Original Article

International Journal of Electrical Engineering

Education
A simple capacitive 2018, Vol. 55(4) 367–377
! The Author(s) 2018
proximity sensor Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
experiment for exploring DOI: 10.1177/0020720918775040
journals.sagepub.com/home/ije

the effects of body

capacitance and
earth ground

Aaron D Scher

Abstract
Capacitive proximity sensors are well-suited for educational projects due to their low
cost and simple design. Traditional undergraduate textbooks and lab exercises rarely
highlight the fact that the performance of capacitive proximity sensors can be quite
sensitive to ground loading. This paper presents a simple classroom demonstration for
exploring this topic in detail. The capacitive proximity sensor for this demonstration is
a hand-held LCR meter connected to a homemade capacitor composed of two strips of
aluminum foil. Students explore the operation of this sensor for two different system
ground configurations. In the first case the LCR meter is battery powered (floating
ground referenced) and in the second case the LCR meter is powered by AC mains
supply (earth ground referenced). When a student positions their hand near the foil
strips, the battery-powered sensor measures an increase in capacitance. Conversely, the
AC-mains-powered sensor measures a decrease in capacitance. The instructor guides
students to discover for themselves the reason for this seemingly puzzling difference by
modeling parasitic capacitance and ground loading using simple circuit models.

Keywords
Proximity sensor, body capacitance, stray capacitance, earth ground, LCR meter

Department of Electrical Engineering and Renewable Energy, Oregon Institute of Technology, Wilsonville,
OR, USA
Corresponding author:
Aaron D Scher, Department of Electrical Engineering and Renewable Energy, Oregon Institute of Technology,
27500 SW Parkway Avenue, Wilsonville, OR 97070, USA.
Email: aaron.scher@oit.edu
368 International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education 55(4)

Introduction
The functioning of electronics can be sensitive to the presence of earth ground and
nearby objects and bodies. For example, a student handling a circuit can unknow-
ingly affect the circuit’s operation via stray capacitance between the student’s body
and the circuit itself. Sometimes this body capacitance can be a nuisance, such as
when encountering unwanted electrostatic discharge (ESD). On the other hand,
body capacitance is intentionally utilized by capacitive proximity sensors in the
form of touchscreens, touchpads, pushbuttons, and theremins.
Capacitive proximity sensors (and capacitance measurement devices in general)
are particularly prone to ground loading effects.1–3 For instance, a capacitive
sensor device connected to a battery with no other connections to the external
world may perform very differently compared to the same sensor powered by an
AC wall outlet and referenced to mains supply earth. An effective designer of such
devices requires an understanding of appropriate system ground design. A key
design skill is knowing how to visualize and model parasitic capacitance between
the various bodies and objects in the system, such as the local ground plane, earth
ground, capacitor electrodes, and the user.
Capacitive proximity sensors are well-suited for educational projects and rapid
prototyping. Simple capacitive sensors can be made with inkjet printing technology
or by hand using inexpensive and recycled materials.4–6 Traditionally, however,
textbooks and the educational literature pay relatively little attention to the fact
that capacitive proximity sensors can be highly sensitive to ground loading. Earth
ground is largely discussed in the context of power distribution, safety, and EMI
shielding, with little attention to capacitive proximity sensors.
This paper presents an interactive classroom demonstration for directly explor-
ing body capacitance and the effects of ground loading on a capacitive proximity
sensor. The activity was developed to give students a simple and practical example
of how ground loading can affect a real capacitance measurement. The activity
follows established strategies for effective demonstrations,7 such as stimulating
discussion, challenging an assumption, and asking students to make predictions
on the most probable outcome. For the demonstration, the class is presented with
a hand-held LCR meter connected to a pair of homemade capacitive sensor elec-
trodes composed of two strips of aluminum foil. Students compare the sensor’s
performance for two system ground configurations. In one case the LCR meter is
battery powered, and in the second case the LCR meter is plugged into a three-
prong wall outlet.
This experiment combines ideas from two recent publications in the literature.
First, the test setup has features in common with a method presented in Aliau-
Bonet and Pallas-Areny8 that uses commercial impedance analyzers to estimate
stray body capacitance to ground. Second, the measurement procedure is similar to
an EMC experiment presented in DuBroff and Drewniak9 that uses a benchtop
LCR meter to measure and compare the capacitance between two metal pipes in
the presence of a grounded and floating aluminum sheet. This paper combines the
Scher 369

above ideas to explore how ground loading and stray capacitance can impact the
performance of a capacitive sensor, yielding a unique experience for students.

