- #1

- 5

- 0

Sincerely,

gta100

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter gta100
- Start date

- #1

- 5

- 0

Sincerely,

gta100

- #2

berkeman

Mentor

- 59,496

- 9,624

Sincerely,

gta100

Welcome to the PF.

What is a negative Thevenin resistance? Is it physical? Or is it related to some complex impedance (in which case there is a good answer)?

- #3

- 5

- 0

By negative Thevenin resistance, I mean Rth < 0 in the Thevenin equivalent circuit. According to my textbook, negative Rth may appear when there are ONLY DEPENDENT sources inside "the circuit". By "the circuit", I mean the circuitry with CONSTANT PHYSICAL QUANTITIES FOR ALL ELEMENTS and with two terminals connected to a load resistor with a VARYING RESISTANCE (rheostat). I hope that is clear? Thank you!

gta100

- #4

berkeman

Mentor

- 59,496

- 9,624

By negative Thevenin resistance, I mean Rth < 0 in the Thevenin equivalent circuit. According to my textbook, negative Rth may appear when there are ONLY DEPENDENT sources inside "the circuit". By "the circuit", I mean the circuitry with CONSTANT PHYSICAL QUANTITIES FOR ALL ELEMENTS and with two terminals connected to a load resistor with a VARYING RESISTANCE (rheostat). I hope that is clear? Thank you!

gta100

So to figure this out, we should take a typical circuit that exhibits negative output resistance, and figure out how to get maximum power to a load impedance (by varying the load impedance in this case).

Can you post a typical circuit that exhibits negative resistance at its two output terminals? And then see if you might be able to answer your own question by trying some different resistances connected to those terminals?

- #5

- 5

- 0

So to figure this out, we should take a typical circuit that exhibits negative output resistance, and figure out how to get maximum power to a load impedance (by varying the load impedance in this case).

Can you post a typical circuit that exhibits negative resistance at its two output terminals? And then see if you might be able to answer your own question by trying some different resistances connected to those terminals?

Hi Berkeman! Sure! Let me go ahead and post a sample circuit for you (Please see attachment).

So in this circuit, I find Rth = -15000/11 ohms = - 1363.636364 ohms , and Vth = - 2680/11 V (Also negative). I need to find the maximum power transfer to the rheostat R as indicated.

Thank you for your help!

gta100

- #6

- 7,905

- 807

Forgetting Thevenin equivalent reistance for a moment, have you determined i(R) for arbitrary R?

- #7

- 5

- 0

I have determined i(R) for sure. It is Vth/(R + Rth), right? I actually included it in the formula for the power transferred to the load resistor, namely, P = R*(Vth/(R + Rth))^2.

I even plotted the equation in MATLAB, and it turned out that P will reach infinitely high when R = - Rth (Recall that Rth < 0 now, so R = -Rth > 0). So it seems like there is no max power. Could you help me investigate if I calculated the wrong Rth? I attached the sample problem in my last post. Thank you very much!

gta100

- #8

- 315

- 0

gta100,

I solved this problem using node analysis, as shown in the attachment. I don't see Thevenin helping very much. Check my node calculations. I show that when R=1363.636364, then the power dissipated in R is 2.962740001E21, a very large number. Included is a plot of the power dissipated.

Ratch

I solved this problem using node analysis, as shown in the attachment. I don't see Thevenin helping very much. Check my node calculations. I show that when R=1363.636364, then the power dissipated in R is 2.962740001E21, a very large number. Included is a plot of the power dissipated.

Ratch

- #9

uart

Science Advisor

- 2,776

- 9

I have determined i(R) for sure. It is Vth/(R + Rth), right? I actually included it in the formula for the power transferred to the load resistor, namely, P = R*(Vth/(R + Rth))^2.

I even plotted the equation in MATLAB, and it turned out that P will reach infinitely high when R = - Rth (Recall that Rth < 0 now, so R = -Rth > 0). So it seems like there is no max power. Could you help me investigate if I calculated the wrong Rth? I attached the sample problem in my last post. Thank you very much!

gta100

Yes, the correct value of [itex]R_{thv}=[/itex] is [itex]-\frac{15}{11}k \Omega[/itex]. (Hand calculated the good old fashioned way. )

Yes the maximum power is unlimited (infinity if you like), as R_L approaches -R_thv.

The direction that Berkeman was trying to point you toward was to consider what type of

Common examples of negative resistances are.

Last edited:

- #10

- 5

- 0

gta100

- #11

- 315

- 0

Yes, the correct value of Rthv= is −1511kΩ. (Hand calculated the good old fashioned way. )

Yes the maximum power is unlimited (infinity if you like), as R_L approaches -R_thv.

