Mutual Inductance Transfer function

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on finding the transfer function Io(s)/Ii(s) for a circuit with multiple inductors and a capacitor. Participants suggest starting from the right-hand side of the circuit and using KVL to establish relationships, though complexity increases due to the circuit's components. Recommendations include using a Thevenin equivalent to simplify the analysis and focusing on mesh equations to isolate the capacitor current. There is a note on ensuring proper notation for the Laplace variable and clarifying the identification of resistors in the circuit. Overall, the circuit's complexity is acknowledged, but it is deemed manageable with the right approach.
JasonHathaway
Messages
113
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Find Io(s)/Ii(s)
Untitled.png


Homework Equations


Basic KVL laws.

The Attempt at a Solution


My idea is to start from the RHS of the circuit until I get a relation between Io(s) and Ii(s).
Untitled.png

Capture.png

Actually I stopped at this point, I wondered whether my approach is appropriate or not since the equations is getting longer and longer.

What do you say?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you can expect the expressions to get longer and nastier. You've got a circuit with four inductors, a mutual inductance and a capacitor, so it's going to have some complex behavior in its general solution. It would be considerably simpler if the input current was confined to being a single frequency sinewave :smile:

If it were me I'd think of "replacing" the input current and R2 with a Thevenin equivalent just to get rid of one loop, then write mesh equations and use Cramer's Rule to solve symbolically for the capacitor current (mesh 3). Then all the hairy parts will be confined to one step: the hammering out of the two 3 x 3 determinants.
 
JasonHathaway said:

Homework Statement


Find Io(s)/Ii(s)
Untitled.png

In the I2 loop is a resistor R2, but the resistor in parallel with the input source also looks like R2 to me. Are they really both R2?

Also, your equations so far don't include LR; I see LL but not LR.
 
I would agree with gneill to change the current input to a Thevenin.
Then, you stated you want to use KVL but you used KCL instead. Stick to KVL. This is not a complicated circuit. Just two equations.
Also, use lowet case for the Laplace variable s.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K