Demonstration description
The interactive classroom demonstration supports learning objectives in under-
graduate courses on circuit theory, electronics, and electromagnetics. It makes
an engaging introduction to a variety of topics including electronic measurement
techniques, capacitive sensors, body capacitance, and the role of earth ground. It
can also be adapted into a conventional laboratory exercise. The demonstration is
divided into five steps, as described below.

Step 1: The experimental setup

The experimental setup consists of a battery-powered, calibrated, hand-held LCR
meter with its test leads connected to a homemade capacitor composed of two
strips of aluminum foil (ordinary wire will also work in place of the foil), as
depicted in Figure 1. At the Oregon Institute of Technology, this experiment is
performed using an Agilent U1733C LCR meter. The capacitance is measured in
front of the class and recorded. In Figure 1, each foil strip is approximately 56 cm
long and 3.5 cm wide with a separation distance of 0.5 cm. This yields a measured
capacitance of approximately 26 pF when measured on a wooden table top, as
shown in the figure. The experiment has been tested and found to work well on
both a solid wood table as well as a plastic laminate work bench and an
ungrounded metal frame.

Figure 1. Photograph of the experimental setup showing battery-powered LCR meter

connected to homemade capacitor composed of two parallel strips of aluminum foil.
370 International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education 55(4)

Step 2: Battery-powered LCR meter

The class is asked to predict what will happen to the measured capacitance if
someone places their hands near the aluminum foil strips without physically touch-
ing the foil (i.e. will the capacitance increase, decrease, or remain fixed?) To test the
various hypotheses, student volunteers place their hands near the foil strips and
record how the capacitance changes. Students will find that moving their hands
close to the foil strips increases the measured capacitance. When the author closely
cupped his hands over the foil strips shown in Figure 1, he measured an increase in
capacitance equal to about 1.7 pF (6.5% increase).
This leads to a class discussion as to why the capacitance increases in this case.
A simple explanation using circuit theory is that stray capacitance between the foil
strips and a person’s hand adds in parallel with the mutual capacitance between the
foil strips themselves, thus increasing the overall capacitance between the two foil
strips. This agrees with the teaching, “If the capacitivity [electric permittivity] of
any part of a capacitor is increased, the total capacitance is either increased or
unchanged”.9 Introducing one’s hand to the system is effectively adding a conduc-
tive heterogeneous dielectric body to the foil capacitor system, which increases the
system’s overall capacitance.

Step 3: AC-mains-supply-powered LCR meter

The LCR meter is powered by a AC switching adapter (model DSA-42D-12),
which is plugged into a three-prong AC wall outlet, and the experiment is repeated.
Students are again asked to predict how the measured capacitance will respond to
someone’s hand in this new case. Curiously, student volunteers will find that
moving their hands closer to the capacitor now has less influence on the measured
capacitance and will likely decrease the measured capacitance, depending on one’s
position, orientation, and how physically close one is to earth grounded equipment
and wiring. When the author closely cupped his hands over the foil strips in this
case, he measured a 4.9% decrease in capacitance. Many students may find it
puzzling that a hand increases the capacitance for the battery-powered meter,
but decreases the capacitance for the same meter powered by AC mains. It
should provoke students to question their assumptions and understanding of the
problem, and lead to a class discussion as to why the LCR meter’s power source
has such an effect on the measurements.

Step 4: Principle of auto-balancing bridge

The LCR meter’s response to the presence of an external body clearly depends on
if the meter is battery powered or plugged into the wall. To understand the reason
for this, it is helpful to review the basics of how LCR meters operate. The auto-
balancing bridge method is commonly used to measure impedance in low-
frequency, hand-held LCR meters like the Agilent U1733C LCR meter.8,10
Figure 2 depicts a simple impedance measurement using an ideal operational
Scher 371

amplifier with negative feedback. The device under test or DUT (in this case the
DUT is the homemade capacitor) is excited by a time-harmonic voltage source
with known frequency x. The current Ix through the DUT is approximately equal
to the current Ir through the feedback resistor Rr. Therefore, if the measured AC
voltage across the DUT is Vx and the measured AC voltage across Rr is Vr, then
the impedance Zx of the DUT can be determined

Vx
Zx ¼ Rr (1)
Vr

where Vx and Vr are taken to be phasor quantities. Assuming the DUT is a capac-
itor, the capacitance C can be found from taking the imaginary part of
the impedance

1
C¼ (2)
xIm½Zx 

Given the above description of the auto-balancing bridge method for determin-
ing capacitance, the class is again asked to explain why the LCR meter’s response
to the presence of an external body depends on whether the meter is battery
powered or plugged into the wall. Students are encouraged to contemplate this
question for themselves and offer a simple and clear explanation using schemat-
ic diagrams.

