
Two batteries of different $emf$ and internal resistances connected in series with each other and with an external load resistor. The current is $3A$ . When the polarity of one battery is reversed, the current becomes $1A$ . The ratio of the $emf$ of the two batteries is:
(A) $2.5:1$
(B) \[2:1\]
(C) $3:2$
(D) $1:1$
Answer
133.2k+ views
Hint: We will use Kirchhoff's rule to find a relation of the resistances and the $emf$ of the two batteries. Then, we will equate them with each other.
Step By Step Solution

Here,
\[{V_1}\] is the $emf$ of the first battery and \[{V_2}\] is that of the second one. \[{r_1}\] is the internal resistance of the first battery and \[{r_2}\] is that of the second. \[R\] in the load resistance.
Now,
For the first situation when current is $3A$ .
By Kirchhoff’s Law,
\[\frac{{\mathop V\nolimits_1 \mathop { + V}\nolimits_2 }}{{\mathop {R + r}\nolimits_1 \mathop { + r}\nolimits_2 }} = \mathop 3\nolimits_{} \]
Thus, we can say
$\mathop {(R + r}\nolimits_1 \mathop { + r}\nolimits_2 ) = \frac{{\mathop V\nolimits_1 \mathop { + V}\nolimits_2 }}{3} \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot (1)$
Similarly for the second case when current is $1A$ ,
$\mathop V\nolimits_1 \mathop { - V}\nolimits_2 = \mathop {R + r}\nolimits_1 \mathop { + r}\nolimits_2 $
Now,
Putting in equation $(1)$, we get
$\mathop {3V}\nolimits_1 \mathop { - 3V}\nolimits_2 = \mathop V\nolimits_1 \mathop { + V}\nolimits_2 $
After further evaluation, we get
$\mathop {2V}\nolimits_1 = \mathop {4V}\nolimits_2 $
In the question, it is asked for $\frac{{\mathop V\nolimits_1 }}{{\mathop V\nolimits_2 }}$
Thus, we get
\[\frac{{\mathop V\nolimits_1 }}{{\mathop V\nolimits_2 }} = \frac{2}{1}\]
Hence, the answer is (B).
Additional Information: The Kirchhoff’s rules are handy to use in the cases for internal resistance, multiple $emf$ and in the cases indulging potentiometer. These rules are simple and very intuitive. Just that they were placed in a standardized manner by Kirchhoff.
The internal resistance we are talking about is referring to the resistance offered by the battery itself at initiation. This internal resistance value decides about the behavior of the circuit. Though minimal, but still of concern.
Note: We directly evaluated the result due to the application of the Kirchhoff’s law. One should not be confused about the direct relation. It is trivially coming from Kirchhoff's law.
Step By Step Solution

Here,
\[{V_1}\] is the $emf$ of the first battery and \[{V_2}\] is that of the second one. \[{r_1}\] is the internal resistance of the first battery and \[{r_2}\] is that of the second. \[R\] in the load resistance.
Now,
For the first situation when current is $3A$ .
By Kirchhoff’s Law,
\[\frac{{\mathop V\nolimits_1 \mathop { + V}\nolimits_2 }}{{\mathop {R + r}\nolimits_1 \mathop { + r}\nolimits_2 }} = \mathop 3\nolimits_{} \]
Thus, we can say
$\mathop {(R + r}\nolimits_1 \mathop { + r}\nolimits_2 ) = \frac{{\mathop V\nolimits_1 \mathop { + V}\nolimits_2 }}{3} \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot (1)$
Similarly for the second case when current is $1A$ ,
$\mathop V\nolimits_1 \mathop { - V}\nolimits_2 = \mathop {R + r}\nolimits_1 \mathop { + r}\nolimits_2 $
Now,
Putting in equation $(1)$, we get
$\mathop {3V}\nolimits_1 \mathop { - 3V}\nolimits_2 = \mathop V\nolimits_1 \mathop { + V}\nolimits_2 $
After further evaluation, we get
$\mathop {2V}\nolimits_1 = \mathop {4V}\nolimits_2 $
In the question, it is asked for $\frac{{\mathop V\nolimits_1 }}{{\mathop V\nolimits_2 }}$
Thus, we get
\[\frac{{\mathop V\nolimits_1 }}{{\mathop V\nolimits_2 }} = \frac{2}{1}\]
Hence, the answer is (B).
Additional Information: The Kirchhoff’s rules are handy to use in the cases for internal resistance, multiple $emf$ and in the cases indulging potentiometer. These rules are simple and very intuitive. Just that they were placed in a standardized manner by Kirchhoff.
The internal resistance we are talking about is referring to the resistance offered by the battery itself at initiation. This internal resistance value decides about the behavior of the circuit. Though minimal, but still of concern.
Note: We directly evaluated the result due to the application of the Kirchhoff’s law. One should not be confused about the direct relation. It is trivially coming from Kirchhoff's law.
Recently Updated Pages
Sign up for JEE Main 2025 Live Classes - Vedantu

JEE Main Books 2023-24: Best JEE Main Books for Physics, Chemistry and Maths

JEE Main 2023 April 13 Shift 1 Question Paper with Answer Key

JEE Main 2023 April 11 Shift 2 Question Paper with Answer Key

JEE Main 2023 April 10 Shift 2 Question Paper with Answer Key

JEE Main 2023 (April 11th Shift 2) Physics Question Paper with Answer Key

Trending doubts
JEE Main 2025 Session 2: Application Form (Out), Exam Dates (Released), Eligibility & More

JEE Main 2025: Conversion of Galvanometer Into Ammeter And Voltmeter in Physics

JEE Main 2025: Derivation of Equation of Trajectory in Physics

Wheatstone Bridge for JEE Main Physics 2025

Electric field due to uniformly charged sphere class 12 physics JEE_Main

Electric Field Due to Uniformly Charged Ring for JEE Main 2025 - Formula and Derivation

Other Pages
JEE Advanced Marks vs Ranks 2025: Understanding Category-wise Qualifying Marks and Previous Year Cut-offs

Diffraction of Light - Young’s Single Slit Experiment

Dual Nature of Radiation and Matter Class 12 Notes: CBSE Physics Chapter 11

If a wire of resistance R is stretched to double of class 12 physics JEE_Main

JEE Advanced 2024 Syllabus Weightage

Current Loop as Magnetic Dipole and Its Derivation for JEE
