Circuit Theory

Resistors, Capacitors, and lnductors (oh, my!)

Resistors:
Anything and everything that resists the flow of electric current can be thought of as a
resistor. How well it resists electric current can be expressed as "resistance". The larger the
value of the resistance, the more the resistor resists the flow of electric current.
Mathematically, resistance is defined as R =

ff, *atis,

it

is

the derivative of the voltage

with respect to the current. This can be rewritten and integrated over, yielding

dV=R*dI

lon=[a *dI

n=lr *dl
Until we have more information about the current dependence of the resistance, we're
stuck. On occasion, the resistance of a given resistor is more or less constant (this is far more
common in textbooks than in the real world). lf this is the case, then the integral simplifies to:

V=IxR
This is a result of Ohm's Law. Again, this relation only applies to resistors that are ohmig or
rather, those whose resistances are constant. lf a resistor is ohmic, then there is a linear

relationship between the voltage across the resistor and the current flowing through it, with
the resistance being the slope. lf a resistor is not ohmic, then the relation can be, well,
anything. For instance, here are some rough graphs of current as a function of the voltage
across an ohmic resistor, a light bulb, and a diode:

Lt

rv.rc Kcsil trrr

Lryrtv 6qlu

>/e

fid*el T
lne

,t
^r/
,*r,Lclrrt)

Clearly there is not a linear relationship between voltage and current for the light bulb and the

diode. Hence, they are not ohmic.

It is possible to mix and match resistors and place them in various locations in an electric
circuit, forming what's called a resistor network.

T l";s f
l-,2 q(u- holro4<
:.
,,
\44' L c cvt I l,.v {r* t i'

\ v at, al,
As it turns out, these resistor networks can be reduced

^,ho

to and replaced by a single resistor. This

new single resistor acts just like the ensemble it replaced and its resistance is described as an
effective resistance. How is this effective resistance found? That depends on how the resistor
network behaves. (The method of replacing a resistor network with a single resistor is just a
part of a larger theorem known as Thevenin's Theorem. This theorem says that not only can
resistors be replaced, but also voltage sources and current sources. Better yet, the way that
they are originally organized does not matier, so Iong as it is a linear network.)
Resistors can be arranged in two different ways: in series and in parallel. Their

arrangement dictates how they are replaced by an effective resistance. How this is done can be
easily derived from Ohm's law (we're stuck in Academia here, so all of our resistors are ohmic
always, even though they don't really exist in the real world).
Series: Here's our

circuit:
V

&

(L

We can use Kirchhoff's Voltage Rule and say 7

IR, n Rt

In, * Rz

0. The voltage of the

battery and the resistances of the two resistors in known, but the two currents aren't. Also, we
only have one equation. With only one equation and two unknowns, we can't solve this
problem. We need a second equation; one that can relate the two currents. Notice how the
resistors are set up. lf we were it measure the current flowing into the top of the first resistor
and compare it to what's coming out of it, the currents must be the same. There's nowhere else
for the current to flow. The same is true for the second resistor. Hence, the current flowing

through the first resistor must be the same as the current flowing through the second resistor,
/2. But then these must also equalthe current found anywhere else in the circuit, so
so
L= Iz = 1. Returningtothevoltage equation,we nowhaveV = / * Rr * I * Rz, orrather
V = I * (R1 * R2). This looks awfully similar to Ohm's law, to the point where the term R1 + Rz

[ -

acts like a resistance, that is, an effective resistonce. Hence, for two resistors in series,
R"f f = R1 + Rz. tf there are more than two resistors in series, then you can continue to create
and replace effective resistances untilthe whole chain collapses down to a single resistance.
Parallel: Here's our circuit:

fi/ole ',
f??

Use the same method

tLc.e hr : lrrfs r vt /" \rS

'Vrftt
.VrRl
. R,, (r-

for the series resistors. By Kirchhoff's Voltage Rule, we have 3 equations

(there are 3 loops):

n-Inr*Rr=0
Y-Inr*Rz=0
Irr*Rr-Inz*Rz=0
front of I*, * R, in the last equation is because We.re
looping around in the direction opposite to the flow of the current.)

(The reason there isn't a minus sign in

From the first two equations, we see that Ip,

= V /Rr and I*, = V /Rz. Unfortunately, we're not

going to get any more use out of these equations. Time to look for something else, like
Kirchhoff's Current Rule. Looking at the junction above the first resistor, we have 1 = Ia, + Inz.
Here, we can substitute in what we found using the voltage rule and write

rather, V

I. tfr + ;)-t

I = # * h,

o,

Again, this tooks rather similar to Ohm's law, with the term

acting like an effective resistance. Therefore, for two resistors in parallel,

C*

* #-t

Ref

f = G * #-t.

Like

the resistors in series, if there are more than two resistors in parallel,

they can all be replaced by effective resistances until only one effective resistance remains.
Better yet, resistor networks that have resistors in parallel and in series can be reduced down
to a single resistance. The main trick is figuring out which resistors are in series and which are in
parallel. Usually a simple tracing of how the current could flow will give the correct setup.

Capacitors:
Capacitors are the only things that can actually store electricity (batteries do not store
electricity, but rather produce it on the spot). How much charge a capacitor can store with a
given voltage as dictated by its capacitance. For a given voltagg the higher the capacitance, the

more charge it can store. Hence, we can write C

f;,

where V is the voltage across the

capacitor, Q is the charge on the capacitor, and C is the capacitance (it is handy to think of
capacitance as "charge per volt"). By looking at this equation, it appears that the capacitance of
a capacitor could be dependent on the voltage across it. lt isn't. Think about it for a moment:
will the capacitance of a capacitor in an open electric circuit (zero voltage, zero current) change
once the circuit is closed? lt won't. The capacitance of a capacitor is entirely and completely
dependent on its geometry (except when it isn't, but that comes later. Life is never that simple,
so why should we start now?). For example, the capacitance of a parallel plate capacitor
(usually only found in Academia. The real world prefers electrolytics, "doorknob" capacitors,
and other, more compact geometries) is given by

o*A
,=T
where A is the area of one of the plates and d is the distance between them. Make the plates
larger or get them closer together and you can boost the capacitance. Notice that the voltage
across this capacitor does not appear at all in this expression. Only the geometry counts. Well,
the geometry and a known constant that's built into the universe that we can't change. Or can
we? Hmmm... What if we could tweak the universe, at least on a small scale. Enter dielectrics.

lf we were to place a non-conducting material in between the plates of a capacitor (nonconducting so we don't short it out), we'll end up changing the electric field inside the capacitor
a bit as charges in the new material are attracted to the two plates of the capacitor. This effect
is known as screening.

r.l->/=i=o
=H/=

--illiEl l:

-/=H//-

P > E- -'- t=
"n't--d''/qtn,-o

Ed,

The screened electric field is *;3i:!r\{'irgnitude than the original field, so more
charge can be placed on each plate for a given voltage without being repelled off of it. Hence,
we've boosted the capacitance of the capacitor without changing the geometry. ln the equation

for the capacitance of the parallel plate capacitor, the only thing that could have changed is eo.
That makes sense, since eo is an electric permeability constant and we changed our material
from a vacuum to a non-conducting chunk of matter, so we need a new permeability constant,
often denoted as just e. We can also describe the whole change as a dielectric constant K, so

that the new capacitance can be written in terms of the old capacitance Cn"* = K *

CoM..

Like resistors, multiple capacitors can be placed in a single circuit, forming a capacitor

network. Capacitors too can be in series with each other or in parallel and can be replaced by
an effective capacitance. How they are arranged affects how the effective capacitance is
calculated.
Series: Here's our circuit:

t,---

v _-_-.

J-'. 1-,
I

.c"

L--J=c.

