0
\$\begingroup\$

circuit

I'm trying to find the Thevenin equivalent for this circuit. I'm confused how to do this, but my solution so far is:

  1. Mesh 1: 0 = 2(I1) + 2(I0) - 2I0(volt source)
    Mesh 2: = ?

  2. Vth = Vab = I1 - I2

  3. Rth = (2+4) * (2+4) / (2+4+2+4) = 3ohm

Is this in the right direction?

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • \$\begingroup\$ Who drawn this schematic? There is no reason that I0 is flowing where it is drawn and your thevenin voltage is 0. \$\endgroup\$
    – wbs2422
    Commented Oct 23, 2019 at 8:25
  • \$\begingroup\$ Yes, I agree with your result of \$3\:\Omega\$. Do you want me to confirm it using an entirely different approach (or two?) Or is that enough -- just knowing you got the right value of \$R_\text{TH}=3\:\Omega\$? \$\endgroup\$
    – jonk
    Commented Oct 23, 2019 at 8:55
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Wheatley The schematic is fine. The controlling current for the CCVS can be defined anywhere in the circuit and with any direction. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Oct 23, 2019 at 13:22
  • \$\begingroup\$ The circuits are not even remotely the same, how is this a duplicate? \$\endgroup\$
    – Voltage Spike
    Commented Nov 6, 2019 at 16:47

1 Answer 1

1
\$\begingroup\$

You really should use the schematic editor that exists here (CircuitLab) so that the parts in your schematic have labels that can be addressed and discussed more easily. Let's do that:

schematic

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

On the left side is your schematic, slightly redrawn. On the right side is the same schematic, with the assignment of \$V_\text{b}=0\:\text{V}\$ (which we are allowed to do to exactly one and only one node of our choosing.) With the right side schematic, the equation development is slightly less tedious but results in the same answer, regardless.

You should readily understand that \$I_0=\frac{V_\text{a}-V_1}{R_1}\$, or put another way, that \$V_1=V_\text{a}-R_1\cdot I_0\$ (the value of \$V_\text{a}\$, less the voltage drop across \$R_1\$.) Also, it's not at all hard to realize that \$V_2=V_1+V_\text{x}\$, where \$V_\text{x}=2\:\Omega\cdot I_0\$. It follows that:

$$\begin{align*} V_2&=V_1+V_\text{x}\\ &=\left(V_\text{a}-R_1\cdot I_0\right)+\left(2\:\Omega\cdot I_0\right)\\ &=\left(V_\text{a}-2\:\Omega\cdot I_0\right)+\left(2\:\Omega\cdot I_0\right)\\ &=V_\text{a} \end{align*}$$

As \$V_2=V_\text{a}\$, there cannot be any current in \$R_2\$. Therefore, \$I_0\$ is the only current passing from \$V_\text{a}\$ to \$V_\text{b}\$ (though it takes two different paths in order to arrive at \$V_\text{b}\$ from \$V_\text{a}\$.) So \$R_\text{TH}=\frac{V_\text{a}-V_\text{b}}{I_0}\$ and in keeping with our tentative assignment (for these purposes) of \$V_\text{b}=0\:\text{V}\$, therefore: \$R_\text{TH}=\frac{V_\text{a}}{I_0}=\frac{V_\text{a}}{\frac{V_\text{a}-V_1}{R_1}}=R_1\cdot\frac{V_\text{a}}{V_\text{a}-V_1}\$.

Now you know that \$I_{R_4}=\frac{V_\text{a}}{R_4}\$ and all of \$I_{R_4}\$ must be the same as the current in \$V_\text{x}\$. The remainder is \$I_{R_3}=I_0-\frac{V_\text{a}}{R_4}\$ and therefore:

$$\begin{align*} V_1&=R_3\cdot I_{R_3}\\ &=R_3\cdot\left(I_0-\frac{V_\text{a}}{R_4}\right)\\ &=R_3\cdot\left(\frac{V_\text{a}-V_1}{R_1}-\frac{V_\text{a}}{R_4}\right)\\\\ &\text{solving for }V_1,\\\\ V_1&=V_\text{a}\cdot \frac{\frac{1}{R_1}-\frac{1}{R_4}}{\frac{1}{R_1}+\frac{1}{R_3}}\\ &=\frac13\cdot V_\text{a} \end{align*}$$

