Thévenin resistance when branch is 0V (RC circuit)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of Thévenin resistance in an RC circuit when a switch changes position, affecting the voltage across a capacitor. Participants explore the implications of circuit configurations on voltage and current behavior, particularly focusing on steady-state conditions and the role of open circuits.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant calculates the initial and final voltages across the capacitor, suggesting that at t=0, v(0)=40 V and at t=∞, v(∞)=0 V, but questions the Thévenin resistance calculation.
  • Another participant challenges the assumption that a capacitor with no current must have 0 V across it, indicating a need for clarification on this point.
  • Some participants assert that under steady-state conditions, the capacitor acts as an open-circuit, leading to a conclusion that v_c(∞)=0 V based on KCL and KVL analysis.
  • One participant reiterates their confusion regarding the Thévenin resistance, stating that the circuit's bottom rail being at 0 V disables certain loops, thus affecting the analysis of the circuit.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the bottom rail does not create a complete circuit, leading to the conclusion that the voltage source and its associated resistors do not influence the capacitor and 100 kΩ resistor when the switch is in position B.
  • One participant expresses a desire for a clearer intuitive understanding of the circuit behavior, particularly regarding the implications of the bottom rail being electrically common.
  • A later reply explains that the rail acts as a barrier between loops, preventing interaction between them due to its zero voltage and zero resistance characteristics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the behavior of the capacitor and the implications of the circuit configuration. There is no consensus on the correct value of the Thévenin resistance, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the intuitive understanding of the circuit behavior.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in their understanding of differential equations in this context and express uncertainty about the implications of circuit configurations on voltage and current behavior.

mabster
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



r76iw8.png


Prior to t=0, switch is in position A (for long time).
Afterward, switch is in position B.

We need to derive the equation for vc.

Homework Equations



v(t)=v(\infty)+[v(0)-v(\infty)]e^\frac{-t}{\tau}
\tau=RC

The Attempt at a Solution



at t=0: v(0)=100\frac{10}{10+15}=40\,\mathrm{V}
at t=\infty: v(\infty)=0\,\mathrm{V} since no current travels through open-circuit at capacitor.

R=R_\mathrm{th}=(15+10)\parallel 100=20\,\mathrm{k\Omega}

From here, I would simply substitute the values in.

My problem is that this thévenin resistance is wrong (the correct value being 100 kΩ). I was told that it has to do with the entire bottom of the circuit being at 0 V relative to the 100 V, so the left hand loop of the circuit is disabled. I was hoping someone could give me a less hand-wavy reason that this would be the case?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
what makes you think that a capacitor with no current going through it has to have 0v across it?
 
Under steady-state condition (t=\infty), the capacitor will act as an open-circuit.

KCL at B: I_1=-0, so I_1=0\,\mathrm{A}
KVL around right-hand loop: v_c(\infty)=I_1(100\times 10^3)=[0](100\times 10^3)=0\,\mathrm{V}

I'm not sure if there's typically a differential equation argument for this, but we don't use DE to solve these in my particular course.

Have I made a mistake at this point?
 
mabster said:
My problem is that this thévenin resistance is wrong (the correct value being 100 kΩ). I was told that it has to do with the entire bottom of the circuit being at 0 V relative to the 100 V, so the left hand loop of the circuit is disabled. I was hoping someone could give me a less hand-wavy reason that this would be the case?

When the switch is in position B the capacitor and 100K resistor are alone in a loop. There is no complete circuit (closed loop) that would place the 10K and 15K resistors in any shared current path or potential difference. A single wire connection (i.e. the bottom rail reference node) does not make a complete circuit.

So once the switch moves to position B, it's as thought the voltage source and its resistors simply vanish as far as the capacitor and 100K resistor are concerned.
 
mabster said:
Under steady-state condition (t=\infty), the capacitor will act as an open-circuit.

KCL at B: I_1=-0, so I_1=0\,\mathrm{A}
KVL around right-hand loop: v_c(\infty)=I_1(100\times 10^3)=[0](100\times 10^3)=0\,\mathrm{V}

I'm not sure if there's typically a differential equation argument for this, but we don't use DE to solve these in my particular course.

Have I made a mistake at this point?

I was responding purely to your statement

... v(∞)=0V since no current travels through open-circuit at capacitor.

as thought it was a general statement without regard to the circuit, which is what it sounded like to me.

The point of the circuit, as gneill has already pointed out, is that the cap is charging in one circuit, discharging in a different circuit.
 
... v(∞)=0V since no current travels through open-circuit at capacitor.
as thought it was a general statement without regard to the circuit, which is what it sounded like to me.

Thanks, that's a really good point phinds! That's the kind of thing that will lose marks during the exams. I'll need to curb that :) !

Much appreciated!
 
A single wire connection (i.e. the bottom rail reference node) does not make a complete circuit.

Thanks! What you're saying makes sense, but I'm still missing the "intuition" here (this seems so fundamental that I should already know this). My problem is that the bottom rail is electrically common, so this should be an equivalent circuit:

102mu1j.png


Which to me would act like resistors in parallel.

I've tried to simulate the original circuit on http://www.falstad.com/circuit/" (not sure how accurate that is) and it does appear that no current travels across the rail.

I'm close, but still a little confused :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Drawn the way you have it the "rail" sits between two loops. That's fine. It's zero voltage, zero resistance characteristic erects an impenetrable barrier between the loops; they cannot see each other. Nothing that happens in one loop will be seen by the other because the wire "shorts out" any voltage changes, and a zero resistance wire can carry any amount of current without creating a voltage drop.
 
Brilliant! That all makes sense to me now!

Thanks heaps!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
7K