Kirchhoff's Laws: Homework Solutions Check

  • Thread starter Thread starter frazdaz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Laws
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on verifying homework solutions related to Kirchhoff's Laws, specifically focusing on current and voltage equations. Participants express concerns about potential mistakes in the signs of currents I1 and I2, noting that their calculations yield both currents as positive. There is a debate about the necessity of the positive sign accompanying current arrows, with some finding it redundant and cluttering the diagram. The conversation highlights the importance of clarity in representing currents and the mathematical implications of sign conventions. Overall, the thread emphasizes the need for careful attention to detail in applying Kirchhoff's Laws.
frazdaz
Messages
13
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



2s1n338.png


Homework Equations



\sum I_{in} = \sum I_{out}
\sum \epsilon = \sum pd

The Attempt at a Solution



Can anyone identify any mistakes in these? Probably signs

I = I_1 + I_2
12=4I_1 +3I
5=4I_1 - 2I_2
12-5=2I_2+3I
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What let's you think there are any mistakes ?
 
BvU said:
What let's you think there are any mistakes ?
The answers have I1 and I2 with opposite signs. I get them both as positive.
 
I make all currents positive for the directions shown.

I'm not sure what is achieved by that + sign accompanying each current arrow? It seems superfluous if it duplicates the function of the arrowhead, and just clutters the diagram.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
NascentOxygen said:
I make all currents positive for the directions shown.

I'm not sure what is achieved by that + sign accompanying each current arrow? It seems superfluous if it duplicates the function of the arrowhead, and just clutters the diagram.
Well that's good news. And, yeah, I guess it's just intended to help with the maths side of things.
 

Thread 'Errors and significant figures'

I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
View full post »
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
View full post »

Similar threads

Thévenin and Norton circuits Exercise
Replies
2
Views
1K
Where Did I Go Wrong in My Multiloop Circuit/Kirchhoff Calculation?
Replies
17
Views
3K
Mesh Analysis Method for Finding Current in a Circuit with Dependent Source
Replies
5
Views
2K
Two networks described by v-i graph: Find voltages when interconnected
Replies
1
Views
1K
What is the relationship between I_eq and i_1, i_2, i_3 in Kirchhoff's Laws?
Replies
7
Views
1K
Kirchhoff's Rules Homework Solution
Replies
1
Views
2K
Circuits involving Kirchoff's law
Replies
10
Views
3K
Finding the Current in a circuit
Replies
6
Views
3K
Multiple resistors not in series / parallel
Replies
12
Views
3K
Value of current through 12V battery
Replies
8
Views
5K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top