KVL/KCL with two sources - can a loop have both sources?

  • Thread starter Thread starter chopnhack
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Loop Sources
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the validity of including multiple voltage sources in a circuit analysis using Kirchhoff's Voltage Law (KVL) and Kirchhoff's Current Law (KCL). Participants clarify that a loop can indeed contain multiple sources, and the potential changes should sum correctly in the equations. The original poster (OP) realizes an error in their equations, specifically regarding the currents through the resistors. They are advised to incorporate all individual currents for each branch of the circuit and to use junction equations appropriately. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of accurately applying KVL and KCL in circuit analysis.
chopnhack
Messages
53
Reaction score
3
forum question.jpg

Homework Statement


In the circuit shown, find (a) the current in each resistors (b)The power dissipated in each resistor.

Homework Equations


V=IR, P=VI, KVL and KCL

The Attempt at a Solution


See attached.

I was going to post this in the main section as its really a question about whether you can have two voltage sources in your equation, but I read the sticky on the main page for general physics and it directed all coursework type questions here.

In the drawing I have a section underlined. When I set up my equations, I got two voltages in the equation. I wanted to know if that is valid? If I should come across another equation like this, is there a rule for knowing not to do this? The solution to this problem is not the same as what I derived. Please give me some direction with this, thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sure, a given loop can contain zero or more sources. For KVL their potential changes sum just as you've done.
 
  • Like
Likes chopnhack
chopnhack said:
In the drawing I have a section underlined. When I set up my equations, I got two voltages in the equation. I wanted to know if that is valid? If I should come across another equation like this, is there a rule for knowing not to do this? The solution to this problem is not the same as what I derived. Please give me some direction with this, thanks!
Your second equation is incorrect.
There should be i2 instead of i1.
 
  • Like
Likes chopnhack
gneill said:
Sure, a given loop can contain zero or more sources. For KVL their potential changes sum just as you've done.
Thanks mate! BTW - if you haven't seen the finale... jumping the shark abit... Still a fan though :-)

cnh1995 said:
Your second equation is incorrect.
There should be i2 instead of i1.
Hi CNH, I think I see the error now. The 5I1 should really be just I1 times the 1 ohm resistor. That makes it all work.
Thanks gents!
 
cnh1995 said:
Does it?

I1 flows through the 3 ohm resistance too. Plus, I2 also flows through the 3 ohm resistance. You should have all the three currents in that equation.
OP has 3 individual currents, each one for each branch of the circuit. He then uses a junction equation to relate them.
 
Last edited:
It was almost 12 am when I posted it and I was kinda sleepy:oops:. I guess I have to sleep now before I post anything stupider.
SammyS said:
OP has 3 individual currents, each one for each branch of the circuit. He then uses a junction equation to relate them.
Yes. I wasn't able to delete that because of network problems (I am traveling in a hilly area).
Fixed it now.
 
Last edited:
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
6K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Back
Top