simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

The KVL equation for the right loop is: $$-(I-gV_c)(\frac{10}{s}+10)-5I+V_s=0$$

But my professor use: $$(I-gV_c)(\frac{10}{s}+10)+5I+V_s=0$$

Which sign convention is right?

If I solve for the transfer function $$H=\frac{V_0}{V_s}$$ using my equation $$-(I-gV_c)(\frac{10}{s}+10)-5I+V_s=0$$.

First I find an equation relating Vc to I: $$gV_c-I=\frac{sV_c}{10}$$. This is the Ohm law for the capacitor. s is Laplace variable. So $$V_c=\frac{10I}{10g-s}$$. Plug this into the my KVL equation $$(I-gV_c)(\frac{10}{s}+10)+5I=V_s$$, you get $$(I-\frac{10gI}{10g-s})(\frac{10}{s}+10)+5I=V_s$$. $$V_s=\frac{50gI-10I-15sI}{10g-s}$$.

I found an equation relating V0, the voltage at the top node, to I, this is basically the Ohm law for the center branch: $$gV_c-I_1=\frac{V_0}{\frac{10}{s}+10}$$ So $$V_0=I\frac{10+10s}{10g-s}$$.

Finally, we divide V0 by Vs:$$H=\frac{10+10s}{50g-10-15s}$$

Now using my professor's equation: $$(I-gV_c)(\frac{10}{s}+10)+5I+V_s=0$$. My professor has the same equation: $$V_0=I\frac{10+10s}{10g-s}$$ and $$V_c=\frac{10I}{10g-s}$$

Finally, my professor got: $$H=\frac{2(s+1)}{3s+2-10g}$$ The denominator is mine multiplied by -1.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Correct the diagram - capacitor should be 1/10 F, not s/10 F. \$\endgroup\$
    – Chu
    Dec 17, 2017 at 18:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Chu Or rather \$\frac{1}{sc}=\frac{1}{10s}\$. \$\endgroup\$ Dec 17, 2017 at 18:31
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @HarrySvensson, looking at the analysis, I think it's 0.1F. \$\endgroup\$
    – Chu
    Dec 17, 2017 at 19:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ I corrected it. The capacitance is 1/10. So the laplace of it is 10/s \$\endgroup\$ Dec 17, 2017 at 19:34

2 Answers 2


Your professor is correct.

Current down through \$\ C_1 ,\: R_2\$ is: \$\ (gV_C-I)\$, hence \$V_0\$ for this branch is:


Voltage across \$R_3\$ is \$\ 5I\$, hence \$V_0\$ for the right branch is:


Equating these:


Multiply through by -1:


  • \$\begingroup\$ But how do you know the actual current goes down through the middle branch? \$\endgroup\$ Dec 17, 2017 at 19:43
  • \$\begingroup\$ Ok maybe the direction of the actual current does not matter. But I dont get why $$(I-gV_c)(\frac{10}{s}+10)$$ does not have a negative sign in front of it. If we are assuming the actual current goes down through the middle branch but $$(I-gV_c)$$ is going up, so against the current. Thus negative. \$\endgroup\$ Dec 17, 2017 at 19:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ gVc is down, I is up, therefore (gVc - I) is down. (I-gVc) would be up. This is a basic relationship. If there is 2A flowing down and 5A flowing up then there is (2-5)=-3A flowing down. The sign indicates the flow direction relative to the specified direction. \$\endgroup\$
    – Chu
    Dec 18, 2017 at 0:54

It doesn't matter which direction you choose for the current, it should all work out if you stay consistent with the passive sign convention (psc).

What I would do is add sign reference to the relevant resistors here—\$R_2\$ and \$R_3\$. This is arbitrary.


simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

Now, if you start from the reference node, and go around the loop through \$R_2\$, \$C_1\$, \$R_3\$, and \$V_S\$, you write KVL as follow:

$$ V_{R_2}+V_{C_1}-V_{R_3}-V_S=0 $$

I gave the voltage rises (from - to +) a positive sign and a negative one to the drops (from + to -). Fair enough. Since I have assumed the current goes up from the reference node around that loop, I run into an issue with the psc. That is because the current going up enters through the negative terminals of \$R_2\$ and \$C_1\$ and this is what happens according to the psc:

enter image description here

That means that the previous KVL equations becomes:

$$ -(R_2)(I-gV_c)-(\dfrac{1}{sC_1})(I-gV_c)-(R_3)(I)-V_S=0 $$

Notice that the terms for \$R_2\$ and \$C_2\$ have a negative sign, because they don't follow the passive sign convention. That is why, if you have a choice, you choose the current to go in the direction of the voltage drops (that is the current enters the positive terminal), that way you don't have to 'manually' insert a negative sign when plugging in for the values of the voltages.

That equation can be rewritten as:

$$ -(I-gV_c)(R_2 + \dfrac{1}{sC_1})-(R_3)(I)-V_S=0 $$

That matches your professor's equation.

I could have alternatively chosen the opposite reference for the voltage across \$R_2\$


simulate this circuit

If I write the same KVL loop, assuming the current is going up from the reference node,

$$ -V_{R_2}+V_{C_1}-V_{R_3}-V_S=0 $$

Notice the negative sign in front of \$V_{R_2}\$, because now I have chosen it to be a drop in the direction of the current and as per my previous rule, drops are negative.

When you plug in Ohm's law, you don't need to worry about putting a negative sign in front of it, because it now follows the psc. \$C_1\$, however, does not, you'd still need to put a negative sign:

$$ -(R_2)(I-gV_c)-(\dfrac{1}{sC_1})(I-gV_c)-(R_3)(I)-V_S=0 $$

The equation is still the same.

You could do the same experiment by changing the reference for polarity of \$C_1\$. It's all about being consistent with the references and the convention.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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