A
Andrew Holme
Guest
I found this surrey.ac.uk past paper whilst surfing:
http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Teaching/Exams/pastpapers/01-02/Spring/Level4/EE4.rfs02.pdf
I'm a bit confused by the 0.5 ohm loss resistance shown in figure A1 on
page 2. The capacitive reactances add up to -j160. If the inductor
was +j160 to resonate, the unloaded Q would be 160/0.5 = 320, which
sounds a bit high even for unloaded Q. It says Q=80 on the diagram,
which is more like it. Did they calculate 80/160=0.5 by mistake? Is
80 supposed to be the loaded Q? What am I missing??
BTW if you go up a few directories on that URL, you can browse all
their past papers.
http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Teaching/Exams/pastpapers/01-02/Spring/Level4/EE4.rfs02.pdf
I'm a bit confused by the 0.5 ohm loss resistance shown in figure A1 on
page 2. The capacitive reactances add up to -j160. If the inductor
was +j160 to resonate, the unloaded Q would be 160/0.5 = 320, which
sounds a bit high even for unloaded Q. It says Q=80 on the diagram,
which is more like it. Did they calculate 80/160=0.5 by mistake? Is
80 supposed to be the loaded Q? What am I missing??
BTW if you go up a few directories on that URL, you can browse all
their past papers.