Solve the Crazy e/m Problem: Change in Capacitance Required for Detection

  • Thread starter imationrouter03
  • Start date
In summary: DeltaC is a definite quantity and so after rearranging the terms so as to get an expression for x (or \Delta x) you will discover that it is a function of DeltaC and s only (and more specifically, a function of s since DeltaC is constant preconfigured for your detection circuitry).
  • #1
imationrouter03
11
0
Thank you for viewing this problem, hope u can help me.

In one type of computer keyboard, each key holds a small metal plate that serves as one plate of a parallel-plate, air-filled capacitor. When the key is depressed, the plate separation decreases and the capacitance increases. Electronic circuitry detects the change in capacitance and thus detects that the key has been pressed. In one particular keyboard, the area of each metal plate is A , and the separation between the plates is "s" before the key is depressed.

If the circuitry can detect a change in capacitance of DeltaC, how far must the key be depressed before the circuitry detects its depression? Use epsilon_0 for the permittivity of free space.

The correct answer involves the variable "s" adn it does not depend on the variable DeltaS

Thanks again for your time and concern

:eek:)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Well it really depends on how sensitive the circuitry is, but u'd need to know the minium change (delta C) for the keyboard to detect a key pressed then you can just...

DeltaC = (Epislion_0 * A)(1/(deltaS))

(Epislion_0 *A)/ (DeltaC) = deltaS, idk if i helped hopefully..
 
  • #3
parallel plate capacitor

imationrouter03 said:
If the circuitry can detect a change in capacitance of DeltaC, how far must the key be depressed before the circuitry detects its depression? Use epsilon_0 for the permittivity of free space.
Model the key as a parallel plate capacitor, the formula for which is: [itex]C = \frac{\epsilon_0 A}{d}[/itex]. Now find the change in capacitance when d changes from s to s - [itex]\Delta x[/itex]. Solve for [itex]\Delta x[/itex].
 
  • #4
I've tried the following of deltax=s-(epsilon_0*A)/(C) but the correct answer didn't involve the variable C =/
but y would u be solving for deltax?

I've also tried (epsilon_0*A)/DeltaC but the correct answer involves the variable "s"
I've also tried (epsilon_0*A)/(s-DeltaS) but the correct answer doesn't depend on DeltaS

And I've still haven't been able to solve this problem... any feedback will be appreciated..thanks
 
  • #5
  • #6
imationrouter03 said:
I've tried the following of deltax=s-(epsilon_0*A)/(C) but the correct answer didn't involve the variable C =/
but y would u be solving for deltax?
I'm not sure what that equation is supposed to be. We need to solve for [itex]\Delta x[/itex] because that's what the problems asks us to find: "how far must the key be depressed". (I just happen to call the distance the key is depressed [itex]\Delta x[/itex].)

In any case, maverick280857 gave you some good advice on solving this problem (in the other thread! please don't post the same question twice), but here's a bit more. Starting with the equation for capacitance:
[itex]C = \frac{\epsilon_0 A}{d}[/itex]
now find [itex]\Delta C[/itex]:
[itex]\Delta C = \frac{\epsilon_0 A}{s - \Delta x} - \frac{\epsilon_0 A}{s}[/itex]
Now rearrange and solve this equation for [itex]\Delta x[/itex] in terms of s and [itex]\Delta C[/itex]. (It's easy.)

(Note: in maverick280857's other post, he calls the distance x instead of [itex]\Delta x[/itex]; it doesn't matter--take your pick!)
 
  • #7
Retrospectively this is quite an interesting situation since the circuit--which you're not concerned with if you're solving this problem per se--has been made to detect a minimum threshold of DeltaC (or exactly DeltaC, as the case may be). Another twist of the problem would be to consider the capacitor to be filled with a dielectric and to have the student/problem-solver find the minimum distance that the key would have to be pressed so that the dilectric would break down. (Of course, you are less likely to have dielectrics for keyboards in computers still...) But this "twist" as I have simply put in words here, cannot be a reasonable question for starters though it does look like an interesting situation. Ah...one of the beauties of physics...somewhat easy to visualize, difficult to model mathematically :-D

Coming back to this problem and DocAl's situation, it is clear now that DeltaC is a definite quantity and so after rearranging the terms so as to get an expression for x (or [tex]\Delta x[/tex]) you will discover that it is a function of DeltaC and s only (and more specifically, a function of s since DeltaC is constant preconfigured for your detection circuitry).

Cheers (and sorry for this rather verbose post...)
Vivek
 
  • #8
thank u all for ur help.. the problem is finally resolved it can out to be the following:
deltax=(s^2*DeltaC)/(epsilon_0*A+s*DeltaC)

thanks =)
 
  • #9
Exactly right.
 

Related to Solve the Crazy e/m Problem: Change in Capacitance Required for Detection

1. What is the "Crazy e/m Problem" and why is it important to solve?

The "Crazy e/m Problem" refers to the discrepancy between the expected change in capacitance and the actual change observed in certain systems. This problem is important to solve because it can impact the accuracy and reliability of capacitance-based detection methods, which are widely used in various scientific and industrial applications.

2. What factors contribute to the change in capacitance required for detection?

There are various factors that can affect the change in capacitance required for detection, including the geometry and material properties of the system, the applied voltage, and the surrounding environment. Other factors such as temperature, humidity, and external disturbances may also play a role.

3. How can the "Crazy e/m Problem" be solved?

One approach to solving the "Crazy e/m Problem" is through careful design and calibration of the detection system. This may involve optimizing the geometry and materials used, as well as implementing signal processing techniques to minimize the effects of external factors. Additionally, ongoing research and advancements in technology may lead to new solutions for this problem.

4. What are the potential consequences of not solving the "Crazy e/m Problem"?

If the "Crazy e/m Problem" is not adequately addressed, it can lead to inaccurate measurements and unreliable data. This can hinder progress in various fields that rely on capacitance-based detection methods, such as biomedical engineering, environmental monitoring, and material science.

5. Are there any current efforts being made to solve the "Crazy e/m Problem"?

Yes, there are ongoing efforts in the scientific community to address the "Crazy e/m Problem". Researchers are exploring various approaches, such as developing new detection techniques and materials, and improving signal processing algorithms. Collaborative efforts and interdisciplinary research may also contribute to finding a solution to this problem.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
10K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
2K
Back
Top