Effective Current calculation

[jumper]

And therefore probably not relevant for an analysis of the NEC.

:angel:

Darn tootin!!!

Don’t be bringing that there logical type stuff into a discussion. Confuses me.

 

[JB78]

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.

 

[Ingenieur]

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

 

[JB78]

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

 

[jumper]

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.

 

[Ingenieur]

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

 

[FionaZuppa]

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 hmy:

 

[jumper]

you know, pot is "not illegal" in CA now. be prepared for lots of weird things popping up hmy:

What in the hell are you talking about?:blink:

OP is in PA and I bloody well do not smoke pot, so your point is what?

 

[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

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

 

[FionaZuppa]

What in the hell are you talking about?:blink:

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.

 

[jumper]

a pun on silly odd stuff popping up. had nothing to do with PA or you.

Ah, okay. You quoted me and I assumed you were addressing me.