Engineering Nodal Analysis on Electrical Circuit

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving a nodal analysis problem in an electrical circuit, focusing on calculating node voltages Vx and Vy. Initial calculations yielded Vx as 1.08V, which participants believe is incorrect. They suggest revising the current expressions, particularly for I2 and I3, to ensure accurate application of Kirchhoff's Law. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly defining current directions and equations based on node potentials. Ultimately, plausible values for Vx and Vy are proposed, indicating that higher voltages are feasible.
gl0ck
Messages
85
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Nodal.png


The Attempt at a Solution


According to the similar problem
Node X:
I1=(22-Vx)/66
I2=(66-Vx)/44
Il=Vx/264
I3=I1+I2+Il
Node Y:
I4=Vy/240
I5=6
I4=I3+I5

After the calculations I get 1.08 for Vx, which I think is wrong.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
gl0ck said:

Homework Statement


View attachment 55350

The Attempt at a Solution


According to the similar problem
Node X:
I1=(22-Vx)/66
I2=(66-Vx)/44 <--- Check the indicated direction of I2.
Il=Vx/264
I3=I1+I2+Il <--- Why not I3 in terms of node voltages Vx and Vy?
Node Y:
I4=Vy/240
I5=6
I4=I3+I5

After the calculations I get 1.08 for Vx, which I think is wrong.

Thanks
Yeah, Vx is definitely greater than 1.08V.

Can you show more of your work? How about writing out the node equations?
 
If the direction of I2 is that shown on the picture, then shouldn't it be I2=(Vx-66)/44
and for I3, I3=(Vy-Vx)/24. If these assumptions are correct, then the calculations are easy, but I think the problem is somewhere in the expressions of the currents.

Thanks for the reply
 
gl0ck said:
If the direction of I2 is that shown on the picture, then shouldn't it be I2=(Vx-66)/44 and for I3, I3=(Vy-Vx)/24.
Yes, they look fine.
If these assumptions are correct, then the calculations are easy, but I think the problem is somewhere in the expressions of the currents.
With the expressions that you now have for the currents you should be able to write and solve the two node equations (based on KCL at each node).
 
Are the equations for the X node:
I1+I2+Il = I3?
and for the Y node:
I4=I3+I5?
Because I don't understand how the current direction should be expressed by the Kirchoff's law.
which will made the equations look like these:
((22-Vx)/66)+((Vx-66)/44)+(Vx/264)=((Vy-Vx)/24)
and
Node Y:
Vy/240=((Vy-Vx)/24)+6
 
If you choose to assume the current directions as depicted in the diagram, then some are flowing into the X node and some are flowing out. According to KCL the sum of the ones flowing in must balance the sum of those flowing out.

Regarding the math of current directions, suppose that you had a couple of nodes A and B with potentials Va and Vb as follows:

attachment.php?attachmentid=55378&stc=1&d=1360016286.gif


The current flowing from node A into node B would be given by ##Iab = \frac{Va - Vb}{R}## .

The current flowing from node B into node A would be given by ##Iba = \frac{Vb - Va}{R}## .

In other words, you specify the assumed current direction by the order in which you take the difference in the potentials.
 

Attachments

  • Fig1.gif
    Fig1.gif
    694 bytes · Views: 697
Last edited:
I2+Il=I1+I3
I3+I5=I4
Are these the correct equations for the currents?
 
Last edited:
gl0ck said:
I2+Il=I1+I3
I3+I5=I4
Are these the correct equations for the currents?

Assuming the current directions as depicted in the diagram, the first equation looks okay but the second equation does not look okay. Note that both I3 and I4 are shown flowing OUT of node Y. For I5 (which isn't defined on the circuit diagram) you can just use a constant 6 Amps.
 
Is it possible Vx to be 160.3V and Vy to be 276.63V?
I found plausible values for the currents:
I1=(22-160.3)/66=-2.095A
I2=(160.3-66)/44=2.143A
I3=(276.63-160.3)/24=4.847A
Il=160.3/264=0.607A
I4=276.63/240=1.152A
 
  • #10
gl0ck said:
Is it possible Vx to be 160.3V and Vy to be 276.63V?
I found plausible values for the currents:
I1=(22-160.3)/66=-2.095A
I2=(160.3-66)/44=2.143A
I3=(276.63-160.3)/24=4.847A
Il=160.3/264=0.607A
I4=276.63/240=1.152A

Yes, it's possible. In fact it's more than likely :smile:
 
  • #11
Thank you for the help. :)
 

Similar threads

Replies
187
Views
57K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
26
Views
3K
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top