Current Electricity

Re-drawing Complex Schematics

REVIEW:

Wires in diagrams and in real circuits can be lengthened, shortened, and/or moved
without affecting circuit operation.

To simplify a convoluted circuit schematic, follow these steps:

Trace current from one side of the battery to the other, following any single path
(loop) to the battery. Sometimes it works better to start with the loop containing
the most components, but regardless of the path taken the result will be accurate.
Mark polarity of voltage drops across each resistor as you trace the loop. Draw those
components you encounter along this loop in a vertical schematic.

Mark traced components in the original diagram and trace remaining loops of
components in the circuit. Use polarity marks across traced components as guides
for what connects where. Document new components in loops on the vertical redraw schematic as well.

Repeat last step as often as needed until all components in original diagram have
been traced.

Lets start with the following (convoluted) circuit diagram. Perhaps this diagram was
originally drawn this way by a technician or engineer. Perhaps it was sketched as
someone traced the wires and connections of a
real circuit. In any case, here it is in all its
ugliness:
With electric circuits and circuit diagrams, the
length and routing of wire connecting components
in a circuit matters little. (Actually, in some AC
circuits it becomes critical, and very long wire lengths can contribute unwanted
resistance to both AC and DC circuits, but in most cases wire length is irrelevant.)
What this means for us is that we can lengthen, shrink, and/or bend connecting wires
without affecting the operation of our circuit.
The strategy I have found easiest to apply is to start by tracing the current from one
terminal of the battery around to the other terminal, following the loop of
components closest to the battery and ignoring all other wires and components for
Page 1 of 62

the time being. While tracing the path of the loop, mark each resistor with the
appropriate polarity for voltage drop.
In this case, Ill begin my tracing of this circuit at the negative terminal of the battery
and finish at the positive terminal, in the same general direction as the electrons
would flow. When tracing this direction, I will mark each resistor with the polarity of
negative on the entering side and positive on the exiting side, for that is how the
actual polarity will be as electrons (negative in charge) enter and exit a resistor:

Any components encountered along this short loop are drawn vertically in
order:
Now, proceed to trace any loops of components connected
around components that were just traced. In this case, theres
a loop around R1 formed by R2, and another loop around
R3 formed by R4:
Tracing those loops, I draw R2 and R4 in parallel with R1 and
R3 (respectively) on the vertical
diagram. Noting the polarity of voltage drops across R 3 and
R1, I mark R4 and R2 likewise:
Now we have a circuit that is very easily understood and
analyzed. In this case, it is
identical to the four-resistor
series-parallel configuration we
examined earlier in the chapter.

Page 2 of 62

Lets look at another example, even uglier than

the one before:
The first loop Ill trace is from the negative (-) side of
the battery, through R6, through R1, and back to the
positive (+) end of the battery:

Re-drawing vertically and keeping track of voltage drop

polarities
along the way,
our equivalent
circuit starts
out looking like
this:

Next, we can proceed to follow the

next loop around one of the traced resistors (R6), in this case, the loop formed by
R5 and R7. As before, we start at the negative end of R 6 and proceed to the positive
end of R6, marking voltage drop polarities across R7 and R5 as we go:

Now we add the R5R7 loop to the

vertical drawing. Notice how the
voltage drop polarities across R7 and
R5 correspond with that of R6, and how
this is the same as what we found
tracing R7 and R5 in the original circuit:

Page 3 of 62

We repeat the process again, identifying and

tracing another loop around an already-traced
resistor. In this case, the R3R4 loop around
R5 looks like a good loop to trace next:

Adding the R3R4 loop to the vertical drawing, marking the correct polarities as well:
With only one remaining resistor left to trace, then
next step is obvious: trace the loop formed by
R2 around R3:

Adding R2 to the vertical drawing, and

were finished! The result is a diagram
thats very easy to understand compared
to the original:

Page 4 of 62

This simplified layout greatly eases the task of determining where to start and how to
proceed in reducing the circuit down to a single equivalent (total) resistance. Notice
how the circuit has been re-drawn, all we have to do is start from the right-hand side
and work our way left, reducing simple-series and simple-parallel resistor
combinations one group at a time until were done.
In this particular case, we would start with the simple parallel combination of R 2 and
R3, reducing it to a single resistance. Then, we would take that equivalent resistance
(R2//R3) and the one in series with it (R4), reducing them to another equivalent
resistance (R2//R3R4). Next, we would proceed to calculate the parallel equivalent of
that resistance (R2//R3R4) with R5, then in series with R7, then in parallel with R6,
then in series with R1 to give us a grand total resistance for the circuit as a whole.
From there we could calculate total current from total voltage and total resistance
(I=E/R), then expand the circuit back into its original form one stage at a time,
distributing the appropriate values of voltage and current to the resistances as we go.

Branch Current Method.

The first and most straightforward network analysis technique is called the Branch
Current Method. In this method, we assume directions of currents in a network, then
write equations describing their relationships to each other through Kirchhoffs and
Ohms Laws. Once we have one equation for every unknown current, we can solve
the simultaneous equations and determine all currents, and therefore all voltage
drops in the network.
Lets use this circuit to illustrate the method:

Page 5 of 62

Steps to follow for the Branch Current method of analysis:

(1) Choose a node and assume directions of currents.

(2) Write a KCL equation relating currents at the node.

(3) Label resistor voltage drop polarities based on assumed currents.

(4) Write KVL equations for each loop of the circuit, substituting the product IR
for E in each resistor term of the equations.

(5) Solve for unknown branch currents (simultaneous equations).

(6) If any solution is negative, then the assumed direction of current for that
solution is wrong!

(7) Solve for voltage drops across all resistors (E=IR).

The first step is to choose a node (junction of wires) in the circuit to use as a
point of reference for our unknown currents. Ill choose the node joining the
right of R1, the top of R2, and the left of R3.

At this node, guess which directions the three wires currents take, labeling the
three currents as I1, I2, and I3, respectively. Bear in mind that these directions of
current are speculative at this point. Fortunately, if it turns out that any of our
guesses were wrong, we will know when we mathematically solve for the
currents (any wrong current directions will show up as negative numbers in
our solution).

Page 6 of 62

Kirchhoffs Current Law (KCL) tells us that the algebraic sum of currents
entering and exiting a node must equal zero, so we can relate these three
currents (I1, I2, and I3) to each other in a single equation. For the sake of
convention, Ill denote any current entering the node as positive in sign, and
any current exiting the node as negative in sign:

The next step is to label all voltage drop polarities across resistors according to
the assumed directions of the currents. Remember that the upstream end of
a resistor will always be negative, and the downstream end of a resistor
positive with respect to each other, since electrons are negatively charged:

The battery polarities, of course, remain as they were according to their

symbology (short end negative, long end positive). It is OK if the polarity of a
resistors voltage drop doesnt match with the polarity of the nearest battery,
so long as the resistor voltage polarity is correctly based on the assumed
direction of current through it. In some cases we may discover that current will
be forced backwards through a battery, causing this very effect. The important
thing to remember here is to base all your resistor polarities and subsequent
calculations on the directions of current(s) initially assumed. As stated earlier,
if your assumption happens to be incorrect, it will be apparent once the
equations have been solved (by means of a negative solution). The magnitude
of the solution, however, will still be correct.

