Physics 2 Quiz: Interpreting Rc Rl Circuit Graphs
8 questions · exam conditions
0:00
Interpreting Rc Rl Circuit GraphsQuestion 1 of 8

A capacitor with initial voltage VC,0V_{C,0} discharges through a resistor RR toward a final voltage of zero. A student plots ln[VC(t)/E]\ln[V_C(t)/\mathcal{E}] versus tt, where E\mathcal{E} is a reference voltage (the initial EMF of the circuit that originally charged the capacitor). The plot yields a straight line with slope mm (a negative number) and y-intercept bb.

Which of the following correctly interprets both the slope mm and y-intercept bb of this semi-log plot, and what does a non-zero y-intercept physically indicate?

The slope m=1/(RC)m = -1/(RC) and the y-intercept b=0b = 0, since VC(0)=EV_C(0) = \mathcal{E} for a fully charged capacitor; a nonzero bb would indicate the capacitor was not fully charged to E\mathcal{E}, corresponding to VC,0=EebV_{C,0} = \mathcal{E}\,e^b, which is less than E\mathcal{E} if b<0b < 0.
The slope m=RCm = -RC and the y-intercept b=ln(E)b = \ln(\mathcal{E}), because the linearized discharge equation gives lnVC=RCt+lnE\ln V_C = -RCt + \ln \mathcal{E}; a nonzero intercept blnEb \neq \ln \mathcal{E} would indicate a measurement error in the reference voltage.
The slope m=1/(RC)m = -1/(RC) and the y-intercept b=ln(VC,0/E)b = \ln(V_{C,0}/\mathcal{E}), where VC,0V_{C,0} is the initial capacitor voltage; a nonzero bb indicates the capacitor's initial voltage differed from E\mathcal{E}, with VC,0=EebV_{C,0} = \mathcal{E}\,e^b.
The slope m=1/τm = -1/\tau where τ=R/C\tau = R/C, and the y-intercept b=1b = -1 for a fully charged capacitor; a value b1b \neq -1 indicates that the resistance or capacitance differs from the assumed values used in computing the normalization.
← Back to quizzes

Physics 2 Quiz

Physics 2 Quiz: Interpreting Rc Rl Circuit Graphs

Practice Interpreting Rc Rl Circuit Graphs in Physics 2 with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Interpreting Rc Rl Circuit Graphs, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for Physics 2.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

A capacitor with initial voltage VC,0V_{C,0} discharges through a resistor RR toward a final voltage of zero. A student plots ln[VC(t)/E]\ln[V_C(t)/\mathcal{E}] versus tt, where E\mathcal{E} is a reference voltage (the initial EMF of the circuit that originally charged the capacitor). The plot yields a straight line with slope mm (a negative number) and y-intercept bb.

Which of the following correctly interprets both the slope mm and y-intercept bb of this semi-log plot, and what does a non-zero y-intercept physically indicate?

  1. The slope m=1/(RC)m = -1/(RC) and the y-intercept b=0b = 0, since VC(0)=EV_C(0) = \mathcal{E} for a fully charged capacitor; a nonzero bb would indicate the capacitor was not fully charged to E\mathcal{E}, corresponding to VC,0=EebV_{C,0} = \mathcal{E}\,e^b, which is less than E\mathcal{E} if b<0b < 0.
  2. The slope m=RCm = -RC and the y-intercept b=ln(E)b = \ln(\mathcal{E}), because the linearized discharge equation gives lnVC=RCt+lnE\ln V_C = -RCt + \ln \mathcal{E}; a nonzero intercept blnEb \neq \ln \mathcal{E} would indicate a measurement error in the reference voltage.
  3. The slope m=1/(RC)m = -1/(RC) and the y-intercept b=ln(VC,0/E)b = \ln(V_{C,0}/\mathcal{E}), where VC,0V_{C,0} is the initial capacitor voltage; a nonzero bb indicates the capacitor's initial voltage differed from E\mathcal{E}, with VC,0=EebV_{C,0} = \mathcal{E}\,e^b. (correct answer)
  4. The slope m=1/τm = -1/\tau where τ=R/C\tau = R/C, and the y-intercept b=1b = -1 for a fully charged capacitor; a value b1b \neq -1 indicates that the resistance or capacitance differs from the assumed values used in computing the normalization.
Explanation: When you see a semi-log plot of a decaying exponential, your first move should be to linearize the governing equation and match its form to y=mt+by = mt + b. For RC discharge, the voltage follows VC(t)=VC,0et/RCV_C(t) = V_{C,0}\,e^{-t/RC}. Dividing by the reference voltage E\mathcal{E} and taking the natural log gives: ln ⁣(VC(t)E)=ln ⁣(VC,0E)1RCt\ln\!\left(\frac{V_C(t)}{\mathcal{E}}\right) = \ln\!\left(\frac{V_{C,0}}{\mathcal{E}}\right) - \frac{1}{RC}\,t This is exactly y=b+mty = b + mt, where the slope is m=1/(RC)m = -1/(RC) and the y-intercept is b=ln(VC,0/E)b = \ln(V_{C,0}/\mathcal{E}). A nonzero bb simply means VC,0EV_{C,0} \neq \mathcal{E}—the capacitor wasn't charged to exactly E\mathcal{E}—and you can recover the actual initial voltage as VC,0=EebV_{C,0} = \mathcal{E}\,e^b. This makes C correct. A is almost right on the slope but incorrectly assumes b=0b = 0 as the default, then contradicts itself—if b=0b=0 requires full charging, a nonzero bb can't simultaneously be the definition of the intercept. B gets the slope completely wrong: m=RCm = -RC has units of ΩF=s2/ss\Omega \cdot F = \text{s}^2/\text{s} \cdot \text{s}, which is dimensionally inconsistent as a rate. The correct slope must carry units of s1\text{s}^{-1}. D invents an incorrect time constant τ=R/C\tau = R/C (it should be τ=RC\tau = RC) and fabricates a required intercept of 1-1, which has no physical basis from the linearized equation. Study tip: On semi-log problems, always linearize first, then read off slope and intercept by direct comparison—never guess the form.

Question 2

An RC circuit consists of a resistor RR and capacitor CC in series with a battery of EMF E\mathcal{E}. At t=0t = 0, the switch is closed and the capacitor begins to charge. A graph of the current I(t)I(t) through the circuit is plotted and shows an exponential decay from an initial value, reaching approximately 37% of its initial value at time t1t_1.

From the graph described, a student extracts the time constant τ=t1\tau = t_1 and the initial current I0I_0. The student then claims: 'The resistance in the circuit is R=E/I0R = \mathcal{E}/I_0 and the capacitance is C=τ/RC = \tau/R.' Which of the following best evaluates this claim?

