J
John Larkin
I don't even know what a Fourier analysis _is_ other than a way of
translating a data set from the time domain to the frequency domain
(transforming?), but my "gut-feeling" is that the zero-crossings would be
identical _of the actual source waves_ - the fundamental would be out of
phase, in the plot of the Fourier-transformed resolved fundamental, but
the zero-crossing would be brought back into sync by the harmonics after
you added them back together.
It's like a sine wave with the half-cycles tilted to one side.
But wouldn't that act more inductive?
Thanks,
Rich
At the intuitive level, a Fourier series answers the question "how
much does this waveform look like a 60 Hz sine wave? How much like a
120 Hz sine wave?...". The answers are of the form "2 volts, 45
degrees" and such, one answer for DC and one for each harmonic. The
Fourier transform is a math operation that gives these answers. It
produces the same results you could get using a bandpass filter bank
at f, 2f, etc (plus the DC term, the zero frequency Fourier term,
which you'd get using a lowpass filter).
You can do an eyeball Fourier by printing the waveform on a piece of
paper. Suppose some waveform has a basic frequency of 60 Hz. Now plot
a 60 Hz sinewave on another piece of paper and hold it next to the
original waveform. Slide it horizontally until you see the best match,
so that the input waveform "helps" the sinewave template, pushing it
up and pulling it down in the best places. Now make a rough estimate
of how much it helps (amplitude), and how far you shifted the papers
to get the best match (phase.) Repeat for higher harmonics, one at a
time. Fourier!!
The SCR phase control waveform at 50% on has power on the load in the
last half of each half-cycle. That shifts the center-of-gravity of the
waveform later in time from the line voltage wave, so the fundamental
component, the 60 Hz Fourier line, lags. By something like 32 degrees,
some people have calculated in other posts. That does look inductive.
John