after substituting in your omega, can you multiply a transfer function by an input signal's amplitude, and expect the result to be the amplitude of the output? (once converted to polar)
This might be a shortcut way to find your amplitude when you don't really need a representation of the whole...
Okay well for a) I'm guessing you would do this by deriving the eigen-equation.
But for b) how would you show that it's not just 'a' solution but is the general solution?
okay, so even though it's not possible to have two equal poles with the transfer function I posted, maybe it's possible if the load is taken into account. I will have to formulate that transfer function and check. Also, there's a different post above to the one I initially posted if you missed it.
I'm beginning to think that two poles at the same positions isn't possible.
My reasoning is that for them to be the same, they're going to be a complex conjugate pair.
And for that to be true, if we look at the standard quadratic formula we see that
4ac needs to be greater than b^2
And using...
It's going to be implemented between two discrete BJT amplifier stages. It's a filter within an amplifier basically, so yeah there's not going to be a loss of signal.
Is it possible to make a 2nd order CR LPF or HPF where the cut off frequencies for each pole are equal?
Here is a calculator for this system which includes the transfer function.http://sim.okawa-denshi.jp/en/CRCRkeisan.htm
I figured that I need to try to solve the denominator of the transfer...
no this is not a homework question. I like pondering about things is all.
Your question can be easily answered if referring to resistive circuits but semiconductors are different.
with a varying R, a current source will supply the voltage necessary to keep the current constant.
With a BJT...
What happens if for argument's sake you have a voltage of 15V and a resistor of 1k connected to the base of a BJT thus biasing it with 15/1000=.015amps
and then you apply a constant current source to the emitter/collector that is
1. less than beta*baseCurrent
2. more than beta*baseCurrent
3...
I'm having trouble understanding what this question is actually asking for. Is it assuming the centroid to be the origin and asking how far the bottom of the shape extends downwards for the origin to be the centroid?