I should have noted: The current that A-phase needs to supply its half of the load is the same magnitude and phase angle as the current that B-phase needs to supply its half of the load.Yes.
Without the load the source sources nothing. The load determines the needed current characteristics.mivey, you seem totally invested in how the load is connected when it seems to me it is the source that matters.
His analogy stated current circulating in a circuit loop on phase A ( A->load->N->A) wanted C terminal as a destination. His premise was that A current wanted to reach C so bad that it would make a turn at the winding's N terminal and go backwards through the C-N winding to try to reach the C terminal.I am entirely lost and perplexed at what you are trying to point out that was so egregious in George's post.
Sure, but that is still not energy going out one wire and back in through the other.True, but if I connect 20kw across A-B, don't the A-B wingdings "share" the energy evenly?
I disagree with that and the fact you feel differently does not make me wrong.Without the load the source sources nothing. The load determines the needed current characteristics.
I say you did not understand George's post.His analogy stated current circulating in a circuit loop on phase A ( A->load->N->A) wanted C terminal as a destination. His premise was that A current wanted to reach C so bad that it would make a turn at the winding's N terminal and go backwards through the C-N winding to try to reach the C terminal.
A current does not want C as a destination. Neither does circuit source current want Earth as a destination.
A current can take a path through C to get back to A but C is not the destination.
Circuit current can take a path through Earth to get back to the circuit source but Earth is not the destination.
Well then that's another thing you are wrong about.I disagree with that and the fact you feel differently does not make me wrong.
I'll invoke Charlie's Rule. Plus his follow-ups did not indicate he meant anything different in his OP.I say you did not understand George's post.
KCL, George. The voltage across the A-N winding causes current to flow from A, through the load, to N through some path, and back to A. Current leaving A and returning to A does not require a voltage across A. Current leaving one part of terminal A MUST return on a different part of terminal A because of KCL. Think of a node: no voltage across, but all current leaving the node must also enter the node.Mivey, the shortest path back to the same phase is never leaving the terminal in the transformer. Voltage from "A" to "A" in any circuit is going to be zero, meaning there is nothing to cause current to flow.
Never called you an idiot. Don't think you are an idiot, quite the contrary in fact. I did, however, call you wrong.You can attack me personally for being an idiot if you like, that is a teaching style I haven't encountered in quite a while and try not to employ personally.
Did not call you a liar either. Nor do I think you are a liar.I am just a simple electrician speaking to other simple electricians in most cases. I don't much appreciate being called a liar, either: I told you that if you can clearly illustrate why my analogy actively does a disservice in visualizing current flow, I would remove it from my teaching. You then claimed that I must be so invested in it that I can't hear you and would not remove it.
Thank you. Then recognize that it is hard to convey in a thread what could be done much quicker in person with a sketch pad and some back and forth. I am trying to find a way to make it clear.No, I respect your experience and your knowledge, and I am listening with rapt attention.
Not my intent. I thought your comment about my illustration being a "novel" was quite rude but I did not get up in arms about it. I assure you I did not type that illustration for my benefit but only to try and help. Had I known it would have been dismissed so I would certainly have typed something shorter.You are not conveying the problem very clearly, and frankly, being damned rude about it.
Your analogy needs changing, not abandoning.I had forgotten about this since the last time I checked in, that's how completely enraptured by this topic I am. Trust me, if you can make your case I will abide by my agreement and cease teaching the method. I do preface that portion of the class with making it clear that I'm not an EE, and this is a cheat to visualize current flow - not that it was fact, for the record.
I was not, but you are correct. If the connection is delta there is also "circulating" current, but I understand what you are saying.Sure, but that is still not energy going out one wire and back in through the other.
Since the two windings are 120 degreesout of phase there is, however, reactive "power" going back and forth . But I don't think that is what you were referring to.