What is the Thevinin's equivalent resistance in a series RLC circuit?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of Thevenin's equivalent resistance in the context of series RLC circuits. Participants explore whether the resistance "R" in such circuits corresponds to the Thevenin's equivalent resistance at the terminals of the capacitor and inductor, particularly when analyzing voltage and current responses.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question if "R" in a series RLC circuit is the Thevenin's equivalent resistance at the capacitor and inductor terminals.
  • Others clarify that in ideal conditions, the capacitor has infinite resistance and the inductor has zero resistance, prompting discussions about the full complex impedance of the series combination of R, L, and C.
  • One participant suggests that the Thevenin equivalent resistance is used to find the time constant in first-order circuits, but may not be necessary for second-order circuits.
  • Another participant discusses the damping factor in series and parallel RLC circuits, questioning if the resistance used for calculating the damping factor is the Thevenin equivalent resistance.
  • Some participants note that in practical scenarios, real components have parasitic elements that can affect the overall impedance and resistance calculations.
  • There is mention of different approaches to solving for circuit responses, with some preferring to derive differential equations rather than using Thevenin's equivalent directly.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the role of Thevenin's equivalent resistance in series RLC circuits, with no consensus reached on whether it is necessary for calculating the damping factor or other circuit responses.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in the discussion include assumptions about ideal components versus real-world properties, as well as the complexity of impedance calculations in practical circuit design.

tete9000
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
hey guys, i was just wondering, in a series RLC circuit, is "R" the Thevinin's equivalent resistance at the "Capacitor and Inductor" terminals?, if not please correct me. Thanks.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
tete9000 said:
hey guys, i was just wondering, in a series RLC circuit, is "R" the Thevinin's equivalent resistance at the "Capacitor and Inductor" terminals?, if not please correct me. Thanks.

Usually a series RLC circuit has all three components -- an R, an L and a C. In intro classes, these ae usually assumed to be ideal, so the C has no parasitic L or R, etc.
 
Hi berkeman, sorry if my question isn't well-clarified, what i meant is "When solving for V(t) or I(t) of an RLC circuit (series or parallel), the resistance in the circuit is taken to be the Thevenin's equivalent resistance at the terminals of both "the Capacitor and Inductor"?I'm not sure if this is right...so I'm asking you guys?is this right?if not please correct me.
 
tete9000 said:
Hi berkeman, sorry if my question isn't well-clarified, what i meant is "When solving for V(t) or I(t) of an RLC circuit (series or parallel), the resistance in the circuit is taken to be the Thevenin's equivalent resistance at the terminals of both "the Capacitor and Inductor"?I'm not sure if this is right...so I'm asking you guys?is this right?if not please correct me.

Sorry that I'm not understanding the question. An ideal capacitor has infinite resistance, and an ideal inductor has zero resistance. Are you asking about the full complex impedance of the series combination of the R, L and C?
 
berkeman said:
Sorry that I'm not understanding the question. An ideal capacitor has infinite resistance, and an ideal inductor has zero resistance. Are you asking about the full complex impedance of the series combination of the R, L and C?

exactly...i meant the series combination of a Resistor, Capacitor, and Inductor.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/RLC_series_circuit.png
 
tete9000,

I think what you are asking is: "Does the R include R + ESR + RL? And then solve for Z = Rtotal + ZC + ZL" The simple answer to that is: "Not generally". In physics and Electronics 101, the reactive components are generally assumed to be "IDEAL", unless otherwise noted. In engineering the real-world properties of each component are evaluated and the circuit is designed to work within tolerances for each component; in general no component's properties are intentionally rated in combination with another component's, though the circuit design certainly takes these properties into account.

For instance here:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/rlcser.html

The components R & C & L are assumed to be "ideal", and the impedance is given by:

Z = ((R^2 + (ZL - ZC)^2)^1/2

The phase angle is given by:

Pa = arctan((ZL - Zc)/R)

In the real world, all resistors have some inductance, all inductors have some resistance, all capacitors have some inductance, etc, etc. In many cases the parasitic inductance/resistance/capacitance of the various components can be ignored, but in many other cases ignoring them can lead to a failed design.

Even in fairly simply circuits keeping track of the phase and impedance can get tricky and very time consuming, so modeling circuits in a software environment is now a very routine part of the design process. Typical enterprise level schematic capture software include parameters for numerous parasitic elements in the PCB itself, frequently defined by the engineering team on a per-trace basis.

I hope this helps.

Fish
 
Thevenin equivalent resistance, across the capacitor or inductor, is used to find the time constant in first-order circuits when using the step-by-step approach, though, it maybe found without it as well I think. In second-order circuits I don't think Thevenin equivalent resistance is necessarily required to find anything.
 
Well, i didn't mean "Impedance and Phase". As a matter of fact, these are the subject of the next chapter in my course of "Circuit Theory".

saim,

Maybe you don't need to find "R" when using the General Way of finding responses, that is, by obtaining the differential equation from scratch, but here I'm talking about the particular cases of Series and Parallel of RLC Circuits.

When solving for the V(t), or I(t) in RLC circuits, you need to find the damping factor (alpha) which is (R/2L) for a series RLC, and (1/2RC) for a parallel RLC, my question is: this "R" that's required for alpha, Is it the Thevenin's equivalent resistance at the "Capacitor and Inductor terminals"?
 
Last edited:
  • #10
tete9000 said:
Hi berkeman, sorry if my question isn't well-clarified, what i meant is "When solving for V(t) or I(t) of an RLC circuit (series or parallel), the resistance in the circuit is taken to be the Thevenin's equivalent resistance at the terminals of both "the Capacitor and Inductor"?


if you're want to model a source as having a real thevenin impedance, sure, you can team up the series R with the V or the parallel G (or 1/R) with the I. fine. but you are deciding which of those components to team up with the source.

it is the case that you can team up the thevenin resistance (the real part) with the series R or the real part of the norton conductance with the parallel G.
 
  • #11
@tete9000: We never learned any separate methods for series and parallel RLCs; we just figure out the diff.eq for the circuit and solve. However, in an sample problem I have before me, which solves parallel RLC, the damping factor is found to be 0.5RC, as you said and in case of series RLC its is R/(2L). In general, for the case of parallel circuit I guess we can always find out the sum of the resistors and that would be the R that would be used for the damping factor. In case of series RLC, well, if all the resistors are in a single series we would add them and use them in this formula but if there do not form a single series I don't know what would be the general R for damping ratio; maybe Thevenin equivalent, maybe not. I'm sure you can write an equation and solve it to find out the general R for this case as well.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
44
Views
6K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K