  1. Both expressions are correct: I0=E/RI_0 = \mathcal{E}/R follows from Kirchhoff's voltage law at t=0t = 0 when the capacitor voltage is zero, and C=τ/RC = \tau/R follows from the definition τ=RC\tau = RC, so both relations are valid. (correct answer)
  2. The expression for RR is incorrect because at t=0t = 0 the capacitor acts as a short circuit, making the initial current infinite; the correct initial current must account for internal resistance of the battery, rendering R=E/I0R = \mathcal{E}/I_0 an overestimate of the true resistance.
  3. The expression for CC is incorrect because τ\tau is defined as the time for the current to fall to 1/e1/e of its initial value only for RL circuits; in RC circuits the time constant governs voltage, not current, so τRC\tau \neq RC for the current graph.
  4. The expression for RR is correct, but the expression for CC is wrong because τ=RC\tau = RC applies only when both RR and CC are measured in SI base units and the graph's time axis must be verified to be in seconds before computing C=τ/RC = \tau/R; otherwise the formula gives an incorrect capacitance.
Explanation: When analyzing RC charging circuits, your anchor should be Kirchhoff's Voltage Law (KVL) applied at two key moments: t=0t = 0 and as tt \to \infty. This question tests whether you understand both the physical meaning of initial conditions and the definition of the RC time constant. At t=0t = 0, the capacitor is completely uncharged, so it contributes zero voltage — it behaves like a plain wire. KVL gives E=I0R\mathcal{E} = I_0 R, which immediately yields I0=E/RI_0 = \mathcal{E}/R, or equivalently R=E/I0R = \mathcal{E}/I_0. The student's first expression is correct. For the time constant, the current in an RC circuit follows I(t)=I0et/τI(t) = I_0 e^{-t/\tau} where τ=RC\tau = RC. The graph confirms τ=t1\tau = t_1 (the time to reach 37%, i.e., 1/e1/e, of I0I_0), so solving gives C=τ/RC = \tau/R — the student's second expression is also correct. Answer A captures both of these valid relationships precisely. B is wrong because it invents a problem that doesn't exist. Nothing in the problem introduces internal resistance, and the formula R=E/I0R = \mathcal{E}/I_0 is perfectly valid for the given ideal circuit. The capacitor at t = 0$ does *not* make current infinite — the resistor R$$ is still present and limits current. C is wrong because the exponential decay et/RCe^{-t/RC} governs both the current and the voltage in an RC circuit (current decays, voltage rises). The time constant τ=RC\tau = RC appears in both expressions — it is not exclusive to RL circuits or to voltage alone. D is a red herring. Using consistent SI units is always assumed in physics problems unless told otherwise; it's not a flaw in the student's reasoning. Study tip: Memorize the two boundary conditions for RC circuits — at t=0t = 0, the capacitor is a wire (zero voltage); as tt \to \infty, it's an open circuit (zero current). These two snapshots solve most RC problems quickly.

Question 3

A fully charged capacitor (initial voltage V0V_0) is discharged through a resistor RR. Simultaneously, a separate RL circuit (same RR, inductance LL) has its battery disconnected at t=0t=0 and the inductor (initially carrying current I0=V0/RI_0 = V_0/R) discharges through RR. A student overlays the graphs of normalized energy stored in each element—UC(t)/UC,0U_C(t)/U_{C,0} and UL(t)/UL,0U_L(t)/U_{L,0}—and notices both curves are identical.

The student concludes that τRC=τRL\tau_{RC} = \tau_{RL}. Assuming τRC=RC\tau_{RC} = RC and τRL=L/R\tau_{RL} = L/R, and given that the energy curves are identical, which of the following correctly identifies what must be true and why the energy curves match?

  1. The student's conclusion is partially correct: RC=L/RRC = L/R is necessary for the current graphs to overlap, but the normalized energy graphs are always identical because the squaring operation removes the distinction between time constants, making the curves degenerate regardless of circuit parameters.
  2. The student's conclusion is incorrect: the energy curves are always identical regardless of whether RC=L/RRC = L/R, because both UCU_C and ULU_L are proportional to the square of their respective state variables, which always decay with the same normalized shape e2t/τe^{-2t/\tau} scaled to unity at t=0t=0.
  3. The student's conclusion is correct: RC=L/RRC = L/R must hold; the energy curves are identical because both UC(t)/UC,0=e2t/(RC)U_C(t)/U_{C,0} = e^{-2t/(RC)} and UL(t)/UL,0=e2t/(L/R)U_L(t)/U_{L,0} = e^{-2t/(L/R)} decay at the same rate when RC=L/RRC = L/R, confirming the time constants are equal. (correct answer)
  4. The student's conclusion is incorrect: the energy curves are never identical because UCU_C decays as et/(RC)e^{-t/(RC)} while ULU_L decays as e2t/(L/R)e^{-2t/(L/R)}; the factor of 2 in the RL exponent arises because the inductor dissipates energy at twice the rate of the capacitor for equal stored energies.
Explanation: When analyzing RC and RL discharge circuits, the key is carefully deriving how energy—not just voltage or current—decays over time, then comparing those expressions directly. In an RC circuit, voltage decays as V(t)=V0et/(RC)V(t) = V_0 e^{-t/(RC)}, so normalized stored energy is UC/UC,0=(V/V0)2=e2t/(RC)U_C/U_{C,0} = (V/V_0)^2 = e^{-2t/(RC)}. In an RL circuit, current decays as I(t)=I0et/(L/R)I(t) = I_0 e^{-t/(L/R)}, so normalized stored energy is UL/UL,0=(I/I0)2=e2t/(L/R)U_L/U_{L,0} = (I/I_0)^2 = e^{-2t/(L/R)}. Both curves share the form e2t/τe^{-2t/\tau}, but with their own respective time constants. For these two curves to be identical, you need RC=L/RRC = L/R—confirming the student's conclusion in answer C is exactly right. Answer A is wrong because it claims squaring "removes the distinction" between time constants—it doesn't. Squaring changes et/τe^{-t/\tau} to e2t/τe^{-2t/\tau}, but the time constant τ\tau remains fully present and determines the decay rate. The curves only overlap if RC=L/RRC = L/R. Answer B makes the same error as A: both normalized energy curves do have the same functional form e2t/τe^{-2t/\tau}, but "same form" doesn't mean "same curve." They match only when the time constants are equal, not universally. Answer D introduces a false asymmetry, incorrectly claiming UCU_C decays as et/(RC)e^{-t/(RC)} (missing the factor of 2) and that RL energy decays faster by an additional factor. Both energy expressions carry the factor of 2 symmetrically. Study tip: Always distinguish between the state variable (VV or II, decaying as et/τe^{-t/\tau}) and stored energy (proportional to the square, decaying as e2t/τe^{-2t/\tau}). Mixing these up is the most common trap on transient circuit questions.