Kirchhoffs Voltage Law (KVL) tells us that the algebraic sum of all voltages in a
loop must equal zero, so we can create more equations with current terms (I 1,
Page 7 of 62

I2, and I3) for our simultaneous equations. To obtain a KVL equation, we must
tally voltage drops in a loop of the circuit, as though we were measuring with a
real voltmeter. Ill choose to trace the left loop of this circuit first, starting from
the upper-left corner and moving counter-clockwise (the choice of starting
points and directions is arbitrary). The result will look like this:

Having completed our trace of the left loop, we add these voltage indications
together for a sum of zero:

Of course, we dont yet know what the voltage is across R 1 or R2, so we cant
insert those values into the equation as numerical figures at this point.
However, we do know that all three voltages must algebraically add to zero, so
the equation is true. We can go a step further and express the unknown
voltages as the product of the corresponding unknown currents (I 1 and I2) and
Page 8 of 62

their respective resistors, following Ohms Law (E=IR), as well as eliminate the
0 term:

Since we know what the values of all the resistors are in ohms, we can just
substitute those figures into the equation to simplify things a bit:

You might be wondering why we went through all the trouble of manipulating
this equation from its initial form (-28 + ER2 + ER1). After all, the last two terms
are still unknown, so what advantage is there to expressing them in terms of
unknown voltages or as unknown currents (multiplied by resistances)? The
purpose in doing this is to get the KVL equation expressed using the same
unknown variables as the KCL equation, for this is a necessary requirement for
any simultaneous equation solution method. To solve for three unknown
currents (I1, I2, and I3), we must have three equations relating these
three currents (notvoltages!) together.

Applying the same steps to the right loop of the circuit (starting at the chosen
node and moving counter-clockwise), we get another KVL equation:

Page 9 of 62

Knowing now that the voltage across each resistor can be and should
be expressed as the product of the corresponding current and the (known)
resistance of each resistor, we can re-write the equation as such:

Now we have a mathematical system of three equations (one KCL equation and
two KVL equations) and three unknowns:

For some methods of solution (especially any method involving a calculator), it

is helpful to express each unknown term in each equation, with any constant
value to the right of the equal sign, and with any unity terms expressed with
an explicit coefficient of 1. Re-writing the equations again, we have:

Using whatever solution techniques are available to us, we should arrive at a

solution for the three unknown current values:

So, I1 is 5 amps, I2 is 4 amps, and I3 is a negative 1 amp. But what does

negative current mean? In this case, it means that our assumed direction for
I3 was opposite of its real direction. Going back to our original circuit, we can
re-draw the current arrow for I3 (and re-draw the polarity of R3s voltage drop to
match):

Page 10 of 62

Notice how current is being pushed backwards through battery 2 (electrons

flowing up) due to the higher voltage of battery 1 (whose current is pointed
down as it normally would)! Despite the fact that battery B 2s polarity is
trying to push electrons down in that branch of the circuit, electrons are being
forced backwards through it due to the superior voltage of battery B 1. Does this
mean that the stronger battery will always win and the weaker battery
always get current forced through it backwards? No! It actually depends on
both the batteries relative voltages and the resistor values in the circuit. The
only sure way to determine whats going on is to take the time to
mathematically analyze the network.

Now that we know the magnitude of all currents in this circuit, we can calculate
voltage drops across all resistors with Ohms Law (E=IR):

Let us now analyze this network using SPICE to verify our voltage figures.
[spi] We could analyze current as well with SPICE, but since that requires the
insertion of extra components into the circuit, and because we know that if the
voltages are all the same and all the resistances are the same, the
currents must all be the same, Ill opt for the less complex analysis. Heres a
re-drawing of our circuit, complete with node numbers for SPICE to reference:

Sure enough, the voltage figures all turn out to be the same: 20 volts across
R1 (nodes 1 and 2), 8 volts across R2 (nodes 2 and 0), and 1 volt across
R3 (nodes 2 and 3). Take note of the signs of all these voltage figures: theyre
all positive values! SPICE bases its polarities on the order in which nodes are
listed, the first node being positive and the second node negative. For
example, a figure of positive (+) 20 volts between nodes 1 and 2 means that
node 1 is positive with respect to node 2. If the figure had come out negative in
the SPICE analysis, we would have known that our actual polarity was
backwards (node 1 negative with respect to node 2). Checking the node
orders in the SPICE listing, we can see that the polarities all match what we
determined through the Branch Current method of analysis.
Page 11 of 62

Mesh Current Method

The Mesh Current Method, also known as the Loop Current Method, is quite similar to
the Branch Current method in that it uses simultaneous equations, Kirchhoffs Voltage
Law, and Ohms Law to determine unknown currents in a network. It differs from the
Branch Current method in that it does not use Kirchhoffs Current Law, and it is
usually able to solve a circuit with less unknown variables and less simultaneous
equations, which is especially nice if youre forced to solve without a calculator.
Mesh Current, conventional method
REVIEW:

Steps to follow for the Mesh Current method of analysis:

Page 12 of 62

(1) Draw mesh currents in loops of circuit, enough to account for all components.

(2) Label resistor voltage drop polarities based on assumed directions of mesh
currents.

(3) Write KVL equations for each loop of the circuit, substituting the product IR for E
in each resistor term of the equation. Where two mesh currents intersect through a
component, express the current as the algebraic sum of those two mesh currents
(i.e. I1 + I2) if the currents go in the same direction through that component. If not,
express the current as the difference (i.e. I 1 - I2).

(4) Solve for unknown mesh currents (simultaneous equations).

(5) If any solution is negative, then the assumed current direction is wrong!

(6) Algebraically add mesh currents to find current in components sharing multiple
mesh currents.

(7) Solve for voltage drops across all resistors (E=IR).

Lets see how this method works on the same example problem:

The first step in the Mesh Current method is to identify loops within the circuit
encompassing all components. In our example circuit, the loop formed by B 1, R1, and
R2 will be the first while the loop formed by B 2, R2, and R3 will be the second. The
strangest part of the Mesh Current method is envisioning circulating currents in each
of the loops. In fact, this method gets its name from the idea of these currents
meshing together between loops like sets of spinning gears:

Page 13 of 62

The choice of each currents direction is entirely arbitrary, just as in the Branch
Current method, but the resulting equations are easier to solve if the currents are
going the same direction through intersecting components (note how currents I 1 and
I2 are both going up through resistor R 2, where they mesh, or intersect). If the
assumed direction of a mesh current is wrong, the answer for that current will have a
negative value.
The next step is to label all voltage drop polarities across resistors according to the
assumed directions of the mesh currents. Remember that the upstream end of a
resistor will always be negative, and the downstream end of a resistor positive with
respect to each other, since electrons are negatively charged. The battery polarities,
of course, are dictated by their symbol orientations in the diagram, and may or may
not agree with the resistor polarities (assumed current directions):

Using Kirchhoffs Voltage Law, we can now step around each of these loops,
generating equations representative of the component voltage drops and polarities.
As with the Branch Current method, we will denote a resistors voltage drop as the
product of the resistance (in ohms) and its respective mesh current (that quantity
being unknown at this point). Where two currents mesh together, we will write that
term in the equation with resistor current being the sum of the two meshing currents.
Tracing the left loop of the circuit, starting from the upper-left corner and moving
counter-clockwise (the choice of starting points and directions is ultimately
irrelevant), counting polarity as if we had a voltmeter in hand, red lead on the point
ahead and black lead on the point behind, we get this equation:

Notice that the middle term of the equation uses the sum of mesh currents I 1 and
I2 as the current through resistor R2. This is because mesh currents I 1 and I2 are going
the same direction through R2, and thus complement each other. Distributing the
coefficient of 2 to the I1 and I2 terms, and then combining I1 terms in the equation, we
can simplify as such:
Page 14 of 62

At this time we have one equation with two unknowns. To be able to solve for two
unknown mesh currents, we must have two equations. If we trace the other loop of
the circuit, we can obtain another KVL equation and have enough data to solve for
the two currents. Creature of habit that I am, Ill start at the upper-left hand corner of
the right loop and trace counter-clockwise:

Simplifying the equation as before, we end up with:

Now, with two equations, we can use one of several methods to mathematically solve
for the unknown currents I1 and I2:

Knowing that these solutions are values for mesh currents, not branch currents, we
must go back to our diagram to see how they fit together to give currents through all
components:

Page 15 of 62

The solution of -1 amp for I2 means that our initially assumed direction of current was
incorrect. In actuality, I2 is flowing in a counter-clockwise direction at a value of
(positive) 1 amp:

This change of current direction from what was first assumed will alter the polarity of
the voltage drops across R2 and R3 due to current I2. From here, we can say that the
current through R1 is 5 amps, with the voltage drop across R 1 being the product of
current and resistance (E=IR), 20 volts (positive on the left and negative on the
right). Also, we can safely say that the current through R 3 is 1 amp, with a voltage
drop of 1 volt (E=IR), positive on the left and negative on the right. But what is
happening at R2?
Mesh current I1 is going up through R2, while mesh current I2 is going down
through R2. To determine the actual current through R2, we must see how mesh
currents I1 and I2 interact (in this case theyre in opposition), and algebraically add
them to arrive at a final value. Since I1 is going up at 5 amps, and I2 is going down
at 1 amp, the real current through R2 must be a value of 4 amps, going up:

A current of 4 amps through R2s resistance of 2 gives us a voltage drop of 8 volts

(E=IR), positive on the top and negative on the bottom.
The primary advantage of Mesh Current analysis is that it generally allows for the
solution of a large network with fewer unknown values and fewer simultaneous
equations. Our example problem took three equations to solve the Branch Current
method and only two equations using the Mesh Current method. This advantage is
much greater as networks increase in complexity:

Page 16 of 62

To solve this network using Branch Currents, wed have to establish five variables to
account for each and every unique current in the circuit (I 1 through I5). This would
require five equations for solution, in the form of two KCL equations and three KVL
equations (two equations for KCL at the nodes, and three equations for KVL in each
loop):

I suppose if you have nothing better to do with your time than to solve for five
unknown variables with five equations, you might not mind using the Branch Current
method of analysis for this circuit. For those of us who have better things to do with
our time, the Mesh Current method is a whole lot easier, requiring only three
unknowns and three equations to solve:

Page 17 of 62

Less equations to work with is a decided advantage, especially when performing

simultaneous equation solution by hand (without a calculator).
Another type of circuit that lends itself well to Mesh Current is the unbalanced
Wheatstone Bridge. Take this circuit, for example:

Since the ratios of R1/R4 and R2/R5 are unequal, we know that there will be voltage
across resistor R3, and some amount of current through it. As discussed at the
beginning of this chapter, this type of circuit is irreducible by normal series-parallel
analysis, and may only be analyzed by some other method.
We could apply the Branch Current method to this circuit, but it would
require six currents (I1 through I6), leading to a very large set of simultaneous
equations to solve. Using the Mesh Current method, though, we may solve for all
currents and voltages with much fewer variables.
The first step in the Mesh Current method is to draw just enough mesh currents to
account for all components in the circuit. Looking at our bridge circuit, it should be
obvious where to place two of these currents:

The directions of these mesh currents, of course, is arbitrary. However, two mesh
currents is not enough in this circuit, because neither I 1 nor I2 goes through the
battery. So, we must add a third mesh current, I 3:
Page 18 of 62

Here, I have chosen I3 to loop from the bottom side of the battery, through R 4,
through R1, and back to the top side of the battery. This is not the only path I could
have chosen for I3, but it seems the simplest.
Now, we must label the resistor voltage drop polarities, following each of the
assumed currents directions:
Notice something very important here:
at resistor R4, the polarities for the
respective mesh currents do not agree.
This is because those mesh currents
(I2 and I3) are going through R4 in
different directions. This does not
preclude the use of the Mesh Current
method of analysis, but it does
complicate it a bit. Though later, we will show how to avoid the R 4 current clash. (See
Example below)
Generating a KVL equation for the top loop of the bridge, starting from the top node
and tracing in a clockwise direction:

In this equation, we represent the common directions of currents by

their sums through common resistors. For example, resistor R3, with a value of 100 ,
has its voltage drop represented in the above KVL equation by the expression
Page 19 of 62

100(I1 + I2), since both currents I1 and I2 go through R3 from right to left. The same
may be said for resistor R1, with its voltage drop expression shown as 150(I 1 + I3),
since both I1 and I3 go from bottom to top through that resistor, and thus
work together to generate its voltage drop.
Generating a KVL equation for the bottom loop of the bridge will not be so easy, since
we have two currents going against each other through resistor R 4. Here is how I do it
(starting at the right-hand node, and tracing counter-clockwise):

Note how the second term in the equations original form has resistor R 4s value of
300 multiplied by the difference between I2 and I3 (I2 - I3). This is how we represent
the combined effect of two mesh currents going in opposite directions through the
same component. Choosing the appropriate mathematical signs is very important
here: 300(I2 - I3) does not mean the same thing as 300(I3 - I2). I chose to write 300(I2 I3) because I was thinking first of I2s effect (creating a positive voltage drop,
measuring with an imaginary voltmeter across R4, red lead on the bottom and black
lead on the top), and secondarily of I 3s effect (creating a negative voltage drop, red
lead on the bottom and black lead on the top). If I had thought in terms of I 3s effect
first and I2s effect secondarily, holding my imaginary voltmeter leads in the same
positions (red on bottom and black on top), the expression would have been -300(I 3 I2). Note that this expression is mathematically equivalent to the first one: +300(I 2 I3).
Well, that takes care of two equations, but I still need a third equation to complete my
simultaneous equation set of three variables, three equations. This third equation
must also include the batterys voltage, which up to this point does not appear in
either two of the previous KVL equations. To generate this equation, I will trace a loop
again with my imaginary voltmeter starting from the batterys bottom (negative)
terminal, stepping clockwise (again, the direction in which I step is arbitrary, and
does not need to be the same as the direction of the mesh current in that loop):

Page 20 of 62

Solving for I1, I2, and I3 using whatever simultaneous equation method we prefer:

Example:
Use Octave to find the solution for I 1, I2, and I3 from the above simplified form of
equations. [octav]
Solution:
In Octave, an open source Matlab clone, enter the coefficients into the A matrix
between square brackets with column elements comma separated, and rows
semicolon separated.[octav] Enter the voltages into the column vector: b. The
unknown currents: I1, I2, and I3 are calculated by the command: x=A\b. These are
contained within the x column vector.
The negative value arrived at for I1 tells us that the assumed direction for that mesh
current was incorrect. Thus, the actual current values through each resistor is as
such:

Page 21 of 62

Calculating voltage drops across each resistor:

A SPICE simulation confirms the accuracy of our voltage calculations:[spi]

Page 22 of 62

Example: (a) Find a new path for current I3 that does not produce a conflicting
polarity on any resistor compared to I1or I2. R4 was the offending component. (b) Find
values for I1, I2, and I3. (c) Find the five resistor currents and compare to the previous
values.
Solution: [dvn]
(a) Route I3 through R5, R3 and R1 as shown:

Note that the conflicting polarity on R 4 has been removed. Moreover, none of the
other resistors have conflicting polarities.
Not all currents I1, I2, and I3 are the same (I2) as the previous bridge because of
different loop paths
However, the resistor currents compare to the previous values:
IR1 = I1 + I3 = -93.793 ma + 136.092 ma = 42.299 ma
IR2 = I1 = -93.793 ma
IR3 = I1 + I2 + I3 = -93.793 ma -58.851 ma + 136.092 ma = -16.552 ma
IR4 = I2 = -58.851 ma
IR5 = I2 + I3 = -58.851 ma + 136.092 ma = 77.241 ma

Since the resistor currents are the same as the previous values, the resistor voltages
will be identical and need not be calculated again.

