Understanding Complex Impedance in Electrical Circuits

  • Thread starter Thread starter influx
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Complex Impedance
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of complex impedance in electrical circuits, specifically focusing on configurations involving capacitors, inductors, and resistors. Participants explore different approaches to solving the problem, including the use of Kirchhoff's Current Law (KCL) and series-parallel combinations of impedances.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the two capacitors are in parallel, while others argue they are not due to the presence of an inductor between them.
  • One participant suggests using KCL equations to solve the circuit, while another proposes that series-parallel combinations of impedances may be easier.
  • There is a discussion about whether the capacitors, if not in parallel, must be in series, leading to confusion about how to combine their impedances.
  • Participants detail their calculations for the right circuit, involving series and parallel combinations, but express uncertainty about arriving at the correct final answer.
  • One participant acknowledges making a small algebraic mistake in their calculations after receiving feedback.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach consensus on the configuration of the capacitors, with competing views on whether they are in parallel or not. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the correct approach to calculating the total impedance.

Contextual Notes

Some calculations involve assumptions about the circuit configuration that may not be clearly defined, leading to potential misunderstandings in the application of series and parallel impedance rules.

influx
Messages
162
Reaction score
1
parallell.png


For the problem on the left, the 2 capacitors are parallel to each other so the 1/z = 1/-2j + 1/-2j = 2/-2j

so 1/z = 1/-j = -1/j

so the total impedance of the 2 capacitors, z = -j

Now if you add this to 5j + 4 (the total impedance of the resistor and inductor) you get 4j+4. However this doesn't give the right answer..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
influx said:
parallell.png


For the problem on the left, the 2 capacitors are parallel to each other so the 1/z = 1/-2j + 1/-2j = 2/-2j

so 1/z = 1/-j = -1/j

so the total impedance of the 2 capacitors, z = -j

Now if you add this to 5j + 4 (the total impedance of the resistor and inductor) you get 4j+4. However this doesn't give the right answer..

The capacitors are not in parallel. They have an inductor between them. You need to write the KCL equations and solve them simultaneously...
 
influx said:
parallell.png


For the problem on the left, the 2 capacitors are parallel to each other
No they are not. One pair of their leads (the bottom ones) are connected together, but there's an inductor in the way of the other connection. So, not parallel.EDIT: Oops. Berkeman beat me to the punch!
 
berkeman said:
The capacitors are not in parallel. They have an inductor between them. You need to write the KCL equations and solve them simultaneously...

Actually, it's easier than using KCL equations. Do series-parallel combinations of the complex impedances to get the overall input impedance...
 
berkeman said:
Actually, it's easier than using KCL equations. Do series-parallel combinations of the complex impedances to get the overall input impedance...

So if they are not in parallel they must be in series? In which case we just add them? -2j +-2j =-4j?
 
influx said:
So if they are not in parallel they must be in series? In which case we just add them? -2j +-2j =-4j?

For the left circuit, you first make a series combination, then a parallel combination, then a final series combination. You fold the circuit up from right to left in this case...
 
berkeman said:
For the left circuit, you first make a series combination, then a parallel combination, then a final series combination. You fold the circuit up from right to left in this case...

Ah I see..

For the one on the right, I done the following but I don't get the answer correct?

the 4 ohm resistor and the 1j ohm inductor are in series so you just add them up to get 4+1j, then this combined total is in parallel with the 2j ohm inductor so

1/(4+1j) + 1/(2j) = 1/Z

so Z = 16/25 + 38j/25 (once simplified and rationalised)

then you add -1j ohm to the answer of the above (as the -1j capacitor is in series with our above answer) so

Z = 16/25 + 13j/25 (2)

Then the remaining 1 ohm resistor (the one to the left) is calculated in parallel with (2)

so 1/Z = 1/1 + 1/(16+13j/25)

But simplifying the above and finding it in the form r<theta, gives me a different answer to the given answer. Where have I gone wrong?

Thanks
 
influx said:
Ah I see..

For the one on the right, I done the following but I don't get the answer correct?

the 4 ohm resistor and the 1j ohm inductor are in series so you just add them up to get 4+1j, then this combined total is in parallel with the 2j ohm inductor so

1/(4+1j) + 1/(2j) = 1/Z

so Z = 16/25 + 38j/25 (once simplified and rationalised)

then you add -1j ohm to the answer of the above (as the -1j capacitor is in series with our above answer) so

Z = 16/25 + 13j/25 (2)

Then the remaining 1 ohm resistor (the one to the left) is calculated in parallel with (2)

so 1/Z = 1/1 + 1/(16+13j/25)

But simplifying the above and finding it in the form r<theta, gives me a different answer to the given answer. Where have I gone wrong?

Thanks

It looks like you are using the correct steps. Can you post your work in detail so we can check it?
 
berkeman said:
It looks like you are using the correct steps. Can you post your work in detail so we can check it?

I just made a small algebraic mistake!

Thanks anyway.. :)
 
  • #10
Sweet! :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
1K