Question about current decay in R-L circuit

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter issacnewton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circuit Current Decay
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the sign conventions used in deriving equations for current decay in an R-L circuit, particularly focusing on the application of Kirchhoff's laws and Lenz's law. Participants explore the implications of these conventions on the equations governing the circuit's behavior during current decay.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the sign convention used in the equation for current decay, suggesting that the equation should reflect the direction of the decaying current according to Kirchhoff's rule.
  • Another participant explains that the minus sign in the term -L di/dt is consistent with Lenz's law and does not change even when the current is decreasing.
  • A participant argues that following Kirchhoff's rules while tracing the loop in the direction of the decaying current should yield a positive voltage drop.
  • It is noted that multiplying by -L when di/dt is negative results in a positive number, which aligns with the expected behavior of the circuit.
  • A later reply emphasizes that the same equation applies for both increasing and decreasing current without needing to switch signs.
  • One participant summarizes a method for applying Kirchhoff's voltage law (KVL) that involves assuming a direction for current flow and applying KVL in that direction, maintaining the sign convention for the inductance term.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the application of sign conventions in the equations for current decay. While some agree on the consistency of the equations across different scenarios, others raise questions about the implications of the sign choices.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential ambiguities in the application of Kirchhoff's laws and Lenz's law, particularly regarding the treatment of signs in equations. There are unresolved aspects related to the assumptions made about current direction and the resulting implications for the equations.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and educators in physics, particularly those studying circuit theory and the principles of electromagnetism, as well as anyone interested in the nuances of applying Kirchhoff's laws in R-L circuits.

issacnewton
Messages
1,035
Reaction score
37
Hello

I am reading Young, Freedman's University physics and I have some questions about the
sign conventions followed in getting the equations for the current decay in the R-L circuit.
I have attached two snapshots which will help the discussions. Consider the series R-L circuit
as shown in the diagram. Say switch S1 is closed and switch S2 is open for a long time. So that means steady current has been established in the upper part of
the circuit. Now open S1 and close S2. Now authors give the following
equation for the first case, when the current is building.

[tex]\mathcal{E}-iR -L\frac{di}{dt}=0[/tex]

which makes sense using the second diagram I attached. But the authors say that , for the
second case , when the current is decaying through the bottom part of the circuit, the equation to be solved becomes,

[tex]-iR -L\frac{di}{dt}=0[/tex]

which doesn't make sense. Since the current is now decreasing, going around the loop
in the direction of current (assuming that the direction of the current is still the same),
and using the second diagram which I have uploaded, the Kirchhoff's rule says that

[tex]-iR +L\frac{di}{dt}=0[/tex]

But this doesn't give correct final result for the decay. So am I doing something wrong ?

thanks
 

Attachments

  • R-L Circuit.jpg
    R-L Circuit.jpg
    14.6 KB · Views: 504
  • Inductor.jpg
    Inductor.jpg
    30.5 KB · Views: 431
Physics news on Phys.org
The minus sign in L di/dt is a consequence of Lenz's law (or the minus sign in Faraday's). Just because we know the current will decrease, we don't change the sign because that would give us an ever increasing current (contrary to our expectations)
 
But Gordianus, but is there not a potential gain in such situation of we trace the loop in the same direction as the decaying current. I was trying to follow the rules of Kirchhoff using the second diagram given for the situation where [itex]\frac{di}{dt} <0[/itex].
 
Exactly. When di/dt<0 you want a positive voltage drop. If you multiply by -L you obtain a positive number. On the contrary, if you multiply by L, you obtain a negative number (this isn't what you want).
In a nut, you don't have to switch the sign from positive to negative. The same equation gives the right answer for both cases.
 
Gordianus, I think it makes sense now... So are the signs used the way they are used to get the end equations working ?
 
The safe method is this:
a) You assume the current flows in some direction (it doesn't matter which one).
b) You apply KVL moving in the same direction current does.

With these previous assumptions the voltage drop across the inductance is -L di/dt, whether the current grows or decays.
 
ok makes sense
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K