mivey
Senior Member
I'm not sure the beginning step has been taken. Some mechanisms only require a little jigging, others need multiple thumps.Do you think the penny has dropped?
I'm not sure the beginning step has been taken. Some mechanisms only require a little jigging, others need multiple thumps.Do you think the penny has dropped?
The beginning of understanding is the acknowledgement of ignorance.I'm not sure the beginning step has been taken.
My great appreciation for your efforts. :thumbsup:What an entirely unreasonable and, actually, quite erroneous conclusion!
I printed out the curves, made some physical measurements to get scale and came up with a slightly lower figure of 150,000 At/m.
Within the resolution possible on A4 and the thickness of the line, the values are certainly comparable.
So the increase in H is 81 times approximately.
The no load current is 0.05 p.u
So the no-load current under 50hz operation is 0.05 x 81=4.05 times transformer rated current.
So, what do you now conclude about 50Hz operation of a transformer designed for 60Hz?
It is clear that the 50hz operation of 60hz transformer is not possible at the same KVA.
.......
You even attempted to support that with calculations.So no problem with no load operation of 60hz transformer on 50hz.
Something of an irrelevance. Think about what a transformer is used for.Now what do you think how much the reduction in KVA would be?
It is stated with different operating condition ( the transformer was assumed to operate in the linear portion of the magnetization curve i.e below saturation to clarify the issue)and so is a valid assertion.Yet, as late as post #61, you posted this:
You even attempted to support that with calculations.So no problem with no load operation of 60hz transformer on 50hz.
It was assumed that the transformer operated in the saturation region as is usual for a modern transformer.Your recent calculations very clearly demonstrate why it IS a big problem.
While I want to place my due regards for what you have done here, the vagueness in your explanation prompted me to provide more clarity by way of quantitative analysis.It's something we have been telling you from year dot. And something you were extremely resistant to accept.
I'm pleased that you now seem to have seen and accepted that it is a problem.
Well done that man!
Maybe we should start billing you for knowledge/experience we are giving you.....![]()
Another example of vagueness.Something of an irrelevance. Think about what a transformer is used for.
I already concluded as
Now what do you think how much the reduction in KVA would be?
It is stated with invalid conditions for a real life transformer. You now know that.It is stated with different operating condition ( the transformer was assumed to operate in the linear portion of the magnetization curve i.e below saturation to clarify the issue)and so is a valid assertion.
What reduction? The transformer will melt down unless re-designed.Now what do you think how much the reduction in KVA would be?
Changing the operating conditions? You had some notion that we could use a 60 Hz transformer in a 50 Hz system if we reduced the load. The problem is that we have to change the design. In reality, adding load actually reduces the flux a little bit. You did not realize that operating the transformer with no load would still cause a melt-down.It is stated with different operating condition ( the transformer was assumed to operate in the linear portion of the magnetization curve i.e below saturation to clarify the issue)and so is a valid assertion.
The vagueness of your discourse is the issue. You refute or attempt to debate a post and when the facts are posted you re-align your position so you can debate with a slightly different set of parameters.While I want to place my due regards for what you have done here, the vagueness in your explanation prompted me to provide more clarity by way of quantitative analysis.
He is trying to make you think about what you are posting. Your discourse tends to meander from one place to the next. It is like herding cats. Instead of focusing on specifics, which is hard to do with a moving target, a focus on concepts from a broader perspective sometimes helps. Sometimes.Another example of vagueness.
Well, if the problem is that the transformer willl fail under no-load conditions, how will any reduction in rated full-load capacity without a redesign help at all?
Are you asking what power handling you could get if you redesigned the transformer using the same amount of copper and iron?
What reduction? The transformer will melt down unless re-designed.
Think about the purpose of a transformer. What it is intended to do,It can be done by de-rating the 60hz transformer without a redesign i.e altering the core size.
For this purpose it is only necessary to ensure that the flux density remains constant in the transformer core. So how would you achieve it?
Think about the purpose of a transformer. What it is intended to do,
It can be done by de-rating the 60hz transformer without a redesign i.e altering the core size.
For this purpose it is only necessary to ensure that the flux density remains constant in the transformer core. So how would you achieve it?
Good. You are getting there.The purpose of a transformer is to change the voltage from one level to another.
That is, precisely, the question I asked you.Now, what would you need to do to make that transformer, designed for 60Hz, to operate at the same flux density on 50Hz?
Good. You are getting there.
Now, what would you need to do to make that transformer, designed for 60Hz, to operate at the same flux density on 50Hz?
I know what I would do. Or, more precisely, what I wouldn't.That is, precisely, the question I asked you.![]()
Appreciated Mr Jumper.A flux capacitor?
Just kidding Mr.B.
A joke from a movie "Back to the future"
I know what I would do. Or, more precisely, what I wouldn't.
Now, if you are suggesting the use of a 60Hz transformer is possible on a 50Hz supply and how that can be done then fire away with the how.
Good lad! Well done!For the flux density to remain constant, v/f should remain constant.
To keep the flux density the same. Flux is dependent on the volts times time. At 50Hz the volt second area for any half cycle is 20% greater than at 60Hz. So, for the same flux density, you need 20% more core.
But not a lot of good if you wanted what the transformer was designed to give - 480V output.So a transformer rated at 13800/480V, 60Hz may be used at 11500/400V, 50Hz with its KVA derated by 17%.