Four-wire delta, phasors, and Kirchoff:

Status
Not open for further replies.

mivey

Senior Member
Rick Christopherson said:
quogueelectric, with all due respect, I would like to try to keep this discussion civil and on topic. Can we address your questions in a separate thread?

For those interested, one place to look is "Four floor motel" for more info
 

mivey

Senior Member
coulter said:
Mivey -
I don't understand. out of phase <> time delay <> phase difference <> phasor angle difference <> reference angle difference

where I use the symbol <> to mean equavalence (not equality)

All of these are the same thing. One uses what ever term fits the math you are using. So "out of phase" = "time delay (like in the audio sense)" is exactly true.

180 deg oop = 8 1/3ms delay for 60 hz.

I'm thinking this is not news to you, its all stuff you know. So I'm puzzled


I'm lost again. We are engineers, not scientists doing original research. Everything we do is covered by a code, standard, recomended practice. External references are what we live by.

My recommendations are to use the standard language. Use recognized codes, standards, recomended practices.

We don't have a secret society. Why would we even consider making up a new language?

carl

I think we have mowed the grass that external references can disagree. Perhaps debating the references we all can cite can be a different thread. I have good references that support my terminology and I have seen links to other peoples references that support their terminology so I'm pretty much over that. Lets talk about the way we see things.

I did not see the phase difference to be the same as a time delay but I saw it as a change of reference. I completely understand phase and time difference can also mean the same thing depending on whos terminology you use. I'm fine with that but that's not what I'm talking about. Here is a picture I made but don't think I'm saying you have to agree with the labels, label it how you want but I would think you would agree that the concept is correct:
Phase-Delay-Polarity.jpg
 

mivey

Senior Member
Carl,

If you don't agree with the labels for graphs #1-#6, please list the labels you would like to see so the terminology you are referencing will be clear.

I'm not saying I have the best terminology but I think my understanding of how the waves propagate is correct (disclaimer: barring any stupid errors).
 

Rick Christopherson

Senior Member
The thing about phasors and vectors, is that no matter what order you place them, the answer is still the same. It doesn't matter if you walk 20 feet north, 20 feet west and 20 feet east, versus walking 20 feet west, 20 feet north, and 20 feet east--you still end up at the same place. This shouldn't be news to anyone that has spent any time with phasors or vectors.

So to put this into perspective, I have redrawn "Yuck" and "Yumm", only I changed their order. As you can see, when you place "Yuck" tip-to-tail in standard phasor/vector addition, the result is suddenly a 240 volt gap. When "Yumm" is rearranged, it looks like an hourglass, but still closes back to the original point.

YuckYumm.jpg


To reiterate what I said in the previous thread, I don't care whether or not someone wants to call the two halves of the transformer out of phase or not. That is a matter of semantics that I do not need or want to argue. My issue was on the use of "phasors" as a justification for making the argument.

New Edit I apologize for this, and I do try to avoid editing a posting that has been posted for over an hour now, but since it is so late at night, I don't think this edit should screw anyone up. The reason for my edit was because I scrolled back up to the top of this thread and read the original posting, as follows:
rattus said:
Please open the attached document for an example of phasor summation around a delta loop.
I added the Bold emphasis. This is directly applicable to the diagram I drew above, and is why I edited this posting to restate the original topic. The diagram I drew represents proper phasor/vector summation.
 
Last edited:

mivey

Senior Member
Also You can see that even though #2 & #6 LOOK the same and #3 & #5 LOOK the same and #4 & #5 LOOK the same in steady state, they are absolutely NOT the same even if they have looked the same for a million years. We can agree that the MATH works out the same in steady state, but that is different.
 

mivey

Senior Member
Rick Christopherson said:
My issue was on the use of "phasors" as a justification for making the argument.

Not one of use here is proposing a gap or a break in the path as we know that is not reality.

I think? we have determined that it is a disagreement in terminology.

ok, we disagree. Is there any other issue or concepts remaining to be discussed?
 

Rick Christopherson

Senior Member
mivey said:
Not one of use here is proposing a gap or a break in the path as we know that is not reality.

