1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Parallel LCR resonant frequency derivation for larger resistances

  1. Apr 1, 2009 #1
    [SOLVED] Parallel LCR resonant frequency derivation for larger resistances

    There have been similar questions here before which I have seen, but I couldn't find an answer with the detail I require.

    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data
    I would like to derive an expression for the resonant frequency of a parallel LCR circuit with a large (not negligible) resistance.

    I have seen a https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=121069" of a solution (the same as mine but with the "4" omitted) but it doesn't fit my experimental data by a long shot, though my data could be wrong. The solution I came up with is a lot closer to my data but that doesn't necessarily mean it's right, could someone check through and explain if/where I've gone wrong
    http://gray.slightlybeanish.com/Other/LCR.jpg [Broken]

    2. Relevant equations

    3. The attempt at a solution

    http://gray.slightlybeanish.com/Other/LCRDerivation.jpg [Broken]

    I mostly suspect the first step is wrong, I was trying to apply Kirchoff's law
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 1, 2009 #2

    turin

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    I[/URL] agree with this. You just have to make sure that 1/LC > R2/4L2 (otherwise the system is overdamped).
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  4. Apr 1, 2009 #3
    Kirchoof is never wrong. What you have done is right. If you want to get the solution of the eqation by the help of complex numbers. However that is unnecessary
     
  5. Apr 2, 2009 #4
    Thanks for replying so quickly, I'm glad you agree.
    Fedex: I'm not sure whether you mean your 3rd sentence to be connected to the 2nd or the 4th. Anyway, I have used complex numbers, which is why the arguments under the square root changed signs.

    As turin said, I'd assumed 1/LC > R2/4L2. Which would give a complex solution to the quadratic, leading to an oscillating solution to the differential equation, with the angular frequency stated.

    For any other readers, this can also be solved by calculating the impedance directly and finding when it's a maximum, I was just looking for a short derivation.
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2009
  6. Apr 2, 2009 #5
    My mistake. What i wanted to say is that we can solve the second order differential equation with the help of complex numbers. But that is quite long.
     
  7. Apr 2, 2009 #6
    Ah ok, that is what I did, I wasn't aware there was another way to do it, I just omitted it from the working because it's the same for any question.

    The method is shown http://tutorial.math.lamar.edu/Classes/DE/ComplexRoots.aspx" [Broken] for those wondering how I suddenly leapt to the frequency from the characteristic equation. I just realised that if the system is to oscillate, the roots will be complex, so the trial solution will have a decay term e-R/2L multiplied by (Acosωt + Bsinωt)
    (ω as above)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  8. Apr 3, 2009 #7

    turin

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    I thought that was the short derivation. That's how I did it. I just found the poles of the transfer function in extended Fourier space. It is just a few lines of algebra (depending on how much detail you want to show).
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Parallel LCR resonant frequency derivation for larger resistances
Loading...