Xavier Bourret Sicotte Monday, March 15th, 2009

Investigating the difference between real and ideal resistors, capacitors and
inductors

Introduction
Passive components, or ones that do not increase the power of a signal, play a crucial role in
electrical engineering. They are used in a large variety of situations because of their relative
simplicity and can be produced and implemented cheaply. Resistors, capacitors and inductors
are three of the most basic passive components as they are also linear. Given that their values
are ideally constant, the circuits they make are easier to analyse and predict.

Real materials and parts, however, behave differently depending on conditions such as
temperature, voltage or frequency. The latter is of great importance in communication
applications since messages are processed in the frequency domain. A radio receiver, for
example, must be able to filter out all but a narrow band of signals to output clear music. If
the filter’s performances are altered because its parts are non-ideal, the quality of the sound
may suffer. For this reason, we will investigate the deviation of real components from their
theoretical characteristics and estimate what effect this can have on passive networks such as
filters.

In this report, we examine an experiment that aims at determining the extent to which real
resistors, capacitors and inductors differ from their ideal behaviour. We will describe the
fundamental theory and experiment design before showing a graphical representation of the
results. We will then be able to produce new circuit models of the components and evaluate
how these can improve predictions in more complicated circuits. This will involve the
analysis of experimental errors and limitations and will lead to the conclusion.

Theory and experiment design

The ideal alternating current (AC) characteristics of the three basic passive linear components
used during the report are shown bellow.

Component Circuit Symbol Z |Z| arg(Z)

Resistor R R R Zero
Capacitor C -90°
Inductor L +90°
 Where j denotes the imaginary number −1 and omega the angular frequency in radians per
1
second, ω = 2πf . The impedance Z is a measure of the opposition to a sinusoidal alternating
current. It can be a real or complex number whose absolute value |Z| is a magnitude, and
argument arg(Z) the phase difference between voltage and current. It is important to note that
impedances can be added in series and in parallel in the same way resistors are in direct
current networks. Also, we will be mostly be interested with |Z| because the phase change is a
direct consequence of the magnitude.

We can therefore predict the ideal behaviour of components from the formulae describing
their impedances. The resistor should be the only part unaffected by voltage oscillations while
the capacitor’s impedance will be inversely proportional to them. On the contrary, the
inductor will become more resistive as frequency increases. Since we are interested in the
difference between the predicted and actual behaviour of circuits, we must find a method of
measuring the impedance of these as a function of frequency. This can be done using the
apparatus shown in fig.1

Signal generator |Z|? V1

R V2

Isolation transformer

Fig. 1 shows the apparatus used during the experiment.

1
It is assumed in this report that the reader understands basic electrical engineering concepts such as
the complex notation of voltages and impedances. Please refer to standard textbooks for further
explanations.
The method used to determine the unknown impedance relies on the fact that |Z| is in series

with the variable resistor R2. Since the same current flows through them, Ohms law R = V can
I
Z
be re-arranged as V1 = and R can be varied until both voltages are the same. At this point,
V2 R

the components we are testing have the same total impedance as the known resistor.
V1 and V2 are measured using an oscilloscope whose reference ground voltage is set to be the
node between Z and R. This enables us to use the invert mode of the oscilloscope and to see
the two voltage signals simultaneously. It also explains why an isolation transformer is
needed to avoid the ground from the signal generator to interfere with the measurements.

Experiment

During the experiment, the components were placed in the position of |Z| and the variable
resistor R was increased until voltages V1 and V2 were equal. The raw data tables are in the
appendix and the resulting Impedance vs Frequency graphs are shown in fig.2

Fig. 2 shows the relationship

between frequency and
impedance for the resistor,
capacitor and inductor.

Note both axes are logarithmic.

2
The unknown impedance |Z| can consist of a single component or a more complex circuit. In both
cases, we are measuring the total impedance of the “black rectangle”, disregard of what it contains.
It appears from the graph that two out of three components behaved as expected. The resistor
was not affected by changes in the input voltage and the impedance of the capacitor decreased
linearly with frequency. Taking 1kHz as an example for the capacitor3:
1 1
Z = = = 159Ω hence the predicted is 12Ω above the measured value of
ωC 1kHz × 2π ×10µF
147Ω. On the other hand, the inductor’s impedance changed from being constant to directly
proportional, and then inversely proportional to frequency. This can be explained by the fact
that the inductor has in-built resistance and capacitance large enough to modify its impedance.
The length of the wire used to make the inductor and the multiple coils separated by
insulating air can account for this non-ideal characteristic.