Mesh current by inspection

We take a second look at the mesh current method with all the currents running
counterclockwise (ccw). The motivation is to simplify the writing of mesh equations
by ignoring the resistor voltage drop polarity. Though, we must pay attention to the
Page 23 of 62

polarity of voltage sources with respect to assumed current direction. The sign of the
resistor voltage drops will follow a fixed pattern.
If we write a set of conventional mesh current equations for the circuit below, where
we do pay attention to the signs of the voltage drop across the resistors, we may
rearrange the coefficients into a fixed pattern:

Once rearranged, we may write equations by inspection. The signs of the coefficients
follow a fixed pattern in the pair above, or the set of three in the rules below.
Mesh current rules:

This method assumes electron flow (not conventional current flow) voltage
sources. Replace any current source in parallel with a resistor with an equivalent
voltage source in series with an equivalent resistance.

Ignoring current direction or voltage polarity on resistors, draw counterclockwise

current loops traversing all components. Avoid nested loops.

Write voltage-law equations in terms of unknown currents currents: I 1, I2, and I3.
Equation 1 coefficient 1, equation 2, coefficient 2, and equation 3 coefficient 3
are the positive sums of resistors around the respective loops.

All other coefficients are negative, representative of the resistance common to a

pair of loops. Equation 1 coefficient 2 is the resistor common to loops 1 and 2,
coefficient 3 the resistor common to loops 1 an 3. Repeat for other equations and
coefficients.
+(sum of R's loop 1)I1 - (common R loop 1-2)I2 - (common R loop 1-3)I3 = E1
-(common R loop 1-2)I1 + (sum of R's loop 2)I2 - (common R loop 2-3)I3 = E2
-(common R loop 1-3)I1 - (common R loop 2-3)I2 + (sum of R's loop 3)I3 = E3

Page 24 of 62

The right hand side of the equations is equal to any electron current flow voltage
source. A voltage rise with respect to the counterclockwise assumed current is
positive, and 0 for no voltage source.

Solve equations for mesh currents:I1, I2, and I3 . Solve for currents through
individual resistors with KCL. Solve for voltages with Ohms Law and KVL.

While the above rules are specific for a three mesh circuit, the rules may be extended
to smaller or larger meshes. The figure below illustrates the application of the rules.
The three currents are all drawn in the same direction, counterclockwise. One KVL
equation is written for each of the three loops. Note that there is no polarity drawn on
the resistors. We do not need it to determine the signs of the coefficients. Though we
do need to pay attention to the polarity of the voltage source with respect to current
direction. The I3counterclockwise current traverses the 24V source from (+) to (-).
This is a voltage rise for electron current flow. Therefore, the third equation right hand
side is +24V.

The mesh currents match the previous solution by a different mesh current method..
The calculation of resistor voltages and currents will be identical to the previous
solution. No need to repeat here.
Note that electrical engineering texts are based on conventional current flow. The
loop-current, mesh-current method in those text will run the assumed mesh
currents clockwise.[aef] The conventional current flows out the (+) terminal of the
battery through the circuit, returning to the (-) terminal. A conventional current
voltage rise corresponds to tracing the assumed current from (-) to (+) through any
voltage sources.
One more example of a previous circuit follows. The resistance around loop 1 is 6 ,
around loop 2: 3 . The resistance common to both loops is 2 . Note the coefficients
of I1 and I2 in the pair of equations. Tracing the assumed counterclockwise loop 1
current through B1 from (+) to (-) corresponds to an electron current flow voltage rise.
Page 25 of 62

Thus, the sign of the 28 V is positive. The loop 2 counter clockwise assumed current
traces (-) to (+) through B2, a voltage drop. Thus, the sign of B2 is negative, -7 in the
2nd mesh equation. Once again, there are no polarity markings on the resistors. Nor
do they figure into the equations.

The currents I1 = 5 A, and I2 = 1 A are both positive. They both flow in the direction of
the counterclockwise loops. This compares with previous results.

Summary:

The modified mesh-current method avoids having to determine the signs of the
equation coefficients by drawing all mesh currents counterclockwise for electron
current flow.

However, we do need to determine the sign of any voltage sources in the loop.
The voltage source is positive if the assumed ccw current flows with the battery
(source). The sign is negative if the assumed ccw current flows against the
battery.

Page 26 of 62

Multi-loop Circuits and Kirchoff's

Rules
Key idea for a multi-loop circuit: In a circuit with multiple batteries we can use
Kirchoffs loop rule and Kirchoffs junction rule to solve for any unknown parameters.
The loop rule is actually a statement of conservation of energy applied to
circuits, while the junction rule is a statement of conservation of charge.
Before talking about what a multi-loop circuit is, it is helpful to define two terms,
junction and branch.
A junction is a point where at least three circuit paths meet.
A branch is a path connecting two junctions.
In the circuit below, there are two junctions, labeled a and b. There are three branches:
these are the three paths from a to b.

Page 27 of 62

Multi-loop circuits
In a circuit involving one battery and a number of resistors in series and/or parallel, the
resistors can generally be reduced to a single equivalent resistor. With more than one
battery, the situation is trickier. If all the batteries are part of one branch they can be
combined into a single equivalent battery. Generally, the batteries will be part of
different branches, and another method has to be used to analyze the circuit to find the
current in each branch. Circuits like this are known as multi-loop circuits.
Finding the current in all branches of a multi-loop circuit (or the emf of a battery or the
value of a resistor) is done by following guidelines known as Kirchoff's rules. These
guidelines also apply to very simple circuits.
Kirchoff's first rule : the junction rule. The sum of the currents coming in to a junction is
equal to the sum leaving the junction. (Basically this is conservation of charge)
Kirchoff's second rule : the loop rule. The sum of all the potential differences around a
complete loop is equal to zero. (Conservation of energy)
There are two different methods for analyzing circuits. The standard method in physics,
which is the one followed by the textbook, is the branch current method. There is
another method, the loop current method, but we won't worry about that one.

The branch current method

To analyze a circuit using the branch-current method involves three steps:
1. Label the current and the current direction in each branch. Sometimes it's hard
to tell which is the correct direction for the current in a particular loop. That does
NOT matter. Simply pick a direction. If you guess wrong, youll get a negative
value. The value is correct, and the negative sign means that the current
direction is opposite to the way you guessed. You should use the negative sign in
your calculations, however.
2. Use Kirchoff's first rule to write down current equations for each junction that
gives you a different equation. For a circuit with two inner loops and two
junctions, one current equation is enough because both junctions give you the
same equation.
3. Use Kirchoff's second rule to write down loop equations for as many loops as it
takes to include each branch at least once. To write down a loop equation, you
choose a starting point, and then walk around the loop in one direction until you
get back to the starting point. As you cross batteries and resistors, write down
Page 28 of 62

each voltage change. Add these voltage gains and losses up and set them equal
to zero.
When you cross a battery from the - side to the + side, that's a positive change. Going
the other way gives you a drop in potential, so that's a negative change.
When you cross a resistor in the same direction as the current, that's also a drop in
potential so it's a negative change in potential. Crossing a resistor in the opposite
direction as the current gives you a positive change in potential.
An example
Running through an example should help clarify how Kirchoff's rules are used. Consider
the circuit below:

Step 1 of the branch current method has already been done. The currents have been
labeled in each branch of the circuit, and the directions are shown with arrows. Again,
you don't have to be sure of these directions at this point. Simply choose directions,
and if any of the currents come out to have negative signs, all it means is that the
direction of that current is opposite to the way you've shown on your diagram.
Applying step 2 of the branch current method means looking at the junctions, and
writing down a current equation. At junction a, the total current coming in to the
junction equals the total current flowing away. This gives:
at junction a : I1 = I2 + I3
If we applied the junction rule at junction b, we'd get the same equation. So, applying
the junction rule at one of the junctions is all we need to do. In some cases you will
need to get equations from more than one junction, but you'll never need to get an
equation for every junction.
There are three unknowns, the three currents, so we need to have three equations. One
came from the junction rule; the other two come from going to step 3 and applying the
loop rule. There are three loops to use in this circuit: the inside loop on the left, the
inside loop on the right, and the loop that goes all the way around the outside. We just
need to write down loop equations until each branch has been used at least once,
though, so using any two of the three loops in this case is sufficient.

