Equivalent Resistance in Diamond-Shaped Circuits

  • Thread starter Thread starter qwertyflatty
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circuits
AI Thread Summary
To find the equivalent resistance of a diamond-shaped circuit resembling a Wheatstone bridge, the middle resistor cannot be omitted unless the bridge is balanced (R1/R4 = R2/R3), which results in no current through it. The equivalent resistance can be calculated by treating the three chains as parallel: first combining R1 and R2 in series, then finding the parallel combination with R3, and finally combining that result with R4 and R5. If the bridge is unbalanced, current will flow through the middle resistor, complicating the analysis. For accurate results, applying Kirchhoff's laws or using a circuit simulator is recommended. Understanding the conditions for balance is crucial for simplifying the circuit correctly.
qwertyflatty
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
How would I find the equivalent resistance of a diamond-shaped circuit? Is the middle resistor simply omitted?

By diamond-shaped, I mean it looks like a Wheatstone bridge, but it has a resistor in the middle instead of a current detector.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Say R1 to R5 form the diamond shape, where there are three chain in parallel.

1) R1 in series with R2.
2) R3.
3) R4 in series with R5.

So the equivalent R is very simple...All 3 chain parallel, or if you like, find;

1) (R1+R2)//R3.

2) [(R1+R2)//R3]//(R4+R5).

Simple!

Am I getting it right? You testing us?!
 
I thought you couldn't use series-parallel relationships to solve a Wheatstone bridge, and had to use mesh analysis or something.
 
yungman, the OP might want the resistance between the other two points on the diamond circuit, which would be the resistance that would be the load on the power supply if the diamond circuit was powered like a Wheatstone bridge.


Code:
        A
        |
       /_\
       \ /
        |
        B
 
Last edited:
yungman said:
Say R1 to R5 form the diamond shape, where there are three chain in parallel.

1) R1 in series with R2.
2) R3.
3) R4 in series with R5.

So the equivalent R is very simple...All 3 chain parallel, or if you like, find;

1) (R1+R2)//R3.

2) [(R1+R2)//R3]//(R4+R5).

Simple!

Am I getting it right? You testing us?!

No, your circuit looks like this:

|
/|\
\|/
|

My circuit looks like what the person above just posted.

I created the circuit using a circuit simulator, and it showed that there would be no current flowing through the middle resistor. I have no idea whether or not this is correct.
 
qwertyflatty said:
I created the circuit using a circuit simulator, and it showed that there would be no current flowing through the middle resistor. I have no idea whether or not this is correct.

It's only correct for balanced bridge. If R1/R4 = R2/R3, then no current would flow through the "middle resistor," but otherwise there would be current there (when VAB ≠ 0).

Code:
       A
       |
 R2   /_\  R1
 R3   \ /  R4
       |
       B
 
Last edited:
simplify: think of a bridge as two voltage dividers on same supply

IF they're both set to the same fraction of that supply
THEN they're the same voltage so no difference and no current flows
whether it's a resistor, current or voltage detector between the dividers
 
Last edited:
Hmm, so there's no way to simplify the circuit into one resistor unless R1/R4 = R2/R3?
 
well there's the old standby of write equations from Kirchoff's laws

5 resistors, five unknown currents, five equations

as we said in the 60's - should be plug&chug.
 
  • #10
Try Googling "wye-delta conversion"

You should find all you need.
 
  • #11
The post is asking about circuits like this:

00485.png


The solution for this circuit is given here:

http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_10/3.html
It starts about half way down the page.
 
  • Like
Likes Aaron John Sabu
Back
Top