Mesh Method and Node Method Check

In summary: Solve the mesh equations for I_1 = \frac{10}{12} - I_2I have arrived at the following solutions I_1 = \frac{5}{84}I_2 = \frac{65}{84}
  • #1
IronBrain
52
0

Homework Statement


Given the following circuit using mesh's method to solve for the power of the dependent source.
Using the same circuit and using the node voltage method solve for the power of the dependent source.

Circuit:
5nlpw5.png


Homework Equations


Noting that I have to implement a super mesh for the dependent source to solve the unknown currents. I have arrived to the following equations

[itex]Vx = 4I_1[/itex]

[itex]3Vx = I_2 - I_1[/itex]

The Mesh equation:

[itex]-4I_1-12I_2+30-8I_1-20 = 0[/itex]

Simplifying:

[itex]-12I_1-12I_2+10 = 0[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution


Solving the simulatenous equations by doing various substitutions of

[itex]Vx = 4I_1[/itex]

[itex]3Vx = I_2 - I_1[/itex]

By solving the mesh equations for [itex]I_1 = \frac{10}{12} - I_2[/itex]

I have arrived at the following solutions

[itex]I_1 = \frac{5}{84}[/itex]

[itex]I_2 = \frac{65}{84}[/itex]

[itex]Vx = \frac{5}{21}[/itex]

[itex]3Vx = \frac{5}{7}[/itex]

Checking by Kirchoff's voltage law to see if all voltages within the outter loop it does equate to 0.

I need a check to see if this is right and I have no idea how to properly implement the node voltage method because the equations do not seem to come out right. I think my trouble is properly putting the correct polarity/sign convention of all devices

Help! Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Sigh bump...
 
  • #3
Dammit! I need this checked by tomorrw morning!
 
  • #4
IronBrain said:
Dammit! I need this checked by tomorrw morning!

Watch the attitude please. The PF is a volunteer help site, so you won't always get help in a timely fashion. The right way to check your problem is for you to do it the two ways the problem asks you -- if the answers are the same, then you probably got it right.

Can you be more specific about what part of the KCL equation writing is bothering you?
 
  • #5
Well I am not entirely sure if my sign convention for all devices is correct. And which or how many nodes to pick when implementing the node method and what to use when using KCL for node for the middle branch, would I just put the current down that branch as 3Vx, and I just want to see if my first solutions using Mesh is correct
 
  • #6
IronBrain said:
Well I am not entirely sure if my sign convention for all devices is correct. And which or how many nodes to pick when implementing the node method and what to use when using KCL for node for the middle branch, would I just put the current down that branch as 3Vx, and I just want to see if my first solutions using Mesh is correct

On your KVL work, I'm not sure I understand why you wrote an equation around the whole outside loop, instead of writing the 2 equations for the left and right loops. Also, be sure to label the +/- assumed voltage drop direction on R3, so you can keep it consistent in later equations.

For the KCL, I would put ground at the bottom of R4, and write equations for nodes on each side of the V1 source, and the top node at the top end of the dependent current source.
 
  • #7
Thanks
Im in my originating equations I believe when doing super mesh you "pretend" as if the current source in a common branch is there hence the equation for my mesh.

Also thanks for the tips on the node method, ill try that out
 
  • #8
IronBrain said:
Thanks
Im in my originating equations I believe when doing super mesh you "pretend" as if the current source in a common branch is there hence the equation for my mesh.

Also thanks for the tips on the node method, ill try that out

To be honest, I'm not familiar with the super mesh concept. I'd just write the two loop equations for the KVL. But I hardly ever use KVL, so I'm probably not a great help on that. The KCL should be fine, and a good check against your answer for the KVL.
 
  • #9
Thanks for help, so do I label the polarities of the devices based on the direction of each loop I have chosen or based of the direction of the device?

I believe super mesh is used for a dependent source or any device shared between a common branch of currents.

Also would I put a node on top of V2?
 
