KCL and First order circuit theory

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the application of Kirchhoff's Current Law (KCL) in analyzing a first-order circuit when a switch opens. The user encounters a discrepancy in the differential equations derived from two nodes, leading to confusion about the validity of the current directions used. It is clarified that while KCL does not depend on current direction, the equations must reflect the physical behavior of the circuit, particularly the decay of voltage across the capacitor. The correct formulation for Node A yields a decaying voltage, while Node B, despite being mathematically valid, does not accurately represent the circuit's behavior. Ultimately, the discussion emphasizes the importance of consistent current direction and correct application of KCL in circuit analysis.
raddian
Messages
66
Reaction score
0
My question applies to the case when the switch opens. By applying KCL in order to get a first order diff equation, the following problem arises when I choose different current directions (which shouldn't happen because KCL says the current direction doesn't matter because it will be fixed after all is said and done.

So the first one (NODE A) has

v/(RC) + dv/dt = 0 whose solution is $$Ke^{^{\frac{-t}{RC}}}$$

while the next case (NODE B) has
v/(RC) - dv/dt = 0 whose solution is $$Ke^{^{\frac{t}{RC}}}$$

I know the correct form is the first one, with a -t for the argument but doesn't a KCL "ignore" current direction and should then produce the solution, regardless of direction?

Am I missing something?
 

Attachments

Engineering news on Phys.org
raddian said:
Am I missing something?
Yes. When you have only a capacitor and a resistor in the circuit, the capacitor voltage drives a current through the resistor. This current reduces the capacitor charge.
 
r I understand your point. Because the form tells me I have a decaying voltage, I need to have a negative argument to e. I need to apologize for not making my question very clear. I know the first form is correct (Node A) but is the second form equally valid but incorrect? And because they are equally valid, the only reason to choose the method of Node A vs. the method of Node b is because the argument of e should be negative?
 
Your current arrows are correct in Node B (and wrong in node A). Your equations are shaky.

Consider: With no external source, the current through R is sourced by the voltage across the capacitor. So in a time interval Δt, the current I removes a charge Q = I⋅Δt from the capacitor. Combine that with I = V/R and Q=C⋅V.
 
Can you please explain what are the correct equations for node A and B?
 
raddian said:
Can you please explain what are the correct equations for node A and B?
I thought I spelled it out quite clearly (and if I just show you the formula, a moderator may delete it). That aside:
I=\frac{V}{R}=-\frac{dQ}{dt} since current leaving the capacitor reduces the charge in the capacitor. Now insert the capacitor formula (Q=C⋅V): I=\frac{V}{R}=-\frac{dQ}{dt}=-C\frac{dV}{dt} and you have your equation for V.
 
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...
Hello dear reader, a brief introduction: Some 4 years ago someone started developing health related issues, apparently due to exposure to RF & ELF related frequencies and/or fields (Magnetic). This is currently becoming known as EHS. (Electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a claimed sensitivity to electromagnetic fields, to which adverse symptoms are attributed.) She experiences a deep burning sensation throughout her entire body, leaving her in pain and exhausted after a pulse has occurred...
Back
Top