Consider a circuit where 2 resistors are connected in parallel

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a circuit problem involving two resistors connected in parallel and another resistor in series. The original poster attempts to derive the total resistance using different approaches and questions the validity of their results based on Kirchhoff's laws.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster presents two formulas for total resistance and questions why they yield different results. Some participants suggest showing work and emphasize that the formulas are derived from Kirchhoff's laws. Others discuss the implications of using different loops in the circuit analysis.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring the differences in their approaches to deriving the total resistance. Some guidance has been offered regarding the application of Kirchhoff's laws, and there is an acknowledgment of the complexity introduced by the series resistor.

Contextual Notes

Participants are examining the assumptions made about current flow in the circuit and the implications of using multiple loops for analysis. There is a focus on ensuring that the voltage across shared components is correctly accounted for in the calculations.

Oerg
Messages
350
Reaction score
0
This is a conceptual problem

Consider a circuit where 2 resistors are connected in parallel, which are in turn connected to another resistor in series. Let the resistance of the two resistors in parallel be R_1 and R_2. The resistance of the resistor in series is R_3

Normally we would add the resistance like this to find the total resistance

R_{total}=R_3+\frac{1}{\frac{1}{R_1}+\frac{1}{R_2}}

however, this works out different when i derive the resistance of the circuit anew from kirchhoffs law which would give

R_{total}=\frac{1}{\frac{1}{R_1+R_3}+\frac{1}{R_2+R_3}}

am i missing something? or is it wrong to apply the resistance formula in the case where there is another resistance connected in series?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Show your work. How did you get your formula? Actually, the formula for parallel and series resistors are derived from Kirchhoff's laws, you should get the same result.

ehild
 


well if you simplify the expressions you would not get the same result, it is immediately apparent that there will be a {{R_3}^2} term in the second expression but not in the first.

The second expression was obtained by considering 2 different loops and combining the resulting current, same as you would for the derivation of the formula for the combination of resistors in parallel.
 
Last edited:


Your 2 loops are: +side of voltage source -> R3 -> R1 -> - side of voltage source
and
+side voltage source -> R3 -> R2 -> - side of voltage source ?

both loops contain R3. The voltage across R3 depends on the currents of both loops.
The voltage across R3 is not equal to R3*(current in one of the loops)

If 2 loops share a voltage source, it isn't a problem, because the voltage across it is
always the same.
 


The picture shows your circuit.
According to Kirchhoff''s Current Law, I3=I1+I2.
According to the loop Law,
UBC+UCA=UBA, that is
E-I3R3-I1R1=0
and E-I3R3-I2R2=0.
The total current is I3, the total voltage is E, and the resultant resistance between A and B is
RAB=E/I3, and it is the same as the first formula.

ehild
 
Last edited:


Ahhh, you even have a diagram, I am so touched. Thanks for your effort on the forums.

I understand now, in my loop, I had assumed that the same current run throughs both resistor and that I could get the resultant current by adding up the current from the other loop. This is of course not equivalent.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
900