The Student Room Group

How much energy has been converted by the cell in the charging process?

A 100μF100\mu F capacitor is charged from a battery of e.m.f 6V6V. What is the charge on the plates of the fully charged capacitor?
Q=CVQ=CV
(100×106)×6=6×104(100 \times 10^{-6}) \times 6 = 6 \times 10^{-4} or 600μC600\mu C.
How much energy has been converted by the cell in the charging process?
Help?
Well, emf is "energy per coulomb", so if you multiply emf by Q ...
Reply 2
Original post by Stonebridge
Well, emf is "energy per coulomb", so if you multiply emf by Q ...


... you won't get the right answer, unless I'm misunderstanding what you are suggesting. It takes less energy to transfer an element of charge dqdq from one plate to the other when the capacitor is uncharged, than when it is nearly fully charged.

To take this into account, you need to integrate the elemental work over the whole charge:

E=0QVdq=0QqCdq=12Q2CE = \int_0^Q V dq = \int_0^Q \frac{q}{C} dq = \frac{1}{2} \frac{Q^2}{C}

[note: what I've said is correct, but doesn't answer the question - always answer the question asked, folks, not the one that you wish they'd asked !!]
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 3
Original post by Stonebridge
Well, emf is "energy per coulomb", so if you multiply emf by Q ...


This gives me the correct answer. 6×(6×104)=3.6×103J6 \times (6 \times 10^{-4}) = 3.6 \times 10^{-3}J
Reply 4
Original post by halpme
This gives me the correct answer. 6×(6×104)=3.6×103J6 \times (6 \times 10^{-4}) = 3.6 \times 10^{-3}J


Yes, in fact that's right. The question asks about the energy converted by the cell, not the energy stored in the capacitor - I misread the question. Someone really ought to downvote me to take away that evil, undeserved "+" that someone clicked.
Reply 5
Original post by atsruser
Yes, in fact that's right. The question asks about the energy converted by the cell, not the energy stored in the capacitor - I misread the question. Someone really ought to downvote me to take away that evil, undeserved "+" that someone clicked.

I'm sure you deserve it :smile:!
Now, why does an uncharged capacitor have no resistance?
Am I interpreting this sentence incorrectly?
Surprisingly, the uncharged capacitor does not resist the current arriving at one plate or leaving the other.
The whole point of this exercise is that the cell converts QV joules of energy in the process, as I said in my original reply and was asked by the original question, and the capacitor, when charged, only has 0.5QV joules of energy stored in it.

So where did the missing energy go?

Classic physics problem.
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 7
Original post by Stonebridge
The whole point of this exercise is that the cell converts QV joules of energy in the process, as I said in my original reply and was asked by the original question, and the capacitor, when charged, only has 0.5QV joules of energy stored in it.

So where did the missing energy go?

Classic physics problem.


If we assume that there is series resistance RR between the capacitor and cell, then the cell transfers QQ coulombs through it, at an average voltage of V2\frac{V}{2}, (since the voltage drop across RR starts at VV and falls linearly to 0), giving an energy dissipation of
Unparseable latex formula:

QV_R_{av} = \frac{QV}{2}

, which is precisely half of the energy, the other half being stored in the E-field of the capacitor.

If we assume that there is no series resistance between the capacitor and cell, then this is too unphysical to analyse properly (since we'd be assuming a perfect voltage source, infinite current to bring the capacitor up to full charge instantly => infinite radiative losses, etc).

Have I solved the classic physics problem?
Original post by atsruser
If we assume that there is series resistance RR between the capacitor and cell, then the cell transfers QQ coulombs through it, at an average voltage of V2\frac{V}{2}, (since the voltage drop across RR starts at VV and falls linearly to 0), giving an energy dissipation of
Unparseable latex formula:

QV_R_{av} = \frac{QV}{2}

, which is precisely half of the energy, the other half being stored in the E-field of the capacitor.

If we assume that there is no series resistance between the capacitor and cell, then this is too unphysical to analyse properly (since we'd be assuming a perfect voltage source, infinite current to bring the capacitor up to full charge instantly => infinite radiative losses, etc).

Have I solved the classic physics problem?


Yes of course. It is lost in the resistance of the connection between the two. It doesn't matter what the value of the resistance is, either. But there must always be some resistance, somewhere, in the real world.
So let's say you connect the cell directly to the plates using no wires at all.
What happens now?
There is the internal resistance of the cell. The charge would have to flow in and along the capacitor plates, and these must have some resistance.
So yes. It's a classic little A Level teaser.
Reply 9
Original post by Stonebridge
Yes of course. It is lost in the resistance of the connection between the two. It doesn't matter what the value of the resistance is, either. But there must always be some resistance, somewhere, in the real world.
So let's say you connect the cell directly to the plates using no wires at all.
What happens now?
There is the internal resistance of the cell. The charge would have to flow in and along the capacitor plates, and these must have some resistance.
So yes. It's a classic little A Level teaser.


Surprisingly enough that's the first time I've seen it presented as a teaser, but it's a nice A level standard question.

Are you familiar with the much trickier two-capacitor conundrum?
Original post by atsruser
Surprisingly enough that's the first time I've seen it presented as a teaser, but it's a nice A level standard question.

Are you familiar with the much trickier two-capacitor conundrum?


Yes, and it's the same answer in principle.

Quick Reply

Latest