Comments for Tim Cinel

Comment on Suspicious Photographer in Melbourne by Jason

Jason — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 14:28:10 +0000

haha! he doesn’t look like a photographer at all! Anyways, all the best in the exams! just a few more to go!

Comment on Suspicious Photographer in Melbourne by Paul

Paul — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 10:16:20 +0000

Pretty much sums it up, though he didn’t even have a camera. Too bad he couldn’t even feign legitimacy, I think we just found a new floor for the common criminal.

Comment on EEET 2249 - Tutorial 5 - Problems by Tim Cinel

Tim Cinel — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 05:21:16 +0000

Darryl - Even though this is obviously now irrelevant:
“Yes” I did get them right in the end, I just haven’t had time to post them here. Wish I did though

I probably still will after eggs hams are over.

Comment on EEET 2249 - Tutorial 5 - Problems by Darryl

Darryl — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 08:26:08 +0000

oh.. i’ve got it now.. HAHA.. did a careless mistake. no need to post.. i understand now and solved it too.. thanks anyway.

all the best in your exam

Comment on EEET 2249 - Tutorial 5 - Problems by Darryl

Darryl — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 07:44:40 +0000

I dont know where to get you, but i think here is the best way..

Now that I’ve started Circuit Theory studies, I found myself stuck at Q8, (Q9 in tute 5).. can you please post an answer if you have one? LOL.. sorry for the trouble but i’m really stucked.. LOL

Comment on EEET 2249 - Tutorial 5 - Problems by Jason

Jason — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 15:51:39 +0000

I think RMIT should put your site up as one of the discussion links in the learning hub!

Comment on EEET 2249 - Tutorial 5 - Problems by Tim Cinel

Tim Cinel — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 04:58:43 +0000

Hey Darryl thanks for the replies. It’s comforting to know I’m not alone in being challenged by this subject.

Regarding Q7, Q8:
I solved it and understood it a the time but I’ve forgotten now! When I post the full solution I’ll notify you.

Regarding Q6:
Thanks to you an Paul I’m aware of my that ridiculous assumption I was making, solved now. Cheers

Nice blog, too - You’re going on my blogroll.

Comment on EEET 2249 - Tutorial 5 - Problems by Tim Cinel

Tim Cinel — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 04:57:23 +0000

Thanks for the replies Paul, I only just realised my fallacy after your help… Wtf was I thinking? i1 and i2 = 1!?!?!

Cheers.

Comment on EEET 2249 - Tutorial 5 - Problems by Darryl

Darryl — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 16:04:55 +0000

oh, also, please do inform me and teach me if you get them. I wonder the boy above is you..

Comment on EEET 2249 - Tutorial 5 - Problems by Darryl

Darryl — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:24:24 +0000

Q8:

this question is a bit tricky. After a long hard thinking, I finally accepted my not-so-good answer to explain why that hint was given.

reasons:
1) The circuit simply do not have enough information to proceed, or may be there are, but I never bother to try because I’m doing something else.

2) here comes the explanation:

- It’s not in lecture note
- It is if you look carefully
- Req = Voc/Isc
- You cannot determine Voc since you simply cant.. (or i cant)
- this is doing it FROM the answer
- setting Isc as 1A enables us to determine Voc
- at the same time determine Req because Isc = 1A (easy)
- setting Isc as other values will get you the same Req

Even though the hint is given, I still cant solve it, got to finish up my C++ before i tough circuit theory.. T.T, i’m so dead