Internal resistance of multimeter

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on measuring the internal resistance of a Radio Shack multimeter using Kirchhoff's voltage law (KVL). The user initially believes that the voltage across the resistor should equal the battery voltage, but finds that the measured voltage is less than expected, suggesting a negative internal resistance. Participants advise reconsidering the circuit configuration, suggesting that the multimeter's internal resistance should be viewed as a parallel component rather than in series. They recommend using a voltage divider approach to correctly apply KVL, clarifying that the equation should reflect the voltage drop across the internal resistance as negative. This highlights the importance of circuit configuration in accurately measuring internal resistance.
bigplanet401
Messages
101
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I am taking a class in circuit analysis and am trying to measure the internal resistance of the Radio Shack multimeter. The internal resistance (unknown) is R_x. A battery (with voltage V_s) is available along with a resistor R that has the same order of magnitude of R_x.

Homework Equations



Kirchhoff's voltage law (KVL)

The Attempt at a Solution



I tried using the circuit shown in the attached file and connected it in the way shown below the circuit. Before making any connections, I tried to figure out what the voltages would be.

I think the voltage across R should be V_s because of KVL around the loop containing the battery and the resistor.

By applying KVL around the loop containing the multimeter, I get the following equation:

V_x + V_s = v

(V_x is the voltage across the internal resistance of the meter.)

But when I hook up the circuit, the voltage v is less than V_s, which would mean that V_x is negative, right? This does not make sense to me. It looks like R_x and R are in series, which, if V_x was positive, would mean that I could write something like

<br /> v \frac{R}{R+R_x} = V_s<br />

which would mean

<br /> R\left( \frac{v}{V_s} - 1 \right) = R_x<br />

But because v is less than V_s, the parenthesized expression is negative and R_x is negative, which can't be true. Any advice?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0001.jpg
    IMG_0001.jpg
    6.9 KB · Views: 307
Physics news on Phys.org
You seem to be thinking of the meter resistance as being in series with a meter device which has infinite resistance. Instead, consider the meter resistance as a resistance value that is in parallel with ("shunts") a perfect meter. The perfect (or "ideal") meter tells you the potential across this meter resistance.

attachment.php?attachmentid=52186&stc=1&d=1350874556.gif


You might want to reconsider the configuration of your test circuit (hint: think voltage divider).
 

Attachments

  • Fig1.gif
    Fig1.gif
    968 bytes · Views: 740
Your equation:
V_x + V_s = v
should rather read
V_s - V_x = V
The emf of the battery is positve, but the voltage drop through Rx is negative.
 
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