Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31

Thread: Effective Current calculation

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    3 Hr 2 Min from Winged Horses
    Posts
    14,181
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldDigger View Post
    And therefore probably not relevant for an analysis of the NEC.

    Darn tootin!!!

    Don’t be bringing that there logical type stuff into a discussion. Confuses me.
    "Electricity is really just organized lightning." George Carlin


    Derek

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Milford, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Ingenieur View Post
    he is only using 1 30 from each pedestal
    not 2 if it has 2
    5 x 30 x 0.8 x 0.9 = 108 A

    the note is not clear
    it says use the largest
    it does not address if you have 2 'largest'
    The 108a is listed as the "effective current", which is still one more step. And the chart shows the receptacle quantity as (9). I don't know why the designer chose to use effective current here but am I correct that the formula that should have been used here to find effective current is:
    Ieff=I/sqrt(2)? Which in this case would be 194.4/1.4142=137.5a.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    4,887
    Quote Originally Posted by JB78 View Post
    The 108a is listed as the "effective current", which is still one more step. And the chart shows the receptacle quantity as (9). I don't know why the designer chose to use effective current here but am I correct that the formula that should have been used here to find effective current is:
    Ieff=I/sqrt(2)? Which in this case would be 194.4/1.4142=137.5a.
    no
    imo the sqrt2 is not involved
    that is used to convert a sinusoidal wave from the peak value to the rms value

    post the chart



  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Milford, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Ingenieur View Post
    no
    imo the sqrt2 is not involved
    that is used to convert a sinusoidal wave from the peak value to the rms value

    post the chart
    I think the attachment took. This is just the first two circuits. Let me know.

    Thanks,
    JB78
    Attached Images Attached Images

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    3 Hr 2 Min from Winged Horses
    Posts
    14,181
    Quote Originally Posted by JB78 View Post
    I think the attachment took. This is just the first two circuits. Let me know.

    Thanks,
    JB78
    Whatever your EE is doing is wrong.

    Using the term effective current is wrong here.

    RFI the guy and ask where the heck he came up with using it here.
    "Electricity is really just organized lightning." George Carlin


    Derek

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    4,887
    Quote Originally Posted by JB78 View Post
    I think the attachment took. This is just the first two circuits. Let me know.

    Thanks,
    JB78
    the numbers make no sense
    looks like he fudging stuff

    270 x 0.8 x 0.9 x X = 108 so X = 0.5556
    240 x 0.9 x 0.9 x X = 97 so X = 0.4990

    no idea what he is doing
    what is the 'conduit fill adj.'?

    RFI him



  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    2,186
    Quote Originally Posted by jumper View Post
    Whatever your EE is doing is wrong.

    Using the term effective current is wrong here.

    RFI the guy and ask where the heck he came up with using it here.
    you know, pot is "not illegal" in CA now. be prepared for lots of weird things popping up

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    3 Hr 2 Min from Winged Horses
    Posts
    14,181
    Quote Originally Posted by FionaZuppa View Post
    you know, pot is "not illegal" in CA now. be prepared for lots of weird things popping up
    What in the hell are you talking about?

    OP is in PA and I bloody well do not smoke pot, so your point is what?
    Last edited by jumper; 01-17-18 at 08:20 PM.
    "Electricity is really just organized lightning." George Carlin


    Derek

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Milford, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Ingenieur View Post
    the numbers make no sense
    looks like he fudging stuff

    270 x 0.8 x 0.9 x X = 108 so X = 0.5556
    240 x 0.9 x 0.9 x X = 97 so X = 0.4990

    no idea what he is doing
    what is the 'conduit fill adj.'?

    RFI him
    So it's not just me. Great! Posting the chart initially would have been better. Still new at that here. I will send an RFI regarding these calculations so I can move forward. Thank you to all for your input.

    Have a good day,
    JB78

  10. #30
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    2,186
    Quote Originally Posted by jumper View Post
    What in the hell are you talking about?

    OP is in PA and I bloody well do not smoke pot, so your point is what?
    a pun on silly odd stuff popping up. had nothing to do with PA or you.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •