How can I determine Rth in Thevenin with a transconductance source?

  • Thread starter Thread starter qwertyuiop
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Thevenin
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on determining the Thevenin resistance (Rth) in circuits with a transconductance source. The correct application of nodal analysis is emphasized, particularly in the context of dependent sources. The calculation reveals that Rth can be negative when the transconductance value exceeds a specific threshold, as demonstrated by the expression Rth = 3.75/(0.00025 - x), where x represents the transconductance value of 0.003. This scenario illustrates the concept of negative resistance in active circuits.

PREREQUISITES
  • Thevenin's Theorem
  • Nodal Analysis
  • Transconductance Sources
  • Negative Resistance Concepts
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of negative resistance in circuit design.
  • Learn about the applications of transconductance amplifiers.
  • Explore advanced nodal analysis techniques for complex circuits.
  • Investigate other circuits that exhibit negative impedance behavior.
USEFUL FOR

Electrical engineers, circuit designers, and students studying circuit analysis who are interested in understanding Thevenin equivalents and the behavior of circuits with active elements.

qwertyuiop
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Member advised to use the homework template for posts in the homework sections of PF.
This is the question
negative-thevenin-resistance-jpg.jpg

First,I use thevenin theorem,when I close the voltage source, i apply nodal analysis to find rth,is my answer correct?
IMG20170523084138.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Just a question but aren't those all resistors if the units are kila-ohms?
 
Futurestar33 said:
Just a question but aren't those all resistors if the units are kila-ohms?
I don't understand what you mean
 
Dependent source 0.003vo should, with your nomenclature, be written 0.003V1
 
  • Like
Likes qwertyuiop
Note: we are not able to see what's at your facebook link, if it's applicable
 
NascentOxygen said:
Note: we are not able to see what's at your facebook link, if it's applicable
Moderator's note: I've restructured the original post to make the relevant images visible, and removed the facebook link as it was not accessible. @qwertyuiop is advised to upload relevant content rather than link to a facebook page.
 
Halfway down the page of your calculations you have:

(V1-V2)/22k + 0.003 V2 +1 + V2/30k = 0

This should be:

(V1-V2)/22k + 0.003 V1 +1 - V2/30k = 0

Which should then become:

30 V1 - 30 V2 + 1980 V1 + 660000 - 22 V2 = 0

Which becomes:

2010 V1 - 52 V2 = -660000
 
  • Like
Likes qwertyuiop
NascentOxygen said:
Dependent source 0.003vo should, with your nomenclature, be written 0.003V1
Thank you for you helping,now i know my mistake
 
gneill said:
Moderator's note: I've restructured the original post to make the relevant images visible, and removed the facebook link as it was not accessible. @qwertyuiop is advised to upload relevant content rather than link to a facebook page.
Thank you
 
  • #10
The Electrician said:
Halfway down the page of your calculations you have:

(V1-V2)/22k + 0.003 V2 +1 + V2/30k = 0

This should be:

(V1-V2)/22k + 0.003 V1 +1 - V2/30k = 0

Which should then become:

30 V1 - 30 V2 + 1980 V1 + 660000 - 22 V2 = 0

Which becomes:

2010 V1 - 52 V2 = -660000
Thank you for your help.
I don't understand why - V2/30k ?
 
  • #11
qwertyuiop said:
Thank you for your help.
I don't understand why - V2/30k ?

Because you have chosen to define currents into a node as positive. The other choice people make is to define current out of a node as positive. But whichever you choose, you must be consistent.

The expression V2/30k gives the current out of the node, so its sign must be negative.
 
  • Like
Likes qwertyuiop
  • #12
The Electrician said:
Because you have chosen to define currents into a node as positive. The other choice people make is to define current out of a node as positive. But whichever you choose, you must be consistent.

The expression V2/30k gives the current out of the node, so its sign must be negative.
ok, thank you for your help. In this circuit, I find the rth = -1363ohm. Is possible rth is negative? why?
 
Last edited:
  • #13
qwertyuiop said:
ok, thank you for your help. In this circuit, I find the rth = -1363ohm. Is possible rth is negative? why?

The dependent source in this circuit is a transconductance source. The value 0.003 is the transconductance. Substitute a variable x for the value 0.003 and solve the circuit for Rth. You will get this expression: Rth = 3.75/(.00025-x). You can see that if x is greater than .00025, Rth will be negative; since .003 is greater than .00025, we get a negative value for Rth.

The circuit of this thread is an example of a circuit with an active element connected in such a way as to generate a negative resistance. There are other well known circuits that can do this, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_impedance_converter
 
  • #14
The Electrician said:
The dependent source in this circuit is a transconductance source. The value 0.003 is the transconductance. Substitute a variable x for the value 0.003 and solve the circuit for Rth. You will get this expression: Rth = 3.75/(.00025-x). You can see that if x is greater than .00025, Rth will be negative; since .003 is greater than .00025, we get a negative value for Rth.

The circuit of this thread is an example of a circuit with an active element connected in such a way as to generate a negative resistance. There are other well known circuits that can do this, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_impedance_converter

Thank you
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K