KVL with a current source in loop

AI Thread Summary
When applying Kirchhoff's Voltage Law (KVL) in circuits with a current source, it's advised not to treat the current source as a voltage variable, as this complicates the analysis. Instead, transforming the current source into an equivalent voltage source or utilizing nodal analysis is recommended for clarity and accuracy. The current source being part of two loops complicates the equations further, making it challenging to eliminate variables effectively. Mesh analysis is considered less effective in these scenarios. Overall, using alternative methods like nodal analysis can simplify the problem-solving process.
ThomasHW
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to solve for a number of different currents in a circuit, and I'm wondering how to do KVL with a current source in a loop?

The current source is actually part of two loops, so is it possible to just name the current source 'V' during KVL and add (or subtract) the two resulting equations to remove 'V' and be left with a third equation?

I've attempted to do this, but my numbers seemed off (could of been an algebraic mistake - not sure.)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You shouldn't be using KVL in a loop with a current source. Denoting the unknown potential by V only gives you an extra variable to solve for and complicates matters. What I'll try to do is to either transform the current souce into a voltage source or simply use nodal analysis. Mesh analysis is overrated, in my opinion.
 
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
3K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
6K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Back
Top