Electrical reactance bench measurement ($X=|Z|\sin \varphi$)

The motivating observation is a pair of sinusoids on an oscilloscope: changing frequency changes both their relative amplitudes and their phase difference. Gary Tuttle's EE 201 laboratory uses resistor voltage as the current-phase reference, compares predictions with readings at several frequencies, and explicitly asks students to measure component values and account for coil electrical resistance. The following bench arrangement applies that method to a series RLC circuit; its component values and illustrated traces are our own toy example. ^[ref].

Connect a low-voltage sine generator to a series chain ending in a known sensing resistor $R_s$ at the common return. Use a resistor whose unwanted inductance is negligible over the chosen frequency range. An oscilloscope displays voltage against time: channel A reads the loaded voltage across the whole chain, and channel B reads the voltage $v_s$ across $R_s$. Both channel ground connections and the generator return meet at that same node. Ordinary bench oscilloscope grounds are electrically common; attaching one to an intermediate circuit node would change the circuit. A separate floating component voltage needs a suitable differential measurement, rather than moving a ground clip. ^[ref].

After the free transient decays, record frequency $f$, period $T=1/f$, both voltage amplitudes, and matched rising zero-crossing times $t_A,t_B$. Check that the traces are sinusoidal. Define $\Delta t=t_B-t_A$ on the branch $|\Delta t|<T/2$. With negligible probe loading and negligible sensing-resistor electrical reactance, $v_s=R_{s}i$, so channel B is the electric current reference, and in the reactance phase conventionA later current crossing gives $\Delta t>0$, hence positive electrical reactance; an earlier crossing gives negative electrical reactance. Use the same amplitude convention for both channels. An amplitude-only ratio recovers $|Z|$, so it cannot distinguish the two signs: timing supplies the missing information. The formulas follow from $Z=|Z|e^{\mathrm{i}\varphi }$ and the chosen terminal orientation.

Begin with a known resistor replacing the reactive chain: its expected phase difference is approximately zero, testing channel polarity and relative delay. Measure the same signal with both channels to establish the instrumental delay baseline, then exchange probes to check that a phase offset does not belong to one channel. Next test an inductor and a capacitor separately with $R_s$: after subtracting $R_s$ from the inferred real part, expect approximately $X/f=2\pi L$ and $fX=-1/(2\pi C)$, respectively. Finally combine $L,C,R,R_s$ and sweep through the predicted resonance. These are proposed controls and consequences of the model, not reported observations.

For the toy series RLC circuit, the prediction at $500\mathrm{Hz}$ is $X=-286.894\Omega$, $|Z|=307.259\Omega$, $\varphi =-69.02^{\circ }$, and $V_{s,\mathrm{rms}}=32.55\mathrm{mV}$. At $5000\mathrm{Hz}$, $X=+282.328\Omega$ and $\varphi =+68.71^{\circ }$. Near $1591.55\mathrm{Hz}$ the model predicts zero phase difference and $V_{s,\mathrm{rms}}=90.91\mathrm{mV}$. Keep actual loaded $V_{A,\mathrm{rms}}$ fixed or normalize by it at each frequency; the generator's display alone does not establish that voltage. The $10\Omega$ sensing resistor is part of the $110\Omega$ total and therefore changes the predicted peak electric current.

Real components add unintended electrical impedance: coil wire has electrical resistance, nearby turns add capacitance, and capacitor leads add inductance. These effects can produce a component's own resonance, beyond which the ideal $\omega L$ or $-1/(\omega C)$ approximation fails. Work in a range where that approximation is adequate, measure coil wire electrical resistance, and compare the inferred $R_{\mathrm{chain}}$ with the sensing resistor, intended resistor, and component losses. A measured nonzero real part is evidence of loss in the assembly, not negative or positive electrical reactance becoming heat. ^[ref]; ^[ref].

The probes also add electrical resistance and capacitance to the measured nodes; their loading becomes more important as frequency increases. Use compensated probes with known input electrical impedance and short ground connections, and repeat with a smaller drive voltage to test whether the inferred $X$ depends on amplitude. ^[ref]. Record actual voltage and phase readings separately from calculated predictions, with component tolerances and timing uncertainty. A phase error $\delta \varphi$ alone produces approximately $\delta X=|Z|\cos \varphi \delta \varphi$, so near zero electrical reactance, a small delay can imitate a small residual $X$. Agreement within stated uncertainties tests the model; the smooth toy curves establish no experimental accuracy.