Timeline for Is the transfer function for the given RC network right?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Oct 8, 2023 at 9:42 | answer | added | user107063 | timeline score: 0 | |
May 15, 2019 at 2:31 | vote | accept | penguin99 | ||
May 12, 2019 at 19:24 | answer | added | jonk | timeline score: 3 | |
May 12, 2019 at 18:48 | comment | added | jonk | @noorav I already did all this in a three stage RC. So look here for a complete analysis process that you can follow for just two stages, as well. I could repost it here, but with just two stages. But can you use it to do this yourself? | |
May 12, 2019 at 17:22 | history | became hot network question | |||
May 12, 2019 at 15:33 | comment | added | D.A.S. | @noorav I imagine you can solve it with four R values, or even 2, then replace R2 with Xc(s) | |
May 12, 2019 at 13:34 | comment | added | Marko Buršič | You would need a buffer (opamp G=1) in between sections A and B, to be able to multiply transfer functions, like in your example. | |
May 12, 2019 at 13:01 | comment | added | Marcus Müller | not that I'd be aware of. Do the full network analysis! | |
May 12, 2019 at 13:00 | comment | added | penguin99 | @Marcus Miller, is there any special formula for a loaded voltage divider? | |
May 12, 2019 at 12:43 | answer | added | Verbal Kint | timeline score: 4 | |
May 12, 2019 at 12:17 | comment | added | Marcus Müller | yep, that's the formula for the unloaded voltage divider. But: assuming you can just cascade RC filters like that is a mistake we've all been through at least once. I sympathize! I think in this situation: try with a star-triangle transform, simplify a bit and then you have a single, different voltage divider that you can analyze. | |
May 12, 2019 at 12:11 | comment | added | Chu | No, you can't do that. There are loading effects. You could do (output impedance)/(input impedance). | |
May 12, 2019 at 12:03 | history | asked | penguin99 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |