Circuit design, 2 equations, 3 unknowns

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the design of an ambient light meter circuit, focusing on solving for component values based on given equations and conditions. Participants explore the relationships between voltages and resistances in the circuit, employing various methods to derive equations and resolve unknowns.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents equations for V1 and V2 based on circuit analysis and simulation results, asserting their correctness.
  • Another participant suggests deriving a third equation to relate V2 to the output, indicating the need for more information to solve for three unknowns.
  • A question arises regarding the derivation of the equations and the absence of R1 in the denominator for V1, prompting further clarification on the analysis method used.
  • One participant explains their approach to solving for V1 and V2, indicating they successfully resolved their original problem by combining the conditional equations for V2.
  • Another participant proposes that if there are more unknowns than equations, an arbitrary value can be assigned to one unknown to facilitate solving for the others, specifically suggesting a value for R7 based on its relationship with Rphoto.
  • A participant reflects on the circuit design as reminiscent of their engineering coursework, indicating a shared experience among participants.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the adequacy of the equations provided for solving the unknowns, with some suggesting additional equations are necessary while others indicate that a solution was found. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to derive the necessary equations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the dependency of their equations on specific values and conditions, and the discussion highlights the limitations of having more unknowns than equations without additional constraints or assumptions.

quaker
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I'm working with this circuit to design an ambient light meter.
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/6479/cktyu0.jpg

We were given steps to go about solving for different values of the components in the circuit.

First we're to solve for the gain and thus V1 which I found to be
V_1=\frac{-R1}{(Rphoto+R7)}*Vee

Then we're to solve for V2, which I found by NVA:
V_2 = \frac{R3*V1+R2*Vee}{(R3+R2)}

I don't think there is anything wrong with either of those equations, as I've verified that they give the correct voltages when simulating the circuit in PSpice.The given\known values in the circuit are Vee=-10V, R1=1k and the condition when Rphoto=400, V2 = 8V and when Rphoto=10k, V2=0V

This leads to:
8 = \frac{R3*\frac{-1000 \Omega}{(400 \Omega+R7)}*-10+R2*-10}{(R3+R2)}
and
0 = \frac{R3*\frac{-1000 \Omega}{(10000 \Omega+R7)}*-10+R2*-10}{(R3+R2)}With those 2 equations, I am to deduce values for R2, R3, and R7, which I can't seem to do having only the 2 equations. Can anyone push me in the right direction? Thanks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Since there are two equations and three unknowns, i would derive the third equation. For instance, derive an equation that defines the relation between V2 and output.
 
Hmm, which output? I'm not sure I see another equation for V2 that includes those unknown resistors.
 
Hmm, now I'm completely lost. How did you derive the last two equations? Another question, you're using voltage-divider for v1, how come there are no R1 in the denominator?

P.S I was talking about writing a equ. for the feedback loop for the second opamp.
 
The last 2 equations are simply V2 with the known values plugged in. As for V1, I solved that by analyzing the left-most op-amp by itself.

Using nva:

\frac{0-Vee}{(Rphoto+R7)} + 0 + \frac{0-V_1}{R1}=0
\frac{-Vee}{(Rphoto+R7)} = \frac{V_1}{R1}
\therefore \frac{-R1}{(Rphoto+R7)}*Vee=V_1

I went on to solve for V2 in a similar manner.

I was able to solve my original problem at school this afternoon. It turns out that R7 can be solved for directly by combining the two V2 conditional equations, and then the other values are fairly trivial to find.
 
Last edited:
I was about to propose the same thing, but i thought that you've already tried it.
 
If you have more unknowns than equations, you can attribute an arbitrary value to one of the unknowns and solve for the other two.
Since R7 is in series with Rphoto, it must not be much greater than the minimum value of Rphoto nor much smaller than its maximum value. A good guess would be the geometrical mean between 400 and 10000.
 
That looks like one of the designs I had to do in my engineering courses as an undergrad. What school do you go to?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
13K