Finding current using Kirchhoff's circuit rules

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
3 replies · 3K views
slaufer
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Nt0Cm.png



Homework Equations



Kirchhoff's loop rule and (maybe) Kirchhoff's current law

The Attempt at a Solution



So I attempted to apply Kirchhoff's loop rule to the circuit, and ended up with a system of linear equations:

24 - 6I[itex]_{1}[/itex] - 3I[itex]_{3}[/itex] = 0 [itex]\rightarrow[/itex] 2I[itex]_{1}[/itex] - I[itex]_{3}[/itex] = 8
36 - 6I[itex]_{1}[/itex] - 6I[itex]_{2}[/itex] = 0 [itex]\rightarrow[/itex] I[itex]_{1}[/itex] + I[itex]_{2}[/itex] = 6
12 - 3I[itex]_{3}[/itex] - 6I[itex]_{2}[/itex] = 0 [itex]\rightarrow[/itex] 2I[itex]_{2}[/itex] + I[itex]_{3}[/itex] = 4

but every time I try to solve it, I end up with everything dropping out. I'm not sure what I'm missing here, but I've been banging my head against this one for about 4 hours now, so any help would be appreciated!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
slaufer said:

Homework Statement



Nt0Cm.png

Homework Equations



Kirchhoff's loop rule and (maybe) Kirchhoff's current law

The Attempt at a Solution



So I attempted to apply Kirchhoff's loop rule to the circuit, and ended up with a system of linear equations:

24 - 6I[itex]_{1}[/itex] - 3I[itex]_{3}[/itex] = 0 [itex]\rightarrow[/itex] 2I[itex]_{1}[/itex] - I[itex]_{3}[/itex] = 8 wrong
36 - 6I[itex]_{1}[/itex] - 6I[itex]_{2}[/itex] = 0 [itex]\rightarrow[/itex] I[itex]_{1}[/itex] + I[itex]_{2}[/itex] = 6
12 - 3I[itex]_{3}[/itex] - 6I[itex]_{2}[/itex] = 0 wrong[itex]\rightarrow[/itex] 2I[itex]_{2}[/itex] + I[itex]_{3}[/itex] = 4

but every time I try to solve it, I end up with everything dropping out. I'm not sure what I'm missing here, but I've been banging my head against this one for about 4 hours now, so any help would be appreciated!

Check the signs.
You also have a relation between the currents. (Nodal Law) Use that and two loop equations.

ehild
 
Last edited:
Thanks, that makes more sense now.

I might have eventually realized that my system was cancelling out because it was using mutually derived equations, but I probably never would have realized that I was treating I[itex]_{3}[/itex] as if it were flowing in two directions at once.

Using two of the equations from the original system in the nodal rule equation I[itex]_{1}[/itex] = I[itex]_{2}[/itex]+ I[itex]_{3}[/itex] made it all fall together though. I'm still not sure how I'd figure out what direction I[itex]_{3}[/itex] was flowing in if it weren't given in the problem, but at least I'm FINALLY done with this problem.

tl;dr you are the best, thanks