Finally,

$$R_\text{TH}=R_1\cdot\frac{V_\text{a}}{V_\text{a}-V_1}=R_1\cdot\frac{V_\text{a}}{V_\text{a}-\frac13\cdot V_\text{a}}=R_1\cdot\frac{1}{1-\frac13}=\frac32 R_1=3\:\Omega$$

I've taken a completely different approach than your mesh approach. Mostly, to avoid doing your homework for you. But partly to bend your mind in another direction to improve mental flexibility and partly to illustrate some other principles. (Re-drawing schematics to help change perspectives and assigning \$0\:\text{V}\$ to exactly one node, for example.)

There are many approaches to this problem. On that note, let's try a different perspective.

Now that we know that \$V_2=V_\text{a}\$, we can re-write the schematic:

schematic

simulate this circuit

The above schematic follows, logically. If \$V_2=V_\text{a}\$ and there's no current in \$R_2\$, then clearly \$I_{R_4}=\frac{V_\text{a}}{R_4}\$ is sinking current away from the \$V_1\$ node. (It subtracts from \$I_0\$.) So the above schematic is equivalent for analysis purposes.

Nodal analysis suggests \$\frac{V_1}{R_1}+\frac{V_1}{R_3}+\frac{V_\text{a}}{R_4}=\frac{V_\text{a}}{R_1}\$ and therefore: \$V_1=V_\text{a}\left(\frac{1}{R_1}-\frac{1}{R_4}\right)\left(R_1\mid\mid R_3\right)\$. (Feel free to do the algebra.) We know that \$R_\text{TH}=\frac{V_\text{a}}{I_0}\$ and that \$I_0=\frac{V_1}{R_3}+\frac{V_\text{a}}{R_4}\$. So:

$$\begin{align*} R_\text{TH}&=\frac{V_\text{a}}{I_0}=\frac{V_\text{a}}{\frac{V_1}{R_3}+\frac{V_\text{a}}{R_4}}\\\\ &=\frac{V_\text{a}}{\frac{V_\text{a}\left(\frac{1}{R_1}-\frac{1}{R_4}\right)\left(R_1\mid\mid R_3\right)}{R_3}+\frac{V_\text{a}}{R_4}}\\\\ &=\frac{1}{\frac{\left(\frac{1}{R_1}-\frac{1}{R_4}\right)\left(R_1\mid\mid R_3\right)}{R_3}+\frac{1}{R_4}}\\\\ &= 3\:\Omega \end{align*}$$

Just another way to confirm the earlier result.

\$\endgroup\$
7
  • \$\begingroup\$ op schematic is wrong, and hence your computation which is based on the false fact that I0 is flowing through the 2 Ohm resistors. \$\endgroup\$
    – wbs2422
    Commented Oct 23, 2019 at 12:03
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Wheatley As I read it, I0 only designates the current flowing in one resistor. You wrote "resistors." Did you mean the plural form? What makes you say the OP posted an incorrect schematic? How did your arrive at that conclusion? I'm interested, as my reading does produce an interesting result. I'd like to know what I missed seeing, if you don't mind saying. \$\endgroup\$
    – jonk
    Commented Oct 23, 2019 at 12:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ The two 2Ohm resistors are connected in parallel with the two 4Ohm resistors. Hence you can't have the same current flowing through these two paths (the current source is 2*I0, so if I0 is flowing through one path, I0 is also flowing through the other path). And because of this parallel connection, you have a voltage divider of 1/2 for node a and node b so Va = Vb, hence the thevenin voltage is 0. \$\endgroup\$
    – wbs2422
    Commented Oct 23, 2019 at 12:22
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Wheatley That's a current dependent voltage source. \$\endgroup\$
    – jonk
    Commented Oct 23, 2019 at 12:24
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ We're good my man. \$\endgroup\$
    – wbs2422
    Commented Oct 23, 2019 at 12:38

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