Applying Kirchoff's Voltage Law to a circuit

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around applying Kirchhoff's Voltage Law (KVL) and Kirchhoff's Current Law (KCL) to analyze a circuit, specifically focusing on finding the current through resistors and the potential difference between two points in the circuit. The context includes homework-related problem-solving and the application of circuit analysis techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • The original poster (OP) attempts to set up equations for three loops using KVL but struggles to obtain the correct values for currents in the resistors.
  • The OP provides their equations for each loop but questions the sign of the voltage across R2 (V2) based on the assumed direction of current flow.
  • Some participants confirm the OP's reasoning regarding the sign of V2 and suggest marking voltage arrows on the circuit for clarity.
  • The OP realizes they were missing an equation relating the currents (I1 = I2 + I3), which they believe will help solve the system of equations.
  • A participant suggests an alternative approach using nodal analysis, proposing to write a single equation based on KCL for a chosen node in the circuit.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need for clarity in voltage signs and the importance of including all necessary equations. However, there are multiple approaches suggested (mesh analysis vs. nodal analysis), indicating that the discussion remains open to different methodologies without a consensus on the preferred method.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the potential for confusion in applying KVL and KCL, particularly regarding the assumptions made about current direction and the completeness of the equations. There are unresolved aspects related to the specific values and relationships in the circuit analysis.

David Day
Messages
12
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Using Kirchhoff’s rules, (a) find the current in each
resistor shown in Figure P28.31 and (b) find the potential
difference between points c and f.
upload_2018-7-30_23-8-27.png
[/B]

Homework Equations


[/B]
Σ ΔV = 0 (KVL)

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
I have been trying to set up a system of equations for the three loops as shown in the picture, but I can't seem to get the right numbers. I was able to get the currents using mesh-current analysis; they are 0.38 mA, 3.08 mA, and 2.69 mA for resistors 1, 2 and 3, respectively. However, I would like to know what mistake I'm making in applying basic KVL to the loops. The equations I get for each loop are:

L1: 70V - 60V - V2 - V1 = 0

L2: 60V - V3 - 80V + V2 = 0

L3: 70V - V3 - 80V - V1 = 0

where V1, V2, and V3 correspond to the voltages at R1, R2, and R3, respectively.

One issue I have noted but am unsure of is whether or not V2 in the second equation should be positive or negative. If I assume the current is flowing downward across R2 it is negative in equation 1. Therefore, I should continue to assume current is flowing downward across R2, which would mean V2 is positive for equation 2. Is that correct?

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

EDIT:

I see now that my equations are not providing enough information to solve for the variables. If I solve for V3 in equation 3 and plug that into equation 2, my equation 2 is just the same equation 1. I'm not sure where to go from this point...

EDIT:

I found my problem. I was missing an equation, I1 = I2 + I3. Using this to solve the system of equation yields the correct results.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-7-30_23-8-27.png
    upload_2018-7-30_23-8-27.png
    10.2 KB · Views: 1,091
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
David Day said:
One issue I have noted but am unsure of is whether or not V2 in the second equation should be positive or negative. If I assume the current is flowing downward across R2 it is negative in equation 1. Therefore, I should continue to assume current is flowing downward across R2, which would mean V2 is positive for equation 2. Is that correct?
Yes, that's right.
 
David Day said:
One issue I have noted but am unsure of is whether or not V2 in the second equation should be positive or negative.

You have it right but it's good practice to mark voltage arrows on the circuit before starting to write the equations.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jim hardy
David Day said:
I found my problem. I was missing an equation, I1 = I2 + I3. Using this to solve the system of equation yields the correct results.
Yup, that's a KCL equation. It might be useful to note that this problem can be solved by writing just one equation using the analysis method based on KCL called nodal analysis. Since the problem has been solved by the OP and it's been several weeks, I can offer up this alternative approach.

Choose node ##f## as the common reference point and write the node equation for node ##c## :
upload_2018-9-26_10-26-29.png


$$\frac{V_c - 70}{2000} + \frac{V_c - 60}{3000} + \frac{V_c - 80}{4000} = 0$$
Each of the terms in the node equation represents a current leaving the node by one of the node branches (i.e. KCL for the node).

Then just solve for ##V_c##, which will be the potential at node ##c## with respect to node ##f##.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-9-26_10-26-29.png
    upload_2018-9-26_10-26-29.png
    11.4 KB · Views: 695
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: David Day

Similar threads

  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K