Fourier transform of given signal
$begingroup$
This is the signal whose FT i need to find, at first i thought that i could solve this as a convolution of two rectangular pulses, but i could not find pulses that fit into this (it turns out that parts from -T/2 to 0 and T to 3T/2 are always somehow narrow). I could also try by definition but that's just too much work and very time consuming, the third option is derivative theorem, but i don't know how to use it, since i never actually used it. Any help appreciated!
fourier-transform
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is the signal whose FT i need to find, at first i thought that i could solve this as a convolution of two rectangular pulses, but i could not find pulses that fit into this (it turns out that parts from -T/2 to 0 and T to 3T/2 are always somehow narrow). I could also try by definition but that's just too much work and very time consuming, the third option is derivative theorem, but i don't know how to use it, since i never actually used it. Any help appreciated!
fourier-transform
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Maybe that is not "one" signal. Maybe it can be decomposed into elementary signals whose FT are known...
$endgroup$
– A_A
Feb 7 at 11:48
$begingroup$
@A_A as i said in my question, i believe it is a convoultion of two rectangular pulses, but i am having hard time finding them
$endgroup$
– cdummie
Feb 7 at 11:57
1
$begingroup$
Maybe that is not "one" signal. Maybe it can be decomposed into elementary signals whose FT are known...
$endgroup$
– A_A
Feb 7 at 12:34
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is the signal whose FT i need to find, at first i thought that i could solve this as a convolution of two rectangular pulses, but i could not find pulses that fit into this (it turns out that parts from -T/2 to 0 and T to 3T/2 are always somehow narrow). I could also try by definition but that's just too much work and very time consuming, the third option is derivative theorem, but i don't know how to use it, since i never actually used it. Any help appreciated!
fourier-transform
$endgroup$
This is the signal whose FT i need to find, at first i thought that i could solve this as a convolution of two rectangular pulses, but i could not find pulses that fit into this (it turns out that parts from -T/2 to 0 and T to 3T/2 are always somehow narrow). I could also try by definition but that's just too much work and very time consuming, the third option is derivative theorem, but i don't know how to use it, since i never actually used it. Any help appreciated!
fourier-transform
fourier-transform
asked Feb 7 at 11:16
cdummiecdummie
1355
1355
$begingroup$
Maybe that is not "one" signal. Maybe it can be decomposed into elementary signals whose FT are known...
$endgroup$
– A_A
Feb 7 at 11:48
$begingroup$
@A_A as i said in my question, i believe it is a convoultion of two rectangular pulses, but i am having hard time finding them
$endgroup$
– cdummie
Feb 7 at 11:57
1
$begingroup$
Maybe that is not "one" signal. Maybe it can be decomposed into elementary signals whose FT are known...
$endgroup$
– A_A
Feb 7 at 12:34
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Maybe that is not "one" signal. Maybe it can be decomposed into elementary signals whose FT are known...
$endgroup$
– A_A
Feb 7 at 11:48
$begingroup$
@A_A as i said in my question, i believe it is a convoultion of two rectangular pulses, but i am having hard time finding them
$endgroup$
– cdummie
Feb 7 at 11:57
1
$begingroup$
Maybe that is not "one" signal. Maybe it can be decomposed into elementary signals whose FT are known...
$endgroup$
– A_A
Feb 7 at 12:34
$begingroup$
Maybe that is not "one" signal. Maybe it can be decomposed into elementary signals whose FT are known...
$endgroup$
– A_A
Feb 7 at 11:48
$begingroup$
Maybe that is not "one" signal. Maybe it can be decomposed into elementary signals whose FT are known...
$endgroup$
– A_A
Feb 7 at 11:48
$begingroup$
@A_A as i said in my question, i believe it is a convoultion of two rectangular pulses, but i am having hard time finding them
$endgroup$
– cdummie
Feb 7 at 11:57
$begingroup$
@A_A as i said in my question, i believe it is a convoultion of two rectangular pulses, but i am having hard time finding them
$endgroup$
– cdummie
Feb 7 at 11:57
1
1
$begingroup$
Maybe that is not "one" signal. Maybe it can be decomposed into elementary signals whose FT are known...
