[Circuits] Calculating the Norton Equivalent

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
8 replies · 2K views
ainster31
Messages
158
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



h_1390343963_6347373_a2b980a606.png


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I am trying to compute ##I_N##.

I connected nodes a and b. The circuit after some simplification:

h_1390344359_4911840_0dbd81aae2.png


$$\frac { 180-{ V }_{ 1 } }{ 20 } =\frac { 120-V_{ 1 } }{ 40 } \\ { V }_{ 1 }=240\quad V\\ \\ R=\frac { V }{ I } \\ 40=\frac { 120 }{ I_{ N } } \\ I_{ N }=3\quad A$$

The correct answer is 1A.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Why would you replace the 3amp current source with a 120 volt voltage source (I KNOW why you did it, but it's wrong and I want you to think about it)
 
phinds said:
Why would you replace the 3amp current source with a 120 volt voltage source (I KNOW why you did it, but it's wrong and I want you to think about it)

I did it to simplify the circuit and make the nodal analysis easier.
 
Actually, changing the 3A / 40Ω subcircuit to its Thevenin equivalent works here. You're left with a simple series circuit, so no need for nodal analysis. Just calculate the current from the given resistances and voltages.
 
gneill said:
Actually, changing the 3A / 40Ω subcircuit to its Thevenin equivalent works here. You're left with a simple series circuit, so no need for nodal analysis. Just calculate the current from the given resistances and voltages.

Is there something wrong with my first attempt?
 
ainster31 said:
Is there something wrong with my first attempt?

Yes. Where did the 240V come from ?
 
gneill said:
Yes. Where did the 240V come from ?

I typed it wrong. I have fixed it now. Sorry about that.
 
ainster31 said:
I typed it wrong. I have fixed it now. Sorry about that.

Okay, now you need to correct the signs in your node equation. The left hand side yields a current flowing into the node from the 180V supply. On the right hand side you should therefore have a current flowing from the node to the 120V supply. You've got the right hand side yielding a current flowing from the 120V supply to the V1 node instead.

I find it easier, and less prone to error, to write all node equations from the perspective of the node itself and assuming that all currents are flowing out of the node (my choice of direction; you could choose the opposite if you wish). Sum all these currents on the same side of the equals and equate to zero:

##\frac{V1 - 180}{20} + \frac{V1 - 120}{40} = 0##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
gneill said:
Okay, now you need to correct the signs in your node equation. The left hand side yields a current flowing into the node from the 180V supply. On the right hand side you should therefore have a current flowing from the node to the 120V supply. You've got the right hand side yielding a current flowing from the 120V supply to the V1 node instead.

I find it easier, and less prone to error, to write all node equations from the perspective of the node itself and assuming that all currents are flowing out of the node (my choice of direction; you could choose the opposite if you wish). Sum all these currents on the same side of the equals and equate to zero:

##\frac{V1 - 180}{20} + \frac{V1 - 120}{40} = 0##

Ah, that makes sense. Yeah, I think I'm going to adopt the same convention to avoid these types of mistakes again.