Breaking down a complicated resistance circuit

  • Thread starter Thread starter The Blind Watchmaker
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circuit Resistance
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving a complicated resistance circuit, initially misidentified but later recognized as a Wheatstone bridge. The original poster sought clarification on their configuration, expressing confusion about their approach. Participants emphasized the importance of using Kirchhoff's Current Law (KCL) equations for solving the circuit, noting that this method is straightforward for such a simple setup. There was a reminder that helpers should provide hints rather than direct solutions. Ultimately, the poster acknowledged their mistake in identifying the circuit, resolving their confusion.
The Blind Watchmaker
Messages
17
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


upload_2018-3-9_0-32-10.png


Homework Equations


-

The Attempt at a Solution


upload_2018-3-9_0-37-59.png


I tried to break it down to:

upload_2018-3-9_0-46-0.png


But apparently it is incorrect, can someone tell me the correct configuration? And explain too! Thanks :)
(Please do not give ambiguous "hints").
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-3-9_0-32-10.png
    upload_2018-3-9_0-32-10.png
    23.1 KB · Views: 740
  • upload_2018-3-9_0-37-59.png
    upload_2018-3-9_0-37-59.png
    10.6 KB · Views: 729
  • upload_2018-3-9_0-46-0.png
    upload_2018-3-9_0-46-0.png
    4.8 KB · Views: 724
Physics news on Phys.org
Oh nevermind just realized this is is a wheatstone bridge, silly me
 
The Blind Watchmaker said:
(Please do not give ambiguous "hints").
LOL. How about an unambiguous hint? Like using KCL equations to solve it. There may be a trick that you can use, but if you don't see the trick pretty quickly, just doing the KCL equations and solving should get you the answer. And for a circuit this simple, The KCL equations are fairly easy.
 
The Blind Watchmaker said:
Oh nevermind just realized this is is a wheatstone bridge, silly me

Oh, never mind then. :smile:
 
Helpers are not allowed to directly provide solutions to homework questions. They can only offer hints, suggestions, or point out mistakes or correctly done parts in your work.

What makes you say that your rearrangement is wrong? The only problem I can see would be if you incorrectly locate the 20 Ω resistor on the figure (you didn't label any of the the resistors, so I can't be 100% sure that you've got that right).

Edit: Just saw the OP's latest post, correctly identifying the circuit configuration. So never mind :smile:
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top