is 0, so there is no period for our system. 122 00:09:42,470 --> 00:09:44,140 This means that our system is going to converge 123 00:09:44,140 --> 00:09:45,390 monotonically. 124 00:10:08,030 --> 00:10:11,080 Now let's walk through some unit sample responses and then 125 00:10:11,080 --> 00:10:15,620 graph the poles that generated those unit sample responses on 126 00:10:15,620 --> 00:10:17,922 the unit circle, where this is the complex plane. 127 00:10:25,010 --> 00:10:28,190 Let's look at this graph first. 128 00:10:28,190 --> 00:10:30,670 The first thing that I notice about this graph is that, like 129 00:10:30,670 --> 00:10:33,500 in the previous example, we have monotonic convergence. 130 00:10:33,500 --> 00:10:36,260 We're tending towards 0, and we're not alternating or 131 00:10:36,260 --> 00:10:37,510 oscillating about the x-axis. 132 00:10:41,640 --> 00:10:43,870 So I know I'm going to be working somewhere along this 133 00:10:43,870 --> 00:10:47,240 line before the edge of the unit circle. 134 00:10:47,240 --> 00:10:48,990 Because at the edge of the unit circle, the distance from 135 00:10:48,990 --> 00:10:52,070 the origin is equal to 1. 136 00:10:52,070 --> 00:10:55,010 If you made me guess, then I would look at the distance 137 00:10:55,010 --> 00:10:57,485 here and compare it to the distance at 138 00:10:57,485 --> 00:10:58,735 the next time step. 139 00:11:02,080 --> 00:11:03,920 I realize this is a blackboard. 140 00:11:03,920 --> 00:11:06,320 It's not entirely to scale. 141 00:11:06,320 --> 00:11:08,440 But for the purposes of this demonstration, I'd like to say 142 00:11:08,440 --> 00:11:12,220 that the signal at this time step is 0.5 the signal from 143 00:11:12,220 --> 00:11:14,670 the previous times. 144 00:11:14,670 --> 00:11:18,240 Likewise at the next time step, I would like to say that 145 00:11:18,240 --> 00:11:22,600 this signal is 0.5 the signal from the previous time step, 146 00:11:22,600 --> 00:11:26,130 and so on and so forth. 147 00:11:26,130 --> 00:11:29,050 Therefore, I'm going to graph my pole right here. 148 00:11:36,310 --> 00:11:38,620 Let's take a look at this graph. 149 00:11:38,620 --> 00:11:43,470 I've drawn these squiggles to indicate that the unit sample 150 00:11:43,470 --> 00:11:46,420 response exceeds the bounds of the space that I 151 00:11:46,420 --> 00:11:47,610 gave for this graph. 152 00:11:47,610 --> 00:11:51,630 So just assume that these values are much larger than 153 00:11:51,630 --> 00:11:52,880 I've drawn them. 154 00:11:59,210 --> 00:12:00,830 The first thing that I notice about this unit sample 155 00:12:00,830 --> 00:12:06,590 response graph is the fact that not only am I increasing 156 00:12:06,590 --> 00:12:13,610 in a way that does not seem to change in any way-- 157 00:12:13,610 --> 00:12:14,860 we're going to end up diverging-- 158 00:12:18,200 --> 00:12:20,465 is that I'm actually alternating about the x-axis. 159 00:12:23,210 --> 00:12:26,730 And that particularly, that if I were to call this an 160 00:12:26,730 --> 00:12:28,160 oscillation, then I would say it's an 161 00:12:28,160 --> 00:12:29,410 oscillation with period 2. 162 00:12:32,290 --> 00:12:36,840 This means that I'm working with a negative real pole. 163 00:12:36,840 --> 00:12:38,860 The fact that I'm diverging means I'm working with a 164 00:12:38,860 --> 00:12:46,170 negative real pole that has magnitude greater than 1. 165 00:12:46,170 --> 00:12:48,860 If you had to make me guess, I would look at the distance 166 00:12:48,860 --> 00:12:51,860 associated with this time step, compare it to the 167 00:12:51,860 --> 00:12:53,520 distance associated with this time step. 168 00:12:56,290 --> 00:13:08,290 And if you had to ask me, I would say this is about 1.3 169 00:13:08,290 --> 00:13:11,460 the value at the previous step. 170 00:13:11,460 --> 00:13:15,010 Likewise, if I were to look at the next time step, I would 171 00:13:15,010 --> 00:13:19,200 say that this increase is about 30% of 172 00:13:19,200 --> 00:13:20,450 the previous value. 173 00:13:25,730 --> 00:13:27,150 I'm not even going to try that one. 174 00:13:27,150 --> 00:13:31,110 But what I'm trying to get at is that you can use 175 00:13:31,110 --> 00:13:34,180 comparisons of previous and future time steps in order to 176 00:13:34,180 --> 00:13:37,020 attempt to determine the magnitude of the pole if 177 00:13:37,020 --> 00:13:38,430 you're working with the first order system. 178 00:13:38,430 --> 00:13:41,100 If you're working with the second order system, then it's 179 00:13:41,100 --> 00:13:43,080 possible that you'll see some really interesting 180 00:13:43,080 --> 00:13:44,790 initialization effects. 181 00:13:44,790 --> 00:13:48,580 And you should probably ask one of us what's up. 182 00:13:48,580 --> 00:13:51,530 But for this example, we're going to put 183 00:13:51,530 --> 00:13:52,780 our pole over here. 184 00:14:02,780 --> 00:14:06,010 Here's the last graph I want to talk about. 185 00:14:06,010 --> 00:14:09,400 The first thing that I notice is that it doesn't seem to be 186 00:14:09,400 --> 00:14:10,750 diverging, but it doesn't really seem to 187 00:14:10,750 --> 00:14:12,550 be converging either. 188 00:14:12,550 --> 00:14:14,990 If this is the case, then I'm going to put 189 00:14:14,990 --> 00:14:17,350 it on the unit circle. 190 00:14:17,350 --> 00:14:20,950 The second thing that I notice is that it's not monotonic and 191 00:14:20,950 --> 00:14:22,960 it's not alternating. 192 00:14:22,960 --> 00:14:24,030 This is oscillating. 193 00:14:24,030 --> 00:14:29,050 So in order to determine what angle I'm going to sign to my 194 00:14:29,050 --> 00:14:32,350 unit simple response, I'm going to count out the time 195 00:14:32,350 --> 00:14:35,260 steps that it takes to cycle through an entire period and 196 00:14:35,260 --> 00:14:37,390 then from there figure out what the angle would have to 197 00:14:37,390 --> 00:14:41,620 be in order to determine a period of that length. 198 00:14:41,620 --> 00:14:43,140 So I start here. 199 00:14:43,140 --> 00:14:44,505 I'm just going to count 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 -- 200 00:14:49,040 --> 00:14:51,400 to complete one full oscillation. 201 00:14:51,400 --> 00:14:53,330 This means that my period is 8. 202 00:14:53,330 --> 00:14:56,590 If I have to divide 2pi by a particular angle in order to 203 00:14:56,590 --> 00:15:01,680 get out 8, I want to divide by pi/4. 204 00:15:01,680 --> 00:15:06,470 So at this point, I'm working with a magnitude of about 1, 205 00:15:06,470 --> 00:15:08,670 and I want this angle to be about pi/4. 206 00:15:15,740 --> 00:15:18,380 This concludes my tutorial on solving poles. 207 00:15:18,380 --> 00:15:20,070 Next time, we'll end up talking about circuits.