Difficulty: Easy
Correct Answer: Correct
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:Inductive reactance quantifies how an inductor impedes alternating current due to the changing magnetic field. It plays a central role in AC analysis, filter design, resonance calculations, and impedance matching. The standard relationship ties reactance to frequency and inductance linearly in magnitude.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:For a sinusoidal steady state, the inductor voltage-current relation is v(t) = L * di/dt. In phasor form, this becomes V = j ω L * I, where ω = 2π f is the angular frequency. The impedance of the inductor is therefore Z_L = j ω L. The magnitude of this impedance is |Z_L| = ω L = 2π f L, which is by definition the inductive reactance, X_L. Thus, X_L grows linearly with frequency and inductance; at DC (f = 0), X_L = 0 Ω, behaving as a short in ideal form.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Write the time-domain relation: v = L * di/dt.Move to phasor domain: Z_L = j ω L with ω = 2π f.Take magnitude: X_L = |Z_L| = ω L = 2π f L.Interpretation: increasing f or L increases reactance proportionally.Verification / Alternative check:Example: L = 10 mH at f = 1 kHz → X_L = 2π * 1000 * 0.01 = about 62.8 Ω. A measurement with an LCR meter at 1 kHz would read a similar reactance (ignoring ESR and parasitics).
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Incorrect” contradicts the standard derivation from v = L di/dt.DC-only, iron-core-only, or kilohertz-only caveats are unnecessary; the formula applies broadly to linear inductors across frequencies where the lumped model holds.Common Pitfalls:Forgetting units (henry and hertz) leading to numeric errors; confusing reactance magnitude X_L with the complex impedance j ω L; neglecting nonidealities like winding resistance and self-resonance at very high frequencies.
Final Answer:Correct
Discussion & Comments