I think? we have determined that it is a disagreement in terminology.

ok, we disagree. Is there any other issue or concepts remaining to be discussed?
I am sorry Mivey, but you are not paying attention to the discussion at hand. This discussion originated with a phasor diagram. The diagram I drew does not represent a "gap" in the circuit--this is how you add phasors and vectors. That "gap" represents a 240 volt difference between the starting point and the ending point, which is why this contradicts Kirchoff. Phasors are a method for graphically and mathematically analyzing a circuit. They do not represent a schematic of that circuit in any way.
mivey said:
I really would like your labels for my curves as a reference. I may change the way I label things.
While the graph looks very nice, I am at a loss as to how this is applicable to the discussion of this thread. It may be helpful to explain how this fits the situation before we worry about a naming convention for the key. We are all engineers and know the difference between a sine and a cosine (or a 180 degree shifted sine).
 

mivey

Senior Member
Rick Christopherson said:
I am sorry Mivey, but you are not paying attention to the discussion at hand.

Sorry. I guess the ADD got the better of me. Maybe I still had not landed from the previous flight.:grin:
 

Rick Christopherson

Senior Member
Rick Christopherson said:
This discussion originated with a phasor diagram.
I am quoting myself because I wanted to point out to anyone reading this thread in real-time, that I just edited post #26, which is relevant to this quote.
 

Rick Christopherson

Senior Member
mivey said:
Rick, have you noticed the post numbers changing sometimes?
No I haven't noticed, but I did read of this in another thread. I suspect it would be the result of a posting being deleted without record. However, since the moderators do not seem to do this without leaving a blank post in its place, I suspect it may simply be some sort of memory error.

On the other hand, this same forum software is used for other forums I have used, and if the user deletes their own thread, it can be done without leaving a record.
 

Rick Christopherson

Senior Member
rattus said:
First, one sums up the real and imaginary components algebraicly as you yourself have quoted Kirchoff. For that matter, some negative components must be present in order for the sum to be zero. This is basic; one adds voltage rises; one subtracts voltage drops.

Second, one cannot negate a magnitude. One can negate the components of the phasor. For example, in the expression,
I apologize that this is more or less repeating the same thing I said in another posting I made earlier, but I hadn't noticed that Rattus had reaffirmed this statement in this specific thread.

The two statements above (ignoring the yellow text for the moment) are contradicting what Rattus has stated in the phasor diagram. You did not add the real and imaginary components--you subtracted one of them, and this is specifically shown in your original table in posting #1 of this thread. If you didn't subtract them, then you would have needed to have this voltage be negative, which contradicts your second statement above, that says you cannot have a negative magnatude.
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
Rick Christopherson said:
However, since the moderators do not seem to do this without leaving a blank post in its place,

It depends, we have the choice of leaving a place holder or not.

On the other hand, this same forum software is used for other forums I have used, and if the user deletes their own thread, it can be done without leaving a record.

The settings here prevent that, you can not delete your own thread without leaving something behind.

To everyone.

We do not put up with any flaming, if we see it we remove it. So if your interested in getting your points across and want them to remain posted you have to post responsibly and leave any personal remarks out of it.

Here is just a portion of the rules

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy,

we at this forum reserve the right to delete any message for any or no reason whatsoever.

More can be found here.

Read Before Posting: Forum Rules / Treatment of New Members

We are always glad to have new members all we ask is you follow the long established rules here. :)
 

mivey

Senior Member
We are guests

We are guests

I have no problems. While we are given the title members, etc. we are all guests on someone else's website. Your house, your rules. End of story.

I was just wondering why the post numbers appear to change sometimes. I have referenced a post number and went back later to find the number wrong. I thought I was just crazy at first but someone else mentioned it too. I had never heard an explanation why.

While we are on this side topic, I am using linear mode. Does that seem to be the most used mode? I was just wondering if some people use the threaded mode and miss posts. I've always hated the thread mode on other sites in years past because it is so cumbersome and I am really enjoying the linear mode.
 

mivey

Senior Member
Rick Christopherson said:
The diagram I drew represents proper phasor/vector summation.

All right. Back on topic. I think I may can see where you are coming from. Give me time to think about it. This is garage sale day...a real yuck. I was volunteered by my wife.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top