- #1
cianfa72
- 2,482
- 264
- TL;DR Summary
- Conditions to be fulfilled to employ (one of ) the 2-port network representation of a quadripole (four-terminal electrical network) in the analysis of a complete 'external' electrical network.
Hello,
I'm struggling with the conditions under which makes sense employ a two-port 'external' representation of a quadripole (four-terminal electrical network) when interconnected to an external circuit (to take it simple assume a linear + permanent electrical network).
Starting from circuit theory I elaborated the following:
Take a quadripole (four-terminal network) interconnected to an 'external' circuit. Do not place any constrains about the current entering in each of the four terminal (no 'port' constrains for the currents). From a network analysis point of view we can proceed as follows:
The other way around, a solution of the second one (the complete network you get replacing the quadripole with its 2-port representation) might not be a solution of the first one (the fundamental loops involving the not 'coupled' quadripole's terminals are actually not included in the equations set)
Thus, we have to explicitly check for those KVL when taking in account any solution of the last network to be sure it is actually a solution of the network we started with.
What do you think about, does it make sense ?
ps. same question shows up in other (italian) forum.
I'm struggling with the conditions under which makes sense employ a two-port 'external' representation of a quadripole (four-terminal electrical network) when interconnected to an external circuit (to take it simple assume a linear + permanent electrical network).
Starting from circuit theory I elaborated the following:
Take a quadripole (four-terminal network) interconnected to an 'external' circuit. Do not place any constrains about the current entering in each of the four terminal (no 'port' constrains for the currents). From a network analysis point of view we can proceed as follows:
- choose a tree spanning just the quadripole internal structure (directed graph) up to its four terminals
- extend this tree to the overall 'external' network starting from those 4 terminals
- write the equations for the equilibrium of currents at each node belonging to the complete network (actually N-1 nodes suffices)
- write the KVLs for the voltage equilibrium at the fundamental loops (f-loop) w.r.t the chosen tree
- write the BCEs (Branch Constitutive Equations) for each element branch
- add 2 constrain equations for the 'port' current condition at each of the 'coupled' terminal pair (port)
- add 2 auxiliary unknowns for the port voltages + the 2 related equations defining them w.r.t the branches of the chosen tree spanning the quadripole internal structure
The other way around, a solution of the second one (the complete network you get replacing the quadripole with its 2-port representation) might not be a solution of the first one (the fundamental loops involving the not 'coupled' quadripole's terminals are actually not included in the equations set)
Thus, we have to explicitly check for those KVL when taking in account any solution of the last network to be sure it is actually a solution of the network we started with.
What do you think about, does it make sense ?
ps. same question shows up in other (italian) forum.
Last edited: