Are My Inductor Equations Correct?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PhysicsTest
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Currents Inductor
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the verification of inductor equations in a circuit analysis problem. The user presented two equations, eq1 and eq2, and attempted to solve for the current and voltage across the inductor. The calculations revealed a discrepancy in the time constant, τ, which was found to be 10ms instead of the expected value. The discussion also addressed the concept of ground reference in circuit analysis, clarifying that ground is an arbitrary node and does not affect the resulting equations in idealized scenarios.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Kirchhoff's Voltage Law (KVL)
  • Familiarity with inductor equations and time constants
  • Basic circuit analysis techniques
  • Knowledge of differential equations in electrical circuits
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of inductor equations in RLC circuits
  • Learn about the impact of ground reference in circuit analysis
  • Explore the concept of time constants in RL circuits
  • Investigate common mistakes in circuit analysis and how to avoid them
USEFUL FOR

Electrical engineering students, circuit designers, and anyone involved in analyzing inductor circuits and their behavior in various configurations.

PhysicsTest
Messages
256
Reaction score
27
Homework Statement
a. What is the energizing circuit time constant?
b. Close the switch and determine the equation for iL and vL during current buildup.
c. What are iL and vL at t = 25 ms?
Relevant Equations
i = E/R*(1 - e^{-Rt/L})
1635693938088.png

I have redrawn the circuit as below
1635697082411.png

40 - (I2+0.5)200 - (I2 + IL)*300 = 0 -> eq1
-(I2 + IL)*300 - IL*280 - 4*dIL/dt = 0 -> eq2
Are my equations correct?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SpectraPhy09 and Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks good to me.
 
I tried the following but answer does not match

##40 - (I_2 + 0.5)200 - (I_2+I_l)*300=0 ## -> 1
##500i_2 = 140 - 300i_l ## -> 1i
##-(I_2+I_l)*300 - I_l*280 - 4\frac{dI_l} {dt} =0 ## -> 2
##-300I_2 - 580I_l - 4 \frac{dI_l} {dt} = 0 ## -> 2i
Substituting 2i in 1i
##\frac{di_l} {dt} + 75i_l + 21 =0 ## Solving for il
##i_l = \frac{21e^{-75t}} {75} - \frac{21} {75} ##
a. Energizing circuit time out, i tried to calculate ##\tau##
##\tau = \frac{1} {75} = 0.013## But the answer is 10ms.
 
There's a sign error when you put the numbers into eqn 1.
40-100≠140.

edit: BTW, this kind of mistake is incredibly common when doing this sort of problem. We ALL do it, all the time. You should just get used to checking for them. It's tedious, but the effort saved by avoiding confusion is worth it in the long run.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: WannabeEinstein, phinds and PhysicsTest
Yes, i got the equation as
##i_l = \frac 9 {100}(1- e^{-100t})##Amps
and
##v_l = 36e^{-100t}##
The time constant is 10ms.
At 25ms
##i_l=82.6 A## ##v_l = 2.95V##

But one question that i want to understand is the negative of the voltage source is not ground reference. As per the theory the ground is low resistance path so the current will try to flow to the ground or negative side of the battery?
 
"Ground" can be thought of as an arbitrary choice for the name of a circuit node. The analysis of this schematic is the same regardless of where you define ground to be. When you were figuring out KVL around each of those loops, did ground matter for your resulting equations?

Ground may not always be "the low resistance path", it is usually just a name. Ground really can matter if you are dealing with circuits that interface with other circuits, then "ground" may be a shared node between circuits.
 
PhysicsTest said:
the current will try to flow to the ground or negative side of the battery?
In addition to @DaveE's explanation, keep in mind that current does not HAVE to flow to the negative side of a voltage source in such idealized problems. In real life you have issues in trying to swamp a battery or power supply with reverse current but in idealized beginner's problem, that is not the case. I'm NOT suggesting that it's happening in this case, I'm just pointing it out for completeness sake.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
863
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
935
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
892