Question 4

An RL circuit with resistance RR and inductance LL is connected to a battery of EMF E\mathcal{E} at t=0t = 0. After many time constants, the switch is opened at time t=Tt = T and the inductor drives current through a parallel resistor RR' (a 'freewheeling' diode-resistor path). A graph of I(t)I(t) shows exponential growth from t=0t = 0 to t=Tt = T, then exponential decay for t>Tt > T.

The graph shows that the decay after t=Tt = T is significantly faster than the growth before t=Tt = T. Which of the following correctly identifies both the cause of this difference and the ratio of the two time constants?

  1. The decay is faster because the inductor now dissipates energy through both RR and RR' in series, giving τdecay=L/(R+R)\tau_{\text{decay}} = L/(R + R'), while the growth time constant is τgrowth=L/R\tau_{\text{growth}} = L/R; the ratio is τdecay/τgrowth=R/(R+R)<1\tau_{\text{decay}}/\tau_{\text{growth}} = R/(R+R') < 1.
  2. The decay is faster because the effective inductance decreases after the switch opens due to back-EMF opposition, giving τdecay=L/(R)\tau_{\text{decay}} = L'/(R') where L<LL' < L; the ratio of time constants depends on how much inductance is lost and cannot be determined without additional information.
  3. The decay is faster because the battery EMF is no longer present to sustain the current, reducing the effective driving voltage; the time constants are equal (τdecay=τgrowth=L/R\tau_{\text{decay}} = \tau_{\text{growth}} = L/R') but the decay appears faster on the graph due to the lower initial amplitude after t=Tt = T.
  4. The decay is faster because the inductor drives current through RR' alone (the battery branch is open), giving τdecay=L/R\tau_{\text{decay}} = L/R', while the growth time constant is τgrowth=L/R\tau_{\text{growth}} = L/R; the ratio is τdecay/τgrowth=R/R\tau_{\text{decay}}/\tau_{\text{growth}} = R/R', which is less than 1 only if R>RR' > R. (correct answer)
Explanation: When analyzing RL circuits with switching events, your key tool is the time constant formula τ=L/Reff\tau = L/R_{\text{eff}}, where ReffR_{\text{eff}} is whatever resistance the inductor actually "sees" in its current loop. The circuit topology changes when the switch opens, so you must redraw the circuit for each phase separately. During growth (0<t<T0 < t < T), the battery drives current through the inductor and resistance RR. The time constant is τgrowth=L/R\tau_{\text{growth}} = L/R. After the switch opens at t=Tt = T, the battery branch is disconnected entirely. The inductor now drives its stored current through the only available closed path: the freewheeling resistor RR'. This gives τdecay=L/R\tau_{\text{decay}} = L/R'. If R>RR' > R, then τdecay<τgrowth\tau_{\text{decay}} < \tau_{\text{growth}}, which is exactly what the faster decay on the graph tells you. The ratio is τdecay/τgrowth=R/R\tau_{\text{decay}}/\tau_{\text{growth}} = R/R', confirming D is correct. Choice A is tempting but wrong — it claims RR and RR' are in series during decay. They are not; the switch is open, so RR is disconnected from the loop entirely. Only RR' carries current after t=Tt = T. Choice B incorrectly invents a changing inductance — inductance is a fixed physical property of the coil and does not change when the switch opens. Choice C makes two errors: it claims both time constants equal L/RL/R' (wrong for the growth phase) and misattributes the faster decay to amplitude rather than τ\tau. A reliable strategy: whenever a switch opens or closes, redraw the circuit and identify the new current loop. The inductor always "sees" only the resistance in its closed path — nothing more, nothing less.

