RC circuit, expression for voltage

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the voltage expression for a capacitor in an RC circuit with two resistors in series. The initial attempt led to an incorrect expression for voltage over time, suggesting an increase rather than a decrease, which contradicts expected behavior. The correct voltage expression should reflect a decay, leading to the conclusion that V(t) = V_0e^{-\frac{t}{(R_1+R_2)C}}. Participants emphasize the importance of sign conventions in Kirchhoff's voltage law and the direction of current flow affecting the voltage across the capacitor. Clarification on these conventions is critical for accurately solving the problem.
nossren
Messages
23
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Assume you have a fully charged capacitor with initial condition V(0) = V_0 connected in series to two resistors R_1 and R_2. Derive an expression for the voltage over the capacitor with respect to time.

Homework Equations


1. Kirchhoff's voltage law \sum_n V_n = 0
2. Ohm's law: V=RI
3. Capacitance of capacitor: C = \frac{Q}{V}
4. Current I = \frac{dQ}{dt}

The Attempt at a Solution


If I "go" in the direction of the current, then the potential difference over both resistors are negative whereas it is positive over the capacitor, hence
V(t) - V_{R_{1}} - V_{R_{2}} = 0 = V(t) - R_1 I - R_2 I.
Which I can rewrite using the time derivative of Q (3 and 4 from above)
= V(t) - (R_1 + R_2)\frac{dQ}{dt} = V(t) - (R_1 + R_2)C\frac{dV(t)}{dt} = 0 \implies \frac{1}{(R_1 + R_2)C}V(t) - \frac{dV(t)}{dt} = 0.
By solving this differential equation, I get
V(t) = V_0e^\frac{t}{(R_1+R_2)C}
which is wrong, because the voltage should decrease over time, so a more logical solution would be
V(t) = V_0e^{-\frac{t}{(R_1+R_2)C}}.
Is there something I have overlooked? Is Kirchhoff's law setup incorrectly (sign conventions)?

Any help is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
VC(t) + VR1(t) + VR2(t) = 0 is the equation
 
Yes, I realize that has to be true for it to be correct, but I am just confused about the signs. My book (Sears and Zemansky's) mentions some sign conventions in relation to Kirchhoff's voltage law (see picture).
w0QUQ.png

So why is it + rather than - ?
 
You have 3 passive elements in the circuit and no driving emf. Don't know what confuses you.
 
nossren, have you considered what sign should be associated with dV/dt on the capacitor? Will V be increasing or decreasing given the direction of the current flow?
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top