How to Derive Impedance in an LCR Circuit at Various Frequencies?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving impedance in an LCR circuit at various frequencies, focusing on the equation of motion, resonant frequency, and high-frequency behavior. The subject area includes circuit analysis and complex impedance concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to express the equation of motion and derive impedance at specific frequencies, questioning how to denote derivatives. Some participants suggest using LaTeX for clarity and discuss the implications of assuming a series circuit. Others raise questions about the definitions of variables and the use of complex impedances.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, providing guidance on notation and exploring the definitions of terms. There is a recognition of the need for clarification on complex impedance and its relation to the problem, but no explicit consensus has been reached.

Contextual Notes

There is uncertainty regarding the circuit configuration (series vs. parallel) and the definitions of certain variables (s, b, m). The original poster's constraints related to their ability to write and express mathematical notation are also noted.

Blue Kangaroo
Messages
41
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


a. express the equation of motion
b derive impedance at the resonant frequency (ω=ωo)
c derive impedance at very high frequencies (ω>>ωo and ω>>R/L)

Homework Equations


Vo=ψ+(R/L)ψ+(1/LC)ψ
Z=(1/iω)K(ω)
K=1/((s-mω2)+ibω)

The Attempt at a Solution


Part a was simple, that was the first equation. I don't know how to put dots to signify derivatives though.
For b, since ω=ωo, it will equal (1/LC)0.5, so I think I got it right in the scratch work I uploaded.
For c, I'm not quite sure where to start. Since ω>>ωo, can I just take ωo to be zero and disregard it so that there will be no (1/LC)0.5 term?

Sorry, my handwriting is not the best. I'm quadriplegic, so it's not the easiest thing for me.
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
Hi,
Blue Kangaroo said:
how to put dots to signify derivatives though
I wouldn't know how to do it with the symbol buttons. You could use single quotes and double quotes. For the dots, all I can do is show how to do it using ##\LaTeX## : You type $$ L \ \ddot q + R\ \dot q + \frac {Q}{C}\ q = V_0 $$ and you get
$$ L\ \ddot q + R\ \dot q + \frac {1}{C} \ q = V_0 $$ the equation for a series LCR circuit (which I have to assume your problem statement mentions ? :rolleyes: )
( here is where I stole the notation -- I added the " \ " to get more spacing)

So it looks like your ##\psi## is actually ##q L## ? (did you miss the 'all variables' in part 1 of the template :smile: ? -- gives you the chance to also tell us what m and s and K stand for ...)Next question: are you familiar with complex impedances ? It makes the math a lot easier:
$$Z \equiv {V\over I} = R + j\omega L + {1\over j\omega C}$$and ##|Z|## should give a nice expression for ##\omega_0^2 = {1\over LC}##
 
The problem never explicitly stated that it was a series circuit. I've uploaded the homework. It's the last problem on the page.

Yes, Ψ should be qL, so the equation is (1/L)Vo=q"+R/Lq'+(1/LC)q

Sorry, Z is impedance, K is compliance and I'm honestly not quite sure what s and b are.

I am not too familiar with complex impedances, but it would probably behoove me to learn.
 

Attachments

Blue Kangaroo said:
never explicitly stated that it was a series circuit
But the picture surely does !
Blue Kangaroo said:
K is compliance
I feel somewhat stupid never having heard of that in circuit analysis. You write ##Z=\displaystyle {1\over i\omega}K(\omega)##. Is that its definition ? ##\ \ i\ ## is the currrent, or ##\ i\ ## is something that has ##i^2 = -1## ? ##\ \ i\ ## also appears in the denominator of K ?
Blue Kangaroo said:
not quite sure what s and b are
you also use the symbol ##\ m\ ## ?. I see a lot of similarity with expressions in the link. But not for ##s##...

PS make sure you distinguish between ##\omega## and ##\omega_0## when you write your expressions.
 
I see, I stand corrected.

That is the equation relating Z and K that we were given in class. I think I found what I was doing wrong though.
 
So what's the situation now ?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K