Paradox of star - mesh transform ?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the implications of using star-mesh transformation in circuits with negative resistance. Specifically, the equation \(\frac{1}{R_n} = - \sum_{i=1}^{n-1} \frac{1}{R_i}\) leads to an equivalent resistance \(R_{k,j} = 0\), suggesting zero impedance across the circuit. This creates a paradox where the transformation implies equal voltage across nodes, contradicting the original circuit's potential differences. The participants question the applicability of equivalence transforms in the presence of negative resistances, highlighting a case of undefined behavior.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electrical circuits and resistances
  • Familiarity with star-mesh transformation techniques
  • Knowledge of negative resistance concepts
  • Basic principles of circuit analysis and impedance
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of negative resistance in circuit theory
  • Study advanced circuit transformation techniques, including star-mesh transformations
  • Explore the concept of undefined behavior in mathematical transformations
  • Examine case studies involving circuits with negative resistances and their practical applications
USEFUL FOR

Electrical engineers, circuit designers, and students studying advanced circuit theory, particularly those interested in the complexities of negative resistance and circuit transformations.

sergv
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Dear All,

I have encountered the following situation:
Given a node that is connected through n resistors to n ports.
One if the resistors is a negative resistance and equals to minus of all other resistors in parallel.
[itex]\frac{1}{R_n} =- \sum_{i=1}^{n-1} \frac{1}{R_i}[/itex]
Using the well known star - mesh transformation, I get
[itex]R_{k,j} = R_k R_j ( \sum_{k=1}^{n} \frac{1}{R_i} )[/itex]
that equals to 0, due to the definition of [itex]R_n[/itex].
[itex]R_{k,j} = 0[/itex]

Therefore, the equivalent mesh representation of this circuit is a shortcut of all nodes.
It makes sense from one side, because the total circuit has zero impedance, but, from the other side, this transform says that all nodes should be of equal voltage. The last one is not true, because in the original network the nodes may have different potentials.

What do I miss ?
Any ideas ?
Are the equivalence transforms applicable for negative resistances ?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
You have cleverly found a case of zero divided by zero. That is undefined and this is not an electrical question.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K