Finding Equivalent Resistance

This is basic Electrical Engineering puzzle - hounting me since 1993. I hope this is a correct place to ask this and such questions. Simple mathematicle induction fails in this 2D arrangement.

If '+' denotes a join, find equivalent resistances between any two adjacent and diagonally opposite "+" in the figure below. The mesh extends infinitely in all the directions.

| | |

--+--R--+--R--+---- | | | R R R | | |

--+--R--+--R--+---- | | |

Extending the question, what could we say about an infinite triangular or hexagonal mesh like this?

Thanks in advance,

-Bhushit

Reply to
joshipura
Loading thread data ...

The mesh extends infinitely in all the directions. =A0=A0|=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0|=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0|

--+--R--+--R--+---- =A0=A0|=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0|=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0| =A0=A0=A0=A0R =A0 =A0 R =A0 =A0 R =A0=A0|=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0|=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0|

--+--R--+--R--+---- =A0=A0|=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0|=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0| Extending the question, what could we say about an infinite triangular or hexagonal mesh like this? Thanks in advance,

-Bhushit

~> Thevenin was a Genius. =AEoy

Reply to
Roy Q.T.

Hint

Inject a 1A current into one node and out of the other. Use symmetry and superposition to calculate the voltage drop between the nodes.

martin

Reply to
Martin DeMello

The paper: Infinite Resistive Lattices by Atkinson and van Steenwijk provides somewhat more details on the Fourier Transform method of solving periodic networks. It develops solutions for multi- dimensional, trangular and hexagonal lattices.

formatting link
Three things:

1) The solution seems to be missing something. It is a methodology lacking an explaination of (a key detail in) why it works. 2) When I tried to open the page just now, it came up with an error message. 3) I have a hard copy and probably the pdf file on my system. If you cannot find the web version, message me for a copy.

John Bailey

formatting link

Reply to
John Bailey

damned little chance of that ever becoming a topic of discussion amongst these pathetic old trolls...

Reply to
Fred Bloggs

FWIW, there was some discussion 13 years ago in sci.physics, here:

formatting link
Quoting one extract from one post: This is problem 2.27 of " -Introduction to Modern Network Synthesis-, by M. E. Van Valkenburg (Wiley, New York, 1960). Although it is intended that much of the book be covered in a one-semester undergraduate course, "[we] assume that the reader is familiar with the elementary methods of network analysis."

The solution approach looks like the one Martin hinted at.

Reply to
Terry Pinnell

"John Bailey" wrote om...

formatting link
seems to work.

Reply to
r.e.s.

This is almost never true of today's undergraduates in EE programs and nowhere not ubiquitous among graduate students. I've looked at those old network theory books and it's amazing how 'deep' the area goes!

(Granted, when you look at the types of problems engineers typically work on today, it's hard to argue they should be reading Van Valkenburg rather than whoever writes a good Java or Linux book or something...)

Reply to
Joel Kolstad

WLOG, take R = 1 and suppose a square lattice with unit spacing. The paper cited by John Bailey doesn't say so (afaics), but inspection of the table of values there suggests that between opposite corners of a square of side n in this network, the resistance is exactly R_nn = (2/PI)*sum(1/(2*k-1),k=1..n) for n=0,1,2,... (Between adjacent lattice points it is 1/2.)

--r.e.s.

Reply to
r.e.s.

That seems right for R_nn. But what about R_nm? As you say, at R_01 it is 1/2. Also, at R_12 for example, the exact answer is 4/PI-1/2.

An iterative algorithm I devised (not the first person to invent the idea, by any stretch, but it is what I came up with when thinking about the problem before) is to arbitrarily place a voltage of 1V at the node under consideration (n,m) and 0V at the node of (0,0). I then arbitrarily set all other nodes of some arbitrarily sized finite grid (extending from -S to S in both dimensions) to an assumed guess of 0.5V to start. I then go to alternate nodes on the finite grid, first those spanning from 1-S to S-1, stepped by 2, and compute the node voltage as the mean of the adjacent node voltages (up, down, left, and right, in the case of a square grid.) Once that is done, the other alternate nodes on the finite grid are then visited, those spanning from S to S, stepped by 2, and compute the node voltages there in the same fashion. (Just be sure not to do any such averaging for the node at (0,0) or at (n,m).) Repeat the process over and over until the voltages settle. At that point, the resistance can be computed by assuming that current flows accurately based on the potential differences between (0,0) and its adjacent squares. (Which, of course, determines the current that the node at (n,m) must inevitably supply.) Since your starting potential is 1V between them and since you know the required current to be supplied by examining the nodes next to (0,0), the resistance is 1/sum.

