12 kw load on buck & boost

Status
Not open for further replies.

augie47

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Tennessee
Occupation
State Electrical Inspector (Retired)
If a grill rated at 12kw at 208v is supplied by a 240v system thru a buck & boost transformer will the 240v load be 50 amps ?
Would the conductors on the "load" side of the transformer needs to be rated for the 208v rating of 58 amps ?
 
If a grill rated at 12kw at 208v is supplied by a 240v system thru a buck & boost transformer will the 240v load be 50 amps ?
Would the conductors on the "load" side of the transformer needs to be rated for the 208v rating of 58 amps ?
Yes the 240 volt load will be 50 amps.

Minimum conductor ampacity will be 50 amps, but needs to be 58 amps on the line side. Minimum overcurrent protection on line side would need to be 58 amps also - and this would force the load side conductors to be increased to 58 amps if you did not use any additional overcurrent protection. JMO.
 
Yes the 240 volt load will be 50 amps.

Minimum conductor ampacity will be 50 amps, but needs to be 58 amps on the line side. Minimum overcurrent protection on line side would need to be 58 amps also - and this would force the load side conductors to be increased to 58 amps if you did not use any additional overcurrent protection. JMO.

Hold on, why would primary side OCPD need to be sized for secondary amps?
 
Hold on, why would primary side OCPD need to be sized for secondary amps?
It is an autotransformer and is the same circuit all throughout.

One conductor is "common" all the way through the circuit.

If it were a bucking connection you would have less current on the load side - unless you provide additional overcurrent protection the conductors are still protected by the supply side overcurrent device and must be protected at or below their ampacity - as general rule. Next size up, motors, etc. do allow some variances, just like on non autotransformer installs.
 
If a grill rated at 12kw at 208v is supplied by a 240v system thru a buck & boost transformer will the 240v load be 50 amps ?
Would the conductors on the "load" side of the transformer needs to be rated for the 208v rating of 58 amps ?

Is this a cord and plug type unit or is it hardwired?

If cord and plug connected, I'd like to know what amperage the male cap is on the cord.

JAP>
 
It is an autotransformer and is the same circuit all throughout.

One conductor is "common" all the way through the circuit.

If it were a bucking connection you would have less current on the load side - unless you provide additional overcurrent protection the conductors are still protected by the supply side overcurrent device and must be protected at or below their ampacity - as general rule. Next size up, motors, etc. do allow some variances, just like on non autotransformer installs.

Since I had to ask the question I am awkward challenging that but based on ohms law it would seem that I would be looking at 50/58 amps respectively at the transformer.

Is this a cord and plug type unit or is it hardwired?

If cord and plug connected, I'd like to know what amperage the male cap is on the cord.

JAP>
Hardwired...thankfully
 
If a grill rated at 12kw at 208v is supplied by a 240v system thru a buck & boost transformer will the 240v load be 50 amps ?
Would the conductors on the "load" side of the transformer needs to be rated for the 208v rating of 58 amps ?

Due to the wiring connection on a single phase buck/boost transformer as K-wired pointed out , I've never really considered the transformer to have an actual line or load.


JAP>
 
Due to the wiring connection on a single phase buck/boost transformer as K-wired pointed out , I've never really considered the transformer to have an actual line or load.


JAP>
agree ..thats why on one post I italicized "load" and it may be that both sides carry the same current which is why I asked. .. not saying that's incorrect but have conflicting ideas in my head.. same current (since its same conductor) and ohms law since its a different voltage,
 
agree ..thats why on one post I italicized "load" and it may be that both sides carry the same current which is why I asked. .. not saying that's incorrect but have conflicting ideas in my head.. same current (since its same conductor) and ohms law since its a different voltage,


Dang that transformer changing the voltage in that one leg and messing with our amperage in both anyway..... :)

JAP>
 
agree ..thats why on one post I italicized "load" and it may be that both sides carry the same current which is why I asked. .. not saying that's incorrect but have conflicting ideas in my head.. same current (since its same conductor) and ohms law since its a different voltage,
The two hot taps (input and output) of the autotransformer will carry different currents, with the difference being made up via current in the neutral of the autotransformer itself rather than just passing through. The neutral of the coil carries more than just the magnetizing current.
In some ways it is easier to visualize if you look at the discrete buck or boost transformer connection that is the equivalent of the autotransformer.

Power in is always equal to power out (as Dereck frequently points out for MPPT devices in PV).
 
