0% found this document useful (0 votes)
130 views5 pages

Laplace Transform

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 5

Mark Joseph Aquino

PETE-3205
Laplace Transform
You know, it’s always a little scary when we devote a whole section just to the definition of
something. Laplace transforms (or just transforms) can seem scary when we first start looking
at them. However, as we will see, they aren’t as bad as they may appear at first.

Before we start with the definition of the Laplace transform we need to get another definition
out of the way.

A function is called piecewise continuous on an interval if the interval can be broken into a
finite number of subintervals on which the function is continuous on each open subinterval
(i.e. the subinterval without its endpoints) and has a finite limit at the endpoints of each
subinterval. Below is a sketch of a piecewise continuous function.

In other words, a piecewise continuous function is a function that has a finite number of breaks
in it and doesn’t blow up to infinity anywhere.

Now, let’s take a look at the definition of the Laplace transform.

Definition
Suppose that f(t) is a piecewise continuous function. The Laplace transform of f(t) is

denoted and defined as

(1)
There is an alternate notation for Laplace transforms. For the sake of convenience we will
often denote Laplace transforms as,

With this alternate notation, note that the transform is really a function of a new variable, s,
and that all the t’s will drop out in the integration process.

Now, the integral in the definition of the transform is called an improper integral and it would
probably be best to recall how these kinds of integrals work before we actually jump into
computing some transforms.

Properties of Laplace Transform


The Laplace transform has a set of properties in parallel with that of the Fourier
transform. The difference is that we need to pay special attention to the ROCs. In the
following, we always assume

Linearity

( means set contains or equals to set , i.e,. is a subset of , or is


a superset of .)

It is obvious that the ROC of the linear combination of and should be the

intersection of the their individual ROCs in which

both and exist. But also note that in some cases when zero-pole

cancellation occurs, the ROC of the linear combination could be larger than
, as shown in the example below.
Example: Let

then
We see that the ROC of the combination is larger than the intersection of the ROCs of
the two individual terms.
Time Shifting

Shifting in s-Domain

Note that the ROC is shifted by , i.e., it is shifted vertically by (with no

effect to ROC) and horizontally by .

Time Scaling

Note that the ROC is horizontally scaled by , which could be either positive (

) or negative ( ) in which case both the signal and the ROC of its
Laplace transform are horizontally flipped.

Conjugation

Proof:

Convolution
Note that the ROC of the convolution could be larger than the intersection

of and , due to the possible pole-zero cancellation caused by the convolution,


similar to the linearity property.
Example Assume

then

Differentiation in Time Domain

This can be proven by differentiating the inverse Laplace transform:

In general, we have

Again, multiplying by may cause pole-zero cancellation and therefore the

resulting ROC may be larger than .


Example: Given

we have:

Differentiation in s-Domain

This can be proven by differentiating the Laplace transform:


Repeat this process we get

Integration in Time Domain

This can be proven by realizing that

and therefore by convolution property we have

Also note that as the ROC of is the right half plane , the

ROC of is the intersection of the two individual ROCs ,

except if pole-zero cancellation occurs (when with ) in


which case the ROC is the entire s-pane.

You might also like