Finding the ODE that describes this circuit + find its transfer function

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the second-order ordinary differential equation (ODE) that describes a circuit in terms of the capacitor voltage, as well as determining its transfer function. The context involves applying Kirchhoff's Current Law (KCL) and exploring relationships between voltages and currents in the circuit components.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to use KCL at node A but struggles to express the node voltage in terms of other variables. Some participants suggest checking the polarity of current equations and substituting variables to clarify relationships. Questions arise regarding the justification of voltage relationships and the application of Kirchhoff's Voltage Law.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, offering guidance on potential approaches such as using Laplace transforms and discussing the implications of voltage relationships. There is no explicit consensus, but various interpretations and methods are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the initial conditions are set to zero for simplification, and there are discussions about the assumptions related to voltage and current relationships in the circuit.

rugerts
Messages
153
Reaction score
11
Homework Statement
Find ODE that describes circuit in terms of capacitor voltage + find its transfer function (Vc/Vs)
Relevant Equations
Ohm's Law; Kirchhoff's Current Law and Voltage Law; Voltage across inductor; Current through
capacitor
IMG-1989.JPG
IMG-1990.JPG

As you can see, I've tried using KCL at node A to find the 2nd order ODE that describes this circuit in terms of the capacitor voltage. The problem I run into, however, is that I can't find anything to put the node voltage at A in terms of. I've tried (not shown here) doing mesh current as well, but ran into similar problems. Can anyone point me in the right direction? I'm certain that after this I'll be able to find the transfer function by applying a Laplace transform since the initial conditions are 0 to make things simple.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
rude man said:
2nd eq. for i1 is wrong (polarity).
Then substitute until you have VC = VC(VS).
Does this reconcile the issue that I can't find an expression for Va? Also, could you expand on why i1 would be wrong in terms of polarity?
 
rugerts said:
Does this reconcile the issue that I can't find an expression for Va?
Probably not.
Also, could you expand on why i1 would be wrong in terms of polarity?
If current flows from A to B then A is higher in voltage than B.

The way I would approach this problem is:
assign Laplace transform to all components. So L becomes Z=sL and C becomes Z=1/sC.

Then sum currents to zero at every dependent node (in your case 2). Don't use currents explicitly. For example, (V1-V2)/Z1 = (V2-V3)/Z2 + (V2-V4)/Z3 that sort of thing. This gets you your transfer function V(C)/V(S) = F(s) immediately.

To get the ODE I would take V(C) = F(s)V(S), multiply both sides by s, then go back to the time domain by s → d/dt and ##s^2## → ##d^2/dt^2##.

Of course there are ways of staying in the time domain but I'm not sure how to best do that so others might help you there.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: rugerts
rugerts said:
I've tried using KCL at node A to find the 2nd order ODE that describes this circuit in terms of the capacitor voltage.
You have written the equation for ##i_c##[/color], the current through the capacitor and through the inductor, so the next step is to say

$$v_A\ =\ v_c\ +\ L\cdot\dfrac{di_c}{dt}$$
 
NascentOxygen said:
You have written the equation for ##i_c##, the current through the capacitor and through the inductor, so the next step is to say

$$v_A\ =\ v_c\ +\ L\cdot\dfrac{di_c}{dt}$$
See, I thought this was the case but couldn't justify it properly to myself. By what physical law is this true might I ask? Is this a consequence of Kirchhoff's Voltage Law?
 
rugerts said:
By what physical law is this true might I ask? Is this a consequence of Kirchhoff's Voltage Law?
The instantaneous voltage across multiple elements = the sum of their individual instantaneous voltages
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K