DC Transient RL Circuit - Current Decay

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating current decay in a DC transient RL circuit using the equation for current rise. The user seeks to adapt the equation for decay, starting from a specified current and applying a negative voltage to accelerate the decay process. It is noted that the equation can be applied symmetrically for both rise and decay, provided the time constant τ is calculated correctly as τ = L/R. Concerns are raised about discrepancies between theoretical calculations and simulation results, particularly regarding the speed of decay. The conversation concludes that for non-step transient inputs, solving the general differential equation may be necessary for accurate results.
LADransfield
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
If I have a circuit with

R = 1Ω
L = 300μH
V = 20V
i0 = 5A

I know that I can use the equation at the bottom of page 13 to calculate the current rise given any starting current and input voltage:

i(t) = (V/R)[1-e-t/τ] + i0e-t/τ

This is fine, and stops increasing at 20A as expected, but then how would I (if I need to) arrange the equation so that it works in a similar way for decay? Say I was starting at a current of 15A, with a driving voltage of 10V?

I know that if I use:

i(t) = (V/R)[e-t/τ]

I will start decaying at 10A down to 0A, but I'm interested in being able to specify a negative voltage to drive the decay faster, with a variable starting current.

Thanks in advance for any advice!

*edit*
Also, how would I work out when it is best to switch between building and decaying current? Would it just be when |V/R| > |i(t)| is less than 0, I build, and when |V/R| < |i(t)| I decay?

Thanks again
 
Last edited:
Engineering news on Phys.org
I don't understand the problem. That equation appears to work regardless of "rise" or "decay", and regardless of what types of inputs you use (provided they are not dynamic).
 
I have been using transient inputs, though every time my input changes, I have resent my t back to 0 and begun recounting, so the dynamic input shouldn't be a problem

Compared to simulation from ANSYS Maxwell and from test data, this appears to be calculating results which decay much slower, though rise appears relatively similar
 
The equation definitely doesn't have any differences between rise/fall times, it is inherently symmetric. The only thing I can think of is that perhaps you are calculating τ incorrectly? It should be τ = L/R.

This equation will work fine for multiple step transients provided it has time to fully settle before applying the next one. If you are trying to calculate transients that are something other than step changes, you will want to solve the general differential equation.
 
Hey guys. I have a question related to electricity and alternating current. Say an alien fictional society developed electricity, and settled on a standard like 73V AC current at 46 Hz. How would appliances be designed, and what impact would the lower frequency and voltage have on transformers, wiring, TVs, computers, LEDs, motors, and heating, assuming the laws of physics and technology are the same as on Earth?
While I was rolling out a shielded cable, a though came to my mind - what happens to the current flow in the cable if there came a short between the wire and the shield in both ends of the cable? For simplicity, lets assume a 1-wire copper wire wrapped in an aluminum shield. The wire and the shield has the same cross section area. There are insulating material between them, and in both ends there is a short between them. My first thought, the total resistance of the cable would be reduced...
I used to be an HVAC technician. One time I had a service call in which there was no power to the thermostat. The thermostat did not have power because the fuse in the air handler was blown. The fuse in the air handler was blown because there was a low voltage short. The rubber coating on one of the thermostat wires was chewed off by a rodent. The exposed metal in the thermostat wire was touching the metal cabinet of the air handler. This was a low voltage short. This low voltage...
Back
Top