Talk:Transient response

message: I added pre-existing damping oscillation diagram. Might still need one more specific to transient response. --Petteri Aimonen (talk) 14:02, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Diagram request

message: Under the Rise Time section, there is an error in the information.  For an underdamped systems, a 0-100% is used, and for overdamped, 10-90% is used.
J Wallace, 11 May 2009  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.0.202.29 (talk) 07:49, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rise Time 

message: I'm pretty sure the natural/transient response is NOT the same thing as the steady-state response (this is a reference to "also known as steady-state response"), unlike what the beginning of the article states.  The transient response should be the source-free (no _applied_ or driving voltages) response, and the steady-state should be the driven (resulting from excitation) response.  And, of course, complete response is the sum of transient and steady-state responses.  So... they're almost definitely not even close to being the same.  I think... 65.183.135.40 11:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This was changed at some point so I believe the relationship between transient and steady-state responses is now clear. ~Kvng (talk) 17:37, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

text: We can continue to discuss this but what we really need are some citations to clarify the relationship between transient and natural responses. ~Kvng (talk) 17:37, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

text: I have removed Natural response as an alias. Indications are that Natural response is Transient response + Steady-state response so I have redirected Natural response to Transfer function. ~Kvng (talk) 00:17, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect? 

message: Some IP editor pasted a copyvio template onto the article. What the hell? The section of text that was supposedly stolen from Ogata's System Dynamics is so general and so short as to make me think that this accusation is from a driveby prankster.
Here is the bottom of the page which is now blanked, and I assume is identified as the section challenged as a violation:
(blanked quoted section, as it does contain unsourced direct quotations against WP:NFC.)
I hope that helps folks figure why the template was slapped down here. Binksternet (talk) 16:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There's not enough creative text to constitute substantial taking from a book. However, since the material was added by an IP contributor some time ago and is unsourced, I'm going to revise the text with sourced information just to be clear. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Trawling through google books in search of sourced replacement confirms that at least some of the text was copied directly from the identified book without meeting the requirements of WP:NFC. Again, just to be on the safe side, I've revised the text with direct quotes and attribution. I do not know anywhere near enough about these subjects to attempt a valid paraphrase. :) But I'm off to mark this one resolved at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 April 8. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:56, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accusation of copyvio 

message: The total response of a system may be described as c(t) = natural response + forced response should be discussed. I believe the forced response is input dependent. You may also categorize the poles which contribute to the response; depending on its position on the s-plane.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bostelk (talk • contribs) 01:06, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Total Response 

message: There should be separate pages for electrical and mechanical transient. It will solve a lot of confusion. Kenfyre 11:20, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What specifically is confusing? --Kvng (talk) 13:15, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Separate Mechanics and Electrical Page

message: Scope of both articles is electrical and electronic engineering. fgnievinski (talk) 02:25, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: A transient osscillation is created by and according to the transient response of the system. They are not the same thing but they are closely realated and can be covered in the same article. ~Kvng (talk) 14:15, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Notwithstanding that, both articles define their topic as more or less the same so a merge is sensible.  In any case "Transient (oscillation)" is a bad title.  The transient stimulus is rarely an oscillation, I suspect the editor means the oscillation resulting from a transient stimulus (and the actual article text supports that).  Which makes it the same topic as "Transient response". SpinningSpark 09:47, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

text:  I was going to ask you to explain why these are different but I see that neither  or I have given a case for why they are the same.  has though and I assume we'll go with that unless we have other input. ~Kvng (talk) 15:33, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think "Transient (oscillation)" can be renamed to "Transient signal" (Ex. Pulse signal). Transient signals are used in Electromagnetic compatibility. The transient signal is applied to the device under test (DUT). Engineers check whether the device under test work properly after this test. In this case, the effect of transient signal is considered, instead of transient response.--Wolfch (talk) 15:52, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you do that then a large chunk of the article will need removing because it is not about that topic, but rather it is about transient response.  The original version of the article had these topics mixed from the beginning (and it was created later than transient response.  If we retain the EMC material in its own article I think a better title would be transient testing.  That's a pretty clear demarcation. SpinningSpark 17:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think it is ok--Wolfch (talk) 01:41, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

text:  I still think it would be better to merge. I have added justification to my original !vote above. ~Kvng (talk) 14:15, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I still think Transient response is different from the general "transient" article. However, I am ok to merge these articles.--Wolfch (talk) 01:36, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of [[Transient (oscillation)]] into [[Transient response]] 

message: While we are on this subject, I think the diagram is problematic wrt to rise time.  Rise time is typically taken as 10% to 90% (as our article says), but the diagram (and it's annotation on Commons) says 0% to 100%.  Note that an overdamped response will never get to 100%, so those are not sensible parameters. SpinningSpark 11:11, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rise time