If time is removed from the equation Q=VxIxt, will it still be valid

  • Thread starter Thread starter totoykabute
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Time
AI Thread Summary
Removing time from the equation Q=VxIxt raises questions about its validity as an energy equation. The discussion highlights the complexity of including time when estimating the heat transfer coefficient of nichrome wire heated by direct current. Participants clarify that Q could refer to heat rather than electric charge, which changes the context of the equation. The dimensions of the equation are also scrutinized, particularly the role of voltage. Ultimately, the conversation emphasizes the need for clarity in the definitions and dimensions used in the equation.
totoykabute
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
if time is removed from the equation Q=VxIxt, will it still be valid to be an equation of energy?
i need that equation to estimate the heat transfer coefficient of a nichrome wire heated using direct current,but putting time to the equation makes everything complicated..

(i'd read someone's post here that use the same equation but does not put time.. too bad i can't find that post again..)
 
Engineering news on Phys.org


VI = power

VIt = energy

Which one do you want?
 


totoykabute said:
if time is removed from the equation Q=VxIxt, will it still be valid to be an equation of energy?
i need that equation to estimate the heat transfer coefficient of a nichrome wire heated using direct current,but putting time to the equation makes everything complicated..

(i'd read someone's post here that use the same equation but does not put time.. too bad i can't find that post again..)

Did you check on the dimensions of that 'equation'?

afaik, Q = It
where does V come into it?
 


sophiecentaur said:
Did you check on the dimensions of that 'equation'?

afaik, Q = It
where does V come into it?

It could be that Q means "heat" here, rather than electric charge. That is sort of what I assumed from the context.
 


OH yes. Makes sense. (I have just removed my blinkers!)
 
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...
Back
Top