Parallel RLC circuit: find resonant frequency and Input at that frequency

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the resonant frequency and input impedance of a parallel RLC circuit. The original poster attempts to calculate the resonant frequency using the formula \(\omega_0 = \frac{1}{\sqrt{LC}}\) and to derive the input impedance at that frequency.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the calculation of the resonant frequency and the subsequent input impedance. Questions arise regarding the correctness of the approach and the implications of the imaginary part of the impedance at resonance.

Discussion Status

There is ongoing exploration of the relationship between the resonant frequency and the conditions for a purely resistive circuit at resonance. Some participants question the validity of using the resonant frequency formula in this context and seek clarification on the reasoning behind the requirement for the imaginary part of the impedance to be zero.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the formula for resonant frequency may not apply universally to all circuit configurations, prompting a discussion on the nature of complex impedance in relation to resonance.

VinnyCee
Messages
486
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



In the circuit below, find the resonant frequency ([itex]\omega_0[/itex]) and [itex]Z_{IN}\left(\omega_0\right)[/itex].

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/9845/problem1444dx4.jpg

Homework Equations



[tex]\omega_0\,=\,\frac{1}{\sqrt{LC}}[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



The resonant frequency is easy to find:

[tex]\omega_0\,=\,\frac{1}{\sqrt{20mH\,9\mu F}}\,=\,2357\,\frac{rad}{s}[/tex]

Now I reconfigure the circuit a little to combine the resistor and capacitor into the element [itex]Z_1[/itex]:

http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/4173/problem1444part2hm4.jpg

Does that seem right?

Now I get this:

[tex]Z_{IN}\,=\,\frac{1}{1\Omega}\,+\,\frac{1}{j\omega\,0.02}\,+\,9X10^{-6}j\omega\,+\,10[/tex]

[tex]Z_{IN}\,=\,\frac{1}{j\omega\,0.02}\,+\,9X10^{-6}j\omega\,+11[/tex]

Now what do I do?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
VinnyCee said:
1.

Now I get this:

[tex]Z_{IN}\,=\,\frac{1}{1\Omega}\,+\,\frac{1}{j\omega\,0.02}\,+\,9X10^{-6}j\omega\,+\,10[/tex]

[tex]Z_{IN}\,=\,\frac{1}{j\omega\,0.02}\,+\,9X10^{-6}j\omega\,+11[/tex]

Now what do I do?


what does the question ask you to find? [tex]Z_{in}(\omega_0)[/tex]
 
Yep, I could just substitute the [itex]\omega_0[/itex] value into the last equation. Would that then be the final answer for [itex]Z_{IN}(\omega_0)[/itex]? Is there any simplification I can do for the j's?

[tex]Z_{IN}\left(\omega_0\right)\,=\,\frac{1}{j(2357)\,0.02}\,+\,9X10^{-6}j(2357)\,+11[/tex]

[tex]Z_{IN}\left(\omega_0\right)\,=\,11\,+\,\frac{1}{47.14\,j}\,+\,0.0212\,j[/tex]
 
Last edited:
[tex]Z_{IN}\left(\omega_0\right)\,=\,518.5j\,+\,0.0006[/tex]

Can someone double-check that the above is correct?
 
VinnyCee said:
[tex]Z_{IN}\left(\omega_0\right)\,=\,518.5j\,+\,0.0006[/tex]

Can someone double-check that the above is correct?

At resonance the circuit should be purely resistive. So, your answer is wrong.
Your mistake is in using [tex]\omega_0\,=\,\frac{1}{\sqrt{LC}}[/tex] to calculate the resonant frequency. This is valid only for series or parallel RLC circuits. For different connections you must calculate the complex impedance [tex]Z_{IN}[/tex] and make the imaginary part zero.
 
SGT said:
At resonance the circuit should be purely resistive. So, your answer is wrong.
Your mistake is in using [tex]\omega_0\,=\,\frac{1}{\sqrt{LC}}[/tex] to calculate the resonant frequency. This is valid only for series or parallel RLC circuits. For different connections you must calculate the complex impedance [tex]Z_{IN}[/tex] and make the imaginary part zero.

yes, your answer is right but I have a question in my mind. Why this is the case? Why at resonance the imaginary part should be zero? I am taking the complex analysis course but have not seen any theorem yet which suggest that the minimum of a complex function occurs where the imaginary part is zero. So I did not get exactly the reasoning behind this approach. Could you please explain it a little?
 
To actually figure out the resonant impedance you use w0 for XL and XC or ZL and ZC depending on nomenclature u maybe using it’s the same thing. Any way when the circuit is at resonance it is to be completely resistive like previously stated. But what that means is XL – XC = 0. To find XL the equation is (w0*L) and the equation for XC is (1/(w0*C)). Now once you find XL and XC you put those in their respective places in the circuit as though they were resistors. Now you can solve for the resonant impedance of the circuit like any parallel or series circuit.
 
Did you really have to resurrect a 10-month old homework thread just to answer it? The OP has probably long lost interest in the thread.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
7K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K