No. By saying that the switch is at position (2) for t >= 0, they are implying that it is NOT at position (2) for t < 0. In this simply scenario, if it is not at position (2), it must be at position (1).Yes, but if he says for t>=0, the switch goes to position (2). Does that mean iL0=0 and uC0=0 cause there is no time for C to charge. Or maybe I'm wrong
I do not think that is correct. I think the simulation demonstrates that there is no exchange of energy between the capacitor and the inductor. The presence of the resistors changes everything. I would agree that without them you would see 2nd order behavior of oscillation with a decaying exponential envelope.For t<0, the circuits is in the steady-state. All the inductors become short circuits and all the capacitors are open circuits. That's how you calculate the initial conditions.
For t>0, you have a second order circuit. The response will not be exponential. Energy will be exchanged between the capacitor and inductor.
On diagram in post #7 amplitude of oscillations can not be more than initial capacitor voltage:I do not think that is correct. I think the simulation demonstrates that there is no exchange of energy between the capacitor and the inductor. The presence of the resistors changes everything. I would agree that without them you would see 2nd order behavior of oscillation with a decaying exponential envelope.
View attachment 294715
That is odd. Did I write the initial condition statement wrong?On diagram in post #7 amplitude of oscillations can not be more than initial capacitor voltage:
View attachment 294731
So are initial conditions for this example iL0=0 and uc0=I*R +E, am I right?For t<0, the circuits is in the steady-state. All the inductors become short circuits and all the capacitors are open circuits. That's how you calculate the initial conditions.
For t>0, you have a second order circuit. The response will not be exponential. Energy will be exchanged between the capacitor and inductor.
What is I in your equation? Where does it come from?So are initial conditions for this example iL0=0 and uc0=I*R +E, am I right?
I don't have I, but I'd put I=E/R and then find uc0 cause it's paralel to that brench. If I am not right, could you please write the correct way cause I feel like I understand it, but I'm not sure. And when the switch goes to position (2) will my Uc be same as uc0What is I in your equation? Where does it come from?
This is the I that I was referring to:I don't have I, but I'd put I=E/R and then find uc0 cause it's paralel to that brench. If I am not right, could you please write the correct way cause I feel like I understand it, but I'm not sure. And when the switch goes to position (2) will my Uc be same as uc0
If you try to put I=E/R, then you claiming that E is the voltage across that resistor (and I'm only guessing which resistor you are referring to).So are initial conditions for this example iL0=0 and uc0=I*R +E, am I right?
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
Simple Circuit Solving Help! | Homework Help | 23 | ||
solving a simple equation | General Science, Physics & Math | 2 | ||
S | Solving Simple Circuit Involving Diodes (part 1) | Homework Help | 7 | |
S | Solving Simple Circuit, Diodes Parallel (part 2) | Homework Help | 14 | |
B | Solving a simple circuit | General Electronics Chat | 7 |
by Jake Hertz
by Duane Benson