Thevenin's Theorem : Reason behind 'nullifying' or 'suppressing' sources?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Thevenin's Theorem and the reasoning behind the methods of 'suppressing' or 'nullifying' sources in circuit analysis. Participants explore the implications of treating voltage and current sources differently when applying this theorem.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why voltage sources are short-circuited and current sources are open-circuited, suggesting a need for clarification on this convention.
  • Another participant explains that an inactive voltage source is equivalent to zero volts, which is represented as a short circuit, while an inactive current source is modeled as an open circuit due to its infinite impedance.
  • A later reply argues that replacing a voltage source with an open circuit could lead to a voltage difference across its terminals, contradicting the definition of it being inactive.
  • Similar reasoning is presented regarding the treatment of current sources, indicating that the definitions of active and inactive sources are crucial to understanding the suppression process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the treatment of sources in Thevenin's Theorem, with no consensus reached on the reasoning behind the established conventions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence on definitions of active and inactive sources, as well as the implications of circuit configurations on the behavior of these sources. Some assumptions regarding the nature of the sources and their interactions with the rest of the network remain unresolved.

dwade258
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
WHY aren't voltage sources open circuited and current sources short circuited?

Thevenin's theorem (and even Superposition Theorem) states that we need to 'suppress' or 'nullify' the effect of all sources. We do this by short circuiting voltage sources and open circuiting current sources. WHY exactly can't we do this the other way round by open circuiting voltage sources and short circuiting current sources? What is wrong about doing that?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
An inactive voltage source is equivalent to zero volts between its terminals, independent of the current through it. This would be a "wire", or a short circuit.

An inactive current source is a current source in which no current can flow independent of the voltage across, which is represented by infinite impedance, and hence an open circuit.
 
Thanks a lot! You are awesome :)
 
If you were to replace the voltage source with an open circuit rather than a short circuit, there may exist a voltage difference across its terminals (dependent on the rest of the network) and hence it would not be considered an "inactive" voltage source. Similar arguments would apply to the current source.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K