Talk:Admittance parameters
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Catslash in topic Wrong Y-equivalent?
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Admittance parameters article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Wrong Y-equivalent? edit
It seems to me that figure 5 in the article is wrong and the correct form is:
Can someone check it please? Thanks. Dalba 19:11, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
- That looks quite similar - except that you have labelled the shunt elements with their admittance, whereas Fig. 5 labels them with their impedance. Are there other important differences? --catslash (talk) 00:48, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- Not really, but this is the first time I see y11 is used to denote impedance (while at the same figure y21 is admittance?). Dalba 07:17, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- The picture above is better than that in the article because
- An immitance is conventional labelled by either its impedance or admittance as appropriate, so taking the reciprocal is redundant and Y11 and Y22 are preferred here.
- The shunt elements should be shown as general admittances/impedances rather than as resistors.
- The currents I1 and I2 should be labelled.
- The external voltage sources are not part of the thing described and so should not be shown.
- Circuit diagrams should use vector graphics (e.g. .svg) rather than raster graphics (e.g. .png).
However neither the ground symbols nor the dotted ground connection are required, since the Y-matrix says nothing about these. Overall, File:Two-Port Y-parameters Norton equivalent.svg is the better. --catslash (talk) 21:00, 3 March 2014 (UTC)