Q of R+LC Circuit: Understanding Q & Phasor Analysis

  • Thread starter Thread starter strauser
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circuit
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the quality factor (Q) of an LC tank circuit in series with a resistance R, focusing on its derivation through phasor analysis. Participants explore various definitions and expressions for Q, as well as the implications of resistance on its value.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that their experiments suggest Q increases with R and presents two expressions for Q: ##Q=R\sqrt{\dfrac{C}{L}}## and ##Q=R\sqrt{\dfrac{C}{L+4R^2C}}##, questioning which is correct.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of defining what is meant by "Q," suggesting that definitions may vary and could lead to different results.
  • A participant challenges the validity of the Q expression provided, stating that for R approaching infinity, the Q value would not be correctly represented and should be large instead.
  • Concerns are raised about the input and output variables in the context of defining Q, specifically whether voltage or current is being considered.
  • One participant mentions that for parallel circuits, Q can be approximated as R/X, where X is the reactance of either L or C, and notes the complexity of the topic in low Q scenarios.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definition and calculation of Q, with no consensus reached on which expression for Q is correct or how to properly define it in the context of the circuit discussed.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for precise definitions and the potential for different interpretations of Q based on circuit configuration and assumptions about input/output variables.

strauser
Messages
37
Reaction score
5
TL;DR
Derive Q of R in parallel with tank circuit
I've been experimenting with an LC tank circuit in series with a resistance R, and I've noted that the Q seems to increase with R. I've tried to derive this result via phasor analysis, but I'm not sure if my expression is correct.

To make things clear, I'm talking about the circuit with impedance ##Z=R+jX_L || X_C=R+j(\dfrac{\omega L}{1-\omega^2 LC}) ##

The only thing I've found via google is this:

https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/108788/voltage-output-from-a-tank-circuit

where the first answer suggests that ##Q=R\sqrt{\dfrac{C}{L}}## which at least agrees with my measured results. I've found however that ##Q=R\sqrt{\dfrac{C}{L+4R^2C}}##

So which result, if either, is right? I note that mine approximates the quoted result if ##L \gg 4R^2C##.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
At first you have to convince yourself about the DEFINITION of the quantity you call "Q".
What is your definition?
 
LvW said:
At first you have to convince yourself about the DEFINITION of the quantity you call "Q".
What is your definition?
Well, nothing too unusual: ##Q=\dfrac{\omega_\text{resonance}}{B_\text{3dB}}## where ##B_\text{3dB}## is the 3dB bandwidth.

I find your question a little odd though; aren't all definitions equivalent up to a factor of ##2\pi##. It's been years since I looked at this stuff in detail, but I don't recall any defn that would give a substantially different result. Maybe I forget?
 
Well, may be that my question appears to you "a little odd" - nevertheless, would you mind to tell us HOW you have found the expression for Q you have mentioned?
According to system theory, the Q value of a frequency-dependent netork is defined using the pole position in the compex s-plane - and only for some special cases this value is identical to the ratio "resonant frequency/bandwidth".
More than that, for R approaching infinity your Q expression would be close to Q=0.5.
This is not correct. In contrast, Q must be very large...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: strauser and berkeman
strauser said:
Maybe I forget?
In addition to what LvW said it’s critical to precisely define what is the input and output variable. For example are you looking at voltage or current? Across or through what? Etc.
 
LvW said:
Well, may be that my question appears to you "a little odd" - nevertheless, would you mind to tell us HOW you have found the expression for Q you have mentioned?
According to system theory, the Q value of a frequency-dependent netork is defined using the pole position in the compex s-plane - and only for some special cases this value is identical to the ratio "resonant frequency/bandwidth".
More than that, for R approaching infinity your Q expression would be close to Q=0.5.
This is not correct. In contrast, Q must be very large...
I don't have time to reply to this fully today, but your final observation suggests that I've indeed effed up somewhere.

I'll put up the details tomorrow.
 
strauser said:
Summary: Derive Q of R in parallel with tank circuit

I've been experimenting with an LC tank circuit in series with a resistance R, and I've noted that the Q seems to increase with R. I've tried to derive this result via phasor analysis, but I'm not sure if my expression is correct.

To make things clear, I'm talking about the circuit with impedance ##Z=R+jX_L || X_C=R+j(\dfrac{\omega L}{1-\omega^2 LC}) ##

The only thing I've found via google is this:

https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/108788/voltage-output-from-a-tank-circuit
where the first answer suggests that ##Q=R\sqrt{\dfrac{C}{L}}## which at least agrees with my measured results. I've found however that ##Q=R\sqrt{\dfrac{C}{L+4R^2C}}##

So which result, if either, is right? I note that mine approximates the quoted result if ##L \gg 4R^2C##.
If you have L, C and R all in parallel, the Q is approx R/X, where X is the reactance of either L or C, which are the same when Q is greater than about 2. For the case when R, L and C are in series, Q= X/R exactly. The topic is actually a bit intricate for parallel circuits, because max voltage and zero phase do not quite coincide for low Q values. It is covered in the very old book Radio Engineering, by Terman.
 

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K