Driven RL circuit, why at infinity is this the current 2, and yet at 0+, its 0?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the behavior of driven RL circuits, specifically the current through an inductor at different time intervals. At time infinity (iL(infinity)), the current stabilizes at 2mA, as the inductor behaves like an ideal wire, allowing all current to flow through it. Conversely, at time 0+ (iL(0+)), the current is 0mA because the inductor initially opposes changes in current, acting as an infinite resistance. This behavior is consistent with the principles of circuit analysis for DC circuits, where inductors and capacitors exhibit distinct characteristics based on their initial states.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of RL circuit theory
  • Familiarity with the concept of inductance and resistance
  • Knowledge of time constants in electrical circuits
  • Basic principles of circuit analysis for DC circuits
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the behavior of capacitors in driven RC circuits
  • Learn about the time constant in RL circuits and its impact on current flow
  • Explore the concept of initial conditions in circuit analysis
  • Investigate the differences between driven and sourceless RL/RC circuits
USEFUL FOR

Electrical engineering students, circuit designers, and anyone studying transient responses in RL and RC circuits will benefit from this discussion.

mr_coffee
Messages
1,613
Reaction score
1
Hello everyone I'm confused...i was just doing RL and RC circuits without a driven source, they made sense after doing them a few 100 times. Now I'm at Driven RL circuits. My professor said:
iL(infinity) = 2mA
iL(0+) = 0.

From my understanding, i thought at infinity, the switch has been closed for a long period of time. If the switch is closed for a long period of time that means there would be no current flowing through the inductor, because you have to have changing current. So why isn't THe current of the inductor 0 at time infinity?>

At time 0+ that means the switch has just been closed, meaning your going to have a change in current. So wouldn't that be when the current through the inductor is 2mA?

Am i interpretting the unit step wrong?
2u(t) ?
this formula doesn't ask for time 0-, that means before the switch is closed, now at that point i can see how she would get iL(0-) = 0, because the current is totally disconnected!

Any help on explaining this would be great! :)
Also by doing it her way, she got the right answer in the back of the book.

http://suprfile.com/src/1/bx0wa2/lastscan.jpg

THen she found VL, the voltage on the inductor and got the opposite, she wrote:
VL(0) = 2 mA* 3k = 6v
vL(infinity) = 0;
VL = 6e^(-t/5E-6);
x = 15mH/3k = 5E-6;

She also wrote this which i think explains why,

Current in inductor and Voltage on a capacitor can NOT change instantly
Voltage on inductor and current in a capacitaor can change indstantly


So is this why she has iL(0+) = 0? it takes time for the 2 mA to go through the inductor?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
mr_coffee said:
Hello everyone I'm confused...i was just doing RL and RC circuits without a driven source, they made sense after doing them a few 100 times. Now I'm at Driven RL circuits. My professor said:
iL(infinity) = 2mA
iL(0+) = 0.

From my understanding, i thought at infinity, the switch has been closed for a long period of time. If the switch is closed for a long period of time that means there would be no current flowing through the inductor, because you have to have changing current. So why isn't THe current of the inductor 0 at time infinity?>
No, after the switch has been closed for a very long time, an inductor will act as it it was an ideal wire! So in that case, all the current will go through the inductor and none through the resistor (since the current has the choice of flowing through a branch offering no resistance at all, it will go that way). At t=0+, the change of current is huge (theoretically infinite) so the inductor offers an inifinite resistance, so all the current will flow through the resistor.
 
Thanks again for clearing up that! :biggrin:
What if i replaced that inductor with a capacitor? With sourcless circuits I treated the capaictor as if it was an open circuit if no current has been flowing or if its been flowing for along time.

nrqed, is this the case only for source driven RL/RC circuits? or does it also apply to sourceless RC/RL?
 
mr_coffee said:
Thanks again for clearing up that! :biggrin:
What if i replaced that inductor with a capacitor? With sourcless circuits I treated the capaictor as if it was an open circuit if no current has been flowing or if its been flowing for along time.

nrqed, is this the case only for source driven RL/RC circuits? or does it also apply to sourceless RC/RL?

In general, you have the following (for DC circuits):

If a circuit has been in a state for a very long time, inductors will act like ideal wires (R=0) and capacitors will act like infinite resistances (no current flows through their branch. They have a potential difference across them and Q= C V).

If change is made (by closing, opening a switch) then an inductor will act (at t=0+) like an infinite resistance. For capacitors, it depends if they were initially charged or uncharged. If they were initially uncharged, at t=0+ they will act like ideal wires (R=0) (Of course, this is just an analogy..no current flows through them, but for the purpose of calculating solving the circuit they can be treated like ideal wires at t=0+).
If they were initially charged, they can be treated (still, at t=0+) like batteries with a potential difference V=Q_0/C where Q_0 is the inital charge.

Patrick
 
Thanks a ton Patrick, excellent summary!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K