Calculating Equivalent Resistance in a Complex Circuit

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the equivalent resistance in a complex circuit involving multiple resistors and transformations. The original poster expresses confusion regarding the lack of symmetry in the circuit and the expected result of 27/17 ohms.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of a delta-wye transformation and question the validity of the calculations leading to the equivalent resistance. There are attempts to verify the calculations and explore alternative methods, including Kirchhoff's rules.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on the delta-wye transformation and shared their calculations. The discussion includes verification of results, with some participants acknowledging errors in their previous calculations. Multiple interpretations of the problem are being explored, and there is no explicit consensus yet.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of a diagram that is referenced but not included in the text. The original poster notes that the textbook answer has been questioned due to past inaccuracies, which adds to the complexity of the discussion.

discoverer02
Messages
138
Reaction score
1
I'm stumped by this problem.

There's no symmetry in the circuit, so I can't ignore the 1 ohm resistor that bisects the triangle. Is there something else I'm missing? I'm supposed to show the Rab = 27/17 ohms.

Please see the attached diagram.

Thanks.
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
You have to apply a delta-wye transformation. See attached picture to see what I mean.

a = A*B / ( A + B + C )
b = A*C / (A + B + C )
c = B*C / (A + B + C)

Once you get a, b and c, then...

b is in series with the 1ohm resister
c is in series with the 5ohm resister

These two series are parallel with each other and in series with a
 

Attachments

Hmmm... This technique isn't mentioned in my Physics book.

a, b, and c are in ohms? a = 3/5, b = 1/5, c = 3/5.

so b + 1 ohms = 6/5 ohms
c + 5 ohms = 28/5 ohms
The equivalent of these parallel resistors is 85/84 ohms + 3/5 ohm
= 677/420 ohms.

This doesn't agree with the answer in the book which is 27/17 ohms.

The book has been known to be wrong.

Can anyone else verify?

Thanks.
 
the answer does come out to be 27/17 ohms
.check 85/84 ohms + 3/5 ohm

Here are the steps for people interesting in knowing how to get the answer.:

a = A*B / ( A + B + C )
a = 1*3 / ( 1 + 3 + 1)
a = 3/5 ohms

b = A*C / ( A + B + C )
b = 1*1 / ( 1 + 3 + 1)
b = 1/5 ohms

c = B*C / ( A + B + C )
c = 3*1 / ( 1 + 3 + 1)
c = 3/5 ohms

The circuit should look like this after the transformation
.......b=1/5ohm...1ohm
...a=3/5ohm...---XXXX-----XXXX---
---XXXX----|....... |----
...... ---XXXX-----XXXX---
.......c=3/5ohm...5ohm

please ignore the periods ( . ). They are there for spacing.

The two resistors on top are in series and combined equal 6/5 ohms

The two resistors on the bottom are in series and combined equal 28/5 ohms

so now you have a circuit that looks like this

......6/5ohms
3/5ohms...---XXXX----
--XXXX--|......|-----
......----XXXX----
......28/5 ohms

The top and bottom resistors are in parallel. The equation is R1*R2/(R1+R2)

So the combined parallel resistors equals 84/85 ohms

finally to have a circuit that looks like this


...3/5ohms...84/85ohms
----XXXX-----------XXXX-----

The final two resistors are in series so just add them up

3/5ohms + 84/85ohms = 27/17ohms
 
Thanks. You're right. I goofed with the math.

I was able to figure it out the hard way going through the three loops to get three equations using Kirchhoff's rules.

I = I1 + I2 => for the currents entering the the various junctions in the network.
E = electromotive force attached to the network.

5I1 - I2 = 3I
7I2 - I1 = 5I
E - 1.0ohm(I1) - 1.0ohm(I2) = 0

Since E = I(R equivalent) if you do the algebra with the equations above you get E = (27/17ohm)I

Thanks for the help and the shortcut. They're much appreciated.
 

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K