How Does a Parallel Plate Capacitor with Different Dielectrics Calculate Keq?

AI Thread Summary
A parallel plate capacitor can be modeled with two different dielectrics occupying equal halves of the space between the plates. The equivalent dielectric constant, Keq, can be calculated by considering the capacitance formula C = KEoA / d, where K represents the dielectric constants of the two materials. The total capacitance can be derived by treating each half as a separate capacitor in series or parallel, depending on the configuration. The discussion highlights the need for clarity in visual representation to understand the arrangement of the dielectrics. Ultimately, the calculation of Keq requires careful consideration of how the dielectrics interact within the capacitor.
Kathi201
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
A parallel plate capacitor is constructed such that there are two different dielectric materials in between the plates, each occupying half the space in between . Still this capacitor can be modeled as a simple parallel plate capacitor with same total area A, plate separation d, but with an equivalent dielectric constant Keq. What is Keq? (Your final answer will be in terms of the two K's, and for a start, you should think in terms of potential being same all over the surface for any given plate)

_________
l l l
l K1 l K2 l d
l____l____l
with an area A (it is supposed to look like a square with two sides K1 and K2)

I know the capacitance of a parallel-plate capacitor filled with a dielectric is C = KEoA / d
But I am not quite sure what to do if K is split into K1 and K2 as displayed in the picture above. Do I set them equal to each other?

Any help would be appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cheeseburger?

Kathi201 said:
A parallel plate capacitor is constructed such that there are two different dielectric materials in between the plates, each occupying half the space in between …

Hi Kathi! :smile:

Which half? :confused:

(I can't understand your diagram)

Is this like a cheeseburger, or like two different ordinary burgers side-by-side? :smile:
 
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