Radians vs Degrees: Explaining to Cooper

  • Thread starter Thread starter Coop
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Degrees Radians
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the necessity of using radians instead of degrees when calculating the voltage across a 60μF capacitor described by the equation vC =(18 V) cos(200t). At t = 0.010 s, the voltage is correctly calculated as -7.5 V using radians, while using degrees yields an incorrect result of 18 V. The argument of the cosine function must be a dimensionless number, which is achieved through radians, aligning with the conventions of alternating current (AC) analysis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of AC circuit analysis
  • Familiarity with trigonometric functions, specifically cosine
  • Knowledge of angular frequency in radians
  • Basic concepts of capacitors and their voltage equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the relationship between angular frequency and radians in AC circuits
  • Learn about the implications of using radians versus degrees in trigonometric calculations
  • Explore the mathematical derivation of the cosine function in AC analysis
  • Investigate the properties of capacitors in alternating current applications
USEFUL FOR

Students studying electrical engineering, physics enthusiasts, and anyone involved in AC circuit analysis who seeks clarity on the use of radians in voltage calculations.

Coop
Messages
40
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



The voltage across a 60μF capacitor is described by the equation vC =(18 V) cos(200t), where t is in seconds.

What is the voltage across the capacitor at t =0.010 s?

Homework Equations



N/A

The Attempt at a Solution



When you use degrees the answer is 18V and when you use radians its -7.5 V (the correct answer). Can someone explain why you must use radians here? It's been a while since using these in math class so the simpler explanation the better if you wouldn't mind :) (maybe I am missing something obvious).

Thanks,
Cooper
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For your formula, you should be using radians rather than degrees. The argument of the cosine is going to be a pure number without units, which suggests that radian measure is the one to use.
 
SteamKing said:
For your formula, you should be using radians rather than degrees. The argument of the cosine is going to be a pure number without units, which suggests that radian measure is the one to use.

Why would using degrees not give a unitless number?
 
You should be using radians because you are dealing with AC. This is obvious because the voltage is given as a cosine wave and alternating current is a waveform (whereas DC is approximated by a "linear" voltage). The AC has an angular frequency of 200 radians because the general equation for a cosine wave is Acos(kx+ωt).
 
Coop said:
Why would using degrees not give a unitless number?

Technically, a degree of angular measure is not strictly dimensionless; it represents part of the arc of a circle, but it cannot be decomposed into basic units of mass, length, or time. The radian, by definition, is the ratio of the length of a circular arc to the radius of the arc, and as such, is dimensionless (L/L).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radian
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
I have a different perspective. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with using degrees per second rather than radians per second. However, in physics, it is customary to work in terms of radians per second. Maybe that's because, if you wanted to calculate the rate of change of V with respect to time, you would have a real problem if you were working in terms of degrees/sec.

Chet
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K