Series Resonance Help

Status
Not open for further replies.

Trav

New Member
Connect the 50 Ω output from the function generator to the oscilloscope input and establish a sine wave on the oscilloscope with the following characteristics:
a. f = 100 Hz, Vmax = 500 mV
Disconnect the output of the function generator from the oscilloscope and apply it to your circuit. Using a 100 Ω resistor and 2.2 μF capacitor.

Giving me the result:

f(hz) Vr(V) vc(V) vl(V)
100 0.096 0.65 0.06
150 0.13 0.63 0.08

It then asks me to use these results to calculate the following parametersfor 100 and 150hz:

1. I (A)
2. XL (Ω)
3. XC (Ω)
4. Z (Ω)

Would i be right in saying:

1. I v/r 0.0957/100

2. Xl = 2pi x f x l

3. Xc = 1/2pi x f x c

4. Z = √rsquared+(Xc-Xl)squared
 

Attachments

  • circuit diagram.png
    19.4 KB · Views: 302
Last edited:

Vl = I * Xl & Vc = I * Xc

Thus Xl = Vl/I & Xc = Vc/I

You can then cross check your answers by

Including the EMF & source resistance of the function generator in the calculation to see if you obtain the correct value for I
 
Last edited:
Think im struggling to find the value of the inductance for the xl formula
 
Last edited:
Think im struggling to find the value of the inductance for the xl formula
Trav,
I have attached my analysis. I believe that there is an error in the original figures since I get different values for L & C when I calculate them at 100 Hz & 150 Hz.

Obviously they should be approximately equal.

I have assumed that the voltages given are those that would be measured across the components, not with respect to Gnd.

I suggest that you check my calculations as I may have made an error.
 

Attachments

  • XL XC Calc.gif
    46.1 KB · Views: 310
Hi,

I came to the same conclusion when i looked at this problem. It also appears that the generator voltage is higher than 0.5 volts (might be as high as 0.6 volts).
I used R=100 ohms also.
Some errors in measurement are likely here for one reason or another.
 
I did a simulation & realised that the 100 Hz figures made more sense if the figures specified are peak values rather than RMS.

But it did not work with the 150 Hz figures. So there must be an error somewhere.

I have attached a spread sheet.

My guess is that his lecturer used L = 100 mH & C = 2 uF as his starting point to create the question.
 

Attachments

  • spread sheet.jpg
    107.7 KB · Views: 295
Hi there Len,

I came up with 0.1H and 2.35uf also, but then when i went back to calculate the responses of the whole network i came to the conclusion that we could not get the same numbers with 0.5v peak we'd need something like 0.6v peak as the source input voltage. So there are a number of questions that come up here regarding the measurements. And yeah, the 150Hz numbers dont make sense at all.
 
Good morning Mr Al.
Yes something is wrong. It could be a transcription error in the figures. One digit in error could be all it takes to muck up the whole exercise.

I don't intend to waste any more time on it.
 
inductor was in henries, frequency in Hz, resistor in ohms, why not capacitor in farads instead of microfarads.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…