Impedance of practical Capacitor

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the impedance of a practical capacitor modeled as an ideal capacitor in parallel with a resistor. Participants are examining the calculations involved at a specific radian frequency and comparing their results with a book solution.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents their calculation for the impedance of a practical capacitor, yielding a result of Z1(377)=10^6/(1+j37.7)= 2.6516*10^4 ∠-1.519.
  • Another participant confirms the book's solution, questioning the calculation method that led to the angle of -1.519.
  • A later reply suggests that the discrepancy may be due to using degree mode instead of radian mode for angle calculation.
  • One participant notes the importance of not posting the same problem in multiple threads, indicating a concern for thread management.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the calculation method, as one participant's result differs from the book's solution, and there is uncertainty regarding the angle calculation.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes potential limitations related to the mode of angle measurement (degrees vs. radians) and the accuracy of calculations, but these remain unresolved.

bigu01
Messages
57
Reaction score
0
A practical capacitor can be modeled by an ideal capacitor in parallel with a resistor.Find the impedance of practical capacitor at the radian frequency ω=377rad/s.Known C1=0.1 x 10^-6F R1=1 *10^6.

I am first determining the Z, by adding the impedance of resistor and the capacitor in parallel.
And I am getting Z1(377)=10^6/(1+j37.7)= 2.6516*10^4 ∠-1.519 However book solutions gives ∠-1.5443.I would like to get some help about where my mistake is,or how should I approach the question. I know that finding the angle we should do θ=arctan(y/x) where y is the imaginary part and x is the real part.Hope I was clear and did not complicate it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I can confirm the solution of the book. How did you calculate -1.519? Maybe just a rounding error?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
mfb said:
I can confirm the solution of the book. How did you calculate -1.519? Maybe just a rounding error?

I was using the degree mode, I should have used the radian angle unit one
 
Don't post the same problem in multiple threads. I am closing this thread.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
20K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
8K
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
12K