I know that for parallel RLC circuits, the Q factor is given by:
Q=R√CL
But now suppose it is connected in series to a resistor R2 and capacitor C2. Would the Q factor be changed?
Answer
There's a really awesome trick for problems like this. This is going to be a long post but the method presented makes problems like this really easy.
The idea is to turn the series branch C2, R2 into an effective parallel R and C. See the diagram. The effective parallel values are denoted C2,p and R2,p. Parallel capacitances just add, so the total capacitance is now C+C2,p. Parallel resistances add in parallel so the total resistance is now R||R2,p=(1/R+1/R2,p)−1. Since we now have a purely parallel circuit, you can stick these values into your formula for Q (which was wrong in the OP, by the way, but I edited it).
Of course, to actually do any of this we have to understand how to solve for R2,p and C2,p.
Before we do that I want to simplify some notation. It is extremely useful to define ZLC=√L/C. This is the "characteristic impedance" of a resonant mode, and it will show up all over the place. With this definition, the equation for the Q of a parallel RLC resonator is Q=R/ZLC which is really easy to remember: if R→∞ then no current flows through the resistor so there's no energy loss, and as we can see Q→∞.
Suppose we have a series resistance Rs and reactance Xs. The total series impedance is Zs=Rs+iXs. We want to find the equivalent parallel circuit. The impedance of a parallel resistance Rp and reactance Xp is Zp=iRpXpRp+iXp=RpX2p+iR2pXpR2p+X2p Now define a new symbol Qp≡Rp/Xp. Using this we can rewrite Zp as Zp=Rp1+Q2p+iXpQ2p1+Q2p. Since this is now just a sum of a real number and an imaginary number, it's obvious what the equivalent series values are: Rs=Rp11+Q2pXs=XpQ2p1+Q2p.(∗) Unfortunately we have solved the problem in the wrong direction: we found series values in terms of parallel ones instead of the other way around. To solve this problem, define Qs≡Xs/Rs, and divide the two equations in (∗) by one another to find Qs=Qp. Now we can easily invert (∗) to find Rp=Rs(1+Q2)Xp=1+Q2Q2Xs where we now write Q instead of Qs or Qp because we just showed that they are equal. We now have the parallel values in terms of the series values. The best part is that almost always when you have a circuit like the one in the original post, you have Q≫1, which simplifies the transformation equations considerably to Rp≈RsQ2Xp≈Xs. The take-home message is that the equivalent parallel resistance is transformed to a much larger value, and the equivalent reactance is basically the same as the series value.
In the original problem we have Rs=R2Xs=1ωC2Qe=XsRs=1ωC2R2. where I've written Qe to indicate that this is the Q of the "external" circuit. The equivalent parallel values are R2,p≈R2Q2eXp≈Xs→C2,p≈C2 We now have a new fully parallel circuit with resistance=R||R2,pcapacitance=C+C2,p≈Cassuming C≫C2inductance=L The Q of the circuit is Q=resistance/ZLC=(1R+1R2Q2e)−1/ZLC1Q=ZLCR+ZLCQ2eR2=1Qi+1Qc where we've defined Qi≡R/ZLC which is the internal Q of the circuit without the external series branch, and Qc≡Q2eR2/ZLC is the extra Q induced by the coupling. In other words, when you add the series branch, the total Q of the resonance winds up being a parallel combination of two components:
Qi: The Q you would have without the coupling to the series branch.
Qc: The Q you would have if R were absent. This part comes from the coupling to the series branch.
This is, of course, just a result of the fact that R and the effective parallel resistance of the series branch R2,p add in parallel.
We now write down a useful expression for Qc. First write Qe=Xs/Rs=1ωR2C2. Since we're talking about properties near resonance, we take ω≈1/√LC giving Qe=√LCR2C2. Then for Qc we get Qc=Q2eR2ZLC=R2LC√CR22C22√L=ZLCR2(CC2)2. The constitutes a full solution to the problem.
1Q=1Qi+1Qc where Qi=RZLC and Qc=ZLCR2(CC2)2. The approximations made here are that C2≪C and Qs≫1. The approximation Qs≫1 is pretty good for Qs>3.
No comments:
Post a Comment