Question 5

A graph of the current I(t)I(t) in an RL circuit shows exponential growth from 0 toward a maximum value ImaxI_{\max}. At time t=τt = \tau (one time constant), the graph shows I(τ)=Imax(1e1)0.632ImaxI(\tau) = I_{\max}(1 - e^{-1}) \approx 0.632\,I_{\max}. A student claims: 'The slope of I(t)I(t) at t=τt = \tau equals Imax/τI_{\max}/\tau, the same as the initial slope at t=0t=0.'

Is the student's claim about the slope at t=τt = \tau correct, and what is the actual slope of I(t)I(t) at t=τt = \tau?

  1. The student is correct: the slope at t=τt = \tau equals Imax/τI_{\max}/\tau because the time constant is defined as the time at which the tangent to the exponential at t=0t=0 intersects the asymptote, and this geometric property guarantees the slope is constant throughout the growth.
  2. The student is incorrect: the slope at t=τt = \tau is Imax/(eτ)0.368Imax/τI_{\max}/(e\tau) \approx 0.368\,I_{\max}/\tau, because dI/dt=(Imax/τ)et/τdI/dt = (I_{\max}/\tau)e^{-t/\tau}, which at t=τt = \tau gives (Imax/τ)e1(I_{\max}/\tau)e^{-1}, smaller than the initial slope by a factor of ee. (correct answer)
  3. The student is incorrect: the slope at t=τt = \tau is Imax(1e1)/τ0.632Imax/τI_{\max}(1-e^{-1})/\tau \approx 0.632\,I_{\max}/\tau, because the instantaneous slope at any time equals the ratio of the current value to the time constant, not the ratio of the maximum current to the time constant.
  4. The student is incorrect: the slope at t=τt = \tau is zero, because the current has reached 63.2% of its maximum and the derivative of an exponential growth function passes through an inflection point at t=τt = \tau, after which the rate of change begins to accelerate before decelerating again.
Explanation: When analyzing RL circuit behavior, always go back to the mathematical definition of the current function rather than relying on intuition about geometric properties. The current in an RL circuit follows I(t)=Imax(1et/τ)I(t) = I_{\max}(1 - e^{-t/\tau}). To find the slope at any moment, take the derivative: dIdt=Imaxτet/τ\frac{dI}{dt} = \frac{I_{\max}}{\tau}e^{-t/\tau}. At t=0t = 0, this gives the initial slope Imax/τI_{\max}/\tau. At t=τt = \tau, substituting directly yields dIdtt=τ=Imaxτe10.368Imaxτ\frac{dI}{dt}\big|_{t=\tau} = \frac{I_{\max}}{\tau}e^{-1} \approx \frac{0.368\,I_{\max}}{\tau}. The slope has decreased by a factor of ee — confirming B is correct and the student's claim is wrong. A contains a true geometric fact — the tangent line at t = 0$ does intersect the asymptote at t = \taubutdrawsafalseconclusionfromit.Thatintersectiondefines— but draws a false conclusion from it. That intersection defines\tau$$; it does not mean the slope stays constant. The slope is continuously decreasing as the exponential decays. C confuses the value of the current with the derivative of the current. While I(τ)0.632ImaxI(\tau) \approx 0.632\,I_{\max}, the instantaneous rate of change is not the ratio of current value to τ\tau. Those are entirely different quantities. D is completely wrong on two counts: the derivative of a pure exponential growth-toward-asymptote function has no inflection point, and the slope never reaches zero until tt \to \infty. A reliable strategy: whenever a question involves exponential functions, differentiate explicitly. Don't rely on verbal descriptions of the graph — the derivative of et/τe^{-t/\tau} carries its own factor of et/τe^{-t/\tau}, which always reduces the slope over time.

