Confused about Kirchhoff's Laws for RC Circuits - Discharging

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the confusion surrounding Kirchhoff's laws in the context of discharging RC circuits. The original poster struggles with deriving the correct voltage equation for a discharging capacitor, mistakenly deriving a positive exponential instead of the expected negative one. Clarification is provided that the current from the capacitor should be treated as negative, leading to the correct application of Kirchhoff's loop law. The conversation highlights that many resources overlook the importance of understanding the signs in these equations, which can lead to misconceptions. Ultimately, recognizing the context of charge and current is crucial for accurately applying Kirchhoff's laws in RC circuits.
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.
 
Very basic question. Consider a 3-terminal device with terminals say A,B,C. Kirchhoff Current Law (KCL) and Kirchhoff Voltage Law (KVL) establish two relationships between the 3 currents entering the terminals and the 3 terminal's voltage pairs respectively. So we have 2 equations in 6 unknowns. To proceed further we need two more (independent) equations in order to solve the circuit the 3-terminal device is connected to (basically one treats such a device as an unbalanced two-port...
suppose you have two capacitors with a 0.1 Farad value and 12 VDC rating. label these as A and B. label the terminals of each as 1 and 2. you also have a voltmeter with a 40 volt linear range for DC. you also have a 9 volt DC power supply fed by mains. you charge each capacitor to 9 volts with terminal 1 being - (negative) and terminal 2 being + (positive). you connect the voltmeter to terminal A2 and to terminal B1. does it read any voltage? can - of one capacitor discharge + of the...
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...

Similar threads

Back
Top