Trouble w/ setting up the equations for capacitive circuits

AI Thread Summary
Understanding when to place capacitance in the denominator is crucial for analyzing capacitive circuits. Voltage is calculated using the formula V = Q/C, which requires dividing charge by capacitance when comparing potential differences. In equations where charges are simply summed, capacitance is not needed in the denominator. Reducing the circuit to find equivalent capacitance can simplify analysis, but it may obscure individual capacitor values. Ultimately, calculating the charge on the equivalent capacitance allows for determining voltages across individual capacitors in the circuit.
Blockade
Messages
68
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


7ad63a263c.jpg


Homework Equations


.Q = CVab

The Attempt at a Solution


ac91a77844.jpg


I am having a hard time understanding when to put the capacitance in the denominator. I get that Voltage = Charge/Capacitance, but for the equation circled in red "q1/c + q2/c = q3c" ... I don't get why each of those charges have their corresponding value of capacitance under it. If you look at two equations up "q2+q3 = q4" does need the capacitance in it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Blockade said:
I am having a hard time understanding when to put the capacitance in the denominator. I get that Voltage = Charge/Capacitance, but for the equation circled in red "q1/c + q2/c = q3c" ... I don't get why each of those charges have their corresponding value of capacitance under it. If you look at two equations up "q2+q3 = q4" does need the capacitance in it.

If you're summing or comparing voltages (potential differences) then you want to divide the charge by its associated capacitance to obtain the PD across the given capacitor.. V = Q/C. If you're just summing and comparing charges, then you just sum or compare them directly.
 
  • Like
Likes Blockade
Wouldn't it be simpler to reduce the circuit in a manner similar to reducing resistive circuits?
For capacitors in parallel:
C = C1 + C2 + ... + Cn
For capacitors in series:
1 / C = 1 / C1 + 1 / C2 + ... + 1 / Cn
After you have the appropriate equivalent capacitances then you can begin analyzing charges and voltage drops.
 
J Hann said:
Wouldn't it be simpler to reduce the circuit in a manner similar to reducing resistive circuits?
For capacitors in parallel:
C = C1 + C2 + ... + Cn
For capacitors in series:
1 / C = 1 / C1 + 1 / C2 + ... + 1 / Cn
After you have the appropriate equivalent capacitances then you can begin analyzing charges and voltage drops.
Sure. But then you "lose" the individual capacitors with that reduction. Since you eventually want to find their individual charges and voltages that could be problematical.

On the other hand it can be used as a method towards the solution. If you first reduce down to a single equivalent capacitance then you can find the charge on it: ##Q = V_{ab}*C_{eq}##. That will also be the charge on the lone series capacitor at the bottom of the original circuit, so you can determine its voltage and by extension, the voltage across the other group of capacitors. It's a short bit of work in a similar fashion to deal out the voltages and charges to the rest.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top