I publish a work done with MATHCAD 15. I don't think you can do the same with PRIME. What do you think about it?
Solved! Go to Solution.
Yes, good work. You used the "by inspection" method, but it doesn't lend itself to analysis automation. To find, then, the currents and voltages in each branch you have to proceed with the same method. My work is an application of analysis based on fundamental cuts. In the case of "cut-set" analysis of a different circuit, it is sufficient to change the cut-set matrix, the branch -impedance matrix and change the dimensions of the vectors and something else, obtaining voltages and currents in all the branches. Furthermore, I assumed that there are no mutual inductances. In this case everything becomes more complicated, even the analysis by inspection. For example, let's analyze the case in which there is a mutual inductance between two inductances.
Undoubtedly the analysis by inspection is the most used in the analysis of small circuits. However, I would avoid having large numbers appear in the formulas.
To verify the results, I am going to apply the methods based on sets of pairs of knots and fundamental links.
The inspection method, as well as all the other methods of analyzing electrical networks, I have known very well since the seventies of the last century. It was important to me, with that worksheet of mine, to highlight a certain automation in doing the analysis of a network thanks to MATHCAD. I don't think I need a teacher to tell me how to do it. Although I make a few mistakes every now and then, in life, there is always something to learn.
By this, I mean that I did not ask for an explanation, but the opinion of the members of the MATHCAD community about that worksheet and also the highlighting of some errors that I missed.
" I don't think you can do the same with PRIME."
I think differently, see here: https://community.ptc.com/t5/Mathcad/Cut-set-based-Network-analysis/m-p/830293#M203208