Page 29 of 62

When applying the loop equation, the first step is to choose a starting point on one
loop. Then walk around the loop, in either direction, and write down the change in
potential when you go through a battery or resistor. When the potential increases, the
change is positive; when the potential decreases, the change is negative. When you get
back to your starting point, add up all the potential changes and set this sum equal to
zero, because the net change should be zero when you get back to where you started.
When you pass through a battery from minus to plus, that's a positive change in
potential, equal to the emf of the battery. If you go through from plus to minus, the
change in potential is equal to minus the emf of the battery.
Current flows from high to low potential through a resistor. If you pass through a
resistor in the same direction as the current, the potential, given by IR, will decrease, so
it will have a minus sign. If you go through a resistor opposite to the direction of the
current, you're going from lower to higher potential, and the IR change in potential has
a plus sign.
Keeping all this in mind, let's write down the loop equation for the inside loop on the left
side. Picking a starting point as the bottom left corner, and moving clockwise around
the loop gives:

Make sure you match the current to the resistor; there is one current for each branch,
and a loop has at least two branches in it.
The inner loop on the right side can be used to get the second loop equation. Starting
in the bottom right corner and going counter-clockwise gives:

Plugging in the values for the resistances and battery emf's gives, for the three
equations:

The simplest way to solve this is to look at which variable shows up in both loop
equations (equations 2 and 3), solve for that variable in equation 1, and substitute it in
in equations 2 and 3.
Rearranging equation 1 gives:

Substituting this into equation 2 gives:

Making the same substitution into equation 3 gives:

Page 30 of 62

This set of two equations in two unknowns can be reduced to one equation in one
unknown by multiplying equation 4 by 5 (the number 5, not equation 5!) and adding
the result to equation 5.

Substituting this into equation 5 gives:

I2 = ( -4 + 1.5 ) / 5 = -0.5 A
The negative sign means that the current is 0.5 A in the direction opposite to that
shown on the diagram. Solving for the current in the middle branch from equation 1
gives:
I3 = 1.5 - (-0.5) = 2.0 A
An excellent way to check your answer is to go back and label the voltage at each point
in the circuit. If everything is consistent, your answer is fine. To label the voltage, the
simplest thing to do is choose one point to be zero volts. It's just the difference in
potential between points that matters, so you can define one point to be whatever
potential you think is convenient, and use that as your reference point. My habit is to
set the negative side of one of the batteries to zero volts, and measure
everything else with respect to that.

In this example circuit, when the potential at all the points is labeled, everything is
consistent. What this means is that when you go from junction b to junction a by any
route, and figure out what the potential at a is, you get the same answer for each route.
If you got different answers, that would be a big hint that you did something wrong in
solving for the currents. Note also that you have to account for any of the currents
coming out to be negative, and going the opposite way from what you had originally
drawn.
One final note: you can use this method of circuit analysis to solve for more things than
just the current. If one or more of the currents was known (maybe the circuit has an
ammeter or two, measuring the current magnitude and direction in one or two
branches) then an unknown battery emf or an unknown resistance could be found
instead.
Page 31 of 62

Nodal Analysis

Page 32 of 62

Page 33 of 62

Millmans Theorem
In Millmans Theorem, the circuit is re-drawn as a parallel network of branches, each
branch containing a resistor or series battery/resistor combination. Millmans
Theorem is applicable only to those circuits which can be re-drawn accordingly. Here
again is our example circuit used for the last two analysis methods:

And here is that same circuit, re-drawn for the sake of applying Millmans Theorem:

By considering the supply voltage within each branch and the resistance within each
branch, Millmans Theorem will tell us the voltage across all branches. Please note

Page 34 of 62

that Ive labeled the battery in the rightmost branch as B 3 to clearly denote it as
being in the third branch, even though there is no B 2 in the circuit!
Millmans Theorem is nothing more than a long equation, applied to any circuit drawn
as a set of parallel-connected branches, each branch with its own voltage source and
series resistance:

Substituting actual voltage and resistance figures from our example circuit for the
variable terms of this equation, we get the following expression:

The final answer of 8 volts is the voltage seen across all parallel branches, like this:

The polarity of all voltages in Millmans Theorem are referenced to the same point. In
the example circuit above, I used the bottom wire of the parallel circuit as my
reference point, and so the voltages within each branch (28 for the R 1 branch, 0 for
the R2 branch, and 7 for the R3 branch) were inserted into the equation as positive
numbers. Likewise, when the answer came out to 8 volts (positive), this meant that
the top wire of the circuit was positive with respect to the bottom wire (the original
point of reference). If both batteries had been connected backwards (negative ends
up and positive ends down), the voltage for branch 1 would have been entered into
the equation as a -28 volts, the voltage for branch 3 as -7 volts, and the resulting
answer of -8 volts would have told us that the top wire was negative with respect to
the bottom wire (our initial point of reference).
To solve for resistor voltage drops, the Millman voltage (across the parallel network)
must be compared against the voltage source within each branch, using the principle
Page 35 of 62

of voltages adding in series to determine the magnitude and polarity of voltage

across each resistor:

To solve for branch currents, each resistor voltage drop can be divided by its
respective resistance (I=E/R):

The direction of current through each resistor is determined by the polarity across
each resistor, not by the polarity across each battery, as current can be forced
backwards through a battery, as is the case with B 3 in the example circuit. This is
important to keep in mind, since Millmans Theorem doesnt provide as direct an
indication of wrong current direction as does the Branch Current or Mesh Current
methods. You must pay close attention to the polarities of resistor voltage drops as
given by Kirchhoffs Voltage Law, determining direction of currents from that.

Millmans Theorem is very convenient for determining the voltage across a set of
parallel branches, where there are enough voltage sources present to preclude
solution via regular series-parallel reduction method. It also is easy in the sense that
it doesnt require the use of simultaneous equations. However, it is limited in that it
only applied to circuits which can be re-drawn to fit this form. It cannot be used, for
example, to solve an unbalanced bridge circuit. And, even in cases where Millmans
Theorem can be applied, the solution of individual resistor voltage drops can be a bit
daunting to some, the Millmans Theorem equation only providing a single figure for
branch voltage.
Page 36 of 62

As you will see, each network analysis method has its own advantages and
disadvantages. Each method is a tool, and there is no tool that is perfect for all jobs.
The skilled technician, however, carries these methods in his or her mind like a
mechanic carries a set of tools in his or her tool box. The more tools you have
equipped yourself with, the better prepared you will be for any eventuality.

REVIEW:

Millmans Theorem treats circuits as a parallel set of series-component branches.

All voltages entered and solved for in Millmans Theorem are polarity-referenced
at the same point in the circuit (typically the bottom wire of the parallel
network).

In the network shown in the figure, all

resistors are identical with R = 300 . The
resistance Rab (in ) of the network is 100
Ohm. [How Symmetry leads to find out
the result with-in seconds]:
Answer:100

Page 37 of 62

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2Lsmws8L2U

Superposition Theorem
Superposition theorem is one of those strokes of genius that takes a complex subject
and simplifies it in a way that makes perfect sense. A theorem like Millmans certainly

Page 38 of 62

works well, but it is not quite obvious why it works so well. Superposition, on the
other hand, is obvious.
The strategy used in the Superposition Theorem is to eliminate all but one source of
power within a network at a time, using series/parallel analysis to determine voltage
drops (and/or currents) within the modified network for each power source separately.
Then, once voltage drops and/or currents have been determined for each power
source working separately, the values are all superimposed on top of each other
(added algebraically) to find the actual voltage drops/currents with all sources active.
Lets look at our example circuit again and apply Superposition Theorem to it:

Since we have two sources of power in this circuit, we will have to calculate two sets
of values for voltage drops and/or currents, one for the circuit with only the 28 volt
battery in effect. . .

. . . and one for the circuit with only the 7 volt battery in effect:

When re-drawing the circuit for series/parallel analysis with one source, all other
voltage sources are replaced by wires (shorts), and all current sources with open
circuits (breaks). Since we only have voltage sources (batteries) in our example
circuit, we will replace every inactive source during analysis with a wire.

Page 39 of 62

Analyzing the circuit with only the 28 volt battery, we obtain the following values for
voltage and current:

Analyzing the circuit with only the 7 volt battery, we obtain another set of values for
voltage and current:

When superimposing these values of voltage and current, we have to be very careful
to consider polarity (voltage drop) and direction (electron flow), as the values have to
be added algebraically.

Page 40 of 62

Applying these superimposed voltage figures to the circuit, the end result looks
something like this:

Currents add up algebraically as well, and can either be superimposed as done with
the resistor voltage drops, or simply calculated from the final voltage drops and
respective resistances (I=E/R). Either way, the answers will be the same. Here I will
show the superposition method applied to current:

Once again applying these superimposed figures to our circuit:

Page 41 of 62

Quite simple and elegant, dont you think? It must be noted, though, that the
Superposition Theorem works only for circuits that are reducible to series/parallel
combinations for each of the power sources at a time (thus, this theorem is useless
for analyzing an unbalanced bridge circuit), and it only works where the underlying
equations are linear (no mathematical powers or roots). The requisite of linearity
means that Superposition Theorem is only applicable for determining voltage and
current, not power!!! Power dissipations, being nonlinear functions, do not
algebraically add to an accurate total when only one source is considered at a time.
The need for linearity also means this Theorem cannot be applied in circuits where
the resistance of a component changes with voltage or current. Hence, networks
containing components like lamps (incandescent or gas-discharge) or varistors could
not be analyzed.
Another prerequisite for Superposition Theorem is that all components must be
bilateral, meaning that they behave the same with electrons flowing either
direction through them. Resistors have no polarity-specific behavior, and so the
circuits weve been studying so far all meet this criterion.
The Superposition Theorem finds use in the study of alternating current (AC) circuits,
and semiconductor (amplifier) circuits, where sometimes AC is often mixed
(superimposed) with DC. Because AC voltage and current equations (Ohms Law) are
linear just like DC, we can use Superposition to analyze the circuit with just the DC
power source, then just the AC power source, combining the results to tell what will
happen with both AC and DC sources in effect. For now, though, Superposition will
suffice as a break from having to do simultaneous equations to analyze a circuit.
REVIEW:

The Superposition Theorem states that a circuit can be analyzed with only one
source of power at a time, the corresponding component voltages and currents
algebraically added to find out what theyll do with all power sources in effect.

To negate all but one power source for analysis, replace any source of voltage
(batteries) with a wire; replace any current source with an open (break).
Page 42 of 62

Thevenins Theorem
Thevenins Theorem states that it is possible to simplify any linear circuit, no matter
how complex, to an equivalent circuit with just a single voltage source and series
resistance connected to a load. The qualification of linear is identical to that found
in the Superposition Theorem, where all the underlying equations must be linear (no
exponents or roots). If were dealing with passive components (such as resistors, and
later, inductors and capacitors), this is true. However, there are some components
(especially certain gas-discharge and semiconductor components) which are
nonlinear: that is, their opposition to current changes with voltage and/or current. As
such, we would call circuits containing these types of components, nonlinear circuits.
Thevenins Theorem is especially useful in analyzing power systems and other
circuits where one particular resistor in the circuit (called the load resistor) is
subject to change, and re-calculation of the circuit is necessary with each trial value
of load resistance, to determine voltage across it and current through it. Lets take
another look at our example circuit:

Page 43 of 62

Lets suppose that we decide to designate R 2 as the load resistor in this circuit. We
already have four methods of analysis at our disposal (Branch Current, Mesh Current,
Millmans Theorem, and Superposition Theorem) to use in determining voltage across
R2 and current through R2, but each of these methods are time-consuming. Imagine
repeating any of these methods over and over again to find what would happen if the
load resistance changed (changing load resistance is very common in power systems,
as multiple loads get switched on and off as needed. the total resistance of their
parallel connections changing depending on how many are connected at a time). This
could potentially involve a lot of work!
Thevenins Theorem makes this easy by temporarily removing the load resistance
from the original circuit and reducing whats left to an equivalent circuit composed of
a single voltage source and series resistance. The load resistance can then be reconnected to this Thevenin equivalent circuit and calculations carried out as if the
whole network were nothing but a simple series circuit:

. . . after Thevenin conversion . . .

The Thevenin Equivalent Circuit is the electrical equivalent of B 1, R1, R3, and B2 as
seen from the two points where our load resistor (R 2) connects.

Page 44 of 62

The Thevenin equivalent circuit, if correctly derived, will behave exactly the same as
the original circuit formed by B1, R1, R3, and B2. In other words, the load resistor (R2)
voltage and current should be exactly the same for the same value of load resistance
in the two circuits. The load resistor R 2 cannot tell the difference between the
original network of B1, R1, R3, and B2, and the Thevenin equivalent circuit of E Thevenin,
and RThevenin, provided that the values for EThevenin and RThevenin have been calculated
correctly.
The advantage in performing the Thevenin conversion to the simpler circuit, of
course, is that it makes load voltage and load current so much easier to solve than in
the original network. Calculating the equivalent Thevenin source voltage and series
resistance is actually quite easy. First, the chosen load resistor is removed from the
original circuit, replaced with a break (open circuit):

Next, the voltage between the two points where the load resistor used to be attached
is determined. Use whatever analysis methods are at your disposal to do this. In this
case, the original circuit with the load resistor removed is nothing more than a simple
series circuit with opposing batteries, and so we can determine the voltage across the
open load terminals by applying the rules of series circuits, Ohms Law, and
Kirchhoffs Voltage Law:

The voltage between the two load connection points can be figured from the one of
the batterys voltage and one of the resistors voltage drops, and comes out to 11.2
volts. This is our Thevenin voltage (EThevenin) in the equivalent circuit:

Page 45 of 62

To find the Thevenin series resistance for our equivalent circuit, we need to take the
original circuit (with the load resistor still removed), remove the power sources (in the
same style as we did with the Superposition Theorem: voltage sources replaced with
wires and current sources replaced with breaks), and figure the resistance from one
load terminal to the other:

With the removal of the two batteries, the total resistance measured at this location
is equal to R1 and R3 in parallel: 0.8 . This is our Thevenin resistance (R Thevenin) for
the equivalent circuit:

With the load resistor (2 ) attached between the connection points, we can
determine voltage across it and current through it as though the whole network were
nothing more than a simple series circuit:

Page 46 of 62

Notice that the voltage and current figures for R 2 (8 volts, 4 amps) are identical to
those found using other methods of analysis. Also notice that the voltage and current
figures for the Thevenin series resistance and the Thevenin source (total) do not
apply to any component in the original, complex circuit. Thevenins Theorem is only
useful for determining what happens to a single resistor in a network: the load.
The advantage, of course, is that you can quickly determine what would happen to
that single resistor if it were of a value other than 2 without having to go through a
lot of analysis again. Just plug in that other value for the load resistor into the
Thevenin equivalent circuit and a little bit of series circuit calculation will give you the
result.
REVIEW:

Thevenins Theorem is a way to reduce a network to an equivalent circuit

composed of a single voltage source, series resistance, and series load.

