Deriving the discrete-time lowpass filter from the Laplace equation











up vote
0
down vote

favorite












I was trying to demonstrate the discrete-time expression of a lowpass filter:



$ y_i = alpha x_i + (1-alpha) y_{i-1} $



However my result is completely off the target so I am wondering which of my assumptions is/are wrong...



So we have the input signal:



$ f(t) <=> F(s) $



The lowpass filter (static gain 1 and, Fc = alpha):



$ g(t) <=> G(s) $



with



$ G(s) = alpha / (s + alpha) $



Thus



$ g(t) = alpha * e^{-alpha t} * u(t) $



Our filtered signal is given by:



$ H(s) = F(s) G(s) $



When converting that to temporal, this boils down to a convolution:



$ h(t) = (f * g)(t) $



Which can be turned into a discreet convolution (I'm not exactly sure of this step):



$ h_i = sum_{k = -infty}^{+infty} f(k)g(i-k) $



For $ forall k > i, g(i-k) = u(i-k) = 0 $, and, assuming our signal is null before 0, $ forall k < 0, f(k) = 0 $ so our previous expression becomes:



$ h_i = sum_{k = 0}^{i} f(k) * alpha * e^{-alpha (i-k)} $



It's pretty clear the result is wrong already, but if one tries to express $h_i$ from $h_{i-1}$ here's what one would obtain:



$ h_i = alpha f(i) + alpha sum_{k = 0}^{i-1} f(k) * e^{-alpha (i-k)} $



$ h_i = alpha f(i) + alpha e^{-alpha} sum_{k = 0}^{i-1} f(k) * e^{-alpha (i-1 -k)} $



$ h_i = alpha f(i) + e^{-alpha} h_{i-1} $



Thanks!










share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




pLesur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
























    up vote
    0
    down vote

    favorite












    I was trying to demonstrate the discrete-time expression of a lowpass filter:



    $ y_i = alpha x_i + (1-alpha) y_{i-1} $



    However my result is completely off the target so I am wondering which of my assumptions is/are wrong...



    So we have the input signal:



    $ f(t) <=> F(s) $



    The lowpass filter (static gain 1 and, Fc = alpha):



    $ g(t) <=> G(s) $



    with



    $ G(s) = alpha / (s + alpha) $



    Thus



    $ g(t) = alpha * e^{-alpha t} * u(t) $



    Our filtered signal is given by:



    $ H(s) = F(s) G(s) $



    When converting that to temporal, this boils down to a convolution:



    $ h(t) = (f * g)(t) $



    Which can be turned into a discreet convolution (I'm not exactly sure of this step):



    $ h_i = sum_{k = -infty}^{+infty} f(k)g(i-k) $



    For $ forall k > i, g(i-k) = u(i-k) = 0 $, and, assuming our signal is null before 0, $ forall k < 0, f(k) = 0 $ so our previous expression becomes:



    $ h_i = sum_{k = 0}^{i} f(k) * alpha * e^{-alpha (i-k)} $



    It's pretty clear the result is wrong already, but if one tries to express $h_i$ from $h_{i-1}$ here's what one would obtain:



    $ h_i = alpha f(i) + alpha sum_{k = 0}^{i-1} f(k) * e^{-alpha (i-k)} $



    $ h_i = alpha f(i) + alpha e^{-alpha} sum_{k = 0}^{i-1} f(k) * e^{-alpha (i-1 -k)} $



    $ h_i = alpha f(i) + e^{-alpha} h_{i-1} $



    Thanks!










    share|cite|improve this question







    New contributor




    pLesur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






















      up vote
      0
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      0
      down vote

      favorite











      I was trying to demonstrate the discrete-time expression of a lowpass filter:



      $ y_i = alpha x_i + (1-alpha) y_{i-1} $



      However my result is completely off the target so I am wondering which of my assumptions is/are wrong...