We could therefore construct a new circuit model for the real inductor using three ideal
components. The resistance of the wire is constant at all frequencies hence a resistor is placed
in series. Moreover, since the capacitive effect decreases the overall impedance at high
frequencies, the current most be able to flow around the nearly open-circuit inductor. This can
only occur if components are in parallel, leading to the model shown in fig.3

100mH 70Ω

Fig.3 showing the equivalent

model of the real 100mH inductor.

0.1nF

The values of the components are found by inspection of fig.2 The initial linear region has a
value 70Ω while the negative slope at high frequencies is 4 powers of ten higher than the 1uF
slope hence the value is capacitance 10 4 times smaller4, or 0.1nF.

3
1kHz is the oscillation frequency, not the angular frequency ω. To substitute into the equation, we
multiplied f by 2π as described in the formula ω = 2π × f
4
Since Z = 1 , 10 4 times larger impedance means 10 4 times smaller capacitance for all frequencies.
ωC
Evaluation

Despite having produced a new model for the inductor, there are still discrepancies between
the real and the predicted values. As an example, the total impedance of the inductor model is
R + jωL
given by Z = 5
, substituting for ω = 2π × 400kHz and taking the absolute
1− ω LC + jωRC
2

value results a value of 4053Ω, when the measured one is 3300Ω. Such differences are caused
by the inherent uncertainties and errors during the experiment and can be categorised in two
distinct types.

The largest errors during the experiment were systematic meaning they influenced all
measurements the same way. Indeed, the values of the components were only known within
10% accuracy, which means that the inductor might have been 90mH instead of a 100mH.
Also, we based our measurements of the unknown impedance on the value of the variable
resistor which was a decade box”. The accuracy of such a “box” is unknown and could vary
greatly depending on its age, settings and calibration. If we assume that these two limitations
introduced a 20% error in all results, then the predicted impedance of 4053Ω at a frequency of
400kHz has an error range of ±810Ω, which contains the measured value.

Random errors such as human reading or oscilloscope mis-calibration introduced scattering in

the results. This is most visible for the 10Ω resistor whose impedance varies between 8 and
12Ω. Such errors are small compared to the systematic ones and have not significantly
influenced the results.

5
See the appendix for the full derivation.
Conclusion

The conclusion of the experiment and its evaluation is that the resistor and the capacitor are
two components that are well described by their ideal impedance formulae. The inductor,
however, appears to have large enough built-in capacitance and resistance to significantly
modify its behaviour as a function of frequency. We can therefore better predict the inductor’s
impedance by modelling it as a network of three ideal components. Also, the experiment
showed that a small uncertainty in the value of the components is primordial, as it will
systematically shift all predictions away from the real values.

Electrical engineers should therefore make use of the “three component” circuit model of the
inductor when calculating and constructing networks. The large change of impedance at high
frequencies could cause serious faults in circuits such as passive filters, which are used in
radio receivers. Moreover, the additional components in the model can be used when
computing the total power consumption and other specific characteristics of an application.
Appendix

Raw data tables

1uF capacitor 10 ohms Resistor 100mH Inductor

f / Hz Z / ohms F / Hz Z /ohms f / Hz Z / ohms

D 100 1480 20 10 20 70
500 294 40 11 40 70
1000 147 100 9 100 93
10000 15 200 11 200 146
20 8000 500 10 500 340
50 3000 1000 10 1000 680
120 1240 2000 9 2000 1300
160 930 5000 11 5000 3300
400 370 10000 10 10000 6600
4000 37 20000 8 20000 16800
100000 0.5 30000 10 30000 38000
50000 2.5 40000 9 40000 170000
80000 11 50000 97000
80000 22000
100000 16000
329000 4200
200000 6700
400000 3300
1000000 1700

Derivation of the total impedance of the inductor model

Since the capacitor is in parallel with both the resistor and the inductor, the total impedance is
given by
Capacitor is in parallel with both the
ZT =Z C //(Z L + Z R ) resistor and inductor

Z C ×(Z L + Z R )
ZT = Expanding the formula for 2 impedances
Z C +(Z L + Z R )

1
× (R + jωL) Substituting for the impedances
jωC
ZT =
1
+ (R + jωL)
jωC
1
Multiplying through by and
R + jωL jωC
ZT = collecting real and imaginary terms
1− ω 2 LC + jωRC