Smart,
I should say that the phase angles of the phase voltages were not defined, but that is not important since the key is the angle between the load currents. 120 degrees is convenient because it allows the use of your formula.
The graphical solution is more of a learning tool than than it is a tool to be used in the field. It is helpful even to those who understand phasors. No question though that a simple formula is quicker and more accurate than a manually done graphic solution. If we do the graphics with a CAD program, then the accuracy should be the same, but that not a practical tool either.
True, you did not compute In, but others did with a misapplied formula. That is the reason for my comment.
PS: I do understand all the angles involved. I just got one of them backward. Didn't feel right at the time, but I did it anyway.
I should say that the phase angles of the phase voltages were not defined, but that is not important since the key is the angle between the load currents. 120 degrees is convenient because it allows the use of your formula.
The graphical solution is more of a learning tool than than it is a tool to be used in the field. It is helpful even to those who understand phasors. No question though that a simple formula is quicker and more accurate than a manually done graphic solution. If we do the graphics with a CAD program, then the accuracy should be the same, but that not a practical tool either.
True, you did not compute In, but others did with a misapplied formula. That is the reason for my comment.
PS: I do understand all the angles involved. I just got one of them backward. Didn't feel right at the time, but I did it anyway.
Last edited:
