Confused about Kirchhoff's Laws for RC Circuits - Discharging

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion clarifies the application of Kirchhoff's Laws in analyzing the discharging behavior of RC circuits. The correct formulation of the voltage across a discharging capacitor in series with a resistor is derived using the equation q(t)/C - i(t)*R = 0, where q(t) represents the charge on the capacitor. The confusion arises from the sign convention; the current i(t) is defined as negative due to the decreasing charge, leading to the correct voltage expression v(t) = V*e^(-t/RC). This highlights the importance of understanding the context of charge and current in circuit analysis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Kirchhoff's Voltage Law (KVL)
  • Basic knowledge of RC circuit behavior
  • Familiarity with capacitor charge and discharge equations
  • Concept of current as the rate of change of charge (i(t) = -dq/dt)
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the voltage across a discharging capacitor in detail
  • Learn about the implications of sign conventions in circuit analysis
  • Explore advanced applications of Kirchhoff's Laws in complex circuits
  • Review the relationship between charge, current, and voltage in capacitors
USEFUL FOR

Electrical engineering students, circuit designers, and educators seeking to deepen their understanding of RC circuits and Kirchhoff's Laws.

spoonerism
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi. When trying to derive the equation for voltage across a discharging capacitor in series with a resistor using Kirchhoff's laws, I got stuck. My attempt was that the voltage gain across the capacitor should equal the voltage drop across the resistor, therefore q(t)/C = i(t)*R, or q(t) - RC*q'(t) = 0. Solving this yields an equation similar to the actual equation, but it yields v(t) = V*e^(t/RC) when it should be V*e^(-t/RC). I have scoured the internet, and every other proof uses the KVL equation as q(t)/C + i(t)*R = 0, seemingly treating i(t)*R as a voltage rise instead of a drop. I am simply confused as to the logistics of this equation, and why it is + i(t)*R instead of - i(t)*R. Thank you for your help, in advance!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Checking against he physics - the current from the discharging capacitor should depend on the negative of the charge. So you've probably missed out a minus sign.

The loop law gives you: $$\frac{q(t)}{C}-i(t)R=0$$ ... where q(t) is the remaining charge on the capacitor plates. The physics for the capacitor tells you the ##i(t)=-\dot q## which you substitute into the loop equation.
 
Alright, that clears it up. Thanks a lot!
 
You can be forgiven for not realizing: the q here has a different context to how you usually think of it in connection with a current.

I had a look around and it seems that every single website kinda "glides" over that bit. i.e. "you only get a positive current when the charge on the cap is decreasing".

The only ones to include the step seem to be for more junior students and, even then, they don't exactly go out of their way to point it out. I think most students would just memorize the argument without questioning it so you are to be commended.

Generally:
Normally when you see something odd like that it means that the author has skipped a step ;)
Funny stuff with minus signs means you probably need to look closer at what any arrows mean.
Have fun.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
8K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K