Step 5: The hidden schematic

The experimental setup shown in Figure 1 is can be modeled by the circuit diagram
shown in Figure 2, with the DUT replaced by a lumped element capacitor that has
the same capacitance as the physical aluminum foil capacitor. Such schematics are
presented in Figure 3(a) and (b) for the battery-powered and AC-mains-powered
cases, respectively. In these schematics, C0F denotes the mutual capacitance between

Figure 2. Principle of auto-balancing bridge method for measuring impedance using an ideal
operational amplifier.
372 International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education 55(4)

Figure 3. Ideal auto-balancing bridge measuring impedance of an isolated aluminum foil

capacitor for different system ground configurations: (a) floating local ground and (b) local ground
connected to earth ground.

Figure 4. Ideal auto-balancing bridge measuring the impedance of the homemade aluminum foil
capacitor near a student for different system ground configurations: (a) floating local ground and
(b) local ground connected to earth ground.

the two foil strips when they are electrostatically isolated from the rest of the world
(i.e. with no objects or people physically present). Theoretically, the LCR meter
should measure the same capacitance C0F for both the battery-powered and
AC-mains-powered cases. In reality, these measurements differ slightly because
of stray capacitive coupling between the foil strips and surrounding objects,
such as the surrounding walls, floor, and RLC meter’s power cord and chassis.
In the current discussion, these small stray couplings are ignored for simplicity.
Suppose now we introduce a student into the picture. Figure 4(a) and (b) reveals
the “hidden schematic”11 comprising stray capacitances in addition to the physical
circuit components. If a student positions his or her hand near the aluminum foil
strips, the student’s hand will capacitively couple to the strips. In Figure 4, CFB;1
and CFB;2 denote the stray capacitances between the hand and each foil strip
Scher 373

individually, CF denotes the mutual capacitance between the two foil strips with
the student’s hand present, and CBE denotes the stray body capacitance between
the person and mains earth ground. These capacitances (CFB;1 , CFB;2 , CF , and CBE )
are all functions of the system’s dielectric properties and physical geometry.
Specifically, body capacitance to mains earth ground is dependent on the local
building wire installation, anthropometric data such as body-mass index, and
other physical factors including the subject’s shoe outsole and type.12 In general,
given a pair of electrodes, the presence of a nearby third conductor tends to
decrease the mutual capacitance of the electrodes while increasing their total
capacitance.1,12,13 Hence, we may write
C0F  CF ðnearby third conductor decreases mutual capacitanceÞ (3)

C0F  CF þ CFB;series ðnearby third conductor increases total capacitanceÞ (4)

where CFB;series is the total capacitance of the series connection of CFB;1 and CFB;2

CFB;1 CFB;2
CFB;series ¼ (5)
CFB;1 þ CFB;2

In equations (3) and (4), the reader is reminded that CF and C0F are the mutual
capacitances between the foil strips with and without a nearby person, respectively.
It is clear from Figure 4(a) that, for the battery-powered case, the local signal
ground is separate from earth ground, i.e. the signal ground is floating. This means
there is no closed path connecting earth and signal grounds (the loop is broken). In
the battery-powered case, proximity detection works as follows:

1. A person moves their hand close to the foil strips.

2. The hand acts as a partial electrostatic shield, which lowers the strips’ mutual
capacitance from C0F to CF (recall that C0F  CF ), while introducing stray
capacitances, CFB;1 and CFB;2 . Overall, the total capacitance is increased, per
equation (4).
3. An increased total capacitance reduces the impedance of the student-foil capac-
itor system, which increases the current through the feedback resistor Rr . This
increases the measured capacitance via equations (1) and (2), in agreement
with experiment.

Figure 3(b) shows that, for the AC mains supply powered case, signal ground is
connected to earth ground. This means there is a closed path connecting earth and
signal grounds (the loop is complete). In the AC mains supply powered case,
proximity detection works as follows:

