Engineering Find the Thevenin equivalent circuit

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on finding the Thevenin equivalent circuit, specifically the Thevenin voltage and resistance. The Thevenin resistance was correctly calculated as 2.06 kΩ, but confusion arose regarding the Thevenin voltage, particularly how it relates to the 3.9 kΩ resistor. Participants clarified that the Thevenin voltage is determined by the voltage across the series combination of R1 and R2, which is in parallel with R3, and emphasized the importance of using current and voltage divider rules. The conversation highlighted the necessity of redrawing circuits for better understanding and the common pitfalls beginners face in circuit analysis. Understanding these concepts is crucial for mastering Thevenin and Norton transformations in circuit analysis.
  • #31
There is probably a follow-on problem which wants the student to use the derived Thevenin equivalent to then determine the current through the (load?) resistor R when the 47k and 180V are then hooked back up.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
diredragon said:
The correct equation for the current divider is ##I_L=I\frac{R_3}{R_{123}}##. Then ##V_{th}=I_LR_1##.
I believe I have ##I_L = 18mA\frac{3.9kΩ}{2.06kΩ}## so ##I_L = 34mA##
I, then, have ##V_{th} = 34mA*(2.7kΩ) = 91.8V##
The answer: ##V_{th} = 16.77V##

If ##R_{123} = R_{th} = 2.06kΩ## and ##I = 18mA## than I'm doing some arithmetic wrong here
 
  • #33
The Electrician said:
The problem wants the Thevenin equivalent at the a,b terminals with the 47 kΩ and 180 volt source not present, as in post #12.
This is correct, ##V_{th}## is the voltage across that blue terminal, in this case ##R = R_L## and the 180V source need to be removed
 
  • #34
vela said:
It's more likely that the authors drew it this way so students learn that they need to remove any load before finding the Norton or Thevenin equivalent.
The outlined procedure in the text for thevenin's theorem explicitly states this must be done but on later problems the circuits are drawn more abstractly so the reader is almost forced to redraw the circuit in order to progress
 
  • #35
icesalmon said:
I believe I have ##I_L = 18mA\frac{3.9kΩ}{2.06kΩ}## so ##I_L = 34mA##
I, then, have ##V_{th} = 34mA*(2.7kΩ) = 91.8V##
The answer: ##V_{th} = 16.77V##

If ##R_{123} = R_{th} = 2.06kΩ## and ##I = 18mA## than I'm doing some arithmetic wrong here

##R_{123} ≠ R_{th}##

##R_{123}## is the sum of all the resistors.
 
  • #36
Yes. Re-read post #19.
 
  • #37
The Electrician said:
##R_{123} ≠ R_{th}##

##R_{123}## is the sum of all the resistors.
Right, I got it now. ##V_{th} = 16.77v##
 
  • #38
Two years ago you said in a post: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/independent-study-for-linear-algebra.880866/

"Hello, I just completed a first course in linear algebra and really enjoyed my studies. So much so that I want to pursue it more in the fall as an independent study, i am a EE major in college and was curious what directions might be useful for applications in that field."

Here's how you could solve the current problem quickly using linear algebra. Using a calculator that can do linear algebra makes it very convenient.

Thev.png
 

Attachments

  • Thev.png
    Thev.png
    11.8 KB · Views: 760
  • #39
The Electrician said:
Here's how you could solve the current problem quickly using linear algebra. Using a calculator that can do linear algebra makes it very convenient.

View attachment 228374
How did you think to do this? the matrix algebra aside, you could have still done these calculations by hand. Where does this method come from?
 
  • #40
icesalmon said:
How did you think to do this? the matrix algebra aside, you could have still done these calculations by hand. Where does this method come from?

The first thing I said in the demonstration is "Perform a nodal analysis." It's just a nodal analysis with the two nodal equations shown as the rows of a 2x2 matrix.
 
  • #41
The Electrician said:
The first thing I said in the demonstration is "Perform a nodal analysis." It's just a nodal analysis with the two nodal equations shown as the rows of a 2x2 matrix.

Oh that portion of your post was blocked out:
thumbnail.jpg

I don't remember using nodal analysis this way, interesting. Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • thumbnail.jpg
    thumbnail.jpg
    45.6 KB · Views: 527
Last edited:
  • #42
icesalmon said:
I believe I have ##I_L = 18mA\frac{3.9kΩ}{2.06kΩ}## so ##I_L = 34mA##
I, then, have ##V_{th} = 34mA*(2.7kΩ) = 91.8V##
The answer: ##V_{th} = 16.77V##

If ##R_{123} = R_{th} = 2.06kΩ## and ##I = 18mA## than I'm doing some arithmetic wrong here

The other have explained it well. Now try to get 16.77 using the second method. Draw the circuit the same way but instead of the blue part elements draw a line so it's short-circuited that way. You lose the ##R_1## element since it's parallel to the wire and then find the current that goes through the left part again. Then you multiply it with ##R_{th}## and you get the same result.
 
  • #43
diredragon said:
Draw the circuit the same way but instead of the blue part elements draw a line so it's short-circuited that way. You lose the ##R_1## element since it's parallel to the wire and then find the current that goes through the left part again. Then you multiply it with ##R_{th}## and you get the same result.
That I did, with this method I got ##I_L = 8.16A## so ##V_{th} = I_LR_{th}## = ##16.7V##. Thanks
 
  • Like
Likes diredragon

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K