Jon

Reply to
Jonathan Kirwan

| This is basic Electrical Engineering puzzle - hounting me since 1993. I | hope this is a correct place to ask this and such questions. Simple | mathematicle induction fails in this 2D arrangement. | | If '+' denotes a join, find equivalent resistances between any two | adjacent and diagonally opposite "+" in the figure below. The mesh | extends infinitely in all the directions. | | | | | | --+--R--+--R--+---- | | | | | R R R | | | | | --+--R--+--R--+---- | | | | | | | Extending the question, what could we say about an infinite triangular | or hexagonal mesh like this?

For AC, this could be even more interesting based on the lengths between nodes and the AC frequency involved.

Reply to
phil-news-nospam
[r.e.s. wrote ... [>> R_nn = (2/PI)*sum(1/(2*k-1),k=1..n) for n=0,1,2,...

The OP asked only about points that were "adjacent and diagonally opposite" (which would reasonably be interpreted as referring only to R_11, or possibly to both R_11 and R_01) -- I mentioned the apparent formula for R_nn (n=0,1,2,...) because of its simplicity.

Are you aware of any formulas of comparable simplicity in the more general cases?

--r.e.s.

Reply to
r.e.s.

Yes, but I don't recollect them, now. I only recall what I wrote.

Jon

Reply to
Jonathan Kirwan

Resistance (ideally or "ohmically") is independent of frequency.

Reply to
Mark P

Sure and why don't you include self and mutual inductances, and the capacitances, for spice.

Reply to
operator jay

Martin Demello has the right approach. However, you have to do it in two steps. Inject current into a node with the return connection a "circle" at infinity. The current splits equally in 4 directions. Now disconnect and draw current from the other node with injection at infinity. Superimpose.

Reply to
Don Kelly

By Superimposing too many of the network traingles you can be vexed infinitely, but, even if you don't have a value for R you can use Thevenize the first network array =3D Rth, and thus so forth., without injecting any imaginary currents and no applied voltage, obtaining an R Value for any node you want to analize.

Dang Dog speak for your Mockin Trollin Self., and I am not going over things twice or thrice., & I don't click mice. =AE

Reply to
Roy Q.T.

a)You don't try to solve all the nodes in the infinite network. You look at the current distribution from a given node to surrounding nodes up to the second node of interest b)You appear to be looking into the Thevenin resistance between the nodes selected. However, Thevenin (unless you are talking of something else than the usual Thevenin model) is not of use for finding this resistance. After all, Thevenin is simply an application of superposition.

Reply to
Don Kelly

Perhaps one can use severel methods to find R at a given node in the array, but Thevenin is not quite Superimposition because we do not need the following I/E/R resolve after the node to resolve for Rnode at any point with Thevenin.=AEoy From: snipped-for-privacy@peeshaw.ca (Don=A0Kelly) "Roy Q.T." wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@storefull-3258.bay.webtv.net... By Superimposing too many of the network traingles you can be vexed infinitely, but, even if you don't have a value for R you can Thevenize the first network array =3D Rth, and thus so forth., without injecting any imaginary currents and no applied voltage, obtaining an R Value for any node you want to analize. a)You don't try to solve all the nodes in the infinite network. You look at the current distribution from a given node to surrounding nodes up to the second node of interest [=AE]OF COURSE[=AE] b)You appear to be looking into the Thevenin resistance between the nodes selected. However, Thevenin (unless you are talking of something else than the usual Thevenin model) is not of use for finding this resistance. After all, Thevenin is simply an application of superposition.

Reply to
Roy Q.T.

From: snipped-for-privacy@peeshaw.ca (Don Kelly) "Roy Q.T." wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@storefull-3258.bay.webtv.net... By Superimposing too many of the network traingles you can be vexed infinitely, but, even if you don't have a value for R you can Thevenize the first network array = Rth, and thus so forth., without injecting any imaginary currents and no applied voltage, obtaining an R Value for any node you want to analize. a)You don't try to solve all the nodes in the infinite network. You look at the current distribution from a given node to surrounding nodes up to the second node of interest [®]OF COURSE[®] b)You appear to be looking into the Thevenin resistance between the nodes selected. However, Thevenin (unless you are talking of something else than the usual Thevenin model) is not of use for finding this resistance. After all, Thevenin is simply an application of superposition.

Reply to
Don Kelly

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.