I think you have that backwards.
Listen to what I mean not what I say:)

I was thinking right thing just came out wrong.

Due to the wiring connection on a single phase buck/boost transformer as K-wired pointed out , I've never really considered the transformer to have an actual line or load.


JAP>
I been trying to avoid using terms primary and secondary in this discussion as I think those would only apply to a separately derived system. I have used line and load terms as I feel that is fairly synonymous to input and output.
 
Answered pretty quickly earlier, now that I looked at things again - I change my line of thinking on my initial reply.

Actually read 450.4 this time also, which says the transformer must be protected at no more then 125% of input current rating of transformer.

NEC is not all that clear on exactly what that means, as the autotransformer used to go from 240 to 208 volts here is not going to be a 12 kVA transformer but rather a 2 kVA transformer

2 kVA high voltage coil of that transformer will only see 8.3 amps at full load rating - but the 32 volt coil of that transformer can see put to 62.5 amps at full load rating.

I presume NEC intends input rating for this 2 kVA autotransformer to be 62.5 amps 125% of that is just over 78 amps - so it could have up to 80 amp protection. Actual load in OP was only 58 amps - so in that case 60 amp protection and 6 AWG conductor is most practical for the load - unless it is continuous load then we jump back to 80 amps and 4 AWG conductor needed.

Now the fact that the actual load of 12 kW is only going to be 50 amps on the 240 input - as long as it isn't continuous load I think you could still provide 50 amp overcurrent protection and 50 amp conductor as the input conductors. Output load is 58 amps though and you would need 58 amp conductor for the output portion of the circuit. It is still protected by the input overcurrent device and will hold even though the output current is higher then input curren.
 
Answered pretty quickly earlier, now that I looked at things again - I change my line of thinking on my initial reply.

Actually read 450.4 this time also, which says the transformer must be protected at no more then 125% of input current rating of transformer.

NEC is not all that clear on exactly what that means, as the autotransformer used to go from 240 to 208 volts here is not going to be a 12 kVA transformer but rather a 2 kVA transformer

2 kVA high voltage coil of that transformer will only see 8.3 amps at full load rating - but the 32 volt coil of that transformer can see put to 62.5 amps at full load rating.

I presume NEC intends input rating for this 2 kVA autotransformer to be 62.5 amps 125% of that is just over 78 amps - so it could have up to 80 amp protection. Actual load in OP was only 58 amps - so in that case 60 amp protection and 6 AWG conductor is most practical for the load - unless it is continuous load then we jump back to 80 amps and 4 AWG conductor needed.

Now the fact that the actual load of 12 kW is only going to be 50 amps on the 240 input - as long as it isn't continuous load I think you could still provide 50 amp overcurrent protection and 50 amp conductor as the input conductors. Output load is 58 amps though and you would need 58 amp conductor for the output portion of the circuit. It is still protected by the input overcurrent device and will hold even though the output current is higher then input curren.

I would think you would need the 58amp rated conductor from start to finish since one of the leads passes straight through. Or are you saying you splice a larger conductor to the input conductor that passes through? If so I don't understand that concept

Jap>
 
I would think you would need the 58amp rated conductor from start to finish since one of the leads passes straight through. Or are you saying you splice a larger conductor to the input conductor that passes through? If so I don't understand that concept

Jap>
splice conductors, somewhere on that lead you need to connect to "common" of the transformer anyway.

The VA is constant, @ 240 volts that is 50 amps, that is the current the "line" side conductors will see.

The additional 8 amps needed to get same VA at load side voltage is only flowing in the low voltage segment of the transformer and out to the load.
 
splice conductors, somewhere on that lead you need to connect to "common" of the transformer anyway.

The VA is constant, @ 240 volts that is 50 amps, that is the current the "line" side conductors will see.

The additional 8 amps needed to get same VA at load side voltage is only flowing in the low voltage segment of the transformer and out to the load.

Yes but amp clamp ahead of and behind that connection and is the amperage not the same on that lead?
 
Yes but amp clamp ahead of and behind that connection and is the amperage not the same on that lead?
No. The splice has three directions for current to possibly flow, one path is to the source, one is to the load, one is to the autotransformer. KVA on input and output sides remains the same, the path to the autotransformer balances the differences.
 
Probly so but l'll have to prove that one to myself

You are welcome to do that, but a Kirchoff's Laws analysis will lead you to that result. Just ignore the magnetizing current and calculate with the current in each winding section inversely proportional to the turn count for that section.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top