Can Oscilloscope Measurements Show Resistance Impact on RLC Circuit Damping?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on demonstrating the relationship between resistance and damping in a series RLC circuit using experimental methods. Participants suggest considering energy loss in the circuit, specifically how it relates to current and resistance. The use of an oscilloscope is highlighted as a practical tool for measuring current peak values, which can indicate damping effects. The idea is to show that variations in resistance lead to observable differences in current peaks, supporting the claim that damping is influenced by resistance. Overall, the conversation emphasizes experimental approaches to validate theoretical concepts without relying on the damping factor formula.
batshwa
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I've got to prepare for a practical session and need some help with a problem: how (by what experiments) can you prove that the damping of a series RLC circuit depends on the value of the resistance (without basing oneself on any knowledge of the damping factor \zeta=\frac{R}{2L}).

Thanks in advance!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
batshwa said:
Hello,

I've got to prepare for a practical session and need some help with a problem: how (by what experiments) can you prove that the damping of a series RLC circuit depends on the value of the resistance (without basing oneself on any knowledge of the damping factor \zeta=\frac{R}{2L}).

Thanks in advance!
Think in terms of energy. What is the energy loss of a current, I, passing through a resistance, R?

AM
 
Thanks a lot for your answer!

The energy loss is \Delta E=Ri^2\Delta t, right? But is there another way (based more on experiments) to show that \zeta\propto R ?

I forgot to mention, that we dispose of an oscilloscope. Would it be then correct to say that the damping depends on the resistance, because the difference between two peak values of the current (measured with the oscilloscope) depends on the resistance?
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top