
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
232.8k+ 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
JEE Main 2023 April 6 Shift 1 Question Paper with Answer Key

JEE Main 2023 April 6 Shift 2 Question Paper with Answer Key

JEE Main 2023 (January 31 Evening Shift) Question Paper with Solutions [PDF]

JEE Main 2023 January 30 Shift 2 Question Paper with Answer Key

JEE Main 2023 January 25 Shift 1 Question Paper with Answer Key

JEE Main 2023 January 24 Shift 2 Question Paper with Answer Key

Trending doubts
JEE Main 2026: Session 2 Registration Open, City Intimation Slip, Exam Dates, Syllabus & Eligibility

JEE Main 2026 Application Login: Direct Link, Registration, Form Fill, and Steps

JEE Main Marking Scheme 2026- Paper-Wise Marks Distribution and Negative Marking Details

Understanding the Angle of Deviation in a Prism

Hybridisation in Chemistry – Concept, Types & Applications

How to Convert a Galvanometer into an Ammeter or Voltmeter

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

Dual Nature of Radiation and Matter Class 12 Physics Chapter 11 CBSE Notes - 2025-26

Understanding Uniform Acceleration in Physics

Understanding the Electric Field of a Uniformly Charged Ring

JEE Advanced Weightage 2025 Chapter-Wise for Physics, Maths and Chemistry

Derivation of Equation of Trajectory Explained for Students

