How is the equation for voltage across an inductor derived?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter CraigH
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    deriving
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the equation for voltage across an inductor, exploring its relationship to Faraday's law and magnetic flux. Participants examine the definitions and implications of inductance in this context, touching on both theoretical and practical aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant states that the voltage across an inductor can be calculated as the inductance multiplied by the rate of change of current, suggesting a connection to Faraday's law.
  • Another participant agrees and elaborates that since EMF (voltage) equals the rate of change of magnetic flux, and magnetic flux is proportional to current, the voltage is proportional to the rate of change of current, with inductance as the proportionality constant.
  • A question is raised about whether magnetic flux equals current multiplied by inductance, with a participant providing a unit analysis that appears to support this relationship.
  • One participant confirms that flux linkage can be expressed as the product of inductance and current, providing a specific example related to the definition of inductance in terms of induced EMF.
  • A later reply introduces a caveat regarding the presence of ferromagnetic materials, noting that the relationship between flux linkage and current may not hold strictly, as inductance may not be constant in such cases, especially under larger currents.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the basic relationship between voltage, inductance, and the rate of change of current, but there is some contention regarding the effects of ferromagnetic materials on inductance and flux linkage, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved in this aspect.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge that the relationship between flux linkage and current may vary depending on the presence of ferromagnetic materials and the operational conditions, such as current levels approaching saturation.

CraigH
Messages
221
Reaction score
1
Voltage across an inductor at any moment in time can be calculated as the inductance multiplied by the rate of change of current.

How is this equation derived?
I'm pretty sure it comes from Faraday law

-emf = rate of change of magnetic flux

but I cannot find the relationship.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You've pretty much hit on it. Since the EMF (voltage) = d/dt(magnetic flux), and the magnetic flux is proportional to the current, then the voltage is proportional to d/dt(current). The proportionality constant is the inductance. You could consider this as the definition of inductance.
 
Okay, so does magnetic flux equal current multiplied by inductance?

The units check out:
base units
M = mass
T = time
Q = charge
L = length

magnetic flux = M(T^-1)(Q^-1)(L^2)
current = Q(T^-1)
inductance = M(L^2)(Q^-2)

M(T^-1)(Q^-1)(L^2) = Q(T^-1) M(L^2)(Q^-2)
 
Yes.
Flux linkage = L x I
This means that an inductance of 1 Henry will produce a flux linkage of 1 weber for a current of 1 amp.
In terms of induced emf it means that an inductance of 1 Henry will generate an emf of 1 volt when the current changes at a rate of 1 amp per second.
 
Last edited:
If there are no ferromagnetic materials present, then n\Phi = LI and \frac{dn\Phi}{dt} = L\frac{dI}{dt} are completely equivalent, and either can be used to define L. [Notation: n\Phi = flux linkage.]

If there are ferromagnetic materials - as is often the case for inductors of large inductance - then the flux linkage is not strictly proportional to the current, that is L in the first equation is not a constant, so the second equation does not follow from the first by differentiation. If we're not too fussy, and the currents are small enough for the ferromagnetic material not to enter the 'saturation' region, we can take L in the first equation as approximately constant and stop worrying!
 
Brilliant answer! Thank you this has helped a lot.
 
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
5K