  • #10
IronBrain said:
Well I am not entirely sure if my sign convention for all devices is correct. And which or how many nodes to pick when implementing the node method and what to use when using KCL for node for the middle branch, would I just put the current down that branch as 3Vx, and I just want to see if my first solutions using Mesh is correct

You've got a sign error here:

The Mesh equation:

[itex]-4I_1-12I_2+30-8I_1-20 = 0[/itex]

It should be:

[itex]-4I_1-12I_2-30-8I_1+20 = 0[/itex]

And you have a sign error here:

[itex]Vx = 4I_1[/itex]

[itex]3Vx = I_2 - I_1[/itex]

You should have:

[itex]Vx = -4I_1[/itex]

[itex]3Vx = I_2 - I_1[/itex]

Combine them to get:

[itex]-12I_1 = I_2 - I_1[/itex]

Now if you solve your simultaneous equations, you should get:

I1 = 1/12
I2 = -11/12

From which the voltage at the top middle node = 19 volts, assuming the bottom of R4 is the reference, or ground.

For the nodal method, I would move R2 to a position between R1 and the middle node; then the negative terminal of V1 is grounded and the whole thing is easier to conceptualize.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Thanks!
I always have a problem with getting the right sign convention here, I've been working on this for multiple hours trying to find a comprehendable explainable solution to my mess. Being that the original direction gets confused with the direction I am trying to take. How do you know which convention of the device is correct, I can never seem to get them correct. Also one minor detail left.

To find the power of the dependent source can I simply use the fact that

[itex]P_ds = I^2R[/itex]

Which R is the resistance of 6 ohms
 
  • #12
IronBrain said:
Thanks!
I always have a problem with getting the right sign convention here, I've been working on this for multiple hours trying to find a comprehendable explainable solution to my mess. Being that the original direction gets confused with the direction I am trying to take. How do you know which convention of the device is correct, I can never seem to get them correct. Also one minor detail left.

To find the power of the dependent source can I simply use the fact that

[itex]P_ds = I^2R[/itex]

Which R is the resistance of 6 ohms

You know the current in R4, so you can calculate the voltage across R4. Then the voltage across the dependent source is (19 - voltage across R4). Then the power delivered by the dependent source is (voltage across the source)*(current through the source).
 
  • #13
I got -1A for the current dependent source, does that seem right?
 

1. What is the difference between Mesh Method and Node Method Check?

The Mesh Method and Node Method are both techniques used in structural analysis to determine the internal forces and displacements of a structure. The main difference between the two methods is the approach used to divide the structure into smaller elements. The Mesh Method divides the structure into smaller areas or "meshes" while the Node Method divides the structure into smaller points or "nodes".

2. How do you perform a Mesh Method Check?

To perform a Mesh Method Check, the first step is to divide the structure into smaller areas or "meshes". Then, the internal forces and displacements within each mesh are calculated using equations and principles of structural mechanics. Finally, the results from each mesh are combined to determine the overall behavior of the structure.

3. What are the advantages of using the Node Method Check?

The Node Method Check is advantageous because it allows for a more accurate representation of the structure's geometry and boundary conditions. It also allows for more flexibility in the type and shape of elements used, making it suitable for more complex structures. Additionally, the Node Method often requires fewer equations and calculations compared to the Mesh Method, saving time and effort.

4. When is the Mesh Method Check preferred over the Node Method Check?

The Mesh Method Check is typically preferred when dealing with simpler structures or when the structural elements are relatively uniform. It is also more suitable for structures with regular geometries, such as buildings or bridges. Additionally, the Mesh Method may be preferred when using certain types of analysis software that are based on this method.

5. Are there any limitations to using the Mesh Method and Node Method Check?

Both the Mesh Method and Node Method have their limitations and may not be suitable for all types of structures. The Mesh Method can become computationally intensive for highly complex structures, and the results may not be as accurate. The Node Method may be less accurate for structures with irregular geometries. It is important for a scientist to carefully consider the structure and the objectives of the analysis before deciding on which method to use.

Similar threads

  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
736
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
848
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
6K
Back
Top