Q Factor of Circuits: Definitions & Applications

  • Thread starter Thread starter tomz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circuit
Click For Summary
The Q factor, or quality factor, measures the efficiency of resonant circuits, defined as the ratio of energy stored to energy dissipated per cycle. The first definition provided is universally applicable to any circuit, while the second and third definitions are specific to series resonant circuits. The equations for resonant frequency and undamped natural frequency also pertain only to series RLC circuits. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for accurately calculating the Q factor in various circuit configurations. Overall, the Q factor is essential for characterizing circuit performance and filtering capabilities.
tomz
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
On my textbook, there are several definition given for this Q factor.

1) 2 pi * maximum energy stored in reactive element / energy dissipated in a period

2)resonance frequency (in terms of ω) / band width

3)Q = 1/(2 * damping factor)I have tried a couple of random circuits, and its seems not all of them are correct for arbitrary circuit. (Some o them may only true for simple RLC series of parallel).

May I ask which statement is always true?

My textbook also says resonant frequency = natural frequency *(1-2*zeta^2) where zeta is damping factor

and undamped natural frequency is = natural frequency *(1-*zeta^2) where zeta is damping factor

Are these true for RLC series only??

Thank you!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
first of all, Q essentially has meaning only for 2nd-order circuits. if it's 4th or higher order, it will have more than one Q to talk about. now, for a 2nd-order circuit, you will get a transfer function that will look like:\begin{align}<br /> H(s) &amp; = \frac{b_0 + b_1 s^{-1} + b_2 s^{-2}}{a_0 + a_1 s^{-1} + a_2 s^{-2}} \\<br /> \\<br /> &amp; = \frac{b_0 s^2 + b_1 s + b_2}{a_0 s^2 + a_1 s + a_2} \\<br /> \\<br /> &amp; = \frac{(b_0/a_2) s^2 + (b_1/a_2) s + b_2/a_2}{(s/\omega_0)^2 + (1/Q) (s/\omega_0) + 1 } \\<br /> \end{align}

put your 2nd-order transfer function in the form shown and then \omega_0 is your resonant frequency and the thing that multiplies your s/\omega_0 term is 1/Q. that is the definition from the POV of a transfer function.
 
Last edited:
tomz said:
On my textbook, there are several definition given for this Q factor.

1) 2 pi * maximum energy stored in reactive element / energy dissipated in a period

2)resonance frequency (in terms of ω) / band width

3)Q = 1/(2 * damping factor)


I have tried a couple of random circuits, and its seems not all of them are correct for arbitrary circuit. (Some o them may only true for simple RLC series of parallel).

May I ask which statement is always true?
For me, they all ring a bell. :smile: :smile: :smile:

I'd say they are all correct (for, as rbj explains, a second-order underdamped system).
 
Quality factor is all 3.
Well I am familiar with first 2, but never used(yet) 3rd one.

I can connect physically first 2.

Quality of your RLC series combination is a measure how "good" your circuit filters one specific frequency.

If the circuit is ideal, with no resistance, it will have infinite quality factor meaning it will oscillate. The oscillation will be a sinusoid. Which means you will have a delta dirac function at your resonant frequency f0 given by f0=\frac{1}{2\pi \sqrt{LC}}. And the bandwidth would there for be 0.
(from B=\frac{f0}{Q}\text{ Q -&gt;}\infty \text{ B -&gt;0}

But if you have some resistance there, your delta will broaden and you will have a non-zero bandwidth.

So yes both of them are correct. Third one is beyond me, never used it.
 


I can provide some clarification on the definition and applications of Q factor in circuits. The Q factor, also known as quality factor, is a measure of the efficiency of a resonant circuit. It is defined as the ratio of the energy stored in the circuit to the energy dissipated per cycle.

The first definition given in your textbook is the most general and can be applied to any circuit. It calculates the Q factor by considering the maximum energy stored in the reactive element (inductor or capacitor) and the energy dissipated in a period. This definition is applicable to both series and parallel resonant circuits.

The second definition is specific to series resonant circuits and calculates the Q factor as the ratio of the resonant frequency (in terms of angular frequency, ω) to the bandwidth of the circuit. This definition is not applicable to parallel resonant circuits.

The third definition is also specific to series resonant circuits and calculates the Q factor as the inverse of two times the damping factor. This definition assumes that the damping factor is small, and therefore, is not applicable to circuits with significant damping.

To answer your question, the first definition is always true for any circuit, while the second and third definitions are only applicable to series resonant circuits.

The equations for resonant frequency and undamped natural frequency that you mentioned are also specific to series RLC circuits. They are used to calculate the resonant frequency and undamped natural frequency in terms of the natural frequency and damping factor.

In summary, the Q factor is a useful measure in characterizing the efficiency of resonant circuits. It is important to understand the different definitions and their applications in order to accurately calculate the Q factor for different types of circuits.
 
Thread 'I thought it was only Amazon that sold unsafe junk'
I grabbed an under cabinet LED light today at a big box store. Nothing special. 18 inches in length and made to plug several lights together. Here is a pic of the power cord: The drawing on the box led me to believe that it would accept a standard IEC cord which surprised me. But it's a variation of it. I didn't try it, but I would assume you could plug a standard IEC cord into this and have a double male cord AKA suicide cord. And to boot, it's likely going to reverse the hot and...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
516
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K