Question 6

A student measures the voltage across the resistor VR(t)V_R(t) in a series RC circuit (battery EMF E\mathcal{E}, resistance RR, capacitance CC) after the switch is closed at t=0t = 0 with the capacitor initially uncharged. The student then mistakenly plots this data on a graph labeled 'Voltage across capacitor vs. time' and reports that the time constant is τreported\tau_{\text{reported}}.

If the student fits the mistakenly labeled graph to the function V0et/τreportedV_0 e^{-t/\tau_{\text{reported}}} and extracts τreported\tau_{\text{reported}}, how does τreported\tau_{\text{reported}} compare to the true time constant τ=RC\tau = RC, and what is V0V_0?

  1. τreported=RC\tau_{\text{reported}} = RC and V0=EV_0 = \mathcal{E}, because VR(t)=Eet/RCV_R(t) = \mathcal{E}\,e^{-t/RC} is itself a decaying exponential with the same time constant as VC(t)V_C(t); fitting it to V0et/τV_0 e^{-t/\tau} correctly recovers τ=RC\tau = RC and initial amplitude E\mathcal{E}. (correct answer)
  2. τreported=2RC\tau_{\text{reported}} = 2RC and V0=E/2V_0 = \mathcal{E}/2, because the resistor voltage is the complement of the capacitor voltage, and summing two exponentials of the same rate effectively doubles the apparent time constant when fit to a single exponential form.
  3. τreported=RC\tau_{\text{reported}} = RC and V0=E/2V_0 = \mathcal{E}/2, because the resistor voltage begins at E/2\mathcal{E}/2 when the capacitor is half-charged at t=0t = 0, and the decay rate is still governed by τ=RC\tau = RC.
  4. τreported=RC/2\tau_{\text{reported}} = RC/2 and V0=EV_0 = \mathcal{E}, because the resistor dissipates energy twice as fast as the capacitor stores it, effectively halving the observed time constant, while the initial voltage across the resistor equals the full EMF at t=0t = 0.
Explanation: When analyzing RC circuits, always start from Kirchhoff's voltage law: the EMF must equal the sum of voltages across each element at every moment. This means VR(t)+VC(t)=EV_R(t) + V_C(t) = \mathcal{E} at all times. Since the capacitor starts uncharged, VC(t)=E(1et/RC)V_C(t) = \mathcal{E}(1 - e^{-t/RC}). Substituting into Kirchhoff's law gives VR(t)=EE(1et/RC)=Eet/RCV_R(t) = \mathcal{E} - \mathcal{E}(1 - e^{-t/RC}) = \mathcal{E}\,e^{-t/RC}. This is already a perfect decaying exponential with initial value E\mathcal{E} and time constant RCRC. So when the student fits the resistor voltage data to V0et/τreportedV_0 e^{-t/\tau_{\text{reported}}}, the fit returns exactly τreported=RC\tau_{\text{reported}} = RC and V0=EV_0 = \mathcal{E}. The label on the graph is wrong, but the extracted parameters are mathematically correct — making A the right answer. Choice B is wrong because no "doubling" occurs. VR(t)V_R(t) is a single clean exponential, not a sum of two separate exponentials requiring a combined fit. Choice C is wrong on two counts: the capacitor is uncharged at t=0t = 0, so VR(0)=EV_R(0) = \mathcal{E}, not E/2\mathcal{E}/2. There is no half-charging condition at the start. Choice D is wrong because energy dissipation rate does not alter the circuit's time constant — τ=RC\tau = RC is fixed by the circuit topology, regardless of power considerations. A useful habit: always write out VR(t)=EVC(t)V_R(t) = \mathcal{E} - V_C(t) explicitly before drawing conclusions. Many RC circuit traps disappear once you see the full exponential form of each voltage.

