Kirchhoff's Voltage
Law (KVL)
Let's take another look at our example
series circuit, this time numbering the points in the
circuit for voltage reference:
If we were to connect a voltmeter between
points 2 and 1, red test lead to point 2 and black test lead
to point 1, the meter would register +45 volts. Typically
the "+" sign is not shown, but rather implied, for positive
readings in digital meter displays. However, for this lesson
the polarity of the voltage reading is very important and so
I will show positive numbers explicitly:
When a voltage is specified with a double
subscript (the characters "2-1" in the notation "E2-1"),
it means the voltage at the first point (2) as measured in
reference to the second point (1). A voltage specified as "Ecg"
would mean the voltage as indicated by a digital meter with
the red test lead on point "c" and the black test lead on
point "g": the voltage at "c" in reference to "g".
If we were to take that same voltmeter and
measure the voltage drop across each resistor, stepping
around the circuit in a clockwise direction with the red
test lead of our meter on the point ahead and the black test
lead on the point behind, we would obtain the following
readings:
We should already be familiar with the
general principle for series circuits stating that
individual voltage drops add up to the total applied
voltage, but measuring voltage drops in this manner and
paying attention to the polarity (mathematical sign) of the
readings reveals another facet of this principle: that the
voltages measured as such all add up to zero:
This principle is known as Kirchhoff's
Voltage Law (discovered in 1847 by Gustav R. Kirchhoff,
a German physicist), and it can be stated as such:
"The algebraic sum of all voltages in a
loop must equal zero"
By algebraic, I mean accounting for
signs (polarities) as well as magnitudes. By loop, I
mean any path traced from one point in a circuit around to
other points in that circuit, and finally back to the
initial point. In the above example the loop was formed by
following points in this order: 1-2-3-4-1. It doesn't matter
which point we start at or which direction we proceed in
tracing the loop; the voltage sum will still equal zero. To
demonstrate, we can tally up the voltages in loop 3-2-1-4-3
of the same circuit:
This may make more sense if we re-draw our
example series circuit so that all components are
represented in a straight line:
It's still the same series circuit, just
with the components arranged in a different form. Notice the
polarities of the resistor voltage drops with respect to the
battery: the battery's voltage is negative on the left and
positive on the right, whereas all the resistor voltage
drops are oriented the other way: positive on the left and
negative on the right. This is because the resistors are
resisting the flow of electrons being pushed by the
battery. In other words, the "push" exerted by the resistors
against the flow of electrons must be in a
direction opposite the source of electromotive force.
Here we see what a digital voltmeter would
indicate across each component in this circuit, black lead
on the left and red lead on the right, as laid out in
horizontal fashion:
If we were to take that same voltmeter and
read voltage across combinations of components, starting
with only R1 on the left and progressing across
the whole string of components, we will see how the voltages
add algebraically (to zero):
The fact that series voltages add up should
be no mystery, but we notice that the polarity of
these voltages makes a lot of difference in how the figures
add. While reading voltage across R1, R1--R2,
and R1--R2--R3 (I'm using a
"double-dash" symbol "--" to represent the series
connection between resistors R1, R2,
and R3), we see how the voltages measure
successively larger (albeit negative) magnitudes, because
the polarities of the individual voltage drops are in the
same orientation (positive left, negative right). The sum of
the voltage drops across R1, R2, and R3
equals 45 volts, which is the same as the battery's output,
except that the battery's polarity is opposite that of the
resistor voltage drops (negative left, positive right), so
we end up with 0 volts measured across the whole string of
components.
That we should end up with exactly 0 volts
across the whole string should be no mystery, either.
Looking at the circuit, we can see that the far left of the
string (left side of R1: point number 2) is
directly connected to the far right of the string (right
side of battery: point number 2), as necessary to complete
the circuit. Since these two points are directly connected,
they are electrically common to each other. And, as
such, the voltage between those two electrically common
points must be zero.
Kirchhoff's Voltage Law (sometimes denoted
as KVL for short) will work for any circuit
configuration at all, not just simple series. Note how it
works for this parallel circuit:
Being a parallel circuit, the voltage across
every resistor is the same as the supply voltage: 6 volts.
Tallying up voltages around loop 2-3-4-5-6-7-2, we get:
Note how I label the final (sum) voltage as
E2-2. Since we began our loop-stepping sequence
at point 2 and ended at point 2, the algebraic sum of those
voltages will be the same as the voltage measured between
the same point (E2-2), which of course must be
zero.
The fact that this circuit is parallel
instead of series has nothing to do with the validity of
Kirchhoff's Voltage Law. For that matter, the circuit could
be a "black box" -- its component configuration completely
hidden from our view, with only a set of exposed terminals
for us to measure voltage between -- and KVL would still
hold true:
Try any order of steps from any terminal in
the above diagram, stepping around back to the original
terminal, and you'll find that the algebraic sum of the
voltages always equals zero.
Furthermore, the "loop" we trace for KVL
doesn't even have to be a real current path in the
closed-circuit sense of the word. All we have to do to
comply with KVL is to begin and end at the same point in the
circuit, tallying voltage drops and polarities as we go
between the next and the last point. Consider this absurd
example, tracing "loop" 2-3-6-3-2 in the same parallel
resistor circuit:
KVL can be used to determine an unknown
voltage in a complex circuit, where all other voltages
around a particular "loop" are known. Take the following
complex circuit (actually two series circuits joined by a
single wire at the bottom) as an example:
To make the problem simpler, I've omitted
resistance values and simply given voltage drops across each
resistor. The two series circuits share a common wire
between them (wire 7-8-9-10), making voltage measurements
between the two circuits possible. If we wanted to
determine the voltage between points 4 and 3, we could set
up a KVL equation with the voltage between those points as
the unknown:
Stepping around the loop 3-4-9-8-3, we write
the voltage drop figures as a digital voltmeter would
register them, measuring with the red test lead on the point
ahead and black test lead on the point behind as we progress
around the loop. Therefore, the voltage from point 9 to
point 4 is a positive (+) 12 volts because the "red lead" is
on point 9 and the "black lead" is on point 4. The voltage
from point 3 to point 8 is a positive (+) 20 volts because
the "red lead" is on point 3 and the "black lead" is on
point 8. The voltage from point 8 to point 9 is zero, of
course, because those two points are electrically common.
Our final answer for the voltage from point
4 to point 3 is a negative (-) 32 volts, telling us that
point 3 is actually positive with respect to point 4,
precisely what a digital voltmeter would indicate with the
red lead on point 4 and the black lead on point 3:
In other words, the initial placement of our
"meter leads" in this KVL problem was "backwards." Had we
generated our KVL equation starting with E3-4
instead of E4-3, stepping around the same loop
with the opposite meter lead orientation, the final answer
would have been E3-4 = +32 volts:
It is important to realize that neither
approach is "wrong." In both cases, we arrive at the correct
assessment of voltage between the two points, 3 and 4: point
3 is positive with respect to point 4, and the voltage
between them is 32 volts.
|