# Does Mathematica solve transfer functions differently to Matlab?

Please note this is an edit to the same question posed a few weeks back:

I'm using Mathematica to derive the transfer functions for a three phase AC/DC inverter.

Given below is the code for the derivation of the transfer function for a third order filter (LCL) connected system:

Clear[Asys, Bsys, Csys, Dsys]

numericalvalues = {
R1 -> 0.,
R2 -> 0.,
Rd -> 0.,
Lff ->  2.3*10^-3,
Lgf -> 0.93*10^-3,
Cf -> 10*10^-6,
Vbatt ->  400,
Vdc -> 800,
d -> 1};

Asys = {{(Rd - R1)/Lff, -(Rd/Lff), 1/Lff}, {-(Rd/Lgf), (R2 + Rd)/Lgf,
1/Lgf}, {1/Cf, -(1/Cf), 0}};

Bsys = {{d/Lff}, {0}, {0}};
Csys = {{0, 1, 0}};

systf4 = TransferFunctionModel[Csys .Inverse[(( {
{s, 0, 0},
{0, s, 0},
{0, 0, s}
} ) - Asys)].Bsys, s]

Convertertf4 = Simplify[systf4 /. numericalvalues // N]


This results in the following transfer function:

(4.67508*10^10/(s^3+6.40486*10^7 s))


The transfer function calculated by this code differs from the same system solved in Matlab given below:

 4.675*10^10/ (s^3 + 1.527*10^-12 s^2 + 6.405*10^7 s + 9.78*10^-5)


Does Mathematica have a tolerance limit that it is assuming the small numbers are insignificant and can be ignored? Has anyone had any experience with this before?

-
I think you'll need to provide more information so that we can reproduce the problem. If you can find a small order example (for instance, does it happen with a 2 by 2 system?) then it will help. –  bill s Apr 2 '13 at 9:21
sorry should try to be more specific! I've added the code, it's a complicated problem but I imagine its a simple solution. –  dhog Apr 2 '13 at 10:11
I'll ask again: can you reproduce the problem in a more concise setting? Say with a single input single output transfer function? With a 2 by 2 system? –  bill s Apr 2 '13 at 10:56
No I can't seem to replicate the same problem with a simpler system. Matlab and Mathematica give the same answers when I compare a lower order system, but the lower order system is not related to what I'm trying to model here. –  dhog Apr 2 '13 at 11:08
I notice you have a term in i1d/dd that is order 10^25. What is the dynamic range of Matlab's variables? There's a good chance that you have exceeded what Matlab can handle with numbers of this size. So I would try a SISO model with parameters of this size and see if you can find the discrepancy there. –  bill s Apr 2 '13 at 11:28

Might try without approximate values. To do this, instead use

numericValues = {Vphrms -> 230,
Vlinerms -> Sqrt[3] 230, \[Omega] -> 2 \[Pi] 50, L1 -> 23*10^-4,
L2 -> 93*10^-5, Cf -> 10*10^-6, Co -> 600*10^-6, rd -> 3/10,
r1 -> 1/5, r2 -> 1/5, Dd -> 623324/1000000, Dq -> 246624/10000000,
Vdc -> 650, I1d -> 16043/1000, I1q -> 0};


At this point I can do

Convertertf = TransferFunctionModel[nss, s];


Here is a part of the numeric approximation.

ExpandAll[N[Convertertf, 100]][[1, 1, 1]] // N

(* Out[165]= {-6.2539325944*10^36 + 1.93055879416*10^35 s +
1.9678706615*10^33 s^2 + 2.11669599008*10^28 s^3 +
3.14177464077*10^25 s^4 + 1.53589504062*10^20 s^5 +
1.21221140625*10^17 s^6, -1.55842541392*10^37 +
6.17150836132*10^35 s + 4.47220373219*10^30 s^2 +
6.55274146604*10^27 s^3 + 3.95988310348*10^22 s^4 +
3.80827444847*10^19 s^5, -9.64607534149*10^32 -
3.74550092088*10^32 s - 3.02482605383*10^30 s^2 -
2.42295265152*10^25 s^3 - 2.0098546875*10^22 s^4 -
6.0159375*10^16 s^5,
2.39971808234*10^34 - 9.50624299627*10^32 s -
9.29312987358*10^27 s^2 - 1.89132246052*10^25 s^3 -
3.77992501089*10^19 s^4,
4.28257698623*10^35 + 3.14637598178*10^33 s +
3.55325872599*10^28 s^2 + 5.02229243353*10^25 s^3 +
2.52853001177*10^20 s^4 + 1.93743708356*10^17 s^5} *)


Notice the coefficients vary in range by around 19 orders of magnitude. A computation at machine precision is not likely to handle such a scale difference very well.

-
I understand the range of values is quite large but if I try and solve using the state space to transfer function equation from state space theory I am given answers that correspond to Matlab. I've added this code to the above question. I really appreciate the input. –  dhog Apr 8 '13 at 9:51