Vo
Rule: V
Take a look
ok at Kirchhoff'ss Voltage

-*-Z=

0. Similarly to what happened with the

resistors, there are 2 unknowns, Q1 and Q2,bul only l equation. We need another. Looking
back at the resistor problem, perhaps we can do something with current. However, current

doesn't really mean much of anything to capacitors. Charge, on the other hand, does matter.
Once the battery fully charges the capacitors, it has placed a total charge Q on the upper plate
of the first capacitor. Thus, there must be a total charge -Q on the lower plate. This lower plate

the upper plate of the second capacitor, so this next plate must have a charge
on it, resulting with a charge ol *Q on the lower plate. Therefore, both capacitors have the
is connected to

same amount of charge on theml Going back to Kirchhoff's Rule,

7=

** *

o, rather

tf + f). rf,ir looks like the equation relating charge to voltage for a single capacitor
with capacitance a-- Hence,'ceff
- =ic1* *.
c2
,rji
V

= Q.

Parallel: Here's our circuit:

Lt?

\L As.,n,3

lo

aro S

cz_

Again, be Kirchhoff's Voltage Rule, we have 3 equations:

n-t=o

,-t=o
Qt
CL
-=-

Qz
C2

The only helpful bit here is in the first two equations. The third simply repeats what the first

two say. We need to look for something else. Again, current won't be of much help here, but
charge will. ln the process of charging the capacitors, the battery has moved a total amount of
charge Q and has deposited it across both capacitors, so we must have Q = Qt * Q2. Using the
firsttwo equationsfromthevoltage loops, we can write Q =V * CL+V * Cz,ot rather,
Q = V * (C1 * C2). Wow. D6ji vu. This implies that we have an effective capacitance
C"f f = q + Cz. Notice how the relations are similar to those for resistors, but the setups are
switched. Be careful not to mix up which relation goes with which setup.
When calculating the effective capacitances, electric current didn't play much of a role.
This is due to the behavior of capacitors. Consider a completely discharged capacitor that is
then connected to a battery. lmmediately after the circuit is connected, the battery moves
charge onto the capacitor. At this point in time, though there is nothing on the capacitor to
oppose the incoming charge. Hence, current flows freely through the circuit. As time tick on
and more charge is deposited on the capacitor, it becomes harder to add more charge. Think
about it: toy to add a positive charge to a collection of positive charges. They'll try to repel each

other making it more difficult to place the next charge. Hence, less charge willflow through the
circuit, reducing the current. Eventually, the capacitor becomes fully charged and nothing more
can be added. Hence current grinds to a halt. lt is as if a capacitor acts like an electrical short
when discharged and like a break in the circuit when fully charged. That's why when you have
something like a light bulb in series with a capacitor that is then connected to a battery, the
light bulb will immediately flash on, but then die down and finally switch off. This behavior
allows for some rather useful elementary timing circuits, like the flashing lamps. The circuit
would look something like this:

The whirring sound usually heard in the flash lamps of cameras is the capacitor charging,

preparing to discharge across the lamp itself.

lnductors:
Similar to how a capacitor stores electric charge, an inductor can "store" magnetic flux.

It does so using a property known as inductance. Mathematically speaking, inductance is

defined 0s

I = ?. *n, L? Because I is used for current, since the word "current" starts with

an "1", naturally.
There is no guarantee that the inductance of an inductor is constant. However, when it
is, we immediately have

, = Y.That's all well and good, but if an inductor is to have any ptace

in electrical circuits, we need an expression for the voltage across the inductor. lt would also be
great if we could get rid of the magnetic flux term, as that isn't really something that can be
easily measured or monitored. Enter Faraday's Law of lnduction (hence the name inductors).

Writing down Faraday's Law of lnduction, we have

c

dQe
-

--

dt

From the inductance equation above, we know that <Dp

I * I . Plugging this in yields

d(Lr)
dt

But the inductance is a constant, so it comes out of the derivative, giving

dI

e=_LE
This is the voltage induced in the inductor to fight offthe change in magnetic flux.
Hence, the voltage across the inductor is simply the negative of this expression.

dI

v=Ld,
What does this mean? lt demonstrates that inductors don't really care how much
current is flowing through them, so long as that value doesn't change. Similar to how resistors
fight the flow of current, inductors try to fight against a change in the current.