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?
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top