Then the treacher is cheating more than the students.I think the 1.7 is a deliberate error to keep students from jumping at it.
Then the treacher is cheating more than the students.I think the 1.7 is a deliberate error to keep students from jumping at it.
If you are allowed up to two resistors for Rin and Rf, then this definitely can be solved, without going outside the given decade.I think were allowed a 1% error. My only question would be, with only being able to use these standard resistor values...if I use the 2ohm, the next size up would be a milliohm right? How could I use 2 X 10^1. Wouldn't that exceed my resistor values from the table?
I think you are correct. Nowhere in the statement of the problem does it say that he has other decades available.Maybe this is an examination for clairvoyants? Seriously though, using two resistors per element, four in total, there are exact solutions just using this list. Isn't that likely to be what the examiner was after?
Then the two tables were titled Standard Resistor Values and Standard Capacitor Values.Using only standard values of resistors and capacitors, design ...
Yes, and that solution does not require the 1.7 ohm resistor, and does not require excluding the 1.8 ohm resistor. Hence, that is a typo, and one that will just confuse a student new to the subject. Hopefully, it was an honest mistake and not a pointless change.With four resistors used in total, no decade multiplier is needed. Series and parallel...
No, it said "when trying to achieve a specific value of resistance, you may use no more than 2 resistors in combination".Unfortunately the problem statement also includes ... using two resistors.
I wouldn't say clearly.
by Jake Hertz
by Jake Hertz
by Duane Benson
by Robert Keim