Leakage Conductance of Cylindrical Coax Cable

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the leakage conductance of a cylindrical coax cable, with specific dimensions and material properties provided. The user calculated the resistance using the formula R = ln(r2/r1) / (l2πσ_c) and obtained a value of 3.667 MΩ, raising concerns about its high magnitude compared to typical coaxial cable resistance, which is around 50 ohms. Clarifications indicate that the calculated resistance reflects insulation resistance rather than the characteristic impedance of the cable. The user questions the role of relative permittivity in the calculation, but responses clarify that permittivity relates to capacitance, not resistance. Overall, the discussion highlights confusion regarding the application of resistance and conductance in coaxial cable calculations.
polarmystery
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Find the leakage conductance per meter of a cylindrical coax cable whose inner conductor (r1) is 0.125" (3.175*10^-3 m) and whose outer conductor (r2) = 0.5" (1.27*10^-2 m) if the space between them is filled with a material whose: \varepsilon_r = 2 and \sigma_c = 6*10^{-8} \mho /m.

Homework Equations



I used this formula for calculating the resistance of the coax wire:

R = \dfrac{ln (\dfrac{r2}{r1})}{l2\pi\sigma_c}

The Attempt at a Solution



After solving for R, I get


R = \dfrac{ln (\dfrac{1.27*10^{-2}}{3.175*10^{-3}})}{(1)2\pi(6*10^{-8})} = 3.667 M\Omega

My question is, do I just invert R in order to get the line leakage conductance? It seems like I should be using the relative permittivity somewhere in the calculation, but not sure where. Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I can't comment on the formula, not without looking it up. :smile: But I'll assume you used it correctly. Yes, its reciprocal gives conductance.

Permittivity is a property concerned with capacitance, etc., whereas resistance (i.e., conductance-1 ) does not involve capacitance. They are independent properties of a dielectric, or of any material.
 
Last edited:
Something seems to be amiss here. I was thinking about it and I remember that typical coax cable resistance is somewhere like 50 ohms. I got this formula from our slides in class. It doesn't make sense that the answer is so high so I think there is something wrong, but honestly I don't know. Any help/suggestions? I think I might have missed something.

I understand that typical coax lines have a characteristic impedance of being 50 ohms, but it still doesn't make sense that the actual wire resistance I calculated is so high. Can someone point me in the right direction? Am I attacking this problem correctly?
 
Last edited:
The 50 ohms is like the wire resistance, sort of, but at RF. We like it to be predictable so RF loads and sources can be matched to it. The 3.6 Mohms is the insulation resistance; we'd like it to be very high. A few megohms seems low, but this is just an exercise.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top