What is the equivalent capacitance of the capacitors shown in the figure?

AI Thread Summary
The equivalent capacitance of the capacitors in the figure is calculated to be 9.23 microfarads. The attempt to find this value involved adding the series capacitors and applying the formula for equivalent capacitance. However, the calculations led to an incorrect negative value for capacitance, indicating a mistake in the approach. It was clarified that capacitors are not in series if other components connect to the nodes between them. The discussion emphasizes the importance of correctly identifying series and parallel configurations in capacitor circuits.
cjames9001
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The equivalent capacitance of the capacitors shown in the figure is 9.23 MicroF



Homework Equations



[URL]http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/2/f/5/2f5b978fd081ea63e204909addf3d028.png[/URL]
[URL]http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/f/a/3/fa34ce461e6988fd973081401cc9790c.png[/URL]

The Attempt at a Solution


[URL]http://session.masteringphysics.com/problemAsset/1122585/1/Walker.21.58.jpg[/URL]
So to find C I Attempted to add the Series ones across the top and the left most capacitor with the following calculation:

[1/(1/c+1/12+1/8.35)]=[1/({100.2+20.35c}/100.2c)]=(100.2c)/(100.2+20.35c)

then I took (100.2c)/(100.2+20.35c) and added it to 7.22 microF +4.25 microF =9.23 microF
Then I got :
(100.2c)/(100.2+20.35c)=-2.24

100.2c=-2.24*(100.2+20.35c)

100.2c= -224.448 - 45.584c

145.784c = -224.448

c=-1.540
Which is not correct, and I'm also pretty sure that capacitors can't be negative right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Components are not in series if there are other components attached to the nodes that join them. In the figure, only the 12 and 8.35 microfarad capacitors are in series.
 
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 '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