Understanding Voltage Dividers: A Practical Approach

  • Thread starter Thread starter WarPhalange
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Volatage
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the voltage divider concept in basic circuitry, focusing on its principles, assumptions, and practical applications. Participants explore the theoretical underpinnings of voltage dividers, including current flow, voltage drops, and the implications of circuit design on the voltage divider's effectiveness.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the voltage divider proof, particularly why the voltage across R2 is considered instead of R1.
  • Another participant clarifies that the potential difference across R2 is defined as Vout - 0, where 0 represents ground voltage.
  • A participant attempts to summarize their understanding of current flow and voltage drops in the circuit, noting that the voltage at the branching point equals Vout.
  • One participant argues that the voltage divider principle only applies when circuit elements are in series, challenging the idea of having a branch between R1 and R2.
  • A participant questions the assumption that Iin equals Iout, suggesting that if Vin = Iin(R1 + R2) and Vout = Iout*R2, the currents should not be the same.
  • Another participant explains that the assumption Iin = Iout is crucial for deriving the voltage divider principle and reiterates that a branch would invalidate this assumption.
  • One participant seeks clarification on how to apply the voltage divider if no elements can be placed between R1 and R2, questioning the practical application of the concept.
  • A participant notes that the voltage divider principle is primarily for evaluating voltages across circuit elements rather than a method for achieving a specific output voltage.
  • Another participant suggests that if Rload is significantly larger than R1 and R2, measuring Vout could still yield approximately correct results, indicating a practical aspect of the voltage divider.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and agreement regarding the voltage divider's principles and assumptions. There is no consensus on the implications of having a branch in the circuit or the validity of the Iin = Iout assumption, indicating ongoing debate and uncertainty.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of circuit configuration and assumptions in applying the voltage divider principle, noting that the presence of branches or loads can affect the validity of the calculations. The discussion reflects a range of interpretations and understandings of the voltage divider concept.

WarPhalange
*sigh* voltage divider...?

I've been going over basic circuitry and got to the voltage divider. I don't understand the proof here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltage_divider#General_case

The first line makes sense. From Vi to Ground there are two resistors in series, so you add them, and V = IR and I is the same all around the whole circuit.

Then the 2nd line I don't get. Why is it R2 and not R1? I thought current would go From Vi through R1 and then to Vo, not Ground to Vo.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


The potential difference across R2 (or Z2) is given by [itex]V_{out} - 0[/itex], where 0 is the ground voltage. For a resistor, V = IR so this means [itex]V_{out} - 0 = IR_2[/tex][/itex]
 


Let me see if I have this right.

Current goes from Vin through R1, which gives a voltage drop. Then since there is a branch, i.e. two things are in parallel, V across both is equal, but current probably isn't. So then you exploit the fact that at V at the branching point = Vout, and then you do this:

Defennder said:
The potential difference across R2 (or Z2) is given by [itex]V_{out} - 0[/itex], where 0 is the ground voltage. For a resistor, V = IR so this means [itex]V_{out} - 0 = IR_2[/tex][/itex]
[itex] <br /> I think I got it. Thanks a lot. :D[/itex]
 


Actually there isn't any "branch" in between R1 and R2. In fact I would say that if there is a branch there, the voltage divider principle does not work. It works only if the circuit elements are connected in series, which they would not be if there was a branch in between.
 


Sorry to revive this. I'm back in "electronics" mode and still stuck on this damn problem again...

By branch I mean it branches off between R1 and R2 to Vout.

I guess my next question is how do they know Iin = Iout? Wouldn't it be Vin = I_in(R1 + R2) and Vout = Iout*R2? Why do they use the same value for I?

EDIT: Or are you assuming it's an open circuit, so that no current actually goes to the right into Vout? Then how would that work with a Load?
 


The diagram is a little misleading. Vout does not denote a wire connected in between R1 and R2. It's just a line which indicates that the potential between the two resistors is V2. The same goes for Vin.

Iin = Iout is the assumption they make in order to derive the voltage divider principle. As said above, if that assumption is not true, ie. if there is a wire branching off from in between 2 resistors, then the potential divider principle does not work.

WarPhalange said:
EDIT: Or are you assuming it's an open circuit, so that no current actually goes to the right into Vout? Then how would that work with a Load?
EDIT: Yes you're right here. I don't know what you mean by "work with a load". It depends on whether you designate R2 as the load or something else.
 


Okay okay, that much makes sense. So how do you apply a voltage divider if you're not allowed to have anything between R1 and R2? I thought that was the whole point, where you kind of siphon off some of the current.
 


The voltage divider principle is just a principle of circuits for easy evaluation of voltages across a circuit element, not a technique for getting a desired voltage out of something. To get a desired voltage across some complicated linear network, you first reduce it to it's Thevenin equivalent, then add resistors in the appropriate manner until you get the desired voltage.
 


I see... but if I had Rload at Vout >> R1 and R2, wouldn't that be approximately correct still?

So if I used a voltmeter I could still read Vout from in between R1 and R2, right?

I guess that's what confused me above all. I had thought this was something practical, not just a thought experiment type of thing.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K