Talk:Source transformation

Untitled
Hello,

I am an inspiring Electrical Engineer, and would like to contribute to this stub. If anybody has any suggestions or comments, please feel free to message me. Perevodchik (talk) 23:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

DC source and Z in image?
It is inconsistent to have DC source and an impedance (Z) in image.Cblambert (talk) 01:58, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

SOURCE TRANSFORMATION
Source Transformation can be done by changing voltage to current source and vice versa. For changing voltage to current source- [I=V/R] For changing current to voltage source- [V=I*R]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.59.82.179 (talk) 16:21, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Edited for clarity of wording. Modified the Process section to include an introduction on the use of source transformation, a paragraph on the use cases and limitations of source transformation, and then a description of the mathematical process of source transformation. Lamprimus (talk) 05:34, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Proof of the theorem
I am thinking of adding the following brief discussion on the proof of the theorem. By the way, I don't tend to think the transformation is an application of an application of Thévenin's theorem and Norton's theorem. In fact, to proof those theorem, one needs a good notion of the source transformation beforehand.

A brief proof of the theorem
The transformation can be derived from the uniqueness theorem. In the present context, it implies that a black box with two terminals must have a unique well-defined relation between its voltage and current. It is readily to verify that the above transformation indeed gives the same V-I curve, and therefore the transformation is valid.

Gamebm (talk) 14:21, 24 August 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree in that source transformation theorem doesn't require Thévenin's and Norton's theorems, and that the latter is actually taught after the former. --Alej27 (talk) 14:44, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Source transformation can be applied to non-linear networks, and the load can have dependent sources
1. In the current version of the article it says this theorem is derived from Thévenin's and Norton's theorem, but I have never read that (not in textbooks like Alexander and Sadiku; Irwin and Nelms; Nilsson and Riedel; Hayt, Kemmerly and Durbin; Dorf and Svoboda; Thomas, Rosa and Toussaint; Van Valkenburg; etc.)

2. In the current version of the article it says "However, this means that source transformation is bound by the same conditions as Thevenin's theorem and Norton's theorem; namely that the load behaves linearly, and does not contain dependent voltage or current sources." As far as I know:


 * 2.1. Source transformation is not limited to linear networks; both the series/parallel resistance and the external network can be non-linear, because the transformation is derived using Kirchhoff's laws (which are valid for non-linear networks) and the equation v = i R for resistors (which can be applied to non-linear resistors, in which case it is not called Ohm's law), but not the superposition theorem (which can be applied only to linear networks or linear approximations of non-linear networks).


 * 2.2. The external network connected to the practical source (what I think the article refers to as load) can have dependent sources. Why it wouldn't?

Please provide a reference where it is said source transformation is derived from Thévenin's and Norton's theorems (in which case it could only be applied to linear networks), and that the external network (load) can't have dependent sources. --Alej27 (talk) 14:42, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

--103.238.104.2 (talk) 07:07, 18 December 2021 (UTC)