1. A person moves their hand close to the foil strips.

374 International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education 55(4)

2. The hand acts as a partial electrostatic shield, which lowers the strips’ mutual
capacitance from C0F to CF , while introducing stray capacitances, CFB;1 and
CFB;2 . Overall, the total capacitance is increased, per equation (4). However,
this total capacitance is irrelevant for the problem, since the current entering
and leaving the terminals of the foil capacitor are not generally equal. Stray
capacitance between the body and earth ground CBE provides current an alter-
native path to ground.
3. Assuming CBE  CFB;2 , negligible current flows through CFB;2 . Hence, the cur-
rent Ir through the feedback resistor Rr is approximately equal to the current
directly through CF . Since the nearby hand decreases the mutual capacitance
from C0F to CF the current through the device and feedback resistor Rr is like-
wise decreased. This in turn decreases the measured capacitance via equations
(1) and (2), in agreement with the experiment. It can be shown by analyzing
Figure 4 that the student’s hand decreases the measured capacitance if the fol-
lowing condition is met

CFB;1 CFB;2
CF < C0F  (6)
CFB;1 þ CFB;2 þ CBE

Discussion
The proposed experiment was first demonstrated in EE 307 (Electricity and
Magnetism with Transmission Line Laboratory), which had an enrollment of
ten students, and was taught by the author at the Oregon Institute of
Technology’s Portland-Metro Campus in Fall 2016. This course was offered as
an elective one-credit laboratory (special topics class) and piloted in Fall 2016 to
supplement the main lecture-based electromagnetics course, EE 341, which is a
required course in the Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering program. The
goal of this pilot was to develop and evaluate activities and demonstrations to help
students better understand the concepts covered in class, and improve student
interest. Activities and demonstrations (like that presented in this paper) were
developed specifically to connect electromagnetism to the circuits and systems
that students study in other electrical engineering courses. The proposed experi-
ment was later incorporated and demonstrated in Fall 207 in EE 341, which had an
enrollment of 24 students.
Personal impressions on how students received the experiment are as follows.
Many students were initially surprised that the AC mains supply-powered LCR
meter responded differently than the battery-powered case. It was also not obvious
to all that powering the LCR meter from mains supply does indeed earth-ground
the meter. However, this fact can be verified by first connecting the meter to the
AC switching adaptor with the adaptor’s power cord safely disconnected from the
wall. Then the LCR meter’s case can be removed exposing the circuit board, and
Scher 375

the battery removed. With an ohmmeter, one finds that the power cable’s ground
prong is indeed connected electrically to the ground pins of the battery holder and
other ICs on the board. A simpler method to demonstrate the equivalent circuit is
to perform a few experiments with lumped components of known value, and prove
that the results are consistent with predictions based on the model. Some students
correctly proposed that a person placing their hand near the foil strips acts as an
electrostatic shield or partial Faraday cage. However, upon further probing by the
instructor, the students were unable to adequately explain why a floating shield
(i.e. a person not electrically connected to earth ground) would tend to increase
measured capacitance in one case (battery-powered LCR meter) and decrease it in
the other (earth-grounded LCR meter). Such a “mystery” seemed to capture the
students’ interest and imagination. After the operation of the auto-balancing
bridge was explained and the equivalent circuit presented, students could solve
the mystery themselves, and they exhibited a sense of satisfaction in doing so.
The demonstration and discussions took about 20 min to complete.
In Fall 2017, the author demonstrated the proposed experiment in EE 341
during a lecture on electrostatics and capacitors. Three more in-class demonstra-
tions were also embedded throughout the course, covering topics in transmission
lines, waveguides, and antennas. Experiments were demonstrated immediately
after the fundamental concept was presented in lecture to compliment the
theory. After the demonstration, the class reflected on what they learned in a
group discussion. At the end of the course, anonymous course evaluations were
administered and collected. One of the evaluation questions asked “Do you feel the
in-class demonstrations helped you learn/understand/retain the material? Please
comment on your experience”. Of the sixteen responses, ten responses were pos-
itive, four were somewhat positive/neutral, and two were negative. Some examples
of student responses are:
Examples of positive responses:

• “Yes. Demonstrations help me retain the equations linked with the concept.”
• “Yes, the in class demonstrations were helpful in illustrating the concepts.”
• “I found it easy to remember the course materials when it’s demonstrated or
applied to real life experience.”
• “Yes, and more demos would be good.”
• “I am [a] hands on learner. So, unequivocally yes.”
• “[Y]es great way to learn.”
• “Yes, definitely.”

Examples of somewhat positive/neutral and negative responses:

• “[N]o really, we went too fast through them.”

• “I never made a connection with the in-class demonstrations to the
topics related.”
376 International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education 55(4)

• “In-class demonstrations helped a lot, but I got a little more out of the
online videos.”
• “I think that it would have better if we worked more problems that were closer
to the homework.”

Overall positive student feedback and the author’s experiences suggest the pro-
posed demonstration is a beneficial addition to a related undergraduate course in
the electrical engineering curriculum. In response to some critical student feedback,
the author plans on assigning a supplementary homework assignment (for future
demonstrations) that explores more in-depth how the experiment connects to
principles learned in class.