Steps to follow for Thevenins Theorem:

(1) Find the Thevenin source voltage by removing the load resistor from the
original circuit and calculating voltage across the open connection points where
the load resistor used to be.

(2) Find the Thevenin resistance by removing all power sources in the original
circuit (voltage sources shorted and current sources open) and calculating total
resistance between the open connection points.

(3) Draw the Thevenin equivalent circuit, with the Thevenin voltage source in
series with the Thevenin resistance. The load resistor re-attaches between the
two open points of the equivalent circuit.

(4) Analyze voltage and current for the load resistor following the rules for series
circuits.

Page 47 of 62

Nortons Theorem
Nortons Theorem states that it is possible to simplify any linear circuit, no matter
how complex, to an equivalent circuit with just a single current source and parallel
resistance connected to a load. Just as with Thevenins Theorem, the qualification of
linear is identical to that found in the Superposition Theorem: all underlying
equations must be linear (no exponents or roots).
Contrasting our original example circuit against the Norton equivalent: it looks
something like this:

. . . after Norton conversion . . .

Remember that a current source is a component whose job is to provide a constant

amount of current, outputting as much or as little voltage necessary to maintain that
constant current.
As with Thevenins Theorem, everything in the original circuit except the load
resistance has been reduced to an equivalent circuit that is simpler to analyze. Also
similar to Thevenins Theorem are the steps used in Nortons Theorem to calculate
the Norton source current (INorton) and Norton resistance (RNorton).

Page 48 of 62

As before, the first step is to identify the load resistance and remove it from the
original circuit:

Then, to find the Norton current (for the current source in the Norton equivalent
circuit), place a direct wire (short) connection between the load points and determine
the resultant current. Note that this step is exactly opposite the respective step in
Thevenins Theorem, where we replaced the load resistor with a break (open circuit):
With zero voltage dropped between
the load resistor connection points,
the current through R1 is strictly a
function of B1s voltage and R1s
resistance: 7 amps (I=E/R). Likewise,
the current through R3 is now strictly a
function of B2s voltage and R3s resistance: 7 amps (I=E/R). The total current through
the short between the load connection points is the sum of these two currents: 7
amps + 7 amps = 14 amps. This figure of 14 amps becomes the Norton source
current (INorton) in our equivalent circuit:
Remember, the arrow notation for a current
source points in the direction opposite that of
electron flow. Again, apologies for the
confusion. For better or for worse, this is
standard electronic symbol notation. Blame
Mr. Franklin again!
To calculate the Norton resistance (RNorton), we do the exact same thing as we did for
calculating Thevenin resistance (RThevenin): take the original circuit (with the load
resistor still removed), remove the power sources (in the same style as we did with
the Superposition Theorem: voltage sources replaced with wires and current sources
replaced with breaks), and figure total resistance from one load connection point to
the other:

Page 49 of 62

Now our Norton equivalent circuit looks like this:

If we re-connect our original load resistance of 2 , we can analyze the Norton circuit
as a simple parallel arrangement:

As with the Thevenin equivalent circuit, the only useful information from this analysis
is the voltage and current values for R2; the rest of the information is irrelevant to the
original circuit. However, the same advantages seen with Thevenins Theorem apply
to Nortons as well: if we wish to analyze load resistor voltage and current over
several different values of load resistance, we can use the Norton equivalent circuit
again and again, applying nothing more complex than simple parallel circuit analysis
to determine whats happening with each trial load.
REVIEW:

Nortons Theorem is a way to reduce a network to an equivalent circuit

composed of a single current source, parallel resistance, and parallel load.

Steps to follow for Nortons Theorem:

(1) Find the Norton source current by removing the load resistor from the original
circuit and calculating current through a short (wire) jumping across the open
connection points where the load resistor used to be.

(2) Find the Norton resistance by removing all power sources in the original
circuit (voltage sources shorted and current sources open) and calculating total
resistance between the open connection points.
Page 50 of 62

(3) Draw the Norton equivalent circuit, with the Norton current source in parallel
with the Norton resistance. The load resistor re-attaches between the two open
points of the equivalent circuit.

(4) Analyze voltage and current for the load resistor following the rules for
parallel circuits.

Millmans Theorem Revisited

You may have wondered where we got that strange equation for the determination of
Millman Voltage across parallel branches of a circuit where each branch contains a
series resistance and voltage source:

Parts of this equation seem familiar to equations weve seen before. For instance, the
denominator of the large fraction looks conspicuously like the denominator of our
parallel resistance equation. And, of course, the E/R terms in the numerator of the
large fraction should give figures for current, Ohms Law being what it is (I=E/R).

Page 51 of 62

Now that weve covered Thevenin and Norton source equivalencies, we have the
tools necessary to understand Millmans equation. What Millmans equation is
actually doing is treating each branch (with its series voltage source and resistance)
as a Thevenin equivalent circuit and then converting each one into equivalent Norton
circuits.

Thus, in the circuit above, battery B 1 and resistor R1 are seen as a Thevenin source to
be converted into a Norton source of 7 amps (28 volts / 4 ) in parallel with a 4
resistor. The rightmost branch will be converted into a 7 amp current source (7 volts /
1 ) and 1 resistor in parallel. The center branch, containing no voltage source at
all, will be converted into a Norton source of 0 amps in parallel with a 2 resistor:

Since current sources directly add their respective currents in parallel, the total circuit
current will be 7 + 0 + 7, or 14 amps. This addition of Norton source currents is
whats being represented in the numerator of the Millman equation:

All the Norton resistances are in parallel with each other as well in the equivalent
circuit, so they diminish to create a total resistance. This diminishing of source
resistances is whats being represented in the denominator of the Millmans equation:

Page 52 of 62

In this case, the resistance total will be equal to 571.43 milliohms (571.43 m). We
can re-draw our equivalent circuit now as one with a single Norton current source and
Norton resistance:

Ohms Law can tell us the voltage across these two components now (E=IR):

Lets summarize what we know about the circuit thus far. We know that the total
current in this circuit is given by the sum of all the branch voltages divided by their
respective resistances. We also know that the total resistance is found by taking the
reciprocal of all the branch resistance reciprocals. Furthermore, we should be well
aware of the fact that total voltage across all the branches can be found by
multiplying total current by total resistance (E=IR). All we need to do is put together
the two equations we had earlier for total circuit current and total resistance,
multiplying them to find total voltage:

Page 53 of 62

The Millmans equation is nothing more than a Thevenin-to-Norton conversion

matched together with the parallel resistance formula to find total voltage across all
the branches of the circuit. So, hopefully some of the mystery is gone now!