$endgroup$
– A_A
Feb 7 at 12:34
$begingroup$
Maybe that is not "one" signal. Maybe it can be decomposed into elementary signals whose FT are known...
$endgroup$
– A_A
Feb 7 at 12:34
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
HINT:
It can be solved by convolution. Take two rectangles, one that is non-zero in $[-T/2,T]$ and the other being non-zero in $[0,T/2]$. Now you just have to choose the amplitudes right and the convolution of the two signals will look like the one in your question.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hint:
If you can get away from your insistence of finding the FT via expressing the waveform as the convolution of two rectangular pulses, consider that the waveform can be expressed as a triangular waveform (base $left[-frac T2, frac{3T}{2}
right]$ and peak $2A$) minus another triangular waveform (base $[0, T]$ and peak $A$). Both of these have FTs that you can look up in a table (or easily derive a tabulated FT such as that of a triangular waveform of base $left[-frac T2, frac T2right]$ and peak $1$) and you are done.
Or, each of the two triangular waveforms that I have described above can be more easily expressed as the convolution of rectangular pulses of equal width (different pulse widths for the two triangles, of course) and so the FTs of each triangular waveform is a $operatorname{sinc}^2$ function. Now, whether your homework grader will accept a difference of $operatorname{sinc}^2$ functions as a correct answer is a different matter.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What is wrong with a difference of sinc^2? As a grader, you have to live with the existence of equivalent answers.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
Feb 7 at 15:07
$begingroup$
@DilipSarwate This is really neat way to find FT for this signal, i must say, it's great idea, however, when i was solving this by using convolution theorem i got product of two $$sinc^2$$ functions, i suppose that it could be equivalent to the difference of $$sinc^2$$ found this way.
$endgroup$
– cdummie
Feb 7 at 15:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could see it as an overlapping of $3$ Triangular functions, if the Triangular function is defined as follows:
$$Delta(t) = begin{cases}
1 - frac{2}{T}|t| qquad & |t| < frac{T}{2} \
0 qquad & mathrm{otherwise} \
end{cases}$$
Notice that we have one grid period equal to $ frac{T}{2}$. If we look closely at the figure, we can see that we have two ramp-up's (each on the edge), where each corresponds to the left/right parts of $Delta(t)$. Now, another important thing to notice is the plateau region, which contains two grid periods. Each grid period could be see as two overlapping triangles. With that being said, we can model your function as
$$x(t) =A Big(Delta(t) + Delta(t- frac{T}{2} ) + Delta(t- T ) Big)$$
Making use of the linearity property and the the fact that a time shift translates to a phase shift in frequency domain, we get
$$X(w) = A big(1 + e^{-jw frac{T}{2}} + e^{-jw T} big)Delta(w )$$
where $Delta(w) = mathcal{F} Big(Delta(t) Big)$, which is computed using the definition,
$$X(w) = int_{-infty}^{infty} x(t) e^{-j w t} dt = Aint_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} (1 + frac{2}{T} t) e^{-j w t} dt + Aint_{0}^{frac{T}{2}} (1 - frac{2}{T} t) e^{-j w t} dt$$
Using $int e^{-jwt} = frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt}$ and $int t e^{-jwt} = frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} $, we get
begin{equation}
begin{split}
X(w) &= ABig[ frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt} Big]_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} + frac{2A}{T}Big[ frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} Big]_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} \
&+
ABig[ frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt} Big]_{0}^{frac{T}{2}} - frac{2A}{T}Big[ frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} Big]_{0}^{frac{T}{2}}
end{split}
end{equation}
Replacing and a bit of arrangements will give you
begin{equation}
begin{split}
X(w) &= frac{4A}{w^2 T}Big( cos(frac{T}{2} w) - 1 Big)
end{split}
end{equation}
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "295"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdsp.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f55345%2ffourier-transform-of-given-signal%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
HINT:
It can be solved by convolution. Take two rectangles, one that is non-zero in $[-T/2,T]$ and the other being non-zero in $[0,T/2]$. Now you just have to choose the amplitudes right and the convolution of the two signals will look like the one in your question.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
HINT:
It can be solved by convolution. Take two rectangles, one that is non-zero in $[-T/2,T]$ and the other being non-zero in $[0,T/2]$. Now you just have to choose the amplitudes right and the convolution of the two signals will look like the one in your question.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
HINT:
It can be solved by convolution. Take two rectangles, one that is non-zero in $[-T/2,T]$ and the other being non-zero in $[0,T/2]$. Now you just have to choose the amplitudes right and the convolution of the two signals will look like the one in your question.
