- Location
- Massachusetts
I don't see why amps per phase is such a terrible statement,
To me it suggests a DIY, a novice.
Stick with VA.
I don't see why amps per phase is such a terrible statement,
To me it suggests a DIY, a novice.
Stick with VA.
Because the word "per" means "for each," and that tends to make people want to add up the three phase to get a "total amps." That is, they will see "15 amps per phase" on Phases A, B, and C, and conclude (incorrectly) that the "total amps" is 45. What I am suggesting is that we should all avoid the "near occasion" of that error.I don't see why amps per phase is such a terrible statement. . . .
It that case, I will offer another resource. This is the textbook from my first class in my Masters Degree program on the topic of power systems analyses: William D. Stevenson, Jr., "Elements of Power System Analysis," McGraw-Hill. I have the fourth edition, copyright 1982. You can find it on line, but in a quick review I was not able to find a more current edition. Perhaps the one I have is, in fact, the most recent edition.Besides I love me some matrix algebra and differential calculus. . . . Thanks again for the resources, and all of your help.
Would people really do that? I've known it to happen.Because the word "per" means "for each," and that tends to make people want to add up the three phase to get a "total amps." That is, they will see "15 amps per phase" on Phases A, B, and C, and conclude (incorrectly) that the "total amps" is 45.