There seems to be some misunderstanding.  What I said is that the currents
do not remain equal when the two currents are applied. The 0.5 ohm result
is therefore false.

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Don & Cathy Kelly <[email protected]> wrote:

> I will try and digest this a bit more before fully responding but here are
> a few initial comments.
> However, there seems to be a problem between your interpretation of
> superposition than mine and a disagreement with your conclusions- which
> requires more sleep and less wine. However, nothing that I have said  is in
> violation of any circuit theory or graph theory which  is involved.
> .
> Initially we are faced with a current in at A and out at B. This can be
> modeled by two current sources , one tied between A and an arbitrary
> reference point. The second between B and the reference point. The net
> current into the reference point is 0,
> The system is linear so it is valid to say that the total sum of what
> actually occurs in the network is the sum of the effects of the two source
> applied independently.  That is current in at A causes an effect at B and
> elsewhere in the grid. Current out at B causes an effect similarly but it
> wont be the
> same in any particular part of the network. Superposition considers that
> in a linear system, the actual effect at any point in the system with the
> current in at A and out at B can be found by considering the two situations
> independently and summing the results.
> In this particular case, infinity is involved only because it is a
> condition for use of symmetry. The approach results in the sum of currents
> into the reference point is 0, whatever the reference point is but symmetry
> involves, strictly speaking, the reference being at infinity (which becomes
> an equipotential.
> I note that you say that the current with both sources acting remains at
> 0.25A in the 8 resistors- that is_not_ true.
> The symmetry is there for each source by itself- but not for the
> combination. What is true is that the voltage at B due to injection at A is
> the same as the voltage at A due to excretion from B. and the current into
> the reference is 0.
> Nowhere is the "hidden infinity" a problem . I recognize that with one
> source only- an  infinite voltage is needed. Connect an ideal current
> source to an infinite resistance and the same thing occurs.
>
> In the meantime I shall put together an example of a finite system using
> the same technique and giving results agreeing with the Z-bus matricx
> results.
>
> Don
>
>
> ..On 28/01/2013 11:50 AM, Keith Park wrote:
>
>> The problem as I see it is that the method of obtaining the solution
>> involves three assertions. The first assertion is that with one ampere fed
>> into into a node, let`s call it node A, of an infinite grid the current
>> divides equally between the four resistors connected to that node, let`s
>> call the resistors a0,a1,a2 and a3.  Because of the symmetry of the
>> situation this assertion is certainly true.  Similarly for the second
>> assertion a current of one ampere pulled out of the opposite, node B,
>> causes a current of 0.25 amperes to flow out of the four resistors
>> connected to that node. This assertion is also certainly true. The four
>> resistors are named b0,b1,b2and b3. Now a0 is connected to b0 and a1 to
>> b1.
>>   The third assertion is that superposition may be invoked when the two
>> currents are applied at the same time.  The current in all eight resistors
>> remains 0.25 amperes.  Node A will therefore be at 0.5 volts above Node A.
>> If we take the junction of a0  and b0 as the reference node (it is where
>> we
>> attach the negative terminal of our imaginary infinite impedance
>> voltmeter)
>> then node A is at 0.25 volts and node B is at -0.25 volts.  Since a2 still
>> has 0.25 amperes flowing through it there must be 0.25 volts across it so
>> the voltage where it joins the rest of the grid must also be zero.  So
>> 0.25
>> amperes flowing into the grid  produces zero voltage. The rest of the grid
>> therefore displays zero resistance at that point.  But there are only
>> three
>> other one-ohm resistors connected to a2 so the resistance can not be less
>> than one third of an ohm and the voltage can not be less than 1%12  volts.
>>   So the third assertion leads to the conclusion that the voltage at this
>> junction is both zero and non-zero, which is incorrect. The conclusion is
>> that superposition  fails because of the hidden infinity. The current a0
>> and a1 is greater than 0.25 amperes and the current through a2 and a3 is
>> less than 0.25 amperes.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  Actually, I think I see an inconsistency.  Or, at least, an issue
>>> which I do not understand.
>>>
>>> If I understand your model properly (and, I might not), you have the
>>> same potential at all points on a square surrounding A (nodes which
>>> have an equal manhattan distance from A).  But this suggests that the
>>> resistance is the same from all points on that square back to A.
>>>
>>> Can this be correct?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> --
>>> Raul
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Don & Cathy Kelly <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Actually not
>>>>   inject 1A at A with B open.  and draws out 1A at the 'edge" (infinite
>>>>
>>> point
>>>
>>>> or ring of all points  equidistant from both A and B) which you can call
>>>> ground as it doesn't matter.
>>>> and finds the voltage drop between A and B.
>>>> Then inject -1A at B with A open and draws out 1A at the 'edge"
>>>> and find the voltage between A and B
>>>> Summing the two cases the result is the same as if the current source
>>>> was
>>>> connected between A and B with the 'edge" open
>>>> there will be no current drawn out from the edge.  It's easy to use
>>>>
>>> infinity
>>>
>>>> but this is simply a way of stating equidistance  from A and B in order
>>>>
>>> to
>>>
>>>> call on symmetry.  Errors will be in the order of 0.25% for distance AB
>>>> being about 1% of distances from both to the edge.
>>>>
>>>> Don Kelly
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 27/01/2013 6:34 PM, Raul Miller wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ok, that clarifies your point.  Except, in Kelly's method, it's not
>>>>> tied to ground at infinity.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is to determine the resistance between two nodes, A and B,
>>>>> which are a finite distance apart.  The method injects 1 amp of
>>>>> current at A and grounds B.
>>>>>
>>>>>  ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>>> ----------
>>> For information about J forums see 
>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/**forums.htm<http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm>
>>>
>>>  ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>> ----------
>> For information about J forums see 
>> http://www.jsoftware.com/**forums.htm<http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm>
>>
>>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**----------
> For information about J forums see 
> http://www.jsoftware.com/**forums.htm<http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to