$endgroup$
HINT:
It can be solved by convolution. Take two rectangles, one that is non-zero in $[-T/2,T]$ and the other being non-zero in $[0,T/2]$. Now you just have to choose the amplitudes right and the convolution of the two signals will look like the one in your question.
answered Feb 7 at 11:54
Matt L.Matt L.
50.7k23889
50.7k23889
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hint:
If you can get away from your insistence of finding the FT via expressing the waveform as the convolution of two rectangular pulses, consider that the waveform can be expressed as a triangular waveform (base $left[-frac T2, frac{3T}{2}
right]$ and peak $2A$) minus another triangular waveform (base $[0, T]$ and peak $A$). Both of these have FTs that you can look up in a table (or easily derive a tabulated FT such as that of a triangular waveform of base $left[-frac T2, frac T2right]$ and peak $1$) and you are done.
Or, each of the two triangular waveforms that I have described above can be more easily expressed as the convolution of rectangular pulses of equal width (different pulse widths for the two triangles, of course) and so the FTs of each triangular waveform is a $operatorname{sinc}^2$ function. Now, whether your homework grader will accept a difference of $operatorname{sinc}^2$ functions as a correct answer is a different matter.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What is wrong with a difference of sinc^2? As a grader, you have to live with the existence of equivalent answers.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
Feb 7 at 15:07
$begingroup$
@DilipSarwate This is really neat way to find FT for this signal, i must say, it's great idea, however, when i was solving this by using convolution theorem i got product of two $$sinc^2$$ functions, i suppose that it could be equivalent to the difference of $$sinc^2$$ found this way.
$endgroup$
– cdummie
Feb 7 at 15:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hint:
If you can get away from your insistence of finding the FT via expressing the waveform as the convolution of two rectangular pulses, consider that the waveform can be expressed as a triangular waveform (base $left[-frac T2, frac{3T}{2}
right]$ and peak $2A$) minus another triangular waveform (base $[0, T]$ and peak $A$). Both of these have FTs that you can look up in a table (or easily derive a tabulated FT such as that of a triangular waveform of base $left[-frac T2, frac T2right]$ and peak $1$) and you are done.
Or, each of the two triangular waveforms that I have described above can be more easily expressed as the convolution of rectangular pulses of equal width (different pulse widths for the two triangles, of course) and so the FTs of each triangular waveform is a $operatorname{sinc}^2$ function. Now, whether your homework grader will accept a difference of $operatorname{sinc}^2$ functions as a correct answer is a different matter.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What is wrong with a difference of sinc^2? As a grader, you have to live with the existence of equivalent answers.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
Feb 7 at 15:07
$begingroup$
@DilipSarwate This is really neat way to find FT for this signal, i must say, it's great idea, however, when i was solving this by using convolution theorem i got product of two $$sinc^2$$ functions, i suppose that it could be equivalent to the difference of $$sinc^2$$ found this way.
$endgroup$
– cdummie
Feb 7 at 15:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hint:
If you can get away from your insistence of finding the FT via expressing the waveform as the convolution of two rectangular pulses, consider that the waveform can be expressed as a triangular waveform (base $left[-frac T2, frac{3T}{2}
right]$ and peak $2A$) minus another triangular waveform (base $[0, T]$ and peak $A$). Both of these have FTs that you can look up in a table (or easily derive a tabulated FT such as that of a triangular waveform of base $left[-frac T2, frac T2right]$ and peak $1$) and you are done.