Equivalent Resistance
in an Infinite grid or
mesh
For Resistances R connected in square mesh or
grid at any node current 1 Amp injected in any
node will spread as 1/4 Amp as in all directions.
This is because resistance in all directions are
same. This current will go and assimilate at infinite radius. So a Battery
positive terminal connected at a node and negative connected to infinite ring
at edge will give current I/4 in adjacent resistances to the node. Similarly a
Negative terminal of a battery connected to next node and positive terminal
connected to infinite grid will also see I/4 in all adjacent resistances of the
node. So as per superposition theorem the effective current in the resistance
between the nodes is I/4 + I/4 = I/2 and thus equivalent resistance is R/2

Page 54 of 62

The principle of
superposition says
that if we add the
two solutions we also
get a solution.
Adding the two
configurations above
means that the
resistor joining A to B
must be carrying 1/2
Amp (1/4 from the
first solution and 1/4
from the second,
both in the same direction). But this is a 1 resistor so the Voltage across AB
must be 1/2 V.
Think ( or Imagine ) the whole mesh or grid as being inside a black box in
between the input wire and output wire. This black box has a current of 1
Amp flowing through it and the voltage dropped is 0.5 V. Its resistance is
therefore 0.5 . ( For resistances of R the equivalent will come as R/2 )
For Triangular mesh:
From node A a current I injected will spread out in
6 directions equally. so I/6 will flow in each node,
for positive of Battery being connected to A and
negative connected to infinite ring away. Now
again connect the Battery Negative to node B and
positive terminal of the Battery to infinite ring
away. So I/6 will flow again from A to B. Thus as
per superposition theorem current in Branch A-B will be I/6 + I/6 = I/3 when
Battery Positive terminal is connected to A and Battery negative is connected
to B. Thus equivalent Resistance will come out to be
R/3
So let us discuss what happens in Hexagonal
Honeycomb Resistances Infinite
mesh or grid
Here I will spread out as I/3 so when
battery connected to adjacent
nodes, the current in the resistance will be 2I/3 thus
equivalent resistance will be 2R/3
Page 55 of 62

2.

Page 56 of 62

RESISTOR NETWORKS
Page 57 of 62

The question was:

Consider and network built of wire segments having unit resistance. Find the
resistance between two adjacent nodes of the network (denoted by blue and
red in the figures) if the network is:
(a) infinite simple cubic network;
(b) infinite square network;
(c) semi-infinite "ladder".
Answer: (a) 1/3; (b) 1/2; (c) 1+sqrt{3}.
The solution:
(a) and (b) Square, cubic and general hypercubic lattices in D space dimensions can be
solved as follows:
Assume that current I is inserted from outside into the "red" junction and withdrawn at
infinity. Since the system is symmetric around the injection points the current will split
equally into 2D currents in bonds connected to the junction. In particular, along the
bond connecting blue and red junctions there will be current I/(2D).
Now consider a different situation: current I is removed from blue junction and is
injected from infinity. At each of the bonds entering the blue junction, there will be a
current I/(2D).
Now consider a linear superposition of two above situations: Current I is injected into
the red junction and current I is withdrawn and the blue junction, and nothing happens
at infinity. The current on the bond connecting the red and blue junctions will be I/(2D)
+I/(2D)=I/D. Therefore, the voltage between the junctions will be V=I/D, and
consequently the effective resistance will be R=V/I=1/D. Thus, the resistance will be
1/3 for cubic, and 1/2 for square lattice.
(c) Assume that the resistance of the semi-infinite ladder is R. Then we can view the
system as consisting of three unit resistors, when in parallel to the center resistor we
connected an effective resistor R, as depicted in the following figure:

From simple sequential/parallel resistor rules we find:

R=2+1/(1+1/R)
which can be solved and gives R=1+sqrt{3}.

There are additional analytically solvable infinite networks. E.g., consider the following
triangular network:
Page 58 of 62

It can be solved in the same way as the square network. Convince yourself that the
resistance between adjacent sites is 1/3. In general, if coordination number (number of
nearest neighbors of a site) on a periodic (symmetric) lattice is z, then the resistance
will be 2/z. E.g., for honeycomb lattice, z=3, and the resistance will be 2/3.
Loic Turban suggested to look at the resistance between the points of a honeycomb
lattice separated by two bonds. If current I is inserted a point A then current (1/3)I will
flow in a bond connecting A with its nearest neighbor B. That current will split, and
(1/6)I will flow from B to next-nearest-neighbor C. The voltage drop between A and C
will be (1/2)I. Similar argument can be repeated for current I being extracted from C;
however, this time there will be current (1/3)I in BC, and (1/6)I and AB. Superposing two
cases, we get current I inserted at A and removed at C, causing voltage drop of I, and
consequently the equivalent resistance is unity. Similar "symmetry arguments" can
prove that the resistance between second neighbors in a diamond lattice is 2/3. Also,
one can show that the second neighbor resistance in a dice lattice is 1/2. The dice
lattice is a two-dimensional lattice (despite its "3D appearance") shown in the following
figure:

Page 59 of 62

My basic premise, which I present without full proof, is that the entire circuit can be
functionally replaced with a simple triangle of equal-valued resistors (fig. 1).
My argument: 1) The circuit is only ever interfaced at the corners, both in the final
problem statement (find the resistance between two outer corner contacts) and in its
recursive inclusion within itself. 2) Under these conditions, any finite network
constructed exclusively of resistors can proveably be replaced by a simple network of
resistors joining the interface points. 3) It is permissible to (initially) assume for
analysis that the given infinite network also has a finite representation, that is the limit
of its resistance as the depth of recursion approaches infinity converges; failure of the
analysis would then invalidate this assumption. 4) Since the given circuit is
symmetrical with respect to its corners, the values of the equivalent resistances, RE,
must all be equal, and the resistance RS between any two corners is then 2/3RE.

At the "top" level the circuit consists of three copies of itself joined at the corners by a
Page 60 of 62

network of 1 Ohm resistors (fig. 2). By replacing each of the copies with the equivalent
network (fig. 3), it is possible to solve for the resistance across one side of the network
in terms of RE. Note that this solution is also the resistance RS of fig. 1. Note also that
since the circuit in fig. 3 is symmetrical left-to-right, all points along the dotted line are
equipotential and may be joined and only half the circuit needs to be solved.

The two resistors spanning the equipotential line can be split into two resistors each
(of half their original value) terminating on the equipotential line (fig. 4a), and then
resistors terminating on the equipotential line combined (fig. 4 b,c) to eventually yield a
circuit of only four resistors (fig. 5). This circuit is readily solved for R3,0, the resistance
between points V3 and V0, using KCL as follows:
Let the voltage V3 be 1 and V0 be 0, with V1 and V2 unknown. By KCL the current into
node V1 is equal to the current out:
1) (1 - V1)/RE = (V1 - V2)/RE + (V1 - 0)/[(4RE + 15)/(3RE + 12)] and likewise at
node V2
2) (1 - V2)/RE + (V1 - V2)/RE = V2/1
Solving for V1 and V2 in terms of RE gives
3) V1 = (4RE + 15)/(3RE2 + 17RE + 15)
4) V2 = (3RE + 15)/(3RE2 + 17RE + 15)
The total current through the circuit I = I1 + I2 (fig. 5) = (1 - V1)/RE + (1
- V2)/RE which gives
6) I = (6RE + 27)/(3RE2 + 17RE + 15)
So R3,0 = (V3 - V0)/I = 1/I which is
Page 61 of 62

7) R3,0 = (3RE2 + 17RE + 15)/(6RE + 27)

This result from KCL is half the resistance of a side of fig. 3, which from fig. 1 gives
us RS = 2/3RE = 2R3,0, finally giving
8 ) RE2 + 8RE + 15 = 0
9) RE = {-3, -5}
10) RS = {-2, -10/3}
Which, I believe, shows, together with point 3 of my argument above, that there are no
positive finite solutions to the given circuit.

Page 62 of 62