1
\$\begingroup\$

I am given the following problem:

When the switch S is closed, current I=(3-j) A. Find complex power of current generator Ig1, when the switch is opened, if it is known that when switch is opened, complex power of Ig2 is $$\underline{S_{g2}}^{(o)}=(10+j6) VA.$$ The following data is given: $$\underline{Z}=(2-j2) \Omega$$ $$\underline{Z_1}=(1+j2) \Omega$$ $$\underline{Z_2}=\underline{Z_4}=(2+j4) \Omega$$ $$\underline{Z_3}=(2-j4) \Omega$$ $$\underline{I_{g1}}=(0.5+j1.5) A$$ $$\underline{E}=(7+j3.5) V$$

Circuit:

enter image description here

Attempt:

When the switch is closed, by using Potential of nodes method, we get the system of 3 equations with 4 unknowns, that is not solvable. If we use Contour currents method, we get the system of 2 equations with 4 unknowns, that is not solvable. In this case, we have the following unknown data: E2, E3, Ig2.

When the switch is opened, we get the same number of unknowns.

How to solve this problem?

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ You cannot solve that, or better there's a whole subspace of solutions spanning over (E2,E3). I do not fancy too much those solutions methods, they are good to computer aided solvers, but do not "tell" much of what's going on. We humans can do better. Try Nortonize everything on the left of 4-5 instead. Norton impedance can be worked out right away while its current can be easily found toghether with Ig2 on Nortonized circuit using I, Z and Sg2(o) only. Then.... \$\endgroup\$
    – carloc
    Feb 10, 2018 at 19:15
  • \$\begingroup\$ No no I was wrong! I was partially wrong at least, circuit has actually a subspace of solutions on (E2,E3), but for each point in that subspace power on Ig1 does not change! Can be easily seen splitting E into two. Any idea about that @user300045 ? \$\endgroup\$
    – carloc
    Feb 11, 2018 at 11:21

1 Answer 1

2
\$\begingroup\$

Okay as outlined in my comments I'd rather go through a dividi et impera approach.

So first point, whatever happens to the switch SW, Z impedance and Ig2 generator the leftside of the circuit can for sure be modelled as per Norton's theorem.

enter image description here

Norton impedance can be worked out right away $$Z_\mathrm{n}=Z_1+Z_3+(Z_2 || Z_4)=4\,\Omega$$ while, for now, we have to leave Norton's current symbolic


Then we are told that with SW closed \$I=(3-\mathrm{j})\,\mathrm{A}\$ which in turn just means $$I_\mathrm{n}+I_\mathrm{g2}=-I=(-3+\mathrm{j})\,\mathrm{A}$$


Switching now SW open we need \$V_{54}\$ to calculate \$S_\mathrm{g2}^{(o)}\$ $$V_{54}=(Z_\mathrm{n} || Z)\,(I_\mathrm{n}+I_\mathrm{g2})=-(Z_\mathrm{n} || Z)\,I=(-4+\mathrm{j}4)\,\mathrm{V}$$


So now $$I_\mathrm{g2}^{(o)}=\left(\frac{S_\mathrm{g2}^{(o)}}{V_{54}}\right)^{*}=(-0.5+\mathrm{j}2)\,\mathrm{A}$$ and conversely $$I_\mathrm{n}=-I+I_\mathrm{g2}=(-2.5-\mathrm{j})\,\mathrm{A}$$


We have now completely defined Norton's equivalent of the whole left part of circuit to be \$Z_\mathrm{n}=4\,\Omega\$ and \$I_\mathrm{n}=(-2.5-\mathrm{j})\,\mathrm{A}\$.

It's now time to get back to its original and try to "fill in" its components.

Looking below at the unloaded Norton's equivalent we can measure an open circuit voltage $$V_\mathrm{n}=Z_\mathrm{n}\,I_\mathrm{n}=(-10-\mathrm{j}4)\,\mathrm{V}$$


The same voltage can obviously found at unloaded original circuit as \$V_{54}\$ but, given no current flowing in \$Z_1\$, the same voltage will also be at \$V_{14}\$

enter image description here

We have now to reverse bottom left corner circuit finding \$E_2\$ and \$E_3\$ which will give required \$V_\mathrm{n}\$.

This can be done in several ways, but splitting E voltage generator is probably the simplest.

Thevenin-izing E2,E3,E(left) into one single voltage generator \$E_\mathrm{t}\$ now clarifies that while we do not have enough relations to find \$E_2\$ and \$E_3\$ individual values, there must exist one single \$E_\mathrm{t}\$ achieving required \$V_\mathrm{n}\$.

In short $$Z_{324}=Z_3+(Z_2\,||\,Z_4)=(3-\mathrm{j}2)\,\Omega$$ $$E_\mathrm{t}=V_\mathrm{n}-Z_{324}\,I_\mathrm{g1}=(5.5+\mathrm{j}2)\,\mathrm{V}$$


So now that we have managed to dig out \$I_\mathrm{g1}\$ from Norton's equivalent we can finally fit it all back toghether.

enter image description here

$$V_{14}=\frac{\frac{E_\mathrm{t}}{Z_{324}}+I_\mathrm{g1}}{\frac{1}{Z_{324}}+\frac{1}{Z_1+Z}}=( 3.675 + \mathrm{j}3.975)\,\mathrm{V}$$

$$V_{13}=V_{14}-E=-3.325 + \mathrm{j}0.475)\,\mathrm{V}$$

and finally

$$S_\mathrm{g1}=V_{13}\,I_\mathrm{g1}^{*}=( -0.95 + \mathrm{j}5.225)\,\mathrm{VA}$$

\$\endgroup\$
5
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'd like your thoughts too, I would like to guide you to the solution rather than just show how I 've done it \$\endgroup\$
    – carloc
    Feb 12, 2018 at 8:24
  • \$\begingroup\$ In your first Norton schema, how did you determined the direction of In? Why is it from 4 to 5? Shouldn't it be from 5 to 4? Could you explain? \$\endgroup\$
    – user300045
    Feb 12, 2018 at 10:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ It's a conventional direction, both option are ok as long as you account them in the eqautions you write. Then value of current might be positive or negative. \$\endgroup\$
    – carloc
    Feb 12, 2018 at 10:41
  • \$\begingroup\$ Let us continue this discussion in chat. \$\endgroup\$
    – carloc
    Feb 13, 2018 at 10:45
  • \$\begingroup\$ @user300045 please continue the discussion in chat \$\endgroup\$
    – clabacchio
    Feb 13, 2018 at 12:50

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.