Impedance of an RLC series circuit when in resonance

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the impedance of RLC series and parallel circuits, particularly in the context of resonance. Participants explore the definitions and calculations of impedance, addressing both theoretical and practical implications.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a formula for the impedance of an RLC series circuit and suggests that at resonance, the impedance equals \(\frac{1}{R}\) instead of \(R\).
  • Another participant challenges this view, asserting that the impedance should be considered as a complex quantity, involving both real and imaginary components.
  • A third participant acknowledges the possibility of defining impedance as a real quantity (the magnitude of complex impedance) and notes that this approach is sometimes used in introductory courses.
  • There is a recognition that at resonance, the circuit behaves as purely resistive, which raises questions about the initial participant's notes.
  • Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

    Participants express differing views on the treatment of impedance, with some emphasizing the importance of complex impedance while others suggest a simpler, real-valued approach. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the correctness of the initial participant's notes.

    Contextual Notes

    There are limitations in the definitions and assumptions regarding impedance, particularly concerning the treatment of real versus complex quantities. The discussion also highlights potential misunderstandings related to resonance conditions.

fluidistic
Gold Member
Messages
3,934
Reaction score
286
I don't find my notes right now, I'll try to use my memory on this.
According to my notes, the impedance of an RLC series circuit is given by [tex]\frac{1}{\sqrt{R^2+\left ( \omega L-\frac{1}{\omega C}\right )^2 }}[/tex].
So when in resonance, [tex]Z=\frac{1}{R}[/tex] instead of [tex]Z=R[/tex].

Also if I recall well, for an RLC parallel circuit, [tex]Z=\frac{1}{\sqrt { \frac{1}{R^2} } +\left ( \omega C-\frac{1}{\omega L}\right )^2 }[/tex] or something close to this, meaning that in resonance Z=R instead of Z=1/R.
Are my notes wrong? Or am I doing something wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your notes have to be wrong because all your impedances are real. The reactance caused by the inductive and capacitive elements give rise to imaginary impedances. The wikipedia article gives the results but they are trivial to work out yourself too.

Series: [tex]Z = R-i\omega L+\frac{i}{\omega C}[/tex]
Parallel: [tex]\frac{1}{Z} = \frac{1}{R}+\frac{i}{\omega L}-i\omega C[/tex]

where the time dependence is [tex]e^{-i\omega t}[/tex].
 
Actually, it is possible to define the impedance as a real quantity, the magnitude of the complex impedance,
[tex]Z = \sqrt{R^2 + \left(\omega L - \frac{1}{\omega C}\right)^2}[/tex]
(for series circuits) This is sometimes done in introductory EM courses. It's not as powerful a concept as the complex impedance but it still allows you to do calculations.

fluidistic, I would imagine you should know that impedance is a quantity analogous to resistance, and specifically, it has the same units as resistance, which should have told you that
[tex]Z = \frac{1}{\sqrt{R^2 + \left(\omega L - \frac{1}{\omega C}\right)^2}}[/tex]
couldn't be right.
 
Ok thank you both.
I'll have to check out my notes.
Indeed I know that in resonance the circuit is purely resistive and the impedance have ohm's units. That's why I doubted about my notes.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
7K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K