Capacitors connected in series?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mohamed el teir
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Capacitors Series
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the behavior of capacitors C1 and C2 when connected in series and then reconnected in various configurations. It is established that when capacitors are disconnected from a battery and then reconnected, the charge does not simply double; instead, the charges equalize, resulting in zero net charge if connected incorrectly. The participants clarify that reconnecting capacitors in parallel after disconnection leads to different charge distributions, and the importance of understanding the zero-sum nature of charge in circuits is emphasized. The conversation also touches on the implications of reconnecting capacitors with reversed polarity and the necessity of a voltage source for further charging.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of capacitor behavior in electrical circuits
  • Familiarity with series and parallel connections of capacitors
  • Knowledge of charge conservation principles in circuits
  • Basic grasp of Ohm's Law and current flow
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the mathematical relationships governing capacitors in series and parallel configurations
  • Learn about charge conservation and its implications in electrical circuits
  • Explore practical applications of capacitors in energy storage and discharge scenarios
  • Investigate the Cockcroft-Walton generator and its use in high voltage applications
USEFUL FOR

Electrical engineers, physics students, and anyone interested in understanding capacitor behavior in circuits will benefit from this discussion. It provides insights into charge dynamics and practical implications for circuit design.

mohamed el teir
Messages
88
Reaction score
1
suppose 2 capacitors C1, C2 connected in series with battery V, let charge in circuit be Q, since they are connected in series so each capacitor will have Q also, suppose we disconnected them from the battery and reconnected them again in series (without connecting voltage source or Earth with them), as total Q in capacitors in the old connection is 2Q so this is the charge in the new connection, and since the new connection is also in series so each capacitor will have 2Q (double the charge in the old connection), is this right ? and if not right, what's exactly the wrong thing in what i have written ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, that's incorrect. As a general rule, the charges in a circuit are a "zero-sum" entity. Electrons aren't inserted somewhere, they are always just moved around from one spot to another. When you disconnect the battery, yes, the plates will be charged with a certain Q, but the plate of the second capacitor that was connected to the other terminal of the battery has a charge of -Q. When you just connect the two terminals (without the battery inbetween), the Q and -Q will equalize again (probably with a nice spark), and you have zero Q everywhere again.
 
rumborak said:
No, that's incorrect. As a general rule, the charges in a circuit are a "zero-sum" entity. Electrons aren't inserted somewhere, they are always just moved around from one spot to another. When you disconnect the battery, yes, the plates will be charged with a certain Q, but the plate of the second capacitor that was connected to the other terminal of the battery has a charge of -Q. When you just connect the two terminals (without the battery inbetween), the Q and -Q will equalize again (probably with a nice spark), and you have zero Q everywhere again.
i read something demonstrated example like this but instead of reconnecting them in series it reconnected them in parallel with plates of equal sign together, it said that Q before = Q after = 2Q then used the constant V to get the charge on each plate, may you explain to me by calculations the difference between the 2 situations ?
 
For each capacitor...

Q = C*V

Connect two in parallel +ve to +ve and you get

2Q = 2C*V

The 2's cancel.
 
Connect the two +ve to -ve and you have a problem...

Lets assume the wire used to connect them has resistance R. We can make R small later..

The initial current around the loop will be

I = 2V/R

If R is very small then I is very large and the capacitors discharge very quickly.
 
If, after disconnecting from the battery, you also disconnected the capacitors and crossed over their terminals, so that +Q is connected to the other +Q (and -Q to -Q), yes you would end up with a 2Q surplus on the wire segment (still only 1Q on each plate though). Interestingly you could then connect the battery again and repeat the procedure, always adding 2Q to the system.
 
Perhaps it's easier to consider two different capacitors C1 and C2?

In series connected to the battery the following equations apply..

Vbat = V1 + V2
Q = C1V1
Q = C2V2

If you know C1 and C2 you can solve to get V1, V2. and Q

Then if you disconnect them and reconnect them in parallel you can write..

2Q = V (C1+C2)

and solve to calculate the new voltage on both.

In practice a large current would flow to equalise the charge and voltage. Some energy might be lost heating the wire.

Finally if the capacitors were identical C1 = C2 then the final voltage ends up as Vbat/2.
 
rumborak said:
If, after disconnecting from the battery, you also disconnected the capacitors and crossed over their terminals, so that +Q is connected to the other +Q (and -Q to -Q), yes you would end up with a 2Q surplus on the wire segment...

No that's totally wrong. There is no "surplus on the wire segment".
 
That sounds impossible because you could have infinite self-charging potential.
 
  • #10
Uhm, pretty sure it is correct. If you disconnect the terminals of a charged capacitor, it will have a surplus charge on its plates (after all, that's what a charged capacitor is). When you then connect it to another capacitor that has the same charges on its plates (connect +Q to +Q), they will have the same potential, thus no current will flow on connection. Ergo, one wire segment has a 2Q surplus, the other a -2Q deficit.

jerromyjon said:
That sounds impossible because you could have infinite self-charging potential.

