5
\$\begingroup\$

I am trying to graph the equation VbackEMF = L di/dt


When SW1 is off and has been off since negative infinity, I realize that there is no current in the system.

Now I imagine SW1 being pressed. The switch can probably make a good connection in 0.1 seconds, and current in the circuit without the inductor is 1A.

So here is what I am stuck on. Back EMF = 1 Volt at the first instant. Well, how does the current ever start moving through the loop if the first instant doesn't allow any current through?

schematic

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

\$\endgroup\$
5
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The back EMF may be 1V at the first instant, but remember that back EMF requires a changing current. A steady current doesn't generate back EMF; don't confuse back EMF with the magnetic field in the inductor, which is steady with steady current. So, if the back EMF is 1V, it stops all current. But if all current stops, then there is no change in current, and so nothing sustains the back EMF. But any collapse in the back EMF allows a trickle of current which props up the EMF again. This chicken and egg situation resolves itself with the calculus (see Alfred Centauri's answer). \$\endgroup\$
    – Kaz
    Commented May 8, 2013 at 2:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ You could also ask, what allows a stone to roll down a hill? Initially it has no kinetic energy. It does not move. If it does not move, how can it make downward progress? If it does not make downward progress, how can it trade potential energy for kinetic energy? If it cannot gain any kinetic energy. So a stone should not roll down hill. :) \$\endgroup\$
    – Kaz
    Commented May 8, 2013 at 2:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ Also Arrow Paradox. A flying arrow has a position determined by time. At some time \$t = a\$, it has a definite, fixed position. If it has a definite, fixed position, how can it possibly be moving? You've fallen into an ancient, well-known philosophical trap. \$\endgroup\$
    – Kaz
    Commented May 8, 2013 at 2:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ Great question and fantastic answers, but some food for thought for "Cluelessly": If you really want a ball of fun, do some engineering of what happens after the switch opens. :) \$\endgroup\$
    – JamesHoux
    Commented May 9, 2013 at 6:46
  • \$\begingroup\$ see my answer , this is not trivial .......... electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/572096/… \$\endgroup\$
    – user288518
    Commented Jun 21, 2021 at 9:19

1 Answer 1

5
\$\begingroup\$

When the series current is zero, the voltage across L1 must equal V1 (by KVL and Ohm's Law).

But, for an (ideal) inductor, we have:

\$v_L = L \dfrac{di_L}{dt}\$

Thus, by KVL and the definition of an ideal inductor, at the moment SW1 closes, the time rate of change of current is:

\$\dfrac{di_L}{dt} = \dfrac{1V}{1H} = 1 \dfrac{A}{sec} \$

So, the crucial insight here is this: there is no current at the moment the switch closes but, at that very moment, the current begins to change.

How do I calculate the rate of change slightly after the first after-SW1-closed rate if R1 is to be taken into consideration?

By solving the differential equation that describes the circuit. By KVL and Ohm's Law, we have:

\$v_L = L \dfrac{di_L}{dt} = v_1 - i_L R \rightarrow \dfrac{di_L}{dt} + \dfrac{R}{L}i_L = v_1\$

This is an easy 1st order ordinary differential equation for the series current \$i_L\$.

The solution, for zero initial condition, is:

\$i_L(t) = \dfrac{v_1}{R}(1 - e^{-\frac{t}{\tau}}) \$

Where

\$\tau = \dfrac{L}{R} \$

When t is "small enough", i.e., right after the switch closes, we have:

\$i_L(t) \approx \dfrac{v_1}{L}t \$

So, in the early moments, the resistance has negligible effect and the current is approximately a ramp. The current begins to significantly deviate from a ramp only after the current becomes large enough such that the voltage drop across the resistor is significant compared to the voltage source.

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ How do I calculate the rate of change slightly after the first after-SW1-closed rate if R1 is to be taken into consideration? \$\endgroup\$
    – Cluelessly
    Commented May 8, 2013 at 14:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Cluelessly, see my update. \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 8, 2013 at 17:31

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.