Parallel RLC circuit initial values

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around analyzing a parallel RLC circuit to determine the initial values of current through the inductor (iL(0+)) and voltage across the capacitor (Vc(0+)). Participants explore the implications of circuit behavior at the moment just after switching, addressing concepts of steady state, transient response, and the effects of changing circuit elements.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that at t=0-, the inductor acts as a short circuit and the capacitor as an open circuit, leading to Vc(0+)=0V and iL(0+)=4A.
  • Another participant questions the contradiction of having a charged capacitor with zero voltage across it, suggesting that zero volts is a valid potential if the circuit demands it.
  • A participant proposes that the capacitor has not been charged until t=0, while the inductor has been charged, depending on the circuit's history.
  • Discussion arises on how the circuit's behavior would change if the current source were replaced by a voltage source, with participants speculating on the implications for current distribution and voltage across components.
  • Concerns are raised about the realism of the circuit, particularly regarding potentially dangerous current levels if ideal components are assumed.
  • Suggestions are made to modify the circuit to prevent unrealistic scenarios, such as adding a resistor in series with the inductor or voltage source.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying views on the behavior of the capacitor and inductor at t=0, with some asserting that zero voltage is acceptable while others question the implications of a charged capacitor. There is no consensus on the realism of the circuit or the exact nature of the current behavior under different configurations.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about circuit behavior at steady state and transient response, with some participants acknowledging the need for a practical circuit design to avoid unrealistic conditions.

ViolentCorpse
Messages
190
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



For the circuit shown (in the attachment), find iL(0+) and Vc(0+).

Homework Equations



V=IR

The Attempt at a Solution



At t=0-; the inductor can be replaced by a short-circuit and the capacitor by an open circuit. This shorts out the resistor so by Ohm's law, the voltage drop across it is 0V. Since all the elements are in a parallel combination, that means the voltage across each element is 0V. And we know that Vc(0-)=Vc(0+); therefore Vc(0+)=0V.

For iL, since the inductor acts like a short circuit and at t=0-, all the current passes through this short alone. So iL(0-)=iL(0+)= 4A.

Right?

Now here's my question: An open-circuit equivalent of capacitor means that the capacitor is charged and thus has a voltage across it. Yet in this problem, my analysis yields Vc(0)=0V. I find this result contradictory to my solution approach because I started by open-circuiting the capacitor only to later arrive at the result that it has developed no voltage at all across it; for how can a charged capacitor not have any voltage across its plates?

This is my conceptual confusion. I'd really appreciate your help guys! :)
 

Attachments

  • dvoyfb.jpg
    dvoyfb.jpg
    4.7 KB · Views: 623
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
ViolentCorpse said:
Now here's my question: An open-circuit equivalent of capacitor means that the capacitor is charged and thus has a voltage across it. Yet in this problem, my analysis yields Vc(0)=0V. I find this result contradictory to my solution approach because I started by open-circuiting the capacitor only to later arrive at the result that it has developed no voltage at all across it; for how can a charged capacitor not have any voltage across its plates?
There's no problem or contradiction; zero volts is a perfectly good value for potential.

The reason we consider the capacitor to be an open circuit at steady state is that it has attained whatever potential is required such that further changes cease; it reaches electrical potential equilibrium with its connection points. This value may very well be zero volts if that's what the external circuit demands.
 
gneill said:
There's no problem or contradiction; zero volts is a perfectly good value for potential.

The reason we consider the capacitor to be an open circuit at steady state is that it has attained whatever potential is required such that further changes cease; it reaches electrical potential equilibrium with its connection points. This value may very well be zero volts if that's what the external circuit demands.

Ah, I see. Will it be correct to say that in this circuit, the capacitor hasn't been charged at all until t=0 and only the inductor has been charged?

Also, how would this problem change if the current source is replaced by a voltage source of say 4 Volts. All the elements should be getting the same voltage across their terminals i.e 4V, but applying ohm's law on the resistor would suggest otherwise...

Thank you so much, gneill!
 
Last edited:
ViolentCorpse said:
Ah, I see. Will it be correct to say that in this circuit, the capacitor hasn't been charged at all until t=0 and only the inductor has been charged?
It depends upon how far back in time you wish to look; at some point the circuit must have been assembled and the current source switched on for the first time. In the first instant the inductor will look like an open circuit and the capacitor will begin to charge... some interactions will occur before the circuit eventually settles into a steady state (this is the transient response).
Thank you so much, gneill!
You're quite welcome :smile:
 
I understand. :)

I've edited my last post. Please take a look at it and bear with me just a little more.
 
ViolentCorpse said:
Also, how would this problem change if the current source is replaced by a voltage source of say 4 Volts. All the elements should be getting the same voltage across their terminals i.e 4V, but applying ohm's law on the resistor would suggest otherwise...

First tell us what your thoughts are on this. In particular, how would the inductor current behave in such a situation?
 
I think it won't be much different from before. The inductor would assume its short-circuit characteristics at steady-state, so all the current (a fairly large current) would be diverted through the inductor.
 
ViolentCorpse said:
I think it won't be much different from before. The inductor would assume its short-circuit characteristics at steady-state, so all the current (a fairly large current) would be diverted through the inductor.

How large is "fairly large"? Is this a realistic circuit?
 
gneill said:
How large is "fairly large"? Is this a realistic circuit?

Umm... I can't give an exact number. Practically, the current would only be impeded by the small wiring and inductor resistances, so it could be dangerously large. I don't think it is a realistic circuit. It may damage the voltage source and the elements involved.

Am I on the right track here?

I think I'm slowly realizing that I asked quite a silly question.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
ViolentCorpse said:
Umm... I can't give an exact number. Practically, the current would only be impeded by the small wiring and inductor resistances, so it could be dangerously large. I don't think it is a realistic circuit. It may damage the voltage source and the elements involved.

Am I on the right track here?

I think I'm slowly realizing that I asked quite a silly question.

There are no silly questions :smile:

If the components are ideal (zero resistance for all non-resistor components), the inductor current would run away to infinity. So, not a realistic circuit.

However, can you think of how you might change the circuit slightly to make it practical? Hint: you want to prevent the voltage source from ever seeing a short circuit.
 
  • #11
I'm really grateful to you for your continuing kind response, gneill. :)

Hmm, to make the circuit practical... I think the resistor should be put in series with the inductor.
 
  • #12
ViolentCorpse said:
I'm really grateful to you for your continuing kind response, gneill. :)

Hmm, to make the circuit practical... I think the resistor should be put in series with the inductor.
Yes, that would work. But even better, put it in series with the voltage source. Then, for the right choice of voltage, the circuit will behave exactly like the one with the current source with the resistor in parallel.
 
  • #13
Thanks a ton, gneill! I really really appreciate your help! :)
 

Similar threads

Engineering Find di/dt and dr/dt for a DC circuit with indepedent current source
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Engineering What Are the Initial and Steady State Values in an SPST Switched RLC Circuit?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Transient Response RLC: Calculating Vc(t) for a Series Circuit | 9121 Problem
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Engineering Finding Current in a Parallel RLC Circuit
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
Engineering Second Order RLC Circuit: Find DEQ & Circuit for Time t>0
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Engineering AC Source driving an RLC circuit....
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Engineering Initial and final values for second order circuits
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Engineering What is the meaning of the rate of change of voltage in an RLC circuit at t=0+?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
RLC Parallel Circuit: Analyzing Current & Voltage at t=0-
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
What Happens to the Current Through an Inductor When the Switch Opens?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K