You always have to reconnect the battery, which then does the work to charge the capacitors even further. You're not getting energy for free, if that's what you were implying.
As a side comment, a Van der Graaf generator does the same thing, just through a different mechanism.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
rumborak said:
Uhm, pretty sure it is correct. If you disconnect the terminals of a charged capacitor, it will have a surplus charge on its plates (after all, that's what a charged capacitor is). When you then connect it to another capacitor that has the same charges on its plates (connect +Q to +Q), they will have the same potential, thus no current will flow on connection. Ergo, one wire segment has a 2Q surplus, the other a -2Q deficit.

Ok I think I see what you are saying..

If the two capacitors are identical then when in series they will have the same charge Q and voltage V. When reconnected in parallel the end result looks like one big capacitor = 2C with charge on it = 2Q.

However if you reconnect them to the battery in series no charge will flow because there is no voltage difference.
 
  • #12
Exactly. Then you can open one side again and insert the battery, which then charges the whole thing further.
 
  • #13
I think my edit crossed with your post.

rumborak said:
Exactly. Then you can open one side again and insert the battery, which then charges the whole thing further.

No because..

CWatters said:
...if you reconnect them to the battery in series no charge will flow because there is no voltage difference.
 
  • #14
The lack of voltage difference is the very point! It is then the battery which adds a fresh voltage difference.

I think you guys get tripped up by the idea that you could somehow get "free energy" out of this. Far from it. All you're doing is slowing piling energy onto the capacitors, but the energy is provided by the battery.
Just like the Van der Graaf generator, you are physically carrying the charges from one reservoir to another, in this device by disconnecting the wires and reconnecting them crossed over.
 
  • #15
No I wasn't thinking this was a free energy claim.

rumborak said:
The lack of voltage difference is the very point! It is then the battery which adds a fresh voltage difference.

That can only happen if the sequence as per this diagram. Note one capacitor is discharged in step 3. If that's not the sequence you mean please post your own version of the drawing..

Capacitors.png
 
  • #16
I don't agree with that sequence. At what point, and why, should that capacitor on the right discharge?
 
  • #17
Oops There is an error on that drawing. Step 2 the voltage should be vbat/2 not vbat.
 
  • #18
rumborak said:
I don't agree with that sequence. At what point, and why, should that capacitor on the right discharge?

Because the current flow will be anti clockwise.
 
Last edited:
  • #19
Updated drawing...

Capacitors.png
 
  • #20
CWatters said:
Because the current flow will be anti clockwise.

Whichever way around the battery is inserted one of the caps will be discharged.
 
  • #21
But, how could one cap be charged and the other completely discharged when they are connected by the bottom wire?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not completely sure at this point anymore either! :D
 
  • #22
Nah, I think I'm still correct. I think the problem is that you are conflating potentials with charges in your drawing.
 
  • #23
20150502_1459012_zpsxa5xh0bi.jpg


The next iteration would give a 3Q and -1Q combo, then 4Q and -2Q, etc.
 
  • #24
Mohamed, can you produce a more cleaned up version? It probably makes sense to you, but for an outsider its virtually indecipherable. All I see are wild formulas everywhere.
 
  • #25
:D
2015-05-02 22.04.34.jpg
 
  • #26
Case 1 is definitely wrong, as that configuration would discharge itself immediately. So is case 3.
Also, how do you arrive at two different results for the same configuration?
 
  • #27
rumborak said:
#2 is definitely wrong, as that configuration would discharge itself immediately.
you mean second capacitor or case 2 ??
 
  • #28
Sorry, I edited my post. I meant "Case 1". That configuration is a short circuit of two charged capacitors.

But my other question is: How can case 3 be the same configuration, but you get a different result?
 
  • #29
rumborak said:
Sorry, I edited my post. I meant "Case 1". That configuration is a short circuit of two charged capacitors.

But my other question is: How can case 3 be the same configuration, but you get a different result?
concerning case 1 : do you mean that the battery is necessary for the system to make its charge Q ?
concerning case 3 : exchanged the plates of one capacitor of them and made it negative with respect to the other capacitor
 
  • #30
Sorry, had not noticed the reversal of charges in case 3. But still, case 1 you can't really calculate like that. The formulas you are using presume ideal components; at the moment of your case 1 picture, you are short-circuiting ideal components. Meaning you have infinite current, and an unaccounted-for potential difference between the capacitors.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Electrostatic Influence and Series-Connected Capacitors
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Graduate An electrolytic capacitor keeps charging by itself
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Undergrad Charging Capacitor with one terminal grounded
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Undergrad Prove to me how capacitors in parallel can have the same V across plates
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Undergrad Voltage drop across a capacitor and resistor in series
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
High School Some Questions about Electric Current/Capacitors to help my understanding
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Undergrad Conservation of Charge in Series Capacitors.
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Capacitor connected to voltage source, vary plate separation
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Undergrad Excess charge in capacitors connected in series
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Undergrad Can current flow in an open circuit?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K