ljcox said:I've decided that I don't want to leave the issue hanging, so I'll make one more attempt to explain why I have a problem with your method.
ljcox said:You divide 20 by 3. Why? Dividing by 3 does not fit the information given.
ljcox said:The 20W is associated with 4 resistors, not 3. So there is no reason to divide by 3 at this point.
ljcox said:It would make sense to divide by 4 since it gives the dissipation per resistor.
ljcox said:Then you add 20. Why? 20W is the total power dissipated by the 4 resistors.
This procedure makes no sense.
Ron H said:Ok, here's my take. To me, the logic goes as follows:
We know that the voltage is a constant. Let's call it V.
Lets call the power dissipated by 4 resistors P4, and the power dissipated by 3 resistors P3.
P4=V^2/(4*R)=20
P3=V^2/(3*R)
therefore,
P3/P4=4/3
P3=P4*(4/3)
Ok, now let's look at North's solution:
P3=P4/3 + P4
simplifying,
P3=P4*(4/3)
Same answer (which I think we already knew).
I probably just repeated whan Len (and maybe several others) said.
I have the same problem as Len. I don't understand how you would come up with North's solution unless you knew the answer and juggled numbers until you got there.
V and R are unknown. But we can find V^2/R.ljcox said:Initial power P = V^2/4R = 20 Wwhere V is the supply voltage and R is the value of each res. Therefore, V^2/R = 80
Now, with only 3 R, P = V^2/3R, but we know that V^2/R = 80
Thus P = 80/3 = 26.7 W, and so power per resistor = 26.7/3 = 8.89 W
This is irrelevant, it is simply part of solving the maths.north said:for instance it didn't make sense to me to say multiply 20W*4. why would I do this? because dynamically this isn't happening in the circuit. do you see my point?
This is because your basic reasoning is flawed.north said:but what is interesting is this , if you take the 6.67W increase and divide this number by 3( each remaining resistor) you get 2.2233W add this to the original 5W when there was 4 resistors and you get 7.2W but the answer is 8.89W which when you divide this answer by 3 you get an increase of 2.96Wwhy?
ljcox said:This is irrelevant, it is simply part of solving the maths.
north said:Originally Posted by north
but what is interesting is this , if you take the 6.67W increase and divide this number by 3( each remaining resistor) you get 2.2233W add this to the original 5W when there was 4 resistors and you get 7.2W but the answer is 8.89W which when you divide this answer by 3 you get an increase of 2.96W why?
ljcox said:This is because your basic reasoning is flawed.
As I wrote earlier, you are just juggling figures. You will not succeed in electronics if you can't apply mathematical reasoning.
This problem is very simple. If you applied your reasoning to a more difficult problem you would fail.
Ron H said:Here's another way to look at it:
You have a constant voltage source. The load goes from 4*R to 3*R. By what ratio does the current from the voltage source increase? Answer that, then remember that power is V*I.
Yep, that makes sense to me, except 4/3 does not equal 1.33333 Watts. 4/3 is just the ratio of the number of resistors you started with to the number you ended with. It has no units.north said:I think I have understood why the 4th resistor must be included.
what I did was 4/3= 1.33333W. but what I also did was take 0.33333 and *20 and got = 6.666W.
so what 0.33333 represents is that for every 1 watt that was originally there(20W) , there is an increase per watt of 0.33333 of the total original wattage because the 4th resistor is no longer considered. and this makes sense since the current in the circuit has increased.
so now if we take the answer of 4/3=1.33333*20=26.6666 and then 26.6666/3=8.8888W=8.89W
is my thinking sound here?
north said:Originally Posted by north
I think I have understood why the 4th resistor must be included.
what I did was 4/3= 1.33333W. but what I also did was take 0.33333 and *20 and got = 6.666W.
so what 0.33333 represents is that for every 1 watt that was originally there(20W) , there is an increase per watt of 0.33333 of the total original wattage because the 4th resistor is no longer considered. and this makes sense since the current in the circuit has increased.
so now if we take the answer of 4/3=1.33333*20=26.6666W and then 26.6666W/3=8.8888W=8.89W
is my thinking sound here?
Ron H said:Yep, that makes sense to me, except 4/3 does not equal 1.33333 Watts. 4/3 is just the ratio of the number of resistors you started with to the number you ended with. It has no units.
north said:I think I have understood why the 4th resistor must be included.
what I did was 4/3= 1.33333W. but what I also did was take 0.33333 and *20 and got = 6.666W.
so what 0.33333 represents is that for every 1 watt that was originally there(20W) , there is an increase per watt of 0.33333 of the total original wattage because the 4th resistor is no longer considered. and this makes sense since the current in the circuit has increased.
so now if we take the answer of 4/3=1.33333*20=26.6666 and then 26.6666/3=8.8888W=8.89W
is my thinking sound here?
You're welcome.north said:thanks Ron and ljcox for making me think and your both your time.
as always appreciated
north
north said:Originally Posted by north
I think I have understood why the 4th resistor must be included.
what I did was 4/3= 1.33333W. but what I also did was take 0.33333 and *20 and got = 6.666W.
so what 0.33333 represents is that for every 1 watt that was originally there(20W) , there is an increase per watt of 0.33333 of the total original wattage because the 4th resistor is no longer considered. and this makes sense since the current in the circuit has increased.
so now if we take the answer of 4/3=1.33333*20=26.6666 and then 26.6666/3=8.8888W=8.89W
is my thinking sound here?
ljcox said:As I wrote earlier, the 4th resistor must be included since that is part of the initial data, ie. 20W is being dissipated in the 4 resistors. This is your starting point.
You did not need to do the 0.33333 part.
As Ron suggested, the current has increased by a factor of 4/3.
Since P = V * I and V is constant, then P has increased by the same proportion. So P3 = 4/3 * 20. Hence for one resistor the power is
4/3 * 20/3 = 80/9 = 8.89W.
north said:I just did not get , at the time , the significance of the 4th resistor, even though it was shorted..
There is more to it than ratios and proportions.north said:I just have to get use to, at times , thinking in terms of ratio or porportion. right now its not easy for me to do. it will take time I just hope not to long.
ljcox said:I did not simply accept Ron's (no offence to Ron) statement that the currents are in a 4/3 ratio. Firstly, I wrote down the equations and proved that this is true.
No offense taken.P4=V^2/(4*R)=20
P3=V^2/(3*R)
therefore,
P3/P4=4/3
P3=P4*(4/3)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?