>>3. Add the +j125.66 in series, to get 28.30 +j170.71 (still series-
>>connected)
>>
>hello
>
>>4. This is now NEW NETWORK that includes the external 200nH. Transform
>>this new network back into its parallel-equivalent:
>>
>It is my opinion that this is not a legal move. In other words, adding
>external X to a parallel L-R circuit does not change the Admittance (Y)
>of the parallel circuit. In other words, it appears that you are
>trying to add oranges and apples, Mr. White.
Rich, I don't know. I can't find the flaw in his argument. When you do
series to parallel transformations, you can add in additional reactances
and transform them back. I remember doing this when creating matching
networks. Any series resonant network can be transformed into a parallel
network and vice versa. Many times it is convenient to do this. This is
so that other reactances can be added to the circuit. A real world
circuit of a series RL circuit certainly can have an additional L added
to it. Then that circuit can be transformed into a parallel circuit. So
why can't you convert a {parallel RL1 network + Series L2} network into a
{series RL1 + Series L2 network} into a {Series R(L1+L2)} network and
back into a parallel R(L1+L2) network? The math works for me.
73,
Jon
KE9NA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Ogden
jono@webspun.com
www.qsl.net/ke9na
"A life lived in fear is a life half lived."
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|