How Does a Multi-Dielectric Parallel Plate Capacitor Calculate Its Capacitance?

AI Thread Summary
The capacitance of a multi-dielectric parallel plate capacitor can be calculated using the formula C = (εA/d), where A is the area of the plates, d is the distance between them, and ε is the dielectric constant. In this specific case, the capacitance is determined as C = (e1*a*b + e2*l*b)/(2h), accounting for the different dielectric materials present between the plates. The configuration includes two dielectrics, e1 and e2, with significant dielectric constants compared to the vacuum between the plates. The potential difference is defined between the plates at z=0, z=h, and z=2*h. This approach effectively combines the contributions of the multiple dielectrics to find the overall capacitance of the system.
meth_90
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
We have got a parallel plate capacitor . The distance between the plates is 2*h and each plate's dimensions are a,b . Between the plates there exists dielectric e1 in the volume 0<z<h and e2 in the volume h<z<2*h (out of the plates e0 ) , with e1,e2>>e0 . At z=h we place another plate with dimensions l,b (l<a) like the figure . The potential of the plates at z=0 , z=h is 0 and at z=2*h is V . What is the capacity of the whole system?




figure :
____ z=2*h
e1
__ z=h e0
e2
____ z=0
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The capacitance of the whole system can be calculated using the formula C=εA/d, where A is the area of each plate, d is the distance between them and ε is the dielectric constant of the material between them. For the parallel plate capacitor, the capacitance can be calculated as: C = (e1*a*b + e2*l*b)/(2h), where a and b are the dimensions of each plate and l is the dimension of the additional plate.
 
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 '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