Summary and conclusions

Capacitive sensors are both commercially important and well-suited for education-
al projects on the undergraduate level. A valuable design skill involves modeling
and understanding how different system ground configurations impact sensor per-
formance. To illuminate this topic, this paper presented an interactive classroom
demonstration for directly exploring body capacitance and the effects of ground
loading. For the demonstration students are presented with an LCR meter that is
connected to a homemade capacitor composed of two strips of aluminum foil.
Students position their hands near the foil strips and measure the change of capac-
itance for two separate cases. In the first case the LCR meter is battery powered
(floating ground referenced), and in the second case the same LCR meter is
plugged into a three-prong wall outlet (earth grounded referenced). The class is
asked to predict what will happen in each case. Curiously, the two cases yield
different results, which may seem puzzling at first and peak student interest.
Specifically, in the battery powered case the measured capacitance increases in
response to a subject’s hand, and in the AC mains powered case the capacitance
decreases in response to a subject’s hand. The instructor guides students to dis-
cover for themselves the reason for these results by modeling parasitic capacitance
using simple circuit models. In doing so, students gain perspective on how parasitic
capacitance and grounding affects a real-world capacitive measurement. The dem-
onstration was conducted in a traditional lecture-based course in electromagnetics.
The majority of students in this course reported that short in-class demonstrations
helped improve learning. The proposed experiment is expandable, and can be used
as a basis to explore related topics, such as isolation transformers, shielding and
EMI, and proper grounding practices for safety.

Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Laura DeVito for her artistic guidance concerning Figure 4.
Nicholas Babcock is also acknowledged for his thoughtful comments and suggestions.
Scher 377

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, author-
ship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication
of this article.

ORCID iD
Aaron D Scher http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5206-9590

References
1. Atmel Corporation. ‘Proximity design guide’, Application note: QTAN0087. http://ww1.
microchip.com/downloads/en/AppNotes/doc10760.pdf (accessed 2 February 2018).
2. Davison B. Microchip Technology Inc., ‘Techniques for robust touch sensing design’,
Application note: AN1334. http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/AppNotes/
00001334B.pdf (accessed 2 February 2018).
3. Liao R. Texas Instruments, ‘Ground shifting in capacitive sensing applications’, Application
Report: SNOA952, 2016. www.ti.com/lit/an/snoa952/snoa952.pdf (accessed 2 February 2018).
4. QuintánsMarcos CJ and Pérez SA. Developing of low cost capacitive sensors for lab-
oratory classes. In: IEEE EDUCON 2010 conference, Madrid, Spain, 14–16 April 2010,
pp. 445–450.
5. KawaharaHodges YS, Cook B, Zhang SC, et al. Instant inkjet circuits: Lab-based inkjet
printing to support rapid prototyping of UbiComp devices. In: Proceedings of ACM
international joint conference on pervasive and ubiquitous computing (UbiComp ’13),
Zurich, Switzerland, 2013, pp. 363–372. New York: ACM.
6. ShorterRogers MJ and McGhee J. Practical notes on paper circuits. In: Proceedings of
2014 conference on designing interactive systems, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 21–25 June
2014, pp. 483–492. New York: ACM.
7. Committee on Undergraduate Science Education. Science teaching reconsidered: A
handbook. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1997, pp. 13–14.
8. Aliau-Bonet C and Pallas-Areny R. A fast method to estimate body capacitance to
ground at mid frequencies. J Electr Bioimp 2015; 6: 33–36.
9. DuBroff RE and Drewniak JL. ‘Inductance and capacitance’, EMC Experiments and
Demonstration Guide, IEEE EMC Society, 2015, pp. 11–18. www.emcs.org/committees/
education/pdf/ExperimentsManual.pdf (accessed 2 February 2018).
10. Keysight Technologies. Impedance measurement handbook: A guide to measurement tech-
nology and techniques. 6th ed. Application Note. http://literature.cdn.keysight.com/
litweb/pdf/5950-3000.pdf (accessed 2 February 2018).
11. Schmitt R. Electromagnetics explained: A handbook for wireless/RF, EMC, and high-
speed electronics. Oxford: Elsevier, 2002.
12. LiuFeng X, Chen S and Liu XJ. Design of a detection system for projected capacitive
touch screen based on PSoC. Int J Simul 2016; 17: 16.1–16.4.
13. Harrington RF. Introduction to electromagnetic engineering. New York: McGraw-Hill,
1958, p. 234.