Capacitance - combining multiple capacitors for equivalent C

Click For Summary
The discussion centers around calculating the equivalent capacitance (Ceq) when combining multiple capacitors. The formula presented, Ceq = C1C2C3C4/(C1 + C2 + C3 + C4), is questioned for its validity, particularly regarding whether Ceq can exceed the value of C1. Participants clarify that when capacitors are in series, the voltage is shared, leading to a lower equivalent capacitance than any individual capacitor. The correct approach for calculating series capacitance is also highlighted, emphasizing that Ceq must be less than C1 due to the division of voltage among multiple capacitors. The conversation concludes with a suggestion to explore the practical reasons for using capacitors in series within circuits.
MathewsMD
Messages
430
Reaction score
7
Capacitance -- combining multiple capacitors for equivalent C

In the given problem, Ceq = C1C2C3C4/(C1 + C2 + C3 + C4)

The answer says the equivalent capacitance is always less than C1 but I can't come up with thy. When I do this, I can't seem to prove that equivalent capacitance is always less than C1. For example, if I let:

C1 = 998 F, C2 = 999 F, C3 = 1000 F and C4 = 10001 F, then I get an answer (767119326 F) and this is much larger than C1. Any suggestions?

(I realize the capacitances used here are very large, but they are just used to make a point.)
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2014-02-12 at 9.22.09 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2014-02-12 at 9.22.09 PM.png
    10.2 KB · Views: 543
Physics news on Phys.org
Use Q=CV and discover that now four capacitors have to share the voltage that C1 would have had all on its own if C2,3,4 were absent!
 
Perhaps your formula is questionable ?
When I do
$$ {1\over C_{eq}} = {1\over C_1} + {1\over C_2} + {1\over C_3} + {1\over C_4} $$
I get something completely different ! Which has the right dimension. Your ##C_{eq}## does not have the dimension of Farads ...

Hint: The ##C_1 C_2 C_3 C_4## in the numerator is correct.
 
BvU said:
Use Q=CV and discover that now four capacitors have to share the voltage that C1 would have had all on its own if C2,3,4 were absent!

Hmmm...
Well I know:

Ceq = Q(V1 + V2 + V3 + V4)/(V1V2V3V4)

I just don't quite see how this shows Ceq < C1...do you mind explaining further?
 
You know this for two capacitors, because then it comes out right.
What you wrote here has the dimension Coulombs * Volts / Volts4 and that is not Farads ...
So: from where did you get this ?
 
You mean you know that
$$ {1\over C_{eq}} = {V\over Q} = {V_1\over Q}+{V_2\over Q}+{V_3\over Q}+{V_4\over Q} $$
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
BvU said:
You mean you know that
$$ {1\over C_{eq}} = {V\over Q} = {V_1\over Q}+{V_2\over Q}+{V_3\over Q}+{V_4\over Q} $$

Sorry, yes.

Ceq = Q/(V1 + V2 + V3 + V4)

Also, Veq = V1 + V2 + V3 + V4

So since C1 = Q/V1 then Ceq must be smaller (i.e. it is divided by more positive numbers).

Thank you!
 
Just in case you ever need to calculate the ##C_{eq}## for 4 capacitors in series: do you know how to work out
$$ {1\over C_{eq}} = {1\over C_1} + {1\over C_2} + {1\over C_3} + {1\over C_4} $$
to ## { C_{eq}} = {C_1 C_2 C_3 C_4 \over ?} ## ? And: can you guess why anyone would ever use capacitors in series in a circuit ?
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
562
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
885
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
14K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K