Question 7

An RC circuit has a resistor R1=10kΩR_1 = 10\,\text{k}\Omega in series with a capacitor C=100μFC = 100\,\mu\text{F}. A second resistor R2=10kΩR_2 = 10\,\text{k}\Omega is connected in parallel with the capacitor. The circuit is driven by a step voltage E=10V\mathcal{E} = 10\,\text{V} applied at t=0t = 0 with the capacitor initially uncharged. A student sketches VC(t)V_C(t) and predicts it will asymptote to 10V10\,\text{V} with time constant τ=R1C=1s\tau = R_1 C = 1\,\text{s}.

Which of the following correctly identifies the errors in the student's prediction?

  1. The student correctly identifies τ=R1C\tau = R_1 C, but the asymptote is wrong: VC()=ER2/(R1+R2)=5VV_C(\infty) = \mathcal{E}\cdot R_2/(R_1 + R_2) = 5\,\text{V} because R2R_2 forms a voltage divider with R1R_1 at steady state, and the time constant is unaffected by R2R_2 since it only loads the final voltage.
  2. Both predictions are wrong: the asymptote is VC()=5VV_C(\infty) = 5\,\text{V} (voltage divider between R1R_1 and R2R_2), and the time constant is τ=(R1R2)C=0.5s\tau = (R_1 \| R_2)\cdot C = 0.5\,\text{s}, because from the capacitor's perspective the Thévenin resistance is R1R2R_1 \| R_2. (correct answer)
  3. Both predictions are wrong: the asymptote is VC()=10VV_C(\infty) = 10\,\text{V} (correct, since R2R_2 draws no current at steady state when VCV_C is constant), and the time constant is τ=(R1+R2)C=2s\tau = (R_1 + R_2)\cdot C = 2\,\text{s} because the two resistors are effectively in series during the transient.
  4. Only the time constant is wrong: VC()=10VV_C(\infty) = 10\,\text{V} is correct because at steady state the capacitor is fully charged to the source voltage, but τ=(R1+R2)C=2s\tau = (R_1 + R_2)C = 2\,\text{s} because the charging current must flow through both resistors before reaching the capacitor.
Explanation: Whenever you analyze an RC circuit with resistors in parallel with the capacitor, your first move should be to find the Thévenin equivalent seen by the capacitor — this gives you both the steady-state voltage and the time constant in one step. To find the Thévenin equivalent, you "look into" the capacitor's terminals with the source active. The Thévenin voltage is determined by the voltage divider that R1R_1 and R2R_2 form: Vth=ER2R1+R2=101020=5VV_{th} = \mathcal{E} \cdot \frac{R_2}{R_1 + R_2} = 10 \cdot \frac{10}{20} = 5\,\text{V}. This is the asymptote VC()V_C(\infty), because at steady state the capacitor stops charging and acts like an open circuit — but current still flows through R1R_1 and R2R_2, so the source voltage is divided between them. The Thévenin resistance (with the voltage source replaced by a short) is Rth=R1R2=5kΩR_{th} = R_1 \| R_2 = 5\,\text{k}\Omega, giving τ=RthC=5,000×100×106=0.5s\tau = R_{th} \cdot C = 5{,}000 \times 100 \times 10^{-6} = 0.5\,\text{s}. Answer B captures both corrections exactly. Answer A correctly finds the asymptote but wrongly claims R2R_2 doesn't affect the time constant — it absolutely does, since it appears in the Thévenin resistance. Answer C gets the asymptote wrong (the steady-state current through R2R_2 means VCEV_C \neq \mathcal{E}) and incorrectly adds the resistors in series for τ\tau. Answer D makes the same asymptote error as C; R2R_2 is in parallel with CC, not in series with R1R_1 in the charging path. Study tip: For any RC transient problem, always apply Thévenin's theorem at the capacitor's terminals first — it immediately gives you both VC()V_C(\infty) and τ\tau, preventing both errors the student made here.

