Solving Keyboard Problem with Capacitance

  • Thread starter FlipStyle1308
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Keyboard
In summary, the minimum distance a key must be depressed to be detected by the circuitry of a computer can be calculated by expressing capacitance as a function of the known variables and the distance, and then finding the change in spacing needed to achieve a change in capacitance of 0.379 pF. This results in a minimum distance of 0.0635 mm.
  • #1
FlipStyle1308
267
0
Here is the question:

Many computer keyboards operate on the principle of capacitance. Each key forms a small parallel-plate capacitor whose separation is reduced when the key id depressed. Suppose the plates for each key have an area of 46.9 mm^2 and an initial separation of 0.550 mm. In addition, let the dielectric have a dielectric constant of 3.75. If the circuitry of the computer can detect a change in capacitance of 0.379 pF, what is the minimum distance a key must be depressed to be detected?

What I did in my attempt solve this is I substituted a lot of variables into one equation, but I still wasn't able to solve the problem. My equation was Farad = C/V = (EoA)^2k/Qd^2. I feel like I just went in a complete circle. Anyone know where I went wrong, or a different approach to solve this? Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #3
Astronuc said:
One should be able to express capacitance as a function of the known variables and the distance.

See -http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/pplate.html[/QUOTE] [Broken]

Yes, I tried to solve using my known variables. By plugging in A, K, and C into C = KEoA/d, and solving for d, I got 4106.847 mm. Do I just subtract the given initial distance of 0.550 mm from this to get a final answer of 4106.2937 mm?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
4106.847 mm = 4.1068 m, assuming mm = millimeter. This can't be right.

The answer should be fractions of mm, or on the order of microns.

One needs to check units, and it would help if one shows the forumula and substitutions.
 
  • #5
Hmm, okay, but is my number correct, except for the placement of the decimal? I keep getting the same answer :(.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
It is "the correct answer," with the decimal point in the wrong place. Check your units. Remember that the value of epsilon-naught usually given in your textbook is in units of F/m, NOT F/mm.

- Warren
 
  • #7
Here are the values I used:

A = 0.0469 m^2
k = 3.75
C = 0.379 x 10^-12 F
Eo = 8.85 x 10^-12 C^2/Nm^2
do = 0.00055 m
d = ?

Is the decimal placement in any of these incorrect?
 
  • #8
You did not convert the area, 46.9 mm^2, into m^2 correctly.

- Warren
 
  • #9
Oh, should it be 46.9 mm^2 = 46.9 x 10^-9 m^2?
 
  • #10
No..

- Warren
 
  • #11
10^-6? Is that right?
 
Last edited:
  • #12
46.9 mm^2 = 4.69 × 10-5 m^2.

(Divide by 10^3 * 10^3.)

- Warren
 
  • #13
Thanks, so I got my answer to be 4.1068 x 10^-3m. Then do I subtract 0.550mm from this to get my final answer of 3.5568mm?
 
Last edited:
  • #14
No, it's not that simple. You're on the right track though.

First, calculate what the capacitance is at the initial spacing of 0.55 mm. Then, add 0.379 pF to it. Finally, find out the spacing that achieves that new, larger capacitance. The difference between the initial and final spacings is the distance the key must be pressed.

- Warren
 
  • #15
So the capacitance at the initial spacing is 2.83 x 10^-12 F, and plus the 0.379pF is 3.209 x 10^-12 F. This initial capacitance is 0.485 mm. 4.1068 mm - 0.485 mm = 3.6218 mm, which is my final answer?
 
Last edited:
  • #16
Uh, what? You found the initial capacitance and the final capacitance okay, but I don't know what you mean by "This initial capacitance is 0.485 mm" or where you got 0.485 mm. Please try to show your work in more detail.

- Warren
 
  • #17
Sorry, I meant that is the distance. But is my final answer of 3.6216 mm correct?
 
  • #18
No, I don't believe it is. After all, the initial spacing is only 0.55 mm, and you're talking about decreasing that distance by almost 4 mm? That doesn't even make any sense.

Please show your work, and I'll help you figure out where you're stuck.

- Warren
 
  • #19
Okay, so you helped me solve that d = 4.1068 mm (this is using the given capacitance of 0.379 pF. Then I calculated the capacitance at the initial spacing of 0.55 mm by using the equation C - kEoA/d, using k = 3.75, Eo = 8.85 x 10^-12 C^2/Nm^2, A = 0.0469 m^2, and d= 0.00055m, getting an answer of 2.83 x 10^-12 F. I then added 0.379 x 10^-12 F to this to get a total of 3.209 x 10^-12 F. Then I plugged 3.209 x 10^-12 F into the same equation I used in the first calculation, again solving for d, obtaining an answer of 0.485 mm. Lastly, I subtracted 0.485 mm from 4.1068 mm, obtaining my answer of 3.6218 mm. Please let me know if this is a simple miscalculation or if I am using a wrong equation, or whatever. Thanks.
 
  • #20
FlipStyle1308 said:
Okay, so you helped me solve that d = 4.1068 mm (this is using the given capacitance of 0.379 pF.

As I said, it's not that simple. What you calculated there was the spacing for a total capacitance of 0.379 pF, not the change in spacing for a change in 0.379 pF. This number is meaningless -- I was only trying to help you with your units.

Then I calculated the capacitance at the initial spacing of 0.55 mm by using the equation C - kEoA/d, using k = 3.75, Eo = 8.85 x 10^-12 C^2/Nm^2, A = 0.0469 m^2, and d= 0.00055m, getting an answer of 2.83 x 10^-12 F.

Correct.

I then added 0.379 x 10^-12 F to this to get a total of 3.209 x 10^-12 F. Then I plugged 3.209 x 10^-12 F into the same equation I used in the first calculation, again solving for d, obtaining an answer of 0.485 mm. Lastly, I subtracted 0.485 mm from 4.1068 mm, obtaining my answer of 3.6218 mm. Please let me know if this is a simple miscalculation or if I am using a wrong equation, or whatever. Thanks.

The initial spacing was 0.55 mm. The final spacing was 0.485 mm. The difference is 0.0635 mm.

- Warren
 
  • #21
I was wondering why I was doing the first part lol. Thank you so much!
 

1. What is capacitance?

Capacitance is the ability of an object to store electric charge. In terms of a keyboard, it refers to the ability of the keys to detect and respond to touch.

2. Why is capacitance used to solve keyboard problems?

Capacitance is used because it allows for a more reliable and accurate detection of key presses compared to traditional mechanical switches. It also allows for a thinner and more lightweight keyboard design.

3. How does capacitance solve keyboard problems?

Capacitance works by using a conductive layer beneath the keys that can detect changes in capacitance when a key is pressed. This information is then sent to the computer, which registers the key press.

4. What are some common keyboard problems that capacitance can solve?

Capacitance can solve problems such as keys not registering when pressed, keys registering multiple times with one press, and keys feeling sticky or unresponsive. It can also help with ghosting, where multiple keys are pressed but only one is registered by the computer.

5. Are there any drawbacks to using capacitance for keyboards?

One potential drawback is that capacitance keyboards may be more expensive to manufacture compared to traditional mechanical keyboards. Additionally, some users may prefer the tactile feedback of mechanical switches over the more subtle touch of capacitance keys.

Similar threads

  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
3K
Back
Top