The question asks to determine V_x and I_y.

I tried to find it by using KVL in to lower LHS mesh and KCL in the middle node. But, my final value is a contradictory statement(such as I_x equal all real numbers). Any help would be appreciated.

Using KCL in the central node, the current that passes through the 10 ohm resistor is -5-0.1V_x+y(where y is the current that goes through V_x/20 ohms resistor). Then I used KVL in lower LHS mesh, so -50-10(-5-0.1V_x+y)-V_x=0 As you can see V_x cancel and 10y=0 is left. However V_x=20y.

  • \$\begingroup\$ I haven't analyzed the circuit, but "I_x equals all real numbers" is not actually a contradictory statement. A contradictory statement (like "X=0 and X=1 simultaneously") means either the circuit is non-physical or you made a calculation error. Your result could mean that the circuit is non-physical, but it could just mean that you haven't used enough information from the circuit. \$\endgroup\$
    – Justin
    Commented Sep 24, 2013 at 13:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ Its implications in my equation(which may be wrong) do form a contradiction. I_x-I_x+10x=0 -->x=0(where x is the current at V_x) which is not possible since there is a current there. \$\endgroup\$
    – user29568
    Commented Sep 24, 2013 at 13:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ I think your solution may be correct. I solved it using another method (KCL at the center node and the top node), and I also calculate that the current through the bottom 20 ohm resistor is 0. What makes you think it must be non-zero? \$\endgroup\$
    – Justin
    Commented Sep 24, 2013 at 14:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ I have the answer given to be Vx = 70 V, Iy = 3 A. Maybe there is something wrong with the question. Random Question: Is it possible for a larger current to pass through an independent current source. For example say there is a 5 A source, the current coming from behind it MUST always be 5 A? \$\endgroup\$
    – user29568
    Commented Sep 24, 2013 at 14:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ I agree something is wrong with the answer Vx = 70V (though Iy = 3A is correct). An ideal current source (independent or dependent) forces the current to equal the specified value -- no more, no less. Same for an ideal voltage source. \$\endgroup\$
    – Justin
    Commented Sep 24, 2013 at 14:26

2 Answers 2


KCL at the center node gives:

$$ \frac{-V_x-50}{10} + 5 + 0.1V_x + \frac{-V_x}{20} = 0 $$

Which is only an equation of \$V_x\$ and can be immediately solved to get \$V_x = 0\$.

KCL at the top node (with voltage \$V_T\$):

$$ \frac{V_T - 50}{20} - 5 + I_Y = 0 $$

Ohm's law on the 25 ohm resistor gives \$ I_Y = \frac{V_T - 5I_Y}{25} \implies V_T = 30I_Y\$. Using this in the preceeding equation gives:

$$ \frac{30I_Y - 50}{20} - 5 + I_Y = 0 \implies I_Y = 3 \text{A}$$

So, along with your own answer and Alfred Centauri's answer, we can conclude that your book's answer of \$V_X = 70 V\$ is incorrect.


This problem is, I think, a good case for using superposition with dependent sources.

Zero all sources (including dependent sources) except for the 50V DC source.

Then, by voltage division and Ohm's Law:

\$V_x = -50V \dfrac{20}{10 + 20} = -33.33V\$

\$I_y = \dfrac{50}{20 + 25} = 1.111A \$

Now, zero that source and enable the 5A current source.

Then, by inspection and current division:

\$V_x = 5A \cdot 20\Omega || 10 \Omega = 33.33V\$

\$I_y = 5A \cdot \dfrac{20}{20 + 25} = 2.222A\$

Now, zero that source and enable the 5Iy source.

Then, by inspection:

\$V_x = 0V \$

\$I_y = -\dfrac{5I_y}{20 + 25} = -0.1111 \cdot I_y\$

Finally, zero that source and enable the 0.1Vx source.

Then, by inspection:

\$V_x = 0.1V_x \cdot 20\Omega || 10 \Omega = 0.6667 V_x \$

\$I_y = 0A \$

The sums of the associated four terms give the answers:

\$V_x = -33.33V + 33.33V + 0V + 0.6667V_x \rightarrow V_x = 0V \$

\$I_y = 1.111A + 2.222A +0A - 0.1111 \cdot I_y \rightarrow I_y = 3A\$

  • \$\begingroup\$ Interesting approach but can you explain why my way is wrong? \$\endgroup\$
    – user29568
    Commented Sep 24, 2013 at 14:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Justin, I just caught a silly sign error in my first equation so we now agree. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Sep 24, 2013 at 14:55

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.