Question 8

A graph of VC(t)V_C(t) for an RC circuit shows an exponential approach to a final value. The graph clearly shows: (1) the initial value VC(0)=2VV_C(0) = 2\,\text{V}, (2) the final asymptotic value VC()=8VV_C(\infty) = 8\,\text{V}, and (3) the value at one time constant, VC(τ)V_C(\tau), marked on the graph.

Based solely on the graph information provided, what is VC(τ)V_C(\tau), and which of the following expressions correctly generalizes the result for arbitrary initial and final voltages?

  1. VC(τ)5.06VV_C(\tau) \approx 5.06\,\text{V}, because at one time constant the capacitor has charged to 63.2% of its final value, giving 0.632×8=5.06V0.632 \times 8 = 5.06\,\text{V}; the general formula is VC(τ)=(1e1)VfV_C(\tau) = (1 - e^{-1})\,V_f.
  2. VC(τ)6.59VV_C(\tau) \approx 6.59\,\text{V}, because the time constant marks the point where the remaining gap to the final value has shrunk to 1/e1/e of the total gap measured from the final value, giving 88/e82.94=5.06V8 - 8/e \approx 8 - 2.94 = 5.06\,\text{V}; the generalization is VC(τ)=Vf(1e1)V_C(\tau) = V_f(1 - e^{-1}).
  3. VC(τ)=5VV_C(\tau) = 5\,\text{V}, because at one time constant the capacitor voltage is exactly halfway between the initial and final values by definition of the exponential midpoint, giving (2+8)/2=5V(2 + 8)/2 = 5\,\text{V}; the generalization is VC(τ)=(Vi+Vf)/2V_C(\tau) = (V_i + V_f)/2.
  4. VC(τ)5.79VV_C(\tau) \approx 5.79\,\text{V}, because the general formula is VC(τ)=Vi+(VfVi)(1e1)V_C(\tau) = V_i + (V_f - V_i)(1 - e^{-1}), which gives 2+6(0.632)2+3.79=5.79V2 + 6(0.632) \approx 2 + 3.79 = 5.79\,\text{V}; at one time constant the capacitor has traversed 63.2% of the gap between its initial and final values. (correct answer)
Explanation: Whenever an RC circuit problem gives you both an initial and final voltage, your first instinct should be to use the general charging equation, not a simplified version that assumes the capacitor starts from zero. The complete formula for capacitor voltage at any time is VC(t)=Vf+(ViVf)et/τV_C(t) = V_f + (V_i - V_f)e^{-t/\tau}. At exactly one time constant (t=τt = \tau), the exponential term becomes e10.368e^{-1} \approx 0.368, so the gap remaining between the capacitor and its final value shrinks to 36.8% of the original gap — meaning the capacitor has closed 63.2% of that gap. Plugging in Vi=2VV_i = 2\,\text{V} and Vf=8VV_f = 8\,\text{V}: VC(τ)=2+(82)(1e1)2+6(0.632)5.79VV_C(\tau) = 2 + (8 - 2)(1 - e^{-1}) \approx 2 + 6(0.632) \approx 5.79\,\text{V}. This confirms D is correct. Choice A applies the 63.2% rule directly to the final voltage (0.632×80.632 \times 8), which only works when Vi=0V_i = 0. Since the capacitor starts at 2 V, this ignores the initial condition entirely. Choice B makes the same conceptual error — it computes 88/e8 - 8/e, again treating the initial voltage as zero — and compounds it by claiming the answer is 6.59 V while actually calculating 5.06 V, making it doubly wrong. Choice C confuses the time constant with a geometric midpoint; exponential functions are not linear, and the halfway point occurs at a different time than τ\tau. The key strategy: always apply the full formula VC(τ)=Vi+(VfVi)(1e1)V_C(\tau) = V_i + (V_f - V_i)(1 - e^{-1}). The 63.2% figure describes the fraction of the gap traveled, never a fraction of VfV_f alone.