How can I accurately calculate the power absorbed in a circuit?

  • Context: Engineering 
  • Thread starter Thread starter karaandnick
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circuit Power
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the power absorbed in a circuit, specifically through the integration of power over time. Participants explore different methods and approaches to arrive at the correct energy value, addressing a homework problem.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant initially calculates energy using P=VI and integration, arriving at 225 µJ but questions the correctness of this result.
  • Another participant suggests that a factor of 1/2 may have been omitted in the integration, proposing that the correct answer could be half of the original calculation.
  • A different participant claims that the error could be a factor of 6, referencing a normalized integral approach that leads to a different expression for energy.
  • Further discussion includes the relevance of higher-order terms in the integration, with one participant noting that the t^3 term may be negligible compared to the t^2 term.
  • One participant shares their successful resolution of the problem by deriving equations for the slopes of voltage and current, leading to a new energy calculation of 37.5 µJ.
  • A final participant expresses gratitude for the various approaches shared, indicating appreciation for the collaborative effort in solving the problem.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants present multiple competing views regarding the correct approach and calculations for the power absorbed, with no consensus reached on a single method or final answer.

Contextual Notes

Participants' calculations depend on specific assumptions about the integration limits and the form of the voltage and current functions, which may not be universally applicable. The discussion reflects varying interpretations of the problem setup.

karaandnick
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I wish someone could tell me what I am doing wrong. I have tried using P=VI then integrating P from t1 to t2 where I get 225uJ but it keeps telling me I am wrong. Seems like a rather simple problem.


circuits.jpg



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


 
Physics news on Phys.org
karaandnick said:
I wish someone could tell me what I am doing wrong. I have tried using P=VI then integrating P from t1 to t2 where I get 225uJ but it keeps telling me I am wrong. Seems like a rather simple problem.


circuits.jpg



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


Welcome to the PF.

I think you left out a factor of 1/2 in the first part of the integration. I get half of your answer.
 
I think he's out by a factor of 6.

If you normalize everything it just comes down to \int_0^1 x(1-x) dx = 1/6

Doing it properly with V, I and tr in the equation you get \frac{V \, I \, t_r}{6}
 
uart said:
I think he's out by a factor of 6.

If you normalize everything it just comes down to \int_0^1 x(1-x) dx = 1/6

Doing it properly with V, I and tr in the equation you get \frac{V \, I \, t_r}{6}

Interesting approach. Did you try it just the standard way, though? The number for t is so small that the t^3 term after the integration is negligible (if I did it right), and only the t^2 term contributes to the answer...
 
I ended up figuring it out. I decided to write equations for the slopes of each line. So

for the voltage

-30/250x + 30

For current

30/250x
\int(-30/250x+30)(30/250x)dx from 0 to 250

Then multiply by 10^-3 to get in micro jewel

Comes to 37.5uJ

Crazy little problem but I am ME so not used to this sort of thing.
 
I just noticed everyone's approach worked, geniuses. Thanks for everything, its nice to know there are still people out there willing to help others. I will definitely write these approaches down in my book for later use.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K