Did you check your negative resistance value by finding the power dissipated by R at that negative value? If you did, you would find that the power is a small negative value, which means that mathematically, R is generating power at that negative value. However, at R=1363.636364, the power dissipated is 2.962740001E21, not infinity. See the power plot I posted above.

Ratch

- #12

uart

Science Advisor

- 2,776

- 9

uart,

Did you check your negative resistance value by finding the power dissipated by R at that negative value? If you did, you would find that the power is a small negative value, which means that mathematically, R is generating power at that negative value. However, at R=1363.636364, the power dissipated is 2.962740001E21, not infinity. See the power plot I posted above.

Ratch

Hi Ratch. Your results are simply an artifact of the simulation software only evaluating the response at a finite number of discrete values of R.

For any circuit that has a negative Thevenins resistance (and a non zero Thevenins voltage) it is easy to see that if you make the external resistance equal to the absolute value of the Thevenins resistance that the total resistance becomes zero. The current, and therefore the load power, must be infinite.

As I explained to gta100 however, in reality this can never happen, as the active components forming the negative resistance will limit or saturate at some finite level.

- #13

- 315

- 0

Your results are simply an artifact of the simulation software only evaluating the response at a finite number of discrete values of R.

I did not use simulation software. As shown in post #8 of this thread, I found the voltage across R by using node analysis. Then using the well known formula V^2/R, I plotted and calculated the R value at the highest power dissipation. That occurs when R is positive, not negative. Anytime R is negative, the resistor is not dissipating power, because V^2/R will always be negative. I stand by my answer of R=1363.636364, and again invite you to calculate the power the resistor dissipates at your value and mine.

Ratch

- #14

uart

Science Advisor

- 2,776

- 9

Ok your plotting software then.uart,

I did not use simulation software.

What are you talking about, they're basically the same value, you just had a decimal approximation. I said to use R = -R_thv, which is positive 15/11 k-ohm. As a decimal this is [itex]1363.\dot{6}\dot{3}\, \Omega[/itex] (that's the .63 repeated).That occurs when R is positive, not negative. Anytime R is negative, the resistor is not dissipating power, because V^2/R will always be negative. I stand by my answer of R=1363.636364, and again invite you to calculate the power the resistor dissipates at your value and mine.

Last edited:

- #15

- 315

- 0

uart,

My plotting software does "evalute the response at a finite number of discrete values of R". However, that is not what I used to determine the value of R.

I don't know about the Thevenin value, but if you agree that R is positive, then the matter is resolved.

Ratch

Ok your plotting software then.

My plotting software does "evalute the response at a finite number of discrete values of R". However, that is not what I used to determine the value of R.

I said to use R = -R_thv, which is positive 15/11 k-ohm.

I don't know about the Thevenin value, but if you agree that R is positive, then the matter is resolved.

Ratch

Last edited:

- #16

uart

Science Advisor

- 2,776

- 9

II don't know about the Thevenin value, but if you agree that R is positive, then the matter is resolved.

- #17

uart

Science Advisor

- 2,776

- 9

My plotting software does "evalute the response at a finite number of discrete values of R". However, that is not what I used to determine the value of R.

Ratch. Are you honestly saying that you cannot see that the maximum value of,

[tex]\frac{2.173 R}{(0.00605R - 8.25)^2}[/tex]

increases without bound as R approaches [itex]\frac{8.25}{0.00605}[/itex]?

* Equation taken from your own working (with factor of [itex]10^{24}[/itex] removed top and bottom).

Last edited:

- #18

- 315

- 0

Ratch. Are you honestly saying that you cannot see that the maximum value of,

increases without bound as R approaches 8.250/.00605?

Sure I can. As the denominator goes to zero, the term becomes infinite. I plugged the decimal value of R into V^2/R and got a very high value of dissipated power. Had I used the exact value of R, then I would have gotten infinity.

Ratch

- #19

uart

Science Advisor

- 2,776

- 9

I plugged the decimal value of R into V^2/R and got a very high value of dissipated power. Had I used the exact value of R, then I would have gotten infinity.

OK, I'm glad that you've finally realized that. Now we're done.

- #20

- 315

- 0

OK, I'm glad that you've finally realized that. Now we're done.

Except for one thing. I did not "finally" realize that, I

Ratch

- #21

uart

Science Advisor

- 2,776

- 9

uart,

Except for one thing. I did not "finally" realize that, Ialwaysknew that I did not have the exact value of R. Therefore I knew that the calculated dissipated power by the approximate R was finite, and not infinite.

Ok I'm happy to concede that. It was really just your reply #11 that confused me into thinking otherwise. It seems that most of the discussion after reply #10 in this thread is therefore pointless.

Share: