In your previous video (Finding Range of K for Stability-FE/EIT Review) you brought the numerator (which was "k") down when doing the Routh criteria. For this problem, at 4:55 you say "[we already have a] k at the bottom" and then you do not bring the numerator down when starting the Routh criteria. This leads me to believe that if there is a k in the denominator, there is no need to bring the numerator down before starting the Routh analysis. Is this correct? I am taking the FE next week and this is the first time i've ever seen Routh problems, so you'll have to excuse me if I sound like I don't know what i'm talking about....because I don't.
That's one simplistic way to look at it, because if there is a K already added at the bottom (and is the same as the expression as in the numerator), chances are you already factored it in but a more correct way to say it is to always use the closed loop transfer function to get the denominator G(s)/(1+G(s)). This example illustrates that. We brought (added) the whole K(S+1) to the denominator. And you can ask me any questions, I'm here to help as much as I can. Good luck on your exam! Hope you do well...one of my subs told me he just passed last weekend.
![SAFEPLANET - ดาวเคราะห์ [ THE PLANET ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4X1XL3I_k3c/mqdefault.jpg)
bruh that sigh when she saw it cubed...lol
i feel yah sir.. lol calculator can factor that out anyways
Thank you so much saved my mechatronics exam
in general, if you got for example, K < 15/2, then would that mean that the maximum gain is 15/2?
not all heroes wear capes
Thank you!
You’re solving is for those who know how to solve but wanna make sure! Not for those who want to learn!
In your previous video (Finding Range of K for Stability-FE/EIT Review) you brought the numerator (which was "k") down when doing the Routh criteria.
For this problem, at 4:55 you say "[we already have a] k at the bottom" and then you do not bring the numerator down when starting the Routh criteria. This leads me to believe that if there is a k in the denominator, there is no need to bring the numerator down before starting the Routh analysis. Is this correct?
I am taking the FE next week and this is the first time i've ever seen Routh problems, so you'll have to excuse me if I sound like I don't know what i'm talking about....because I don't.
That's one simplistic way to look at it, because if there is a K already added at the bottom (and is the same as the expression as in the numerator), chances are you already factored it in but a more correct way to say it is to always use the closed loop transfer function to get the denominator G(s)/(1+G(s)). This example illustrates that. We brought (added) the whole K(S+1) to the denominator.
And you can ask me any questions, I'm here to help as much as I can. Good luck on your exam! Hope you do well...one of my subs told me he just passed last weekend.
How was your FE? Im taking it soon
Doesnt the greater than sign flip when you divide?
Thanks a lot. Saved me a lot of time
What if you have an s^4 term? Does that mean you now have three columns?🤔
U thought this to me, I'll remember that ❤
Thank you so much madam🌹i really understand the theory
what if I have higher exponents? for example s^5, will I get 3 rows in your table? then what should I do? (please need a fast answer)
Same procedure doc
Best explanation
Thank you!
where is the denominator 5 goes???
0x5 = 0
Thanks for this Video. Good explaination.
You're welcome John. Thank You
Damn, this actually works :D
THX
yea Its help, Thanks lot
Good concise video
Your voice is stunning
Allah razı olsun
thank you
❤❤❤
Thank you the video helped me so much. I have a girlfriend
Thanks JOSH!
#bhataveer
merci pour les explications
धन्यवाद
Thanx
i love ur voice
your voice
Slow asf
you are too cute