I Resonance peak for a driven RLC circuit - Physics 10th Edition

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter FranzDiCoccio
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Curves Resonance
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around reproducing resonance curves for a driven RLC circuit using specified values for resistance, inductance, and capacitance. An initial attempt yielded a flatter curve than expected, prompting questions about the accuracy of the resistance values. It was suggested that the correct curves might be achieved with different resistance values while keeping the original inductance and capacitance. Ultimately, the original poster acknowledged that their curves were correct and expressed a desire to retain the thread for future reference. The conversation highlights common challenges in plotting RLC resonant curves and the importance of precise component values.
FranzDiCoccio
Messages
350
Reaction score
43
TL;DR Summary
I am trying to reproduce the resonance curves at page 925 of "Physics, 10th edition" by Halliday et al.
It seems to me that there is something wrong in the values for the parameters
1738192079036.png

I tried to reproduce these curves. The values for the resistance are shown in the graph. The other values are ##L=100 {\rm \mu H}## and ##C=100 {\rm pF}##.
Using those values I get a much flatter curve, where the value at 0,9 is roughly 83% of the value at 1,00.
Am I missing something?

It seems to me that curves such as those in the figure are obtained with ##R = 0.2 {\Omega}##, ##R = 0.6 {\Omega}## and ##R = 2.0 {\Omega}##. Probably it is possible to obtain the same curves keeping the given values of the resistance and changing ##L## and ##C##.

Thank you for any insight
Francesco

1738192064406.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
sorry my bad. The curves are correct. Forget about it.
I tried to see if I could remove this post, but did not find a way.
 
No need to remove your thread. It will be interesting reading for users in the future searching for help on RLC resonant curve plots. :smile:

FranzDiCoccio said:
The other values are ##L=100 {\rm \mu H}## and ##L=100 {\rm pF}##.
I will fix the typo in your ##C## value though. :wink:
 
Hello, I'm joining this forum to ask two questions which have nagged me for some time. I am in no way trolling. They both are presumed obvious, yet don't make sense to me. Nobody will explain their positions, which is...uh...aka science. I also have a thread for the other question. Yes, I'm questioning the most elementary physics question we're given in this world. The classic elevator in motion question: A person is standing on a scale in an elevator that is in constant motion...
Thread ''splain this hydrostatic paradox in tiny words'
This is (ostensibly) not a trick shot or video*. The scale was balanced before any blue water was added. 550mL of blue water was added to the left side. only 60mL of water needed to be added to the right side to re-balance the scale. Apparently, the scale will balance when the height of the two columns is equal. The left side of the scale only feels the weight of the column above the lower "tail" of the funnel (i.e. 60mL). So where does the weight of the remaining (550-60=) 490mL go...
Consider an extremely long and perfectly calibrated scale. A car with a mass of 1000 kg is placed on it, and the scale registers this weight accurately. Now, suppose the car begins to move, reaching very high speeds. Neglecting air resistance and rolling friction, if the car attains, for example, a velocity of 500 km/h, will the scale still indicate a weight corresponding to 1000 kg, or will the measured value decrease as a result of the motion? In a second scenario, imagine a person with a...

Similar threads

Replies
21
Views
1K
Replies
32
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Back
Top