Scioly.org

cyanophycean314 wrote:At Indiana, our State test made each team split into two parts, a lab portion consisting of five stations and a very long test. Because there were stations and the other person was in another room sometimes, it made consulting about things kinda weird.
I manned the test portion and it didn't cover too many advanced topics. It was definitely all within phys B level. They tried to squeeze you with the time limit, but I still finished with time to spare.

In the end, my partner messed up one of the labs, but that's ok because we got 1st! It was a very happy conclusion to my season.

Yeah its just disappointing when they don't do advanced topics that are in the rules... I'm used to NYS having rules and then some random stuff on top of it, but I've been disappointed this year with how simple the concepts on the tests were, I'd like to see a more challenging test in the future.

Unbihexium wrote: Also, who needs Kirchhoff's laws when you have node voltage analysis?

Cough. What laws are you using when you are using node voltage. Well, with some of the explanations I've been hearing on these forums as well, Kirchhoff would be the quick and easy answer that makes things make more sense.

tangentline wrote:

Unbihexium wrote: Also, who needs Kirchhoff's laws when you have node voltage analysis?

Cough. What laws are you using when you are using node voltage. Well, with some of the explanations I've been hearing on these forums as well, Kirchhoff would be the quick and easy answer that makes things make more sense.

I know perfectly well that Nodal analysis is an application of Kirchhoff's laws, its simple a much more effective version... And sure, kirchhoff's are easy for some situation, but nodal is practically guaranteed to give you fewer equations...

I hate nodal analysis I think mesh or the superposition theorem are a lot simpler haha

fourLoko wrote:I hate nodal analysis I think mesh or the superposition theorem are a lot simpler haha

Really? mesh is just Kirchhoff's loop rule with a little simplification, and superposition is slower than node not to mention it only works for linear circuits... I'm confused of the advantages here.. I do like simplifying to thevenins/nortons though if i'm analyzing something that can be helped that way...

Unbihexium wrote:

fourLoko wrote:I hate nodal analysis I think mesh or the superposition theorem are a lot simpler haha

Really? mesh is just Kirchhoff's loop rule with a little simplification, and superposition is slower than node not to mention it only works for linear circuits... I'm confused of the advantages here.. I do like simplifying to thevenins/nortons though if i'm analyzing something that can be helped that way...

Superposition can totally work for non-linear circuits with multiple voltage sources...

fourLoko wrote:

Unbihexium wrote:

fourLoko wrote:I hate nodal analysis I think mesh or the superposition theorem are a lot simpler haha

Really? mesh is just Kirchhoff's loop rule with a little simplification, and superposition is slower than node not to mention it only works for linear circuits... I'm confused of the advantages here.. I do like simplifying to thevenins/nortons though if i'm analyzing something that can be helped that way...

Superposition can totally work for non-linear circuits with multiple voltage sources...

Linear circuits have nothing to do with number of voltage sources a linear circuit means all elements have linear VI curves as opposed to things like diodes...google is your friend you missunderstand the deffinition
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_circuit#section_1

I think labeling our techniques is more confusing than just stating a problem and the steps taken to solve it.
Superposition, Node/Mesh Analysis, Thevenin/Norton, Kirchhoff, etc are all techniques that I just use intermixed to solve a problem the fastest way I see possible. If I see a viable shortcut to the "usual" method, I'll take it. There have been problems for example that "superposition" (I'm labeling) provides a quick and easy fix to multiple batteries---it depends on the question that is asked, especially if it isn't asking to find literally everything you can out of a circuit, there often is a faster way to find elements such as the current in one spot.

Besides, I have a calculator that solves systems of however many equations, so no big worry.

tangentline wrote:I think labeling our techniques is more confusing than just stating a problem and the steps taken to solve it.
Superposition, Node/Mesh Analysis, Thevenin/Norton, Kirchhoff, etc are all techniques that I just use intermixed to solve a problem the fastest way I see possible. If I see a viable shortcut to the "usual" method, I'll take it. There have been problems for example that "superposition" (I'm labeling) provides a quick and easy fix to multiple batteries---it depends on the question that is asked, especially if it isn't asking to find literally everything you can out of a circuit, there often is a faster way to find elements such as the current in one spot.

Besides, I have a calculator that solves systems of however many equations, so no big worry.

Ditto on that, same story i choose whats best at the moment and a calculator like that helps me alot too.. also i put a transient network analysis program on my calc in case some weird circuit came up

Wow... what kinds of tests have you all been getting? I've seen one test(out of 4 this year) that had norton and thevenin equivalents, and I haven't seen anything complicated from a circuit analysis standpoint. All I've seen is a battery and a resistor network... Maybe a charge curve equation or two, and one test had a diode thrown in just to trick people. sigh....