Or, each of the two triangular waveforms that I have described above can be more easily expressed as the convolution of rectangular pulses of equal width (different pulse widths for the two triangles, of course) and so the FTs of each triangular waveform is a $operatorname{sinc}^2$ function. Now, whether your homework grader will accept a difference of $operatorname{sinc}^2$ functions as a correct answer is a different matter.
$endgroup$
Hint:
If you can get away from your insistence of finding the FT via expressing the waveform as the convolution of two rectangular pulses, consider that the waveform can be expressed as a triangular waveform (base $left[-frac T2, frac{3T}{2}
right]$ and peak $2A$) minus another triangular waveform (base $[0, T]$ and peak $A$). Both of these have FTs that you can look up in a table (or easily derive a tabulated FT such as that of a triangular waveform of base $left[-frac T2, frac T2right]$ and peak $1$) and you are done.
Or, each of the two triangular waveforms that I have described above can be more easily expressed as the convolution of rectangular pulses of equal width (different pulse widths for the two triangles, of course) and so the FTs of each triangular waveform is a $operatorname{sinc}^2$ function. Now, whether your homework grader will accept a difference of $operatorname{sinc}^2$ functions as a correct answer is a different matter.
answered Feb 7 at 13:24
Dilip SarwateDilip Sarwate
13.2k12463
13.2k12463
$begingroup$
What is wrong with a difference of sinc^2? As a grader, you have to live with the existence of equivalent answers.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
Feb 7 at 15:07
$begingroup$
@DilipSarwate This is really neat way to find FT for this signal, i must say, it's great idea, however, when i was solving this by using convolution theorem i got product of two $$sinc^2$$ functions, i suppose that it could be equivalent to the difference of $$sinc^2$$ found this way.
$endgroup$
– cdummie
Feb 7 at 15:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What is wrong with a difference of sinc^2? As a grader, you have to live with the existence of equivalent answers.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
Feb 7 at 15:07
$begingroup$
@DilipSarwate This is really neat way to find FT for this signal, i must say, it's great idea, however, when i was solving this by using convolution theorem i got product of two $$sinc^2$$ functions, i suppose that it could be equivalent to the difference of $$sinc^2$$ found this way.
$endgroup$
– cdummie
Feb 7 at 15:15
$begingroup$
What is wrong with a difference of sinc^2? As a grader, you have to live with the existence of equivalent answers.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
Feb 7 at 15:07
$begingroup$
What is wrong with a difference of sinc^2? As a grader, you have to live with the existence of equivalent answers.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
Feb 7 at 15:07
$begingroup$
@DilipSarwate This is really neat way to find FT for this signal, i must say, it's great idea, however, when i was solving this by using convolution theorem i got product of two $$sinc^2$$ functions, i suppose that it could be equivalent to the difference of $$sinc^2$$ found this way.
$endgroup$
– cdummie
Feb 7 at 15:15
$begingroup$
@DilipSarwate This is really neat way to find FT for this signal, i must say, it's great idea, however, when i was solving this by using convolution theorem i got product of two $$sinc^2$$ functions, i suppose that it could be equivalent to the difference of $$sinc^2$$ found this way.
