ok i reading

 

ok i reading

If you have questions please ask! -- I encourage appropriate questions!

 

From where we have taken the value

X1=869^.5 ohm=32.47ohm
X2=-33.58ohm

 

Can we write
(11-3j)
(90+650j)
port 1 and 2?

 

Can we write
(11-3j)
(90+650j)
port 1 and 2?

Port 1 impedance indeed equals (11-3j)

However because port 2's impedance is specified in parallel, we must first covert it to series form before we may write it in rectangular format.

So:

Xport2 (series form)=(650*90^2)/(650^2+90^2)≈12.2271
Rport2 (series form)=(90*650^2)/(90^2+650^2)≈88.307

Hence:
Port1 Impedance = (11 - 3j)
Port2 Impedance = (88.307+12.2271j)

Got it?

 

Xport2 (series form)=(650*90^2)/(650^2+90^2)≈12.2271
Rport2 (series form)=(90*650^2)/(90^2+650^2)≈88.307

Please tell the formula ?
i got it.

 

Xport2 (series form)=(650*90^2)/(650^2+90^2)≈12.2271
Rport2 (series form)=(90*650^2)/(90^2+650^2)≈88.307

Please tell the formula ?
i got it.

The form 'conversion' formulae are merely an 'adaptation' of those for compounding resistors:

Parallel Z form to Series Z form:
Xs=(Rp^2*Xp)/(Rp^2+Xp^2)
Rs=(Rp*Xp^2)/(Rp^2+Xp^2)

Series Z form to Parallel Z form:
Xp=(Rs^2+Xs^2)/Xs
Rp=(Rs^2+Xs^2)/Rs

Note: These relations yield the equivalent resistance and reactance of the discrete components --- NOT the net impedance of the circuit!!!

Best regards
HP

 

Port 1 impedance indeed equals (11-3j)

However because port 2's impedance is specified in parallel, we must first covert it to series form before we may write it in rectangular format.
So:
Xport2 (series form)=(650*90^2)/(650^2+90^2)≈12.2271
Rport2 (series form)=(90*650^2)/(90^2+650^2)≈88.307
Hence:
Port1 Impedance = (11 - 3j)
Port2 Impedance = (88.307+12.2271j)

but in figure there is difference, if we convert // to series we will cut the original to get value in series?
Port2 Impedance = (88.307+12.2271j)
These value are not written.

 

How the inductor use was started?

 

Port 1 impedance indeed equals (11-3j)

However because port 2's impedance is specified in parallel, we must first covert it to series form before we may write it in rectangular format.
So:
Xport2 (series form)=(650*90^2)/(650^2+90^2)≈12.2271
Rport2 (series form)=(90*650^2)/(90^2+650^2)≈88.307
Hence:
Port1 Impedance = (11 - 3j)
Port2 Impedance = (88.307+12.2271j)

but in figure there is difference, if we convert // to series we will cut the original to get value in series?
Port2 Impedance = (88.307+12.2271j)
These value are not written.

The port reactances are 'canceled' via compensation (i.e. 'adjustment' of the corresponding network reactors) and hence irrelevant

 

Anyway, the // is converted to series than why it is shown in figure // form.
and two extra C L are added how?

 

 

 

Anyway, the // is converted to series than why it is shown in figure // form.
and two extra C L are added how?

There is no need to convert it to series equivalent form - it's canceled via adjustment of the network capacitor...

 

There is no need to convert it to series equivalent form - it's canceled via adjustment of the network capacitor...

Like so:
(-33.5834*650)/(650-(-33.5834))≈-31.9335 --- Got it?

 

There is no need to convert it to series equivalent form - it's canceled via adjustment of the network capacitor...

Then why we were using this formula?
not got it so much.

 

Then why we were using this formula?

Because you wished to write the port impedances in rectangular format:

Can we write
(11-3j)
(90+650j)
port 1 and 2?

 

Then the circuit should also be changed according to it.
why we use 2*3.14(pia)
while calculating impedance??

 

why we use 2*3.14(pia)
while calculating impedance??

The product 2Pi is the conversion factor of Hertz to radians per second -- hence its application to AC circuits

 

Because you wished to write the port impedances in rectangular format

The circuit should also be changed with it.