|
New to Ham Radio?
My Profile
Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Speak Out
Strays
Survey Question
Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation
Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers
Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net
|
|
1-10 of 11 messages
|
  Page 1 of 2  
Next
|
|
Thevenin and Norton are equivalent circuits
|
Reply
|
|
by K2OOG on November 6, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
A most distinguished eham Elmer writes that Thevenin and Norton are equivalent circuits, not laws.
Questions:
Are the Thevenin and Norton circuits more likely to be used in LF, HF, VHF, or UHF rigs, and why?
Which of the two circuits, Thevienin or Norton, are better suited for lower frequency solid state oscillators and which is better suited for high powered tube rigs?
|
|   |
|
RE: Thevenin and Norton are equivalent circuits
|
Reply
|
|
by N3OX on November 6, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Which of the two circuits, Thevienin or Norton, are better suited for lower frequency solid state oscillators and which is better suited for high powered tube rigs?"
It really all depends on the nascent circuit coercability with respect to the the Poynting tensor field as per the covariant reentrance equations on the voltage-current pseudomanifold.
When kalfonic portrusions exceed the pfreedlic (camophryal) saliftrude conditioned on the trace of the impedal matrix, the transfer metafunction can develop unscrubbable Polifan-Sarori singularities. The Thevenin circuit is more suited for that condition.
If the transfer metafunction's inverse reprisal matrix foliation can be apluded analytically and forcibly, the Norton circuit *may* be more appropriate.
However, colfornial sompination screeds filliatron fomestery nombludent on the gratofierous sompf.
73,
Bof
|
|   |
|
RE: Thevenin and Norton are equivalent circuits
|
Reply
|
|
by AA4PB on November 6, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Actually McAfee and Norton are equivalent circuits and either will work with solid-state or tubes.
|
|   |
|
RE: Thevenin and Norton are equivalent circuits
|
Reply
|
|
by W5DXP on November 6, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
In "Fields and Waves ...", Ramo and Whinnery give a warning that applies to both Thevenin and Norton equivalent circuits: "It must be emphasized, as in any Thevenin equivalent circuit, that the equivalent circuit was derived to tell what happens *in the load under different load conditions*, and significance cannot be automatically attached to a calculation of power loss in the internal impedance of the equivalent circuit."
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com
|
|   |
|
RE: Thevenin and Norton are equivalent circuits
|
Reply
|
|
by N2EY on November 6, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N3OX: "It really all depends on the nascent circuit coercability with respect to the the Poynting tensor field as per the covariant reentrance equations on the voltage-current pseudomanifold."
No it doesn't.
N3OX: "When kalfonic portrusions exceed the pfreedlic (camophryal) saliftrude conditioned on the trace of the impedal matrix, the transfer metafunction can develop unscrubbable Polifan-Sarori singularities. The Thevenin circuit is more suited for that condition."
You're just saying that..
N3OX: "If the transfer metafunction's inverse reprisal matrix foliation can be apluded analytically and forcibly, the Norton circuit *may* be more appropriate."
Only if the particular design of the interocitor and flux capacitor require it.
N3OX: "However, colfornial sompination screeds filliatron fomestery nombludent on the gratofierous sompf."
Now THAT I agree with!
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
|   |
|
RE: Thevenin and Norton are equivalent circuits
|
Reply
|
|
by K5END on November 6, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Holy cow, I did not know there is a user ID "drolltroll."
Now I'll have to find another adjective for "funny."
How about, uhm, "funny?"
Yeah. That oughta do.
What do those Poynting vectors poynt to anyway?
(Yeah, I know. That joke is old and lame. I couldn't resist.)
Now let's see who can hijack this thread the fastest and we can discuss some more movie reviews...
|
|   |
|
RE: Thevenin and Norton are equivalent circuits
|
Reply
|
|
by K5END on November 6, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Are the Thevenin and Norton circuits more likely to be used..."
You know this already, but they are not used anywhere, not even homebrew rigs.
This might be a good April 1st prank.
Go to Radio Shack or Fry's and ask to see the Norton and Thevenin circuit boards.
|
|   |
|
RE: Thevenin and Norton are equivalent circuits
|
Reply
|
|
by TANAKASAN on November 6, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"It really all depends on the nascent circuit coercability with respect to the the Poynting tensor field as per the covariant reentrance equations on the voltage-current pseudomanifold."
Scotty: Capt'n, ye cannot break the laws of physics!!
Tanakasan
|
|   |
|
It's Not Polite to Poynt
|
Reply
|
|
by N2EY on November 6, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"What do those Poynting vectors poynt to anyway?"
That's a trick question. Of course they don't poynt *to* anything. They poynt *away*!
Is this the right forum for an argument?
73 de Jim, "I've got movie sign!" N2EY
|
|   |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
Forum, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Forum Manager.
|
|
|