$endgroup$
– cdummie
Feb 7 at 15:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could see it as an overlapping of $3$ Triangular functions, if the Triangular function is defined as follows:
$$Delta(t) = begin{cases}
1 - frac{2}{T}|t| qquad & |t| < frac{T}{2} \
0 qquad & mathrm{otherwise} \
end{cases}$$
Notice that we have one grid period equal to $ frac{T}{2}$. If we look closely at the figure, we can see that we have two ramp-up's (each on the edge), where each corresponds to the left/right parts of $Delta(t)$. Now, another important thing to notice is the plateau region, which contains two grid periods. Each grid period could be see as two overlapping triangles. With that being said, we can model your function as
$$x(t) =A Big(Delta(t) + Delta(t- frac{T}{2} ) + Delta(t- T ) Big)$$
Making use of the linearity property and the the fact that a time shift translates to a phase shift in frequency domain, we get
$$X(w) = A big(1 + e^{-jw frac{T}{2}} + e^{-jw T} big)Delta(w )$$
where $Delta(w) = mathcal{F} Big(Delta(t) Big)$, which is computed using the definition,
$$X(w) = int_{-infty}^{infty} x(t) e^{-j w t} dt = Aint_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} (1 + frac{2}{T} t) e^{-j w t} dt + Aint_{0}^{frac{T}{2}} (1 - frac{2}{T} t) e^{-j w t} dt$$
Using $int e^{-jwt} = frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt}$ and $int t e^{-jwt} = frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} $, we get
begin{equation}
begin{split}
X(w) &= ABig[ frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt} Big]_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} + frac{2A}{T}Big[ frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} Big]_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} \
&+
ABig[ frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt} Big]_{0}^{frac{T}{2}} - frac{2A}{T}Big[ frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} Big]_{0}^{frac{T}{2}}
end{split}
end{equation}
Replacing and a bit of arrangements will give you
begin{equation}
begin{split}
X(w) &= frac{4A}{w^2 T}Big( cos(frac{T}{2} w) - 1 Big)
end{split}
end{equation}
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could see it as an overlapping of $3$ Triangular functions, if the Triangular function is defined as follows:
$$Delta(t) = begin{cases}
1 - frac{2}{T}|t| qquad & |t| < frac{T}{2} \
0 qquad & mathrm{otherwise} \
end{cases}$$
Notice that we have one grid period equal to $ frac{T}{2}$. If we look closely at the figure, we can see that we have two ramp-up's (each on the edge), where each corresponds to the left/right parts of $Delta(t)$. Now, another important thing to notice is the plateau region, which contains two grid periods. Each grid period could be see as two overlapping triangles. With that being said, we can model your function as
$$x(t) =A Big(Delta(t) + Delta(t- frac{T}{2} ) + Delta(t- T ) Big)$$
Making use of the linearity property and the the fact that a time shift translates to a phase shift in frequency domain, we get
$$X(w) = A big(1 + e^{-jw frac{T}{2}} + e^{-jw T} big)Delta(w )$$
where $Delta(w) = mathcal{F} Big(Delta(t) Big)$, which is computed using the definition,
$$X(w) = int_{-infty}^{infty} x(t) e^{-j w t} dt = Aint_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} (1 + frac{2}{T} t) e^{-j w t} dt + Aint_{0}^{frac{T}{2}} (1 - frac{2}{T} t) e^{-j w t} dt$$
Using $int e^{-jwt} = frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt}$ and $int t e^{-jwt} = frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} $, we get
begin{equation}
begin{split}
X(w) &= ABig[ frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt} Big]_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} + frac{2A}{T}Big[ frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} Big]_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} \
&+
ABig[ frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt} Big]_{0}^{frac{T}{2}} - frac{2A}{T}Big[ frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} Big]_{0}^{frac{T}{2}}
end{split}
end{equation}
Replacing and a bit of arrangements will give you
begin{equation}
begin{split}
X(w) &= frac{4A}{w^2 T}Big( cos(frac{T}{2} w) - 1 Big)
end{split}
end{equation}
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could see it as an overlapping of $3$ Triangular functions, if the Triangular function is defined as follows:
$$Delta(t) = begin{cases}
1 - frac{2}{T}|t| qquad & |t| < frac{T}{2} \
0 qquad & mathrm{otherwise} \
end{cases}$$
Notice that we have one grid period equal to $ frac{T}{2}$. If we look closely at the figure, we can see that we have two ramp-up's (each on the edge), where each corresponds to the left/right parts of $Delta(t)$. Now, another important thing to notice is the plateau region, which contains two grid periods. Each grid period could be see as two overlapping triangles. With that being said, we can model your function as
$$x(t) =A Big(Delta(t) + Delta(t- frac{T}{2} ) + Delta(t- T ) Big)$$
Making use of the linearity property and the the fact that a time shift translates to a phase shift in frequency domain, we get
$$X(w) = A big(1 + e^{-jw frac{T}{2}} + e^{-jw T} big)Delta(w )$$
where $Delta(w) = mathcal{F} Big(Delta(t) Big)$, which is computed using the definition,
$$X(w) = int_{-infty}^{infty} x(t) e^{-j w t} dt = Aint_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} (1 + frac{2}{T} t) e^{-j w t} dt + Aint_{0}^{frac{T}{2}} (1 - frac{2}{T} t) e^{-j w t} dt$$
Using $int e^{-jwt} = frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt}$ and $int t e^{-jwt} = frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} $, we get
begin{equation}
begin{split}
X(w) &= ABig[ frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt} Big]_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} + frac{2A}{T}Big[ frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} Big]_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} \
&+
ABig[ frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt} Big]_{0}^{frac{T}{2}} - frac{2A}{T}Big[ frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} Big]_{0}^{frac{T}{2}}
end{split}
end{equation}
Replacing and a bit of arrangements will give you
begin{equation}
begin{split}
X(w) &= frac{4A}{w^2 T}Big( cos(frac{T}{2} w) - 1 Big)
end{split}
end{equation}
$endgroup$
You could see it as an overlapping of $3$ Triangular functions, if the Triangular function is defined as follows:
$$Delta(t) = begin{cases}
1 - frac{2}{T}|t| qquad & |t| < frac{T}{2} \
0 qquad & mathrm{otherwise} \
end{cases}$$
Notice that we have one grid period equal to $ frac{T}{2}$. If we look closely at the figure, we can see that we have two ramp-up's (each on the edge), where each corresponds to the left/right parts of $Delta(t)$. Now, another important thing to notice is the plateau region, which contains two grid periods. Each grid period could be see as two overlapping triangles. With that being said, we can model your function as
$$x(t) =A Big(Delta(t) + Delta(t- frac{T}{2} ) + Delta(t- T ) Big)$$
Making use of the linearity property and the the fact that a time shift translates to a phase shift in frequency domain, we get
$$X(w) = A big(1 + e^{-jw frac{T}{2}} + e^{-jw T} big)Delta(w )$$
where $Delta(w) = mathcal{F} Big(Delta(t) Big)$, which is computed using the definition,
$$X(w) = int_{-infty}^{infty} x(t) e^{-j w t} dt = Aint_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} (1 + frac{2}{T} t) e^{-j w t} dt + Aint_{0}^{frac{T}{2}} (1 - frac{2}{T} t) e^{-j w t} dt$$
Using $int e^{-jwt} = frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt}$ and $int t e^{-jwt} = frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} $, we get
begin{equation}
begin{split}
X(w) &= ABig[ frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt} Big]_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} + frac{2A}{T}Big[ frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} Big]_{-frac{T}{2}}^{0} \
&+
ABig[ frac{j}{w} e^{-jwt} Big]_{0}^{frac{T}{2}} - frac{2A}{T}Big[ frac{j}{w} te^{-jwt} - frac{1}{w^2}e^{-jwt} Big]_{0}^{frac{T}{2}}
end{split}
end{equation}
Replacing and a bit of arrangements will give you
begin{equation}
begin{split}
X(w) &= frac{4A}{w^2 T}Big( cos(frac{T}{2} w) - 1 Big)
end{split}
end{equation}
edited Feb 7 at 13:31
answered Feb 7 at 12:36
Ahmad BazziAhmad Bazzi
426212
426212
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Signal Processing Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdsp.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f55345%2ffourier-transform-of-given-signal%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Maybe that is not "one" signal. Maybe it can be decomposed into elementary signals whose FT are known...
$endgroup$
– A_A
Feb 7 at 11:48
$begingroup$
@A_A as i said in my question, i believe it is a convoultion of two rectangular pulses, but i am having hard time finding them
$endgroup$
– cdummie
Feb 7 at 11:57
1
$begingroup$
Maybe that is not "one" signal. Maybe it can be decomposed into elementary signals whose FT are known...
$endgroup$
– A_A
Feb 7 at 12:34