Resolving Multiloop Circuit Configurations with Delta Star Transformation

  • Thread starter Thread starter nanotubez
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circuit Diagram
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on resolving a multiloop circuit with resistances R1, R2, R3, R4, and junction resistance Rj. Participants suggest using Kirchhoff's Current Law (KCL) to analyze the circuit, as simplifying using series and parallel combinations may not be effective. The goal is to find the equivalent resistance, and it is recommended to apply delta-star transformation for simplification. If resistors are identical, Rj can be eliminated due to the symmetry of a Wheatstone bridge. The conversation emphasizes the importance of setting up simultaneous equations to derive the total resistance accurately.
nanotubez
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


So, imagine that there are two wires stretched across 2 electrodes crossing over each other, dividing each wire into two pieces at a junction, j. Each wire is connected to two electrodes, one at each end. The pieces have resistances R1, R2, R3, and R4 and the resistance at the junction is Rj.

Homework Equations



Series: Rtot = R1 + R2

Parallel 1/Rtot = 1/R1 + 1/R2

The Attempt at a Solution



Circuit Diagram(attached)

I tried saying R1, Rj, and R4 are in series and are parallel to R2 and R3 and for (1/R2 + 1/(R1+RJ + R4) + 1/R3)^-1, but then you could say that R3, RJ, and R2 are in series and parallel to R1 and R4, but (1/R1 + 1/(R2 + Rj + R3) + 1/R4)^-1 does not equal the same thing. Please help?

Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • Circuit.jpg
    Circuit.jpg
    11.5 KB · Views: 518
Physics news on Phys.org
nanotubez said:

Homework Statement


So, imagine that there are two wires stretched across 2 electrodes crossing over each other, dividing each wire into two pieces at a junction, j. Each wire is connected to two electrodes, one at each end. The pieces have resistances R1, R2, R3, and R4 and the resistance at the junction is Rj.

Homework Equations



Series: Rtot = R1 + R2

Parallel 1/Rtot = 1/R1 + 1/R2

The Attempt at a Solution



Circuit Diagram(attached)

I tried saying R1, Rj, and R4 are in series and are parallel to R2 and R3 and for (1/R2 + 1/(R1+RJ + R4) + 1/R3)^-1, but then you could say that R3, RJ, and R2 are in series and parallel to R1 and R4, but (1/R1 + 1/(R2 + Rj + R3) + 1/R4)^-1 does not equal the same thing. Please help?

Thanks!

Welcome to the PF.

What does the problem ask for you to solve? Solve for the equivalent resistance? Or current given some battery voltage?

In the general case, I think the best way to solve this is to use KCL equations at the nodes. In the general case, I'm not sure you can use parallel & series combinations to simplify the circuit.
 
berkeman said:
Welcome to the PF.

What does the problem ask for you to solve? Solve for the equivalent resistance? Or current given some battery voltage?

In the general case, I think the best way to solve this is to use KCL equations at the nodes. In the general case, I'm not sure you can use parallel & series combinations to simplify the circuit.


Solve for total resistance resistance. No mention of current
 
Are any of the resistors the same?

If not then I'd number the nodes at each end of Rj and assign them unknown voltages (eg V1 and V2) then write lots of simultaneous equations (eg for the current through each resistor and into and out of the various nodes). Then laborious job of reducing them down to one for the total R (eliminating Vbat, V1 and V2 and all the currents along the way).

If the resulting equation doesn't have a certain symetry about it then it's probably wrong.
 
Last edited:
if you need equivalent resistance, then it can be reduced to series/parallel combination by first using delta star transformation.
 
As pcm stated, you can use delta star transformation and if the resistors are identical, you can remove RJ because it's a wheat stone bridge then.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...

Similar threads

Back
Top