      So we have the input signal:



      $ f(t) <=> F(s) $



      The lowpass filter (static gain 1 and, Fc = alpha):



      $ g(t) <=> G(s) $



      with



      $ G(s) = alpha / (s + alpha) $



      Thus



      $ g(t) = alpha * e^{-alpha t} * u(t) $



      Our filtered signal is given by:



      $ H(s) = F(s) G(s) $



      When converting that to temporal, this boils down to a convolution:



      $ h(t) = (f * g)(t) $



      Which can be turned into a discreet convolution (I'm not exactly sure of this step):



      $ h_i = sum_{k = -infty}^{+infty} f(k)g(i-k) $



      For $ forall k > i, g(i-k) = u(i-k) = 0 $, and, assuming our signal is null before 0, $ forall k < 0, f(k) = 0 $ so our previous expression becomes:



      $ h_i = sum_{k = 0}^{i} f(k) * alpha * e^{-alpha (i-k)} $



      It's pretty clear the result is wrong already, but if one tries to express $h_i$ from $h_{i-1}$ here's what one would obtain:



      $ h_i = alpha f(i) + alpha sum_{k = 0}^{i-1} f(k) * e^{-alpha (i-k)} $



      $ h_i = alpha f(i) + alpha e^{-alpha} sum_{k = 0}^{i-1} f(k) * e^{-alpha (i-1 -k)} $



      $ h_i = alpha f(i) + e^{-alpha} h_{i-1} $



      Thanks!










      share|cite|improve this question







      New contributor




      pLesur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      I was trying to demonstrate the discrete-time expression of a lowpass filter:



      $ y_i = alpha x_i + (1-alpha) y_{i-1} $



      However my result is completely off the target so I am wondering which of my assumptions is/are wrong...



      So we have the input signal:



      $ f(t) <=> F(s) $



      The lowpass filter (static gain 1 and, Fc = alpha):



      $ g(t) <=> G(s) $



      with



      $ G(s) = alpha / (s + alpha) $



      Thus



      $ g(t) = alpha * e^{-alpha t} * u(t) $



      Our filtered signal is given by:



      $ H(s) = F(s) G(s) $



      When converting that to temporal, this boils down to a convolution:



      $ h(t) = (f * g)(t) $



      Which can be turned into a discreet convolution (I'm not exactly sure of this step):



      $ h_i = sum_{k = -infty}^{+infty} f(k)g(i-k) $



      For $ forall k > i, g(i-k) = u(i-k) = 0 $, and, assuming our signal is null before 0, $ forall k < 0, f(k) = 0 $ so our previous expression becomes:



      $ h_i = sum_{k = 0}^{i} f(k) * alpha * e^{-alpha (i-k)} $



      It's pretty clear the result is wrong already, but if one tries to express $h_i$ from $h_{i-1}$ here's what one would obtain:



      $ h_i = alpha f(i) + alpha sum_{k = 0}^{i-1} f(k) * e^{-alpha (i-k)} $



      $ h_i = alpha f(i) + alpha e^{-alpha} sum_{k = 0}^{i-1} f(k) * e^{-alpha (i-1 -k)} $



      $ h_i = alpha f(i) + e^{-alpha} h_{i-1} $



      Thanks!







      discrete-mathematics laplace-transform filters discrete-calculus






      share|cite|improve this question







      New contributor




      pLesur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|cite|improve this question







      New contributor




      pLesur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question






      New contributor




      pLesur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked Nov 14 at 7:51









      pLesur

      1




      1




      New contributor




      pLesur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      pLesur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      pLesur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.



























          active

          oldest

          votes











          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: "69"
          };
          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',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          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
          });


          }
          });






          pLesur is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2997941%2fderiving-the-discrete-time-lowpass-filter-from-the-laplace-equation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown






























          active

          oldest

          votes













          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          pLesur is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          pLesur is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













          pLesur is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          pLesur is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.















           


          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2997941%2fderiving-the-discrete-time-lowpass-filter-from-the-laplace-equation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          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







          Popular posts from this blog

          Plaza Victoria

          Brian Clough

          Cáceres