Engineering Calculating Thevenin Equivalent Voltage for a Complex Network

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the Thevenin equivalent voltage for a complex network using the node voltage method. The original poster attempted source transformations but arrived at an incorrect equation for vT. Another participant suggests that source transformations are unnecessary and proposes using Kirchhoff's Voltage Law (KVL) to derive the correct equations. They clarify the origin of the current I1 in the KVL equations and confirm the approach. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly applying KVL for accurate circuit analysis.
magnifik
Messages
350
Reaction score
0
I need help finding the thevenin equivalent voltage for the following network:
2lxyyh5.jpg


i did source transformations so that i could analyze it using the node voltage method.
72c84j.png

my equations are:
I1 = v1
(a) vx + vx - vT = v1 + av1 - bv1
2vx - vT = v1 + av1 - bv1
(b) vT - vx + vT = bv1
2vT - vx = bv1

when i simplify (by substituting vx), i get
vT = v1/3(a + b + 1)

however, the answer should be
vT = v1/2(a + b + 1 - ab)

help please! thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
magnifik said:
I need help finding the thevenin equivalent voltage for the following network:
2lxyyh5.jpg


i did source transformations so that i could analyze it using the node voltage method.
72c84j.png

my equations are:
I1 = v1
(a) vx + vx - vT = v1 + av1 - bv1
2vx - vT = v1 + av1 - bv1
(b) vT - vx + vT = bv1
2vT - vx = bv1

when i simplify (by substituting vx), i get
vT = v1/3(a + b + 1)

however, the answer should be
vT = v1/2(a + b + 1 - ab)

help please! thanks.

I think I've spotted a problem with how you've redrawn your circuit.

I think it be should more like this,

attachment.php?attachmentid=35760&stc=1&d=1306029035.png


EDIT: There's really no reason to apply source transformations to the circuit at all, the original circuit can be solve by writing two KVL equations.

\text{Equation 1:}

Voc = I_{1} + aV_{1} + bI_{1}

\text{Equation 2:}

-V_{1} + 2I_{1} + aV_{1} = 0

\text{Equation 2} \Rightarrow \text{Equation 1}

This gives the expected result.

The Latex doesn't seem to be working, but hopefully you can follow through my work.
 

Attachments

  • 72c84j.png
    72c84j.png
    1.5 KB · Views: 459
Last edited:
thank you for your help!
 
can you explain for first KVL equation? I'm not sure where the I1 comes from
 
magnifik said:
can you explain for first KVL equation? I'm not sure where the I1 comes from

Here we are writing a KVL in the righthand loop.

Notice that the loop is open thus there is no current flowing in this loop except for the current in the vertical, leftmost branch.

This current is clearly I1 by writing a KCL at the top node.

Clear?
 
jegues said:
Here we are writing a KVL in the righthand loop.

Notice that the loop is open thus there is no current flowing in this loop except for the current in the vertical, leftmost branch.

This current is clearly I1 by writing a KCL at the top node.

Clear?

yup. thanks.
 

Similar threads

Replies
42
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Back
Top