Simple KVL (kirchhoff's voltage law) problem

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter PainterGuy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Kvl Law Voltage
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Kirchhoff's Voltage Law (KVL) in specific circuit scenarios presented in linked PDFs. Participants are examining the conditions under which KVL can be applied, particularly in cases where certain terms appear to be missing from the equations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the application of KVL when the equations in the provided PDFs do not include the electromotive force (E) or the current-resistance (IR) terms.
  • Another participant suggests that if E=0 in a loop, then the sum of the current times resistance (IxR) must also equal zero, implying that no current flows in that scenario.
  • A different perspective is offered regarding an open circuit, where it is stated that the sum of voltages around the closed loop equals zero, indicating a balance of potential differences.
  • Further clarification is provided about the need for an additional battery to balance the existing emfs in the circuit to prevent current flow.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the application of KVL in the scenarios presented. There is no consensus on whether the book's statements are incorrect or how to interpret the absence of certain terms in the equations.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific equations and scenarios from the PDFs, which may contain limitations or assumptions not fully explored in the discussion.

PainterGuy
Messages
938
Reaction score
73
hello everyone,:wink:

my book says:
\sum E = \sumIR

where E is emf. it says the sum of all emfs equal sum of all IR terms.

1:-- please have a look on this PDF
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...ljMzctZjQxNzNlNjZlMGMy&hl=en&authkey=CNnjye8P

in the highlighted part - the equation #3 - there is no "E". how can we apply KVL when there is no "E".

2:-- and in this PDF (the highlighted part):
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...gwOTYtOGQzN2NmMmFjNTRh&hl=en&authkey=CM62nsYK

there is no IR terms and Vcd is neither E nor IR. so how can we apply KVL here?

please help me with this KVL problem as soon as possible. i am very grateful for your helping me out. many thanks.

cheers
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hello,

will someone please help me with this? it will be generous of you. is what book says incorrect?

cheers
 
please, please, help me on this.

cheers
 
It's a very long time since I did anything like this but I can't see a problem.

In (1) in loop 3, if E=0, then sum(IxR)=0 which can only be achieved by having I=0. There is no voltage driving a net current round the triangle of three resistors so that seems sensible.

In (2) we know sum(IxR)=0 because it is an open circuit so sum(V)=0 round the closed loop You can think of it as calculating the battery that would have to be connected across C-D to exactly cancel out the emf provided by the two that are already there so that no current would flow when the loop is closed.
 
PainterGuy said:
hello everyone,:wink:

my book says:
\sum E = \sumIR

where E is emf. it says the sum of all emfs equal sum of all IR terms.

1:-- please have a look on this PDF
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...ljMzctZjQxNzNlNjZlMGMy&hl=en&authkey=CNnjye8P

in the highlighted part - the equation #3 - there is no "E". how can we apply KVL when there is no "E".

2:-- and in this PDF (the highlighted part):
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...gwOTYtOGQzN2NmMmFjNTRh&hl=en&authkey=CM62nsYK

there is no IR terms and Vcd is neither E nor IR. so how can we apply KVL here?

please help me with this KVL problem as soon as possible. i am very grateful for your helping me out. many thanks.

cheers

the page in the link "1" was not properly rotated. here is proper page:--
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...I4ODgtNGUwODhiZTE4MDM5&hl=en&authkey=CPzZ4vsE


varialectio said:
It's a very long time since I did anything like this but I can't see a problem.

In (1) in loop 3, if E=0, then sum(IxR)=0 which can only be achieved by having I=0. There is no voltage driving a net current round the triangle of three resistors so that seems sensible.

In (2) we know sum(IxR)=0 because it is an open circuit so sum(V)=0 round the closed loop You can think of it as calculating the battery that would have to be connected across C-D to exactly cancel out the emf provided by the two that are already there so that no current would flow when the loop is closed.


Hi varialectio,

Many thanks for this help. I would keep on reading your reply several times and if I have any question I will ask. Much grateful this kind help.

Cheers
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
19K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K