Capacitors connected in parallel to store a charge of 1.49 C?

AI Thread Summary
To determine how many 1.48 µF capacitors are needed in parallel to store a charge of 1.49 C at 105 V, the calculation must yield an exact whole number. Rounding is not acceptable since capacitors cannot be purchased in fractions. The discussion suggests that the answer should be rounded up to 9589 capacitors. Participants confirm the importance of using whole numbers in practical applications. This highlights the necessity of precise calculations in capacitor arrangements.
McAfee
Messages
96
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


rIbhP.png

How many 1.48 µF capacitors must be connected in parallel to store a charge of 1.49 C with a potential of 105 V across the capacitors?


Homework Equations


Refer to the attempt at a solution.

The Attempt at a Solution


10AcM.jpg

Also, for the answer exact number, no tolerance. I tried just rounding the number but that didn't work. I not sure. Does it mean I should round the answer up to 9589?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi McAfee! :smile:

(i haven't checked your figures)
McAfee said:
How many 1.48 µF capacitors must be connected in parallel to store a charge of 1.49 C with a potential of 105 V across the capacitors?
…
Also, for the answer exact number, no tolerance. I tried just rounding the number but that didn't work. I not sure. Does it mean I should round the answer up to 9589?

yes, of course …

you can't buy 0.16 of a capacitor, can you? :biggrin:​
 
tiny-tim said:
Hi McAfee! :smile:

(i haven't checked your figures)


yes, of course …

you can't buy 0.16 of a capacitor, can you? :biggrin:​


You are right. Thanks for the help.
 

Thread 'Errors and significant figures'

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...
View full post »
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

Why Do Capacitors Behave Differently in Series and Parallel Configurations?
Replies
20
Views
2K
Ranking charge stored on three capacitors by a battery
Replies
6
Views
3K
Finding charge on a capacitor given potential difference across two points
Replies
4
Views
2K
Final Charge of a Capacitor in a Circuit with Capacitors and Resistors
Replies
9
Views
2K
Capacitors charged in parallel
Replies
3
Views
2K
Capacitance of a Parallel Plate Capacitor
Replies
28
Views
2K
Questions about a capacitor with 4 parallel plates
Replies
14
Views
1K
Comparing energy lost by the battery & energy gained by the capacitor.
Replies
5
Views
2K
Capacitors in Parallel: Finding the Relationship Between Capacitance and Charge
Replies
6
Views
3K
Why can we model spherical capacitor with two dielectrics as two capacitors in series?
Replies
4
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top