Kirchhoff's Rules, system of equation problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter coile3
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rules System
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving a DC circuit problem using Kirchhoff's rules, where the user encountered an issue with dependent equations leading to an infinite number of solutions. It was determined that two of the three equations derived from the loop rule were equivalent, resulting in insufficient information to solve for the three unknown currents. The addition of the junction rule is necessary to provide a unique solution, as it introduces an additional independent equation. Users are advised to always incorporate the junction rule when formulating equations for circuit analysis. This ensures a complete and solvable system of equations.
coile3
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I came up with three equations, to find three different currents in a DC circuit, using Kirchhoff's loop rule, but when I solved them as a matrix in my calculator the bottom row becomes all zero's and the first two rows do not appear to be in "rref" form. I solved the system of equations by hand and when I add the solution from the first two (my new equation) to the third I get 0=0. Is this because they are dependent? If I use Kirchoffs junction rule to get an additional equation I can substitute the junction equation for any of the original three and get the answers. Should I always use the junction rule to find at least one of my equations, and is this problem due to not having used an equation from the junction rule originally or is it an occasional occurance and normally using any three equations (following Kirchhoff's rules) will give me the results I need?

thanks for the help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Probably, two of the three equations you obtained using the loop rule are equivalent, which means that without the junction rule you don't have enough information to solve the problem.

Essentially, you're trying to solve 2 equations for 3 unknowns, so you get an infinite number of possible solutions. The addition of the junction rule narrows it down to one solution.
 
Thanksl that is exactly what has happened, I get an infinite amount of solutions so, Does that mean I should always use an equation generated by the junction rule?
 
Does that mean I should always use an equation generated by the junction rule?

In these types of problems it is usually necessary, since the currents are related.
 
You MUST use the junction rule (explicitly or implicitly). You will have an insufficient number of linearly independent equations without it.
 
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...
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...
Back
Top