Phasor Circuit Analysis Homework: Understanding Incorrect Answers | MacLaddy

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

This discussion revolves around a homework problem related to phasor circuit analysis, specifically addressing the interpretation of signs in Kirchhoff's Voltage Law (KVL) and the implications for alternating current (AC) sources. Participants explore the reasoning behind the instructor's correction of the final answer and the treatment of voltage sources in circuit analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • MacLaddy presents a circuit analysis using superposition and expresses confusion over the sign of the final answer, questioning the instructor's assertion that it should be negative.
  • Some participants clarify that when summing potential drops around a loop, a potential rise from a voltage source is treated as a negative value, while potential drops are positive.
  • There is a discussion about the polarity of AC sources and how they can be represented in terms of phase angles, with some participants noting that sources can be 180° out of phase.
  • MacLaddy expresses uncertainty about the relevance of polarity direction in alternating current and acknowledges the academic nature of the problem.
  • Participants discuss the implications of different frequencies on the relative phases of AC sources, indicating that their phases will change over time.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the treatment of voltage sources in KVL, but there remains some uncertainty regarding the implications of phase differences in AC sources and how they relate to the problem at hand. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the broader implications of these concepts for practical applications.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations in understanding the application of KVL in AC circuits, particularly regarding the treatment of signs and phase relationships. There is also an acknowledgment of the complexity introduced by different frequencies in AC sources.

MacLaddy
Gold Member
Messages
290
Reaction score
11

Homework Statement



Hello folks. I had a recent midterm where I got a problem wrong, but I'm not sure I understand why. I am hoping someone here can shed some light. Please see the attached circuit diagram.

Homework Equations



Phasor notation stuff... I am correct on all except one sign. Please see below.

The Attempt at a Solution



Using superposition, and considering the sources as Case 1, and Case 2, as noted in the image.

Case 1:

12cos(2000t)=12\angle{0^\circ}
cap= -40j
Ind= 10j

Using KVL

-12\angle{0^\circ}+(-40j)I_1+30I_1+10jI_1=0
I_1=0.28\angle{45^\circ}
I_1=0.28cos(2000t+45^\circ)

Case 2:

18cos(4000t)=18\angle{0^\circ}
cap= -20j
Ind= 20j

Using KVL

-18\angle{0^\circ}+(-20j)I_2+20jI_2+30I_2=0
I_1=0.6\angle{0^\circ}
I_1=0.6cos(4000t)

Final answer

i(t)=0.28cos(2000t+45^\circ)+0.6cos(4000t)

However, my instructor says that the answer above should have a negative sign instead of a positive. Like this...

i(t)=0.28cos(2000t+45^\circ)-0.6cos(4000t)

He explained that he is following KVL by using the sign directions that are drawn on the diagram. This seems wrong to me, as that would make every element in the second equation positive.

18\angle{0^\circ}+(-20j)I_2+20jI_2+30I_2=0

But shouldn't the power source always have a different sign than the other elements? If I apply KVL to the above it would indicate that either everything is applying voltage to the element, or everything is removing it.

Any hints on where my thinking is incorrect?

Thanks,
MacLaddy
 

Attachments

  • Capture.JPG
    Capture.JPG
    8.2 KB · Views: 440
Physics news on Phys.org
When you are summing potential drops around a loop, then a potential rise due to a voltage source is written as a negative value, and a potential drop as a positive value.

In your case for the second source you are going clockwise around the loop and when you go through the 18 V source you do it from + to -, so it's a potential drop. It gets treated like any other drop, which is to say, it is summed as a positive quantity.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MacLaddy
gneill said:
When you are summing potential drops around a loop, then a potential rise due to a voltage source is written as a negative value, and a potential drop as a positive value.

In your case for the second source you are going clockwise around the loop and when you go through the 18 V source you do it from + to -, so it's a potential drop. It gets treated like any other drop, which is to say, it is summed as a positive quantity.

Thanks gneill. I suppose I'm convinced, especially since you echo my professors sentiments. It just seems unlikely that a polarity direction could be assigned to a current that is alternating. Perhaps this is more of an academic problem than a real life one? At least now I know for sure when the final comes rolling around.

Mac
 
MacLaddy said:
Thanks gneill. I suppose I'm convinced, especially since you echo my professors sentiments. It just seems unlikely that a polarity direction could be assigned to a current that is alternating. Perhaps this is more of an academic problem than a real life one? At least now I know for sure when the final comes rolling around.

Mac
Consider an AC source with a function of time given by ##v1(t) = A sin(\omega t)##. At time t = 0 the value is increasing in the positive direction. Another source ##v2(t) = -A sin(\omega t)## would be decreasing. So the sources are in fact 180° out of phase. The polarity of the symbol used in the schematic tells you the relative orientation of the sources' basic phase angles.
 
Last edited:
gneill said:
Consider an AC source with a function of time given by ##v1(t) = A sin(\omega t)##. At time t = 0 the value is increasing in the positive direction. Another source ##v2(t) -A sin(\omega t)## would be decreasing. So the sources are in fact 180° out of phase. The polarity of the symbol used in the schematic tells you the relative orientation of the sources' basic phase angles.

Thank you, that I do understand. But aren't the sources above out of phase--have different frequencies? Truly, it doesn't matter too much. I'm a mechanical guy taking an electrical class. I believe I understand well enough now for my purposes.

Mac
 
MacLaddy said:
Thank you, that I do understand. But aren't the sources above out of phase--have different frequencies?
Their relative phases will change over time due to having different fundamental frequencies, yes. It's not always the case though, and relative phase matters a great deal in many cases.
 
A.sin(ωt) and -A.sin(ωt)
have the same peak amplitude, A
have opposite phase, meaning they differ by 180°

The pair could be written, equivalently, as A.sin(ωt) and A.sin(ωt - 180°)
because the minus sign for amplitude is, basically, a